Evaluation of a Pile Design Method Using the Results of Static Load Tests

for a Double Track Railway Project (Chira Junction to Khon Kaen Station)

by

Ketkaewngoen Mahakhotchasenichai

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Engineering in
Geotechnical and Earth Resources Engineering

Examination Committee: Dr. Kuo Chieh Chao (Chairperson)

Dr. Noppadol Phien-wej
Dr. Pham Huy Giao
Dr. Thayanan Boonyarak (External Expert)

Nationality: Thai
Previous Degree: Bachelor of Engineering in Civil Engineering
Ubon Ratchathani University
Thailand

Scholarship Donor: Thailand (HM King)

Asian Institute of Technology

School of Engineering and Technology
Thailand
May 2018
 Acknowledgements

Master degree in Geotechnical and Earth Resource Engineering in Asian Institute of

Technology is a challenge for me, however, I am really grateful to my lecturers, family and
friends, who always provide me with both mental and physical support during my study.
It is my great honor to work with Dr. Kuo Chieh Chao who serves as my thesis advisor and
examination committee. I would like to express my sincere thanks for all his precious
guidance, advice and encouragement during my life in AIT.
I would like to thank to Dr. Noppadol Phien-wej and Dr. Pham Huy Giao who serves as the
examination committee, for their essential suggestions on my research.
I am also grateful to Dr. Thayanan Boonyarak, who serves as the external examination
committee, for his guidance to initiate my research.
I also would like to acknowledge SEAFCO Public Limited Company for the financial
support on my laboratory testing.
I am really appreciated Mr. Jorm Uttamais, Engineering manager of CH. Karnchang Public
Company Limited for providing me rock core samples and static load test reports of Jira-
Khonkaen railway project.
Finally, I sincerely thank to my family for their motivation, love, encouragement and support
me during my study.

ii
 Abstract

SRT Double Track Railway project (Chira Junction to Khon Kaen station) is one of the
largest projects in Thailand. Construction management and engineering design are one of
the key success factors. However, the available engineering data in this area is very limited
because the project is located in rural area. Furthermore, the area originated from alluvial
and aeolian deposition, resulting in uncertainty in soil and rock layers. Pile foundations of
infrastructures have to be placed on sandstone and siltstone which the behavior of piles in
these rocks is not fully understood. So, static load test was performed on 16 tested piles to
check bearing capacity. VWSG strain gauges and extensometer tubes were installed to the
test piles to find out the axial force and pile shortening. Piles are placed on either siltstone,
sandstone, hard clay or very dense sand. Every pile was taken load to 2.5 times of working
load. The tested result shown that all piles did not reach the failure criterion. The objectives
of this research is to carry out the back-calculated parameters and propose the appropriate
method for pile design. Pile settlement and load distribution are also studied to understand
pile behavior on those rocks. Extrapolation methods are adopted to find out the fully
mobilized parameters. The results of back-calculated parameters for pile design are
compared to those proposed by others.

iii
 Table of Contents

Chapter Title Page

Title Page i
Acknowledgements ii
Abstract iii
Table of Contents iv
List of Tables vi
List of Figures viii
List of Abbreviations x

1 Introduction 1
1.1 Problem statement 1
1.2 Objectives 1
1.3 Scope of work 2

2 Literature Review 3
2.1 Introduction 3
2.2 Geology of Korat plateau, Thailand 3
2.3 Weak rock 4
2.3.1 Definition of weak rock 4
2.3.2 Typical index properties of weak rock 5
2.4 Shaft friction resistance of pile 6
2.4.1 Shaft friction resistance for clay and weak rock 6
2.4.2 Shaft friction resistance for sand 12
2.5 Base resistance of pile 13
2.5.1 Base resistance for soil 13
2.5.2 Base resistance for rock 14
2.6 Settlement on pile socketed in soil/rock 15
2.7 Other related theory 18
2.7.1 Fellenius method 18
2.7.2 Bentonite and polymer, bored pile construction 19
2.7.3 Extrapolation methods for failure load 22

3 Methodology 49
3.1 Introduction 49
3.2 Information of the project 49
3.2.1 Project locations 49
3.2.2 General geological conditions along the project 49
line
3.2.3 Investigation 50
3.2.4 Laboratory testing 50
3.3 Bored pile construction 51
3.3.1 Quantity of bored pile in construction 51
3.3.2 Sequences of construction 51
3.3.3 Quality control 52
3.4 Static load test and instrumentation 53
3.4.1 Static load test 53
3.4.2 Geotechnical instrumentation 53

iv
 3.5 Methods used in calculation 54
3.5.1 Extrapolation method for failure load 54
3.5.2 Settlement prediction 54
3.5.3 Strain gauge interpretation 54
3.5.4 Load distribution plotting 55
3.5.5 Elastic shortening measurement 55
3.5.6 Back analysis of α for clay and weak rock 55
3.5.7 Back analysis of β for sand 55
3.5.8 Shaft friction comparison 55
3.5.9 End bearing on weak rock 55

4 Results and Discussion 66

4.1 Soil and rock profiles, properties and parameters 66
4.1.1 Soil and rock profiles 66
4.1.2 Soil and rock properties and strength parameters 66
4.1.3 The additional testing results for rocks 68
4.2 Pile settlement 68
4.2.1 Elastic shortening from extensometer and toe 68
movement
4.2.2 Pile head settlement 69
4.3 Strain gauges data analysis 70
4.3.1 Evaluation of pile stiffness 70
4.3.2 Mobilized skin friction 70
4.3.3 Mobilized end bearing 70
4.4 Data analysis 71
4.4.1 Extrapolation method of failure load 71
4.4.2 Back calculated parameters 72

5 Conclusion and Recommendations 92

5.1 Conclusion 92
5.2 Recommendations 93

References 94
Appendix A: Elastic shortening of pile 100
Appendix B: Load - estimated settlement of bored pile 117
Appendix C: Strain values from strain gauges 134
Appendix D: Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness 151
Appendix E: Load distribution along Pile Shaft 168
Appendix F: Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity 185
Appendix G: Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve 243
Appendix H: Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction 260
Appendix I: Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve 277

v
 List of Tables

Table Title Page

2.1 The identification, characterization and investigation of weak rock 24

present problems
2.2 Descriptive terms for strength of rock substance 24
2.3 RQD index and allowable bearing pressure 24
2.4 Typical Poisson’s ratio for sedimentary rocks 24
2.5 Typical values of laboratory unconfined compressive strength and 25
drained friction angle of some rocks
2.6 Typical porosity and bulk density of rock materials 25
2.7 Dry density and porosity 25
2.8 Engineering properties of some British mudrocks 26
2.9 Recommended values of adhesion modified from NAVFAC 27
2.10 Values of χ, multiplier in expression for adhesion factor proposed 27
by various authors
2.11 Roughness of classification 27
2.12 Mass factor values 28
2.13 Side resistance reduction factor for rock 28
2.14 χ and b values for side resistance Equation 2.6 proposed by many 28
authors
2.15 Average values of Kh 29
2.16 The coefficient of lateral earth pressure Kh 29
2.17 Friction angle between pile and soil friction for different interface 29
conditions
2.18 Maximum bearing pressures for specified displacements for 30
footings on sandstone
2.19 Typical range of unconfined compressive strength expressed in 31
a function of rock type
2.20 Coefficient (Nms) for the ultimate bearing capacity estimation 32
2.21 Formula for base resistance in Equation 2.35 proposed by many 32
authors
2.22 Atterberg limit for clay minerals 33
2.23 Typical tests and compliance values for support fluid 33
3.1 Relationship between SPT-N with φ for sand and Su for clay 56
3.2 Testing and testing standards applied 56
3.3 Rock samples planned for additional testing 57
3.4 Amount of bored piles in the project 57
3.5 Recommended properties of bentonite slurry and testing methods 58
3.6 Details of test piles 58
3.7 Example level of strain gauges installation of test pile no. NBH-034 58
3.8 Example tip of extensometer of test pile no. NBH-034 59
4.1 Rock parameters from investigation 75
4.2 Results from uniaxial compressive strength test mounted with strain 76
gauges
4.3 Summary of uniaxial compressive strength test results mounted with 76
strain gauges
4.4 Results from direct shear tests 76
4.5 Summary of direct shear test results 77

vi
4.6 Actual pile shortening values of test piles 77
4.7 Ranges of mobilized skin friction for each types of soil or rock 77
4.8 Summary of extrapolated ultimate failure load 78
4.9 Average of factor safety 78
4.10 Range of extrapolated unit skin friction of rock 79
4.11 Extrapolated end bearing of piles socketed in siltstone 79
5.1 Summary the results of skin friction for rocks 93

vii
 List of Figures

Figure Title Page

2.1 Boundary of tectonic plates in the past and Korat plateau 34

2.2 Classification of rock material strength 34
2.3 Engineering classification based on modulus ratio 35
2.4 Modulus ratio ranges for some Triassic rock 35
2.5 Adhesion factor for bored and driven piles 36
2.6 Adhesion factors from the others approach 36
2.7 Design curves for unit side resistance friction and adhesion factor 37
versus strength
2.8 Shaft resistances 37
2.9 Average bond strength 38
2.10 Relationship of shaft resistances and normalized UCS 38
2.11 Relationship of shaft resistances and normalized uniaxial 39
compressive strength
2.12 Shaft resistances in regression approach averaged per site 39
2.13 Relationship between α and qu for grouted piles and drilled shafts 40
expressed in solid line fitted by logarithm
2.14 Adhesion factor as a function of rock strength 40
2.15 Modifying factor for rock mass stiffness 41
2.16 Relationship RQD and Em/Ei 41
2.17 Dimensions of rough shafts for definition of roughness factor, RF 42
2.18 Effect from degree of weathering on rock properties 42
(Kulhawy & Prakoso 2001, 2003)
2.19 Bearing capacity factor proposed by Meyerhof 43
2.20 Bearing capacity factor proposed by Pimpasugdi 43
2.21 Unit base resistance versus intact rock strength 44
2.22 Load distribution in each segment of bored pile 44
2.23 Bentonite filter cake 45
2.24 Construction time effect on capacity of pile shaft of bored piles in 45
Bangkok subsoil
2.25 The mechanism of polymer for stabilization of borehole 46
2.26 Correlation between friction factor and angle of internal friction for 46
coarse grained soil
2.27 Soft pile base from sediment 47
2.28 Tremie pipe embedded to concrete too deep 47
2.29 Tremie pipe too far from the bottom (Reese et al, 1985) 48
3.1 Structures planned to construct in the project 59
3.2 Location of Chira-Kohn Kaen project 59
3.3 Geological map of Chira-Khan Kaen project 60
3.4 Corrected SPT values and friction angle 61
3.5 General bored pile construction sequences socketed in rock 62
3.6 Rock auger, Core barrel and Tungsten carbide bullet tooth 63
3.7 Drilling by auger and Lowering rebar cages 63
3.8 Static load test system 64
3.9 Vibrating Wire Strain Gauge of SISGEO, Model VK4000VS00 64
3.10 Three extensometer tubes attached with a rebar cage 65
4.1 Soil and rock profile for NBH-033 to 039 80

viii
4.2 Rock sample for NBH-034 80
4.3 Soil and rock profiles 81
4.4 Piles socketed in different level of soil/rock layer 82
4.5 Actual pile shaft shortening comparing to Tomlinson (1995) 83
4.6 Actual pile shaft shortening comparing to Bowles (1996) 83
4.7 Applied load VS Pile head settlement of 16 test piles 84
4.8 Normalized Applied load VS Pile head settlement of 16 test piles 84
4.9 Mobilized skin friction from strain gauges – TZ curve for siltstone 85
4.10 Mobilized skin friction from strain gauges – TZ curve for sandstone 85
4.11 Mobilized end bearing from strain gauges – QZ curve for siltstone 86
4.12 Adhesion factors for clay (Tomlinson’s pattern) 86
4.13 Adhesion factors for clay (Kulhawy’s pattern) 87
4.14 Adhesion factors for weak rock (Kulhawy’s pattern) 87
4.15 Adhesion factors for clay and weak rock (Kulhawy’s pattern) 88
4.16 Adhesion factors for weak rock (William’s pattern) 88
4.17 Side friction resistance for weak rock versus uniaxial compressive 89
strength of rock (normalized by atmospheric pressure)
4.18 Side friction resistance for weak rock versus uniaxial compressive 89
strength of rock (linear fitting)
4.19 Side friction resistance for weak rock versus uniaxial compressive 90
strength of rock (square root fitting)
4.20 Friction factor for coarse-grained soil varying OCR 90
4.21 Extrapolated ultimate end bearing capacity of piles socketed in 91
siltstone VS uniaxial compressive strength of rock

ix
 List of Abbreviations

A constant parameter ≈ 0.75 to 0.80

Aco composite cross section area of steel and concrete at a strain gage plane
Ai area of pile at segment i
Ap area of pile
At area of pile at pile toe
b power in expression for adhesion factor
c y-axis intercept value of the tangent modulus line
c’ cohesion of soil supporting the pile tip
D width or diameter of pile
Dt pile diameter at pile toe
EA pile stiffness
E elastic modulus
E50 elastic modulus of rock at 50% of peak strength
Eco composite modulus of concrete and steel at the strain gage plane
Ei intact rock stiffness
Em rock mass stiffness or modulus of deformability
Ep elastic modulus of pile
Epi elastic modulus of pile at segment i
Es elastic modulus of soil or rock at the tip of pile
F1 reduction factor
f'’c concrete compressive strength
fs shaft friction resistance or unit skin friction
fsu ultimate shaft friction resistance
IF Fox embedment factor
Iwp influence factor
Iws influence factor
j mass factor related to rock mass stiffness
Kh coefficient of lateral earth pressure
K0 coefficient of earth pressure at rest
K0,OC coefficient of earth pressure at rest for overconsolidated soils
L length or embedded length of pile
Li length of each segment
Ls nominal socket length
Lt total arc length through the wall profile
m the tangent slope of line
Nc, Nq the bearing capacity factors
OCR overconsolidation ratio
P applied load
Pi pile axial force of each segment
Pi axial load at the strain gauge plane
Pt transferred load at pile toe
pa atmospheric pressure
p perimeter of pile
Qwp the actual point load transferred by pile in working stress
Qws the actual skin friction load transferred by pile in working stress
qp end bearing capacity
qpu ultimate end bearing capacity

x
qpa allowable end bearing capacity
qu uniaxial compressive strength
qwp bearing pressure at pile base
RQD rock quality designation
RF roughness factor
rs nominal socket radius
Su undrained shear strength
SPT standard penetration test
α side resistance factor or adhesion factor
αE empirical reduction factor related to joint spacing and quality
αs the coefficient, depending on type of load distribution
ασ reduction factor of UCS
β coefficient of skin friction for coarse grained soils
βm modifying factor related to the discontinuity of rock
∆q bearing pressure at pile base
δh settlement at pile head, total settlement
δps settlement along the pile shaft
δs pile shortening or elastic shortening
δt pile toe settlement or point settlement
δ’ soil-pile friction angle
ε measured strain
χ multiplier in expression for adhesion factor
σ stress
σc uniaxial compressive strength of rock
σi uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock
σ’v effective vertical stress, effective overburden pressure
φ angle of friction
φ’ effective or drained angle of friction
Δr average height of asperities
ν Poisson’s ratio

xi
 Introduction / 1

Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Background/Rationale for the Thesis
SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen project
is one of the strategies for the development of Thailand's transport infrastructure in 2015-
2022. The goals are to increase economic stability, reduce transportation costs, and create
competitive trade opportunities and also to be a catalyst for the construction of standard
gauge railways for high speed trains that will be taking place in the future for linking
neighboring countries.
Construction began on 19 February 2016 with a total length of 187 km running parallel to
the original railway tracks and planned to finish in 2019. To solve the problem about
interception between trains and local cars, the buildings in the project are planned to
construct consist of U-turn bridges, overpass bridges, elevated railways in city area, and
railway stations. Therefore, engineering design is very necessary. However, the engineering
data available in this area is limited. Because the area is a rural area. Not many large
structures exist in this area. Furthermore, the area of the project originated from the
sedimentation of transported soil and residual soil, ranging from sand, clay to sedimentary
rocks such as sandstone and sandstone. Moreover, there is an aeolian deposit such as loess
which formed by the accumulation wind-blown silt. Piles, which are the foundation of the
structure, must be placed on this area, which engineering properties are uncertain. So,
understanding and interpretation of the behavior of pile in soil and rock is very necessary.
In order to have precise analysis, theories and knowledge should be wisely selected. As the
result, the pile capacity calculation is close to pile load test result. The cost of construction
is reduced, which will be useful to construction in the future.

1.2 Statement of the Problems

Problems for this project is likely about the right method to design pile due to lack of design
information. The area has never been used in construction for large projects. After studying,
thesis should be able to find out what is the appropriate parameters of soil and rock for pile
design. The next project to be constructed in the same area as this project is the high speed
rail project that is planned to construct on 2019. Back calculated parameters of soil and rock
obtained from this thesis for pile design can be used instead of ordinary parameters. So, this
thesis will be helpful considerably in the future.

1.3 Objectives of the Research

The main objectives of this thesis are to:
1. Study load settlement behavior of bored piles from static load tests.
2. Understand bearing capacity behavior of soils and rocks from pile load test in
studied area.
3. Develop skin friction and end bearing factors for the soils and the rocks using the
load test pile data and compare the factors to those proposed by others.

1
 Introduction / 2

4. Evaluate the current pile design method and propose the appropriate method to pile
design of the studied area.

1.4 Scope
This thesis is to interpret the results from 16 bored piles tested by static load test method.
Each test pile uses 4 anchorage piles acting as reaction force. Those test piles have diameter
1.2-1.5 m. and allowable load-carrying capacity 650-700 ton and 1,000 ton for bored pile
diameter 1.2 m. and 1.5 m., respectively. The tests were performed at maximum load equal
to 2.5 times of allowable load-carrying capacity. 12 strain gauges and 5 extensometers were
installed in rebar cages at different levels to measure strain occurred and pile shortening. To
measure pile head settlement, 4 dial gauges were installed on a pile cap at different position
and also using conventional survey installed with reference beam to do a cross check.
The results that this thesis intends to explain is:
1. Soil and rock properties from laboratory test
2. Pile load test results including load settlement behavior, load distribution
3. Skin friction and end bearing resistance obtained from strain gauges
4. Failure load from extrapolation
5. Settlement prediction using failure load
6. Back calculated parameters for pile design
The test piles are located in the construction area of SRT Double Track Railway project,
which is constructed along the railway from Chira junction railway station to Khon Kaen
railway station. Bored piles are constructed in wet process, using rotary drilling and
bentonite slurry to stabilize boreholes. Soil and rock layers are formed by the alluvial
deposits, starting the sedimentation from Mesozoic era to the present. Pile bearing capacity
is obtained from both skin friction and end bearing. Some piles are embedded either siltstone
or sandstone. In case no rock layer found, Piles are drilled until they have friction resistance
sufficiently.

2
 Literature Review / 3

Chapter 2
Literature review
2.1 Introduction
The development of public utilities in the field of transportation of Thailand is taking place in
accordance with the government's policy that wants to connect districts from urban to rural
areas, for example, SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to
Khon Kaen under construction project and the forthcoming Bangkok-Korat high speed train
project. Therefore, engineering design is becoming more significant and more essential.
However, the available data in this area is limited. Furthermore, the area is formed by
deposition, which ranges from weathered sedimentary rock to fresh sedimentary rock
(sandstone and siltstone). Pile foundation of infrastructure has to be placed on these rocks,
which properties are uncertain. So, rock mechanic theory has to be adopted to in design. But
there are a few numbers of bore pile constructed in sandstone and siltstone. Behavior of these
rocks are still not fully understood. Nowadays, theoretical soil are used to design instead by
assuming rock as soil for design. As result, pile design is too conservative.
This thesis has an attempt to study regarding the piling work on rock around the world and
apply that knowledge to the pile load test in this project. The back-calculated results will be
useful for forthcoming projects in Thailand.

2.2 Geology of Korat plateau, Thailand

The subduction of Indian plate under Eurasian plate that occurred around 55 to 65 million
years ago during late Cretaceous, generated the Himalayas. This was a major transformation
of the European and Asian crust. Many mountains arose along the suture. Some lands
subside, causing in occurrence of large basins. Both plates are still moving until now, it can
be proved from the rise of the Himalayan in every year. As a result, earthquake often happens
along the boundary.
If looking at the local scale, Thailand consists of Shan-Thai and Indochina Microplates
(Bunopas, 1981) as illustrated in Figure 2.1, which both plates are part of Eurasian plate.
Both plates collided before around 200 million years ago during late Triassic, many
mountains arose along Shan-Thai margin. At that time, volcanic rocks were extruded on the
land. Erosion of volcanic mountains created alluvial plain red-beds both side of the suture.
The area of west side of Indochina plate was thrusted up by Shan-Thai plate, creating the
Korat plateau, which has a height ranging between 100 to 250 meters from mean sea level.
The types of the rocks found in the Korat Plateau, Northeast part of Thailand, are mostly
sandstone, siltstone, claystone or mudstone and conglomerate. Most of the mountains are
sandstone and conglomerate, occurring in the Mesozoic Era. The plain area found loess and
alluvial deposits underlain by sandstone and clay. Volcanic rocks were found in some area in
the south of plateau such as Basalt that erupted during the quaternary period (Peangta, 2007).
Rocks found and their properties will be explained in details in Chapter3.

3
 Literature Review / 4

2.3 Weak rock

The presence of weak rock has been a major problem in pile design. Because these rocks
have heterogeneous with many inhomogeneity behaviors, the predictions of bearing capacity
are inaccurate, and also the alterations are easy. For example, sandstone can quickly dissolve
in water or siltstone slakes when it loses moisture or exposures to air. Due to the uncertainty,
geotechnical engineers have a duty to comprehend the characteristics of these rocks to be
applied in the design. Therefore, in the investigation process, it is very important to study and
collect the information needed to make the interpretation of the ground as accurate as
possible.
2.3.1 Definition of weak rock
Many authors have described definition of weak rock in various meanings. Generally, weak
rocks mean that rocks are weaker than the others, they are weaker, more compressible, high
susceptibility to weather or easy to disintegration. Weak rocks can be sandstone, siltstone,
mudstone, shale or the other weathered rocks.
For piling work in weak rock, Gannon et al (1999) suggest that the investigation involves
three broad considerations: nature, properties and behavior and he also pointed out the
present problems as demonstrated in Table 2.1.
Robin (1992) defined the four common types of mudrocks are claystone, siltstone, mudstone
and shale which their strength are in range of weak to extremely weak as defined in Table
2.2. He explained further that their sediments have been obtained from the older rocks, some
sediment came from weathered volcanic rocks as mentioned in section 2.2 and sedimentation
generate in either marine or fresh water. As result, there are many types of cementing agents
such as calcite, silica, iron oxides and evaporate minerals (gypsum, anhydrite and halite)
In addition, Hoek E. (2006) stated that some typical weak rocks are shales, mudstones,
siltstones, phyllites and tuffs.
Most mudrocks contain many fine grained particles, the nature of clay particles can be
expansive when touching water resulting in small crack propagate inside mudrocks. After
exposure to air or changing of groundwater level. Rocks will get wet and dry alternately and
forasmuch mudrocks can absorb water higher than the other rock. So, that make these rocks
have high rate of disintegration. This phenomenon occurs in repeatable cycle day after day.
However, the detail on rock deterioration is beyond the scope of this thesis.
To classify type of weak rock by using UCS, Gannon et al (1999) proposed that weak rocks
will have UCS in the range 0.6-12.5 MPa and mass stiffness around 100-1,000 MPa.
BS 5930-1999 recommended to use the simpler index tests in the site, for example peeling by
a pocket knife. Weak rocks were classified to 3 types; extremely weak, very weak and weak,
their UCS are in the range of 0.6-25 MPa. The other ranges of weak rocks are illustrated in
Figure 2.2.
BS 8004 stated that allowable end bearing capacity on weak rocks is dependent on
compressibility, rock mass strength and allowable settlement. Also divided classes of weak
and broken rocks into 4 groups by type of rock in group No.4 is uncemented mudstones and
shales.

4
 Literature Review / 5

It can be evidently seen that σi of weak rocks are around in the range 1 to 20 MPa. The lowest
UCS of rocks are 0.6 MPa as defined by BS5930-1999. Rocks, which have strength lower
than 0.6 MPa, can be defined as soils.
As above, deformability of weak rocks is rarely considered. Weak rocks usually contain fine
particles, after expansion, the fracture will propagate. It can be stated that the weak point of
weak rock come from rock fracture. However, some authors have an attempt to classify rock
in term of deformability. The relation between UCS and deformability of rocks were initially
proposed by Deere and Miller (1966). The graphs were plotted for various types of rocks
such as volcanic rock and sedimentary rock. For igneous rocks, modulus of deformability
(Em) is between 200 to 500 times of UCS as shown in Figure 2.3. Whilst mudrocks such as
mudstone and siltstone are lower than that. Em are around 20 to 100 times of UCS as shown
in Figure 2.4.
2.3.2 Typical index properties of weak rock
Normally, index properties of rock considered are density, Poisson’s ratio, fracture state by
RQD, moisture content or porosity. There are many types of rocks. Each type has different
properties, such as slate, which has plain of weakness, As a result, this rock is anisotropic.
For sedimentary rocks, they are formed by sedimentation in water, particles were bonded
together by cementing material.
For some weak rocks, their particles have been strengthened by consolidation, deterioration
occurs immediately after exposure due to stress relief and changing moisture content.
Swelling will generate cracks further due to existence of clay particles. So, durability of these
rocks should be concerned.
The simple method to recognize rock quality was proposed by Deere (1964). Rock quality
designation (RQD) is a representative of presence of joints and fractures in rocks that can be
measured by:
RQD (%) = ∑ Lengths of core pieces equal to or longer than 100 mm x 100 (2.1)
Total length of the core run
Peck (1974) compared the allowable foundation bearing pressures with RQD as summarized
in Table 2.3:
Another rock quality indicator is Poisson’s ratio, it is the ratio between lateral strain and axial
strain. For small values of these changes, it means that the rock has high stiffness and
resistant to deformation. Typical magnitudes of Poisson’s ratio for sedimentary rocks were
demonstrated by (Gercek, 2007) shown in Table 2.4.
According to Mohr-coulomb failure criterion, base resistance of a pile correlates to the angle
of internal friction (Goodman, 1980) as explained in Section 2.5. Sivakugan et al (2012)
suggested the typical internal friction angle of rock as shown in Table 2.5 and other typical
properties were shown in Table 2.6-2.8:

5
 Literature Review / 6

2.4 Shaft friction resistance of pile

The capacity of piles in cohesive soils such as clay come from the sum of skin friction
resistance and end bearing capacity. The skin friction resistance of a pile occurs at the contact
surface between concrete of pile and soil. For driven piles, piles are jacked into the ground
causing soil movement. The soil inclosing the pile is squeezed, resulting an increase of pore-
water pressure. Under this state, strength of soils are decreased and recovered during the
water dissipation. So, strength of soils or skin friction resistance take some time to develop.
In contrast with bored piles, after boring a hole, soils in a hole are dilated and move into the
hole due to stress relief. The skin friction for a bored and cast-in-place pile generate after
casting a pile.
2.4.1 Shaft friction resistance for clay and weak rock
2.4.1.1 Study in term of fs = αSu
In general, for cohesive soils, skin friction or shaft resistance (fs) has a relationship with
strength of soils and adhesion force between the interface of pile and soils that was initially
proposed by Tomlinson (1971) in the form following:
fs = αSu (2.2)
where
Su = undrained shear strength
α = adhesion factor ranging from 0.3 to 1.0 depends on soil type, pile material and strength
of soils (see Figure 2.5)
Weltman and Healy (1978) produced the adhesion factor curve by using data of the ultimate
skin friction in boulder clay and glacial tills.
The graph was showed that adhesion factors of bored pile are commonly lower than driven
piles due to stress relief of soil and construction method. This graph can be adopted for any
type of clay, in case that no published information of adhesion factors.
Note that skin friction resistance is variable which is dependent on soil types linking to
strength and confining stress of soil, pile material linking to roughness of pile surface such as
timber, steel or concrete pile and construction method explained in chapter 3
Other adhesion factors (α) relating to undrained shear strength were proposed by FHWA,
2010. Values of α is shown as follow:
α = 0 between the ground surface and 5 ft depth or to the depth that seasonal moisture
change, whichever is greater
α = 0.55 for Su/pa ≤ 1.5
α = 0.55 – 0.1 (Su/pa -1.5) for 1.5 ≤ Su/pa ≤ 2.5
NAVFAC (1986) proposed adhesion factors from experience in pile driving. The remolded
material represented soft clay will regain shaft friction equal to original strength after
consolidation. Adhesion factors can be seen in Table 2.9.

6
 Literature Review / 7

API (1984) also suggested adhesion factors for normal consolidated clay as plotted in solid
line as shown in Figure 2.6 Note that these adhesion factors can be used for over consolidated
clay in case that undrained shear strength is lower than 50 kPa.
2.4.1.2 Study in term of fs = αqu/2
For weak rocks, rocks in mudstone family contain mainly clay mineral, therefore, bearing
capacity behavior of a pile can be assumed according to behavior of a pile in clay. The shaft
friction (fs) is normally based on strength uniaxial compressive strength (qu) of rocks. To
study further in the same pattern with cohesive soil, uniaxial compressive strength (qu) was
assumed that qu/2 = Su, therefore the equation of shaft resistance change to:
fs = αqu/2 (2.3)
The example of correlation between adhesion factor (α) and uniaxial compressive strength
(qu) studied on clay and mudrock proposed by Kulhawy and Phoon (1993) can be seen in
Figure 2.7 It shown that strength of soil/rock was normalized by atmospherics pressure (pa).
Adhesion factors can be plotted with both undrained shear strength (su) and uniaxial
compressive strength (qu).
Several authors proposed relationships of the side resistance factor in the form of power law
as follows:
α = χ(Su/pa)b = χ(qu/2pa)b (2.4)
Instead of using shaft friction (fs), adhesion factor (α) was chosen to analyze that will be
explained further.
For clays, Kulhawy and Phoon (1993) proposed the value of χ equal to 0.5 and b equal to -0.5
for clayey soils which is based on a series of 127 bored pile tests to failure. This relationship
is demonstrated in power law form as follows:
α = 0.5(Su/pa)-0.5 (2.5)
Many researches were studied regarding values of χ, which in the range of 0.89-3 for weak
rocks as demonstrated in Table 2.10
2.4.1.3 Study in term of fs/pa = χ(qu/pa)b
In the old days, a number of patterns to analyze the shaft resistance were proposed in
consistent form as follows:
fs/pa = χ(qu/pa)b (2.6)
Where
b = power in expression for adhesion factor
χ = multiplier in expression for adhesion factor
pa = atmospherics pressure (101.325 kpa)
The first attempt to explain the shaft friction was initiated by Horvath (1978). He used the
values from the field and laboratory test both small and large scale drilled shafts. He

7
 Literature Review / 8

proposed that the shaft friction should consider the strength of concrete and the rock together
by using lesser values (Figure 2.8).
Note that uniaxial compressive strength (qu) for this approach was not normalized by
atmospheric pressure (pa).
The best fitting curve (see Figure 2.9) given by Horvath (1978) can be normalized by
atmospheric pressure (pa) which the regression equation is:
fs/pa = 1.04 (lesser of f’c/pa or qu/pa)0.50 (2.7)
Horvath and Kenney (1979) proposed the relationship between skin friction resistance and
uniaxial compressive strength of rock in shale family:
fs/pa = 0.65 to 0.78 (lesser of f’c/pa or qu/pa)0.50 (2.8)
The optimum approach at that time was proposed by Rowe and Armitage (1984), the shaft
resistance (fs) had been plotted with uniaxial compressive strength (qu) for most sockets (see
Figure 2.10). The available test data is carefully considered in critical evaluation.
The best fitting curve for the data shown in dashed line was presented as:
fs/pa = 1.42(qu/pa)0.50 (2.9)
However, in design, using the conservative values are an alternative since piles in a site might
be constructed in slurry as smooth socket. Hence, lower bound equation of all data was
proposed in solid line as follow:
fs/pa = 0.63(qu/pa)0.50 (2.10)
This lower bound approach could cover most cases of socket.
Carter and Kulhawy (1988) considered a series of field test on rock socket (Figure 2.11).
Twelve of field load tests were performed both compression and uplift behavior. The
approximate lower bound of these data was presented by the following equation:
fs/pa = 0.63(qu/pa)0.50 (2.11)
This lower bound equation is coincident with previous equation.
Kulhawy and Phoon (1993) presented regression lines of shaft resistance after eliminating
site bias for those shafts in clay and rock by using database developed from Rowe and
Armitage and others. They divided the data to two sets analysis, first for all data points and
another averaged per site. So, these results were the first demonstration, which is more
appropriate for use. (see Figure 2.12)
The results are consistent to the values obtained from Rowe and Armitage as Equation 2.9.
Prakoso (2002) performed a series of tests for pile socketed in rock and interpreted the data in
logarithm manner. The tests were performed in vary types of rock such as intrusive and
extrusive rocks including man-made rocks. The results were proposed in terms of the side
resistance factor (α), which is suggested as Equation 2.11

8
 Literature Review / 9

The relations between the side resistance factor (α) and uniaxial compressive strength (qu)
had been plotted in logarithm scale as shown in Figure 2.13. Note that the uniaxial
compressive strength (qu) was normalized by one atmospheric pressure.
In order to understand the format of graph, the proposed linear equation was fitted by using
logarithm theory the following:
log α = log χ (qu/pa)b (2.11)
log α = log χ + b log (qu/pa)b (2.12)
The logarithm equation proposed in the graph can be transformed to the power law
corresponding to the following:
fs/pa = 0.98(qu/pa)0.50 (2.13)
or approximately
fs/pa = (qu/pa)0.50 (2.14)
Prakoso (2002) proposed the lower bound of the graph subsequently to cover 100% of data
points, χ can be set to 0.25:
fs/pa = 0.25(qu/pa)0.50 (2.15)
Many authors proposed equations to estimate the side resistance in term of uniaxial
compressive strength only wherewith qu was not normalized by pa, note that this form is
conversion from the Equation 2.6 as will be discussed below.
fs = χ(qu)b (2.16)
Note the both fsu and qu in Equation 2.16 are in units of MPa
The relation between skin friction resistance and uniaxial compressive strength from
Equation 2.8 of Horvath and Kenney (1979) can be converted to:
fs = 0.20-0.25qu0.5 (2.17)
Rowe and Armitage (1987) performed load tests on sockets side resistance of Ordovician
aged shales, they suggested the ultimate side resistance as a function of uniaxial compressive
strength only for different roughness classes of socket (the roughness classes are given in
Table 2.11), the initial estimation of side expected resistance as follow:
For roughness classes R1, R2 and R3:
fs = 0.45qu0.5 (2.18)
To account for roughness class R4, side resistance can be increased to:
fs = 0.60qu0.5 (2.19)
Moreover, Zhang and Einstein (1998) also suggested equations to estimate side resistance
based on socket roughness.
For smooth socket:
fs = 0.4(qu)0.5 (2.20)

9
 Literature Review / 10

For rough socket:

fs = 0.8(qu)0.5 (2.21)
2.4.1.4 Study in term of fsu = αβmqu (based on rock fracture)
General form of the ultimate shaft resistance (fsu) was developed and suggested the formula
in the form of uniaxial compressive strength (qu) only. The relationship is:
fsu = αqu (2.22)
where
α = adhesion factor related to qu
In practical work, when there is sufficient reliable data, shaft resistance (fs) of piles in weak
rocks should be dependent on stiffness and strength of the surrounding rocks. Williams and
Pells (1981) modified the Equation 2.22 by concerning a reduction factor for the influence of
rock mass stiffness and their adhesion factor as seen in Figure 2.14. Thus:
fsu = αβmqu (2.23)
Where
βm = modifying factor or correlation factor related to the discontinuity of rock mass.
Considering the details of equation 2.23, it is found that α is the multiplication factor to
decrease the strength of intact rock. The βm factor is the ratio of the shear strength between
rock mass and intact rock.
Williams, Johnston, and Donald (1980) proposed modifying factor (βm) as seen in Figure
2.15 to be the multiplier used to decrease the capacity due to rock fracture, which is in a
function of rock quality:
(2.24)
βm = f(j)
Where
j = the mass factor, j = Em/Ei, the ratio of rock mass stiffness to intact rock stiffness.
Hobbs (1974) presented values of mass factor in relationship with RQD as demonstrated in
Table 2.12
For this thesis, average RQD of each bored holes will be used to find mass factor (j) and
modifying factor (βm) obtained from Figure 2.15 will be used to further back analyzed
adhesion factor (α).
In addition, Zhang and Einstein (2004) have proposed the method for estimating the mass
factor (j) by fitting the graph between RQD and Em/Ei. The relations are shown in Figure
2.16(a).
The Relationship of RQD-Em/Ei for the average trend is:
Em/Ei = j = 100.0186RQD-1.91 (2.25)

10
 Literature Review / 11

However, instead of using elastic modulus of rock, many authors proposed correlation
between uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock (σi) and uniaxial compressive strength
of rock mass (σm). Kulhawy and Goodman (1987) initially proposed that σm equal to 0.33σi
when RQD is in the range of 0 to 70% and then constantly increase to 0.8σi when RQD
increases from 70 to 100%. AASHTO (1996) and Zhang (2010) also suggested reduction
factor of UCS (ασ) using the following expression:
σm = ασσi (2.26)
Where
ασ = 0.0231RQD – 1.32 ≥ 0.15 (AASHTO, 1996)
ασ = 100.013RQD - 1.34 (Zhang, 2010)
The relationships of σm and σi were plotted as expressed in Figure 2.16(b).
O’Neill and Reese (1999) modified the Equation 2.6 by adding an empirical reduction factor
(αE) for smooth rock sockets or drilled sockets using bentonite, the equation changes to:

fs/pa = 0.65αE(qu/pa)0.50 (2.27)

The coefficient αE related to ratio of rock mass stiffness to intact rock stiffness which can be
determined as given in Table 2.13.
To take into account the roughness of shafts, a formal formula of roughness factor RF can be
defined as:
RF = (Δr/rs)/(Lt/Ls) (2.28)
Where
Δr = average height of asperities
rs = nominal socket radius
Lt = total arc distance along the socket wall profile
Ls = nominal socket length (Figure 2.17)
Horvath et al (1983) recommended a relationship between fsu and RF modified from
artificially roughened (grooved) sockets in mudstone as follow:
fsu = 0.8(RF)0.45qu (2.29)
Typical roughness factor (RF) values are in the range of 0.01 for smooth socket to 0.1 for
grooved/rough socket.
Rock mass quality is considered for side resistance in rock with quality. In weathered rock
with complexity of rock profiles, degree of weathering become necessary due to the variation
of rock properties. The actual side resistance forces occur at the boundary of soil/rock and
piles in small scale. Some authors proposed consideration of degree of weathering instead of
using RQD for whole rock mass to calculate skin friction of piles in weak rocks. Prakoso
(2007) presented the reduction factors to decrease the intact rock properties from effect of
weathering as shown in Figure 2.19. It will be seen that the ratio between uniaxial

11
 Literature Review / 12

compressive strength of weathered rocks to unweathered rocks are 0.7, 0.4 and 0.2 for
slightly, moderately and highly weathered rocks, respectively. This means that pile capacity
might drop to 20% for highly weathered rocks.
χ and b values for side resistance proposed by many authors can be described shortly in Table
2.14. It can be seen that the minimum value of χ is 0.2. Therefore, it is more suitable to use
this value in the calculation of limitation of side friction. Note that a lesser value of strength
between rock and concrete should be used in the calculation.
2.4.2 Shaft friction resistance for sand
Forasmuch as sand is a cohesionless and granular material, sand particles can be densified by
vibration from pile driving; resulting in the skin friction increases with depth until reaching
the certain depth, the skin friction remains constantly. During the skin friction increase, it can
be described in accordance with Equation 2.30. The skin friction of piles are uncertain,
depending on soil properties and construction method. Typically, the unit skin friction of
bored piles is less than driven piles after the strength regain to its original state that already
explained in 2.4.1.1
The general formula for the unit skin friction in sand can be described as follow:
fs = Khσ’vtanδ’ (2.30)
Where
Kh = effective coefficient of lateral earth pressure, normally relating to coefficient of earth
pressure at rest (K0), ranging from K0 to approximately 1.75, Kh < 1 for loose sand and Kh =
1 for dense sand
σ’v = effective vertical stress at the considered depth
δ’ = soil-pile friction angle = Aφ’
A = constant parameter ≈ 0.50 to 1.00
φ’ = effective angle of friction
For normally consolidated and cohesionless soils, K0 can be estimated by Jaky’s (1944)
equation:
K0 = 1-sin φ’ (2.31)
Normally, the magnitude of Kh is inaccurate because density of sand increases with depth.
Therefore, Braja (2014) concluded and recommended to use average Kh values as presented
in Table 2.15:
Values of δ and Kh are used widely, which were proposed by Kulhawy (1984). The
coefficient of Kh is involved with at-rest earth pressure coefficient (K0) and pile construction
method as illustrated in Table 2.16-2.17.
Angle of pile/soil friction (δ) have different values, which is dependent to interface
conditions.

12
 Literature Review / 13

In the case of overconsolidated soils, when cohesionless soils are in the unloading state, soils
are in preconsolidated state, K0 may be expressed as Schmidt (1967):
K0,OC = (1-sin φ’)(OCRsin φ’) (2.32)
Where
K0,OC = coefficient of earth pressure at rest for overconsolidated soils
OCR = overconsolidation ratio
Noted K0,OC from Equation 2.32 is the estimated value. To obtain the most appropriate value,
K0,OC should be found out from in situ test.

2.5 Base resistance of pile

2.5.1 Base resistance for soil
The equation to calculate base resistance of pile in soils was modified from the shallow
foundation equation by Terzaghi, unit point resistance qp can be expressed as:
qp = Nc c’ + Nq σ’v (2.33)
Where
c’ = cohesion of soil at the pile tip
σ’v = effective vertical stress at the pile tip
Nc, Nq = the bearing capacity factors
2.5.1.1 Clay
To calculate base resistance, clay under pile tip is assumed to be in saturated and undrained
conditions (φ=0). The ultimate base resistance was calculated from taking moment at the pile
tip, qp can be given as:
qp ≈ Nc Su = 9 Su (2.34)
Where
Su = undrained shear strength of soil below the pile tip
2.5.1.2 Sand
For piles in sand, soil is no cohesion c’= 0. So, Equation 2.33 simplifies to:
qp = Nq σ’v (2.35)
Because strength of sands increase with depth until reaching a certain depth as explained in
section 2.4.2, design should specify limitation of base resistance. Typical limiting values of
unit end bearing of clay and sand are 270 t/m2 and 1,000 t/m2, respectively.
The correlation of Nq and friction angle was presented by Meyerhof (1976) shown in Figure
2.19.

13
 Literature Review / 14

Pimpasugdi (1989) also suggested values of Nq shown in Figure 2.20. Nq came from back
analyze the data of pile load tests in Bangkok subsoils. Piles were designed as mainly-
frictional piles because bed rock was found at a depth over than 400 meters.
Hence, the correlation of Nq and φ’ are more appropriate to use for design piles in Thailand.
2.5.2 Base resistance for rock
End bearing capacity of bored piles placed on rock is dependent on the strength of rock mass.
Naturally, the rock mass will have discontinuities and instability of mechanical properties
which directly affects the strength of rock. Calculation the end bearing capacity of a pile,
applying the following general equation:
qp = χ(qu)b (2.36)
2.5.2.1 Study related to qu and φ of rock
The ultimate base resistance was initially suggested by Goodman (1980). Mohr-coulomb
failure criterion was applied by assuming rocks are homogeneous and rock mass has a
constant of angle of internal friction and uniaxial compressive strength. So, the correlation of
bearing capacity can be described as:
qp = qu(design)(Nφ+1) (2.37)
Where
Nφ = tan2(45+φ/2) (2.38)
Due to the scale effect of rock specimens, the larger specimens can contain more fractures
than smaller one. As a result, the magnitude of uniaxial compressive strength tested in the lab
should be decreased a fourfold to fivefold reduction. So:
qu(design) = qu(lab)/5 (2.39)
Hence, the Equation 2.39 is changed to:
qpu = [qu(lab)/5](Nφ+1) (2.40)
Note that number 5 is not the factor of safety. To cover the uncertainties of estimation qp,
Goodman (1980) recommended to use safety factor from 2.5 to 10. So, the equation of
allowable end bearing capacity is:
qpa = [qu(lab)/5][(Nφ+1)/FS] (2.41)
2.5.2.2 Study in term of qp = χ(qu)b
Zhang and Einstein (1998) interpreted the database of 39 pile load tests which pile tips were
placed on generally soft rock. The results were plotted in logarithm scale as shown in Figure
2.21. The equation derived from their scatter were proposed by NCHRP (2006) as follow:
Lower bound:
qp = 3.0(qu)0.5 (2.42)
Upper bound:
(2.43)

14
 Literature Review / 15

qp = 6.6(qu)0.5
Mean:
qp = 4.8(qu)0.5 (2.44)
Rowe and Armitage (1987b) stated that in experiments, there is a significant variation
depending on which theory is adopted. The lowest theoretical data was chosen and applied a
safety factor of 3, the allowable end bearing capacity obtained is approximately 2.7 times of
uniaxial compressive strength of rock.
Williams, Johnston, and Donald (1980) performed base loading tests on rock sockets by
considering ultimate resistance. At settlement δ/D = 25 %, the base load pressure occurs
higher than 10σc. They proposed the “minimum peak base resistance for all piles in intact
rock” equal to 5σc for all sockets with L/D.
Pells and Turner (1980) considered allowable bearing capacity instead of ultimate resistance
as illustrated in Table 2.18:
Allowable bearing pressures were produced in term of UCS for specific normalized
displacements at different types of sandstone.
The authors mentioned above are not concerned about the quality of rock mass such as level
of weathering, fracture characteristics or joint frequency which effect the strength of rock
mass. So, AASHTO (1996) recommended the strength reduction coefficient of rock mass
(Nms) to compute end bearing of pile. Equation 2.36 now change to.
qp = Nmsqu (2.45)
Nms is a parameter as a function of quality and type of rock which can be found in Table 2.19-
2.20.
In summary, design method of end bearing capacity is illustrated in Table 2.21:

2.6 Settlement on pile socketed in soil/rock

In pile design, consideration of only bearing or structural capacity may be inappropriate.
Because of the uncertainty of the rock and insufficiency of data in design, the pile may have
potentially excessive settlement. The key success of pile design is to control the settlement of
pile within the allowable range. Many authors have attempted to create equations to predict
pile settlement. In general, pile settlement originate from two parts, the sum of pile
shortening and toe settlement of soil/rock beneath the pile base.
δh = δs + δt (2.46)
Where
δh = settlement at pile head
δs = pile shortening
δt = pile toe settlement

15
 Literature Review / 16

Therefore, estimating the magnitude of settlement should consider soil and rock properties
inclosing pile shaft and at the tip of pile and properties of pile itself.
Hooke’s law is a principle to explain the state of force needed to compress or extend a spring
which can be applied to calculate pile settlement. The pile is divided into sections as shown
in Figure 2.22. The load starts acting on the top of the pile head and transfers along the
segment, as it is reduced by frictional resistance of soil/rock layer. After this, the remaining
load is transmitted to the lower segment and eventually to the pile toe.
In this state, each segment of pile is compressed, the pile shortening can be calculated by:
௉೔ ௅೔
δs = (2.47)
஺೔ ா೛೔

Where
Pi = pile axial force of each segment
Li = length of each segment
Ai = area of pile at segment i
Epi = elastic modulus of pile at segment i
The pile load is carried by the friction resistance of each layer. After that, the remaining load
is transferred to soil or rock layer at pile tip. The base load transferred compresses the ground
beneath pile and creates the settlement. Pile toe settlement can be calculated from:
௉೟ ஽೟
δt = (2.48)
஺೟ ாೞ

Where
Pt = transferred load at pile toe
Dt = pile diameter at pile toe
At = cross-section area of pile at pile toe
Es = elastic modulus of soil/rock at pile toe
Note that this approach consider that the pile and soil/rock are in elastic behavior. In order to
estimate settlement under ultimate load, it is not appropriate to use this method.
Bowles (1996) proposed a method to estimate pile settlement by dividing settlement into 2
terms, pile shortening of each segment of soil layer which is the same term with Hooke’s law
and the point settlement or pile toe settlement.
௉೔ ௅೔ (ଵିνమ)
δh = ∑൤ ൨ + ∆qD mIsIFF1 (2.49)
஺೔ ா೛೔ ாೞ

Where:
∆q = bearing pressure at pile base = base load transferred/At.
ν = Poisson’s ratio

16
 Literature Review / 17

mIs = 1.0 (shape factor)

IF = Fox embedment factor, as follow:
IF = 0.55 if L/D ≤ 5
IF = 0.50 if L/D > 5
F1 = reduction factor, as follows:
0.25 if the axial skin resistance reduces the point load Pt ≤ 0
0.50 if the point load Pt > 0
0.75 if point bearing (there is always some skin resistance)
Vesic (1977) suggested the calculation of pile settlement is different from the others by
dividing the settlement into three components. The first is the term of pile elastic shortening
(δs) and the second and third terms are settlements at pile point caused by load transferred at
the point (δt) and surrounding the pile shaft (δps), respectively.
So, the three components can be written in general formula as follow:
δh = δs + δt + δps (2.50)
The pile shortening can be determined by assuming the pile materials are in elastic behavior
and strength of materials are well-known.
(ொೢ೛ ା αೞ ொೢೞ )௅
δs = (2.51)
஺೛ ா೛

Where
Qwp = the actual point load transferred by pile in working stress
Qws = the actual skin friction load transferred by pile in working stress
αs = the magnitude of this coefficient varies between 0.50-0.67 which depends on type of
load distribution
L = length of pile
Ap = area of pile
Ep = elastic modulus of pile
The pile point settlement for both components can be found by assuming that the soil or rock
around the pile shaft and tip of pile toe behave in elastic condition. The pile toe and pile shaft
settlement consider pressure at the pile toe and average unit skin friction transferred along the
pile shaft, respectively. The solutions can be written as follow:
୯౭౦ ୈ
δt = (1 - ν2)Iwp (2.52)
୉౩
Qws D
δps = ቀ ቁ (1 - ν2)Iws (2.53)
୮୐ Es

17
 Literature Review / 18

Where
qwp = bearing pressure at pile base = Qwp/At
D = width or diameter of pile
Iwp = influence factor ≈ 0.85
p = perimeter of pile
L = pile length
௅
Iws = influence factor = 2 + 0.35ට
஽

Tomlinson (1995) proposed a method to calculate pile head settlements which is based on
settlement at pile shaft and base similar to the others. The solutions can be presented by:
(୛౩ ାଶ୛ౘ )୐ π୛ౘ ୈ(ଵିνమ)୍౦
δh = + (2.54)
ଶ୅౦ ୉౦ ସ୅౪ ୉౩

Where
Ws = loads on the pile shaft
Wb = loads on the pile base
Ip = influence related to the ratio of L/B
It can be seen that all of these theories mentioned assume that pile and soil/rock
behaves as an elastic material. But at the site of Chira Junction to Khon Kaen project, bearing
capacity of piles were tested at the ultimate load (as designed), resulting in the settlement
value may be different from the prediction. So, to eliminate the bias, the author uses the finite
element method to estimate the pile settlement which can be seen in Chapter 4.

2.7 Other related theory

2.7.1 Fellenius method
It is well known that the data obtained from the pile static test such as the sum of bearing
capacity of soil and pile head settlement are not sufficient for further analysis. It cannot
explain the actual behavior of the soil/rock. In order to study the behavior of soil and rock,
strain gauges are inserted into the pile at each segment. A strain gauge is a type of electrical
resistor. When the load acting on pile, concrete and rebar is compressed, it causes resistance
in resistors to change. The different values of resistance can be converted to strain values.
However, the most popular method to interpret the signal of strain gauge is proposed by
Fellenius (2001).
A strain gauge is an equipment to measure strain of pile section and convert to stress or axial
force. Composite modulus of concrete and steel at the strain gauge plane (Eco) has to be
found. The equation to find Eco proposed by Fellenius (2001) as presented below:

Eco = 0.5mε + c (2.55)

18
 Literature Review / 19

Where
m = the tangent slope of line

ε = measured strain
c = y-axis intercept value of the tangent modulus line
In practical work, the applied load are measured instead of stress (σ). If the graphs between
applied load and strain are plotted, the slope of graphs are:
From
σ/ε = E (2.56)
However,
σ = P/A (2.57)
Therefore,
EA = P/ε (2.58)
The slope of the graphs are pile stiffness (EA). So, the Equation 2.55 can be changed to:

EcoAco = 0.5mε + c (2.59)

After calculating the pile stiffness, axial force at strain gauge plane can be determined by:

Pi = EcoAcoε or (EA)coε (2.60)

Where
Pi = axial load at the strain gauge plane
(EA)co = equivalent pile stiffness
Aco = composite cross section area of steel and concrete at a strain gage plane
If strain gages are installed in multiple layers of pile, the axial force at the boundary of layers
can be calculated from above equations. Hence, load distribution behavior of a pile can be
known.
2.7.2 Bentonite and polymer, bored pile construction
Large diameter bored pile construction in Thailand always uses rotary drilling rigs, namely,
crawler crane mounted with a drilling rig or self-mounting rig. The first soft layer such as
Bangkok soft clay is prevented by using temporary casing. The casing is driven through the
soft layer to the firm layer. Drilling is started by using auger for cohesive soils and using
bucket for cohesionless soils. During drilling, the borehole wall tends to collapse due to
interference of groundwater. To maintain the stability of borehole, bentonite slurry is
adopted. However, properties of the bentonite slurry should be checked before using. The use
of slurry is not only useful, but also causing problems if it is not used properly. Therefore, an
engineer has to understand it before using.

19
 Literature Review / 20

2.7.2.1 What is bentonite?

Bentonite is a type of soil that consists primarily of Montmorillonite which is one of clay
mineral. Secondary components are silicon oxide, iron oxide and calcium oxide. The cations
surrounding Montmorillonite mineral is pulled in by anions on the surface of clay mineral.
The higher concentration of cations means higher rate of water attraction, resulting in
expansion of mineral. The expansion capacity of Montmorillonite can be indicated from
Atterberg limit as shown in Table 2.22.
It can be seen that Montmorillonite has very high liquid limit, meaning that it can absorb and
contain a lot of water which is still in plastic state. If bentonite is mixed with water in
moderation, the solution will become viscous slurry, that proper to stabilize the borehole. In
general, bentonite can be categorized into three types as follow:
(1) Natural sodium bentonite – high liquid limit and swelling, low fluid loss, suitable
for use but expensive and difficult to find.
(2) Natural calcium bentonite – low liquid limit and swelling, high fluid loss, not
suitable for use in bored pile work.
(3) Sodium-activated calcium bentonite – bentonite is produced by admixing sodium
carbonate into Calcium bentonite which is suitable for use in bored pile
construction.
2.7.2.2 Functions and properties of bentonite slurry in bored pile construction
The major function of bentonite slurry is to stabilize the borehole during both drilling and
concreting. As mentioned, the required bentonite slurry should have high density and
viscosity. Meanwhile, during drilling, if the bentonite slurry is too viscous, the drilling will
perform with difficulty because of fluid pressure. The functions of bentonite slurry can be
classified briefly as follow:
(1) Prevent sidewall collapse by creating resisting pressure against the sidewall and
groundwater pressure
(2) No fluid loss during construction, the slurry maintains in the borehole until finish.
(3) Keep soil sediments in suspension, sediment not fall to the bottom oh borehole too
fast
(4) Easy to be replaced by concrete during pouring
(5) Able to be recycled, the sediment can be easily separated from the slurry
(6) Easy to be pumped
It can be seen that the needed bentonite slurry is required both heavy and light slurry for
prevention from borehole collapse and replacement by concrete, respectively. Therefore, ICE
(2007) proposed typical tests and compliance values to control the quality of bentonite slurry
as shown in the Table 2.23.
However, the bentonite slurry tested is manufactured in United Kingdom . In order to use in
Thailand, the compliance values should be adapted for specific area.
2.7.2.3 Effects from bentonite in bored pile construction
Bentonite slurry performs its task by creating the fluid pressure to resist the pressure from
groundwater. Some bentonite slurry can intrude into void of sandy soils and bentonite

20
 Literature Review / 21

particles form itself as a seal the so-called filter cake at the wall of borehole as illustrated in
Figure 2.23. Filter cake can be generated all the time and become thicker when fluid losses
into the soil. If the filter cake is not removed in the concreting process. Filter cake inserted
between concrete and soils will reduce skin friction of pile. Thasnanipan et al (1998) studied
about bearing capacity of 11 bored piles constructed in Bangkok subsoil with different
construction time and found that the pile shaft capacity is decreased below the capacity from
design if the construction time is longer than 40 hours. The reduction of pile capacity can be
seen in Figure 2.24.
In order to eliminate the problem, Thasnanipan et al (1998) also suggested that leaving the
slurry over than 4 hours should not be allowed and in the case that the construction time over
than 24 hours, the slurry should be agitated by drilling rig to scrape the filter cake out from
the surface before lowering rebar cages.
2.7.2.4 Polymer application in bored pile construction
The major problem of bentonite slurry used in bored pile construction is the reduction of the
pile shaft capacity due to the layer of the filter cake. Bentonite has a phenomenon the so-
called Thixotropic recovery namely when the slurry is left, bentonite becomes gelatin film
adhered to the wall and when the slurry is agitated, bentonite becomes liquid again. So,
agitation is used to decrease the rate of formation of the filter cake. To solve the difficulty,
polymer becomes another choice for bored pile construction in Thailand (Thasnanipan et al,
2000).
Mechanism of polymer to stabilize the borehole is to form itself as strand and gelation to
infiltrate and seal the void of soil, resulting increase of bonding force between soil particles.
The mechanism of polymer is summarized in Figure 2.25.
Boonyarak (2001) also back analyzed to find coefficient of skin friction (β) and effective or
drained angle of friction (φ’) for coarse grained soils for bored piles constructed in Bangkok
subsoil and found that the trend of β and φ’ obtained from bored piles constructed in polymer
slurry is higher than parameters obtained from bentonite slurry as shown in Figure 2.26.

Boonyarak (2001) also explained that the relationship of β and φ’ in polymer slurry higher
because polymer does not form itself as filter cake in sand layer. Consequently, skin friction
of piles does not loss and also the work is much easier because polymer catches the
suspended soil particles and drop them to the bottom of the borehole which is easy to be kept
by cleaning bucket.
2.7.2.5 Suitable concrete in bored pile construction
Wet process bored piles have slender ratio L/D 20-75 with reinforced rebar along the pile.
Concrete is poured continuously without interruption throughout the pile length through
tremie pipe, fulfill the void in borehole thru the space of rebar, replace the slurry to stabilize
the borehole and also lift up the sediment. Concrete cannot be compacted by vibrator, it has
to be compacted under self-weight with appropriate strength and durability after hardening.
The other requirement are resistance to segregation, bleeding and leaching. So, the concrete
has to be designed properly. The required properties of fresh concrete is described as follow:

21
 Literature Review / 22

(1) High workability – Fresh concrete has to be poured thru tremie pipe and compacted
by self-weight, suitable slump is around 17-20 cm.
(2) Resistance to bleeding and segregation - Adhesion between materials must be well
enough to resist the segregation. Water reducing admixture should be added to
maintain the workability.
(3) Setting time – Retarders should be added to the concrete to extend the setting time,
making the whole concrete setting together.
(4) Compressive strength – high enough to take the friction force.
(5) Durability – Concrete is constructed under ground level, which has to contact to the
soils and groundwater all the time. So, it has to withstand to these conditions
without any damage to concrete surface.
2.7.2.6 Concrete pouring under slurry and control
However, even concrete and slurry is well controlled the quality. But the construction process
is not right, it can cause problems to the pile. For example:
(1) Bottom of the borehole is not cleaned properly, namely after drilling, the leaving
time of sedimentation is too short, the remaining sediments settle down to the
bottom of the borehole during lower rebar cages, resulting in happening of soft pile
base. After concrete pouring to the bottom, sediments will be suddenly discharged.
Soft toe of pile happens from intermixing between sediments and concrete as
demonstrated in Figure 2.27. This is the main reason for end bearing reduction.
(2) The reduction of skin friction resistance occurs from the membrane of filter cake
when it is thicker. Filter cake can be eliminated by agitation and also concrete
pouring. The pressure from concrete during casting can scrape filter cake out.
However, if the tremie pipe embeds in the concrete too deep as seen in Figure 2.28,
the pressure from concrete will drop. As a result, the pressure is not enough to
scrape filter cake. The construction process should be well controlled.
(3) Tremie pipe is lifted up too far from the bottom of borehole as displayed in Figure
2.29, causing intermixing between concrete and slurry. The first batch of concrete
will be segregated and mixed with slurry. As a result, the end bearing capacity of
pile is reduced.
The main objective of section 2.7.2 is to try to explain about the others reasons that can
decrease bearing capacity of pile. Which can be seen that many factors directly effect to pile
capacity. There are many other factors that are not mentioned in this thesis. However, the
working process of the site is trying to follow the standards and specifications that are
planned to ensure the best quality of the pile.
2.7.3 Extrapolation methods for failure load
Pile static load tests is usually performed on the ultimate load, namely 2 to 2.5 times of safe
working load. The tests might not reach to the failure load. As a result, piles are not fully
mobilized. In order to reach the failure load, the cost of pile load test will increase
dramatically. To obtain the fully mobilized back analysis parameters, extrapolation method is
inevitably adopted. Many authors proposed methods to extrapolate the correlation of load and
settlement as follow:
2.7.3.1 Brinch-Hansen’s method (1963)

22
 Literature Review / 23

Brinch-Hansen (1963) developed a method based on hyperbolic relationship using correlation

between square root of pile head settlements divided by applied load values compared against
the pile head settlement. The curve of graph is fitted by using straight line. The relationship
of slope and y-intercept of straight line is used to calculate pile load capacity at failure:
qpu = (2C1C2)1/2
Where
C1 = slope of the best fitting linear line
C2 = y axis intercept of the linear line
2.7.3.2 Chin’s method (1970)
The graph is plotted between pile head settlements divided by corresponding load values
against the pile head settlement before applying Chin’s method. The inverse slope of the
straight line is the failure load of piles:
qpu = 1/C1
2.7.3.3 Ahmad and Pise’s method (1997)
Similar to Chin’s method, Ahmad and Pise (1997) suggested the reduction factor to reduce
values of the ultimate load that obtained from Chin (1970) by using ratio different settlement
∆δ (different value of settlement from the intersection of two fitting straight line to total
settlement) to pile head settlement (δh), Reduction factor (RF) is equal to:
RF = ∆δ/δh
Where
RF = reduction facter
∆δ = different settlement
2.7.3.4 Mazurkiewicz’s method (1980)
Bengt (1980) presented a method to extrapolate the load-settlement curve by assuming that
the curve is parabolic. The equal interval of settlements are chosen and the straight lines are
drawn to intersect the load settlement relation, then the projection of those lines are made and
intercept to the load axis. 45 degree line are drawn to intercept with the straight lines that
projected from the load settlement relation. The intervals of applied loads are getting smaller,
then the ultimate load can be predicted.
2.7.3.5 Decourt’s method (1999)
According to Decourt’s method, the relationship is plotted by using applied load divided by
its corresponding settlement versus log applied load. The straight line can be fitted with last
three points. The intercept value of this straight line with applied load axis can be defined as
the failure load.

23
 Literature Review / 24

Table 2.1 The identification, characterization and investigation of weak rock present
problems (after Gannon et al, 1999)

Not investigated in its own right (usually the soil borehole is

extended into the weak rock, changing of coring techniques)
Investigation Rarely tested except by SPT
Properties are difficult to measure, alteration during the piling
process
Deformability is rarely considered
Characterization
Heterogeneous with many inhomogeneities
Identification Boundary between weak rock and soil are difficult to classify

Table 2.2 Descriptive terms for strength of rock substance (after Robin et al, 1992)

Point load strength Approximate UCS

Rock strength class Symbol
index, Is(50) (MPa)
Extremely weak EW 0.04 1
Very weak VW 0.2 5
Weak W 1 25
Medium strong MS 2 50
Strong S 4 100
Very strong VS 10 250
Extremely strong EH

Table 2.3 RQD index and allowable bearing pressure (after Peck, 1974)

RQD Rock Quality Allowable bearing

(%) pressures (MPa)
0-25 Very poor 1-3
25-50 Poor 3-6.5
50-75 Fair 6.5-12
75-90 Good 12-20
90-100 Excellent 20-30

Table 2.4 Typical Poisson’s ratio for sedimentary rocks (after Gercek, 2007)

Rock type Poisson’s ratio,ν

Conglomerate 0.10–0.40
Limestone 0.10–0.33
Rock salt 0.05–0.30
Sandstone 0.05–0.40
Shale 0.05–0.32
Siltstone 0.05–0.35

24
 Literature Review / 25

Table 2.5 Typical values of laboratory unconfined compressive strength and drained friction
angle of some rocks (after Sivakugan et al, 2012)

Rock Type UCS Drained angle of internal

(MPa) friction, φ’ (degrees)
Sandstone 70-140 27-45
Limestone 105-210 30-40
Shale 35-70 10-20
Granite 140-210 40-50
Marble 90-70 25-30
Sandstone - 27-34(1)
and Siltstone
(1)Wyllie (1999)

Table 2.6 Typical porosity and bulk density of rock materials

Type of rock Bulk density Porosity (%)

(gm/cm3)
Granite 2.6-2.9 0.5-1.5
Rhyolite 2.4-2.6 4.0-6.0
Siltstone 2.3-2.8(2) 21.0-41.0(3)
Sandstone 2.0-2.6 5.0-25.0
Shale 2.0-2.4 10.0-30.0
Limestone 2.2-2.6 5.0-20.0
Marble 2.6-2.7 0.5-2.0
Slate 2.6-2.7 0.1-0.5
(2)Austin powder company (2002), (3)Morris and Johnson (1967)

Table 2.7 Dry density and porosity

Class Dry density Description Porosity (%) Description

(gm/cm3)
1 Less than 1.8 Very low Over 30 Very high
2 1.8-2.2 Low 30-15 High
3 2.2-2.55 Moderate 15-5 Medium
4 2.55-2.75 High 5-1 Low
5 Over 2.75 Very high Less than 1 Very low

25
 Literature Review / 26

Table 2.8 Engineering properties of some British mudrocks (after Cripps and Taylor, 1981)

(Cont. )

Note: W = weathered, U = unweathered

26
 Literature Review / 27

Table 2.9 Recommended values of adhesion modified from NAVFAC (1986)

Table 2.10 Values of χ, multiplier in expression for adhesion factor proposed by various
authors (after Gannon, J. A., 1999)

Table 2.11 Roughness of classification (after Pells et al, 1980)

27
 Literature Review / 28

Table 2.12 Mass factor values (after Hobbs, 1974)

Table 2.13 Side resistance reduction factor for rock (O’Neill and Reese, 1999)

Table 2.14 χ and b values for side resistance Equation 2.6 proposed by many authors

28
 Literature Review / 29

Table 2.15 average values of Kh (Braja, 2014)

Table 2.16 The coefficient of lateral earth pressure Kh (after Kulhawy, 1984)

Table 2.17 Friction angle between pile and soil friction for different interface conditions
(after Kulhawy, 1984)

Note values of φ’ are converted from SPT according to the relationship shown in Figure 3.4

29
 Literature Review / 30

Table 2.18 Maximum bearing pressures for specified displacements for footings on sandstone
(after Pells and Turner, 1980)

30
 Literature Review / 31

Table 2.19 Typical range of unconfined compressive strength expressed in

a function of rock type (after AASHTO, 1996)

(1)Range of unconfined compressive strength reported by various investigations

(2)Not including oil shale

31
 Literature Review / 32

Table 2.20 Coefficient (Nms) for the ultimate bearing capacity estimation
(after AASHTO, 1996)

Table 2.21 Formula for base resistance in Equation 2.35 proposed by many authors

Pile design method Formula Description

1. Goodman (1980) qpu = [qu(lab)/5](Nφ+1) Rock homogeneous
2. Williams et. al. (1980) qpu = 5.0(qu) Piles in intact rock
3. Pells and Turner (1980) qpu = 1.2MPa to 2.2(qu) see details Table 2.18
4. Rowe and Armitage (1987b) qpa = 2.7(qu) Factor of safety 3
5. Zhang and Einstein (1998) qpu = 4.8(qu )0.5 39 pile load tests
6. Zhang (2008) qpu = 4.93(qu)0.5 50 pile load tests
7. AASHTO (1996) qpu = Nmsqu see details Table 2.20

32
 Literature Review / 33

Table 2.22 Atterberg limit for clay minerals (after Fell, 2005)

Table 2.23 Typical tests and compliance values for support fluid (after ICE, 2007)
Compliance values measured at 20°°C
Property to be Test method and Sample from
Freshly Ready for
measured apparatus mixed re-use
excavation prior
concreting
Density Mud balance <1.10 g/ml <1.25 g/ml <1.15 g/ml
Fluid loss
Low-temperature test fluid loss <30 ml <50 ml n/a
(30 minute test)
Filter cake thickness Low-temperature test fluid loss <3 mm <6 mm n/a
Viscosity Marsh cone 30-50 sec 30-60 sec 30-50 sec
Shear strength
Fann viscometer 4-40 N/m2 4-40 N/m2 4-40 N/m2
(10min gel strength)
Sand content Sand screen set n/a n/a <4%*
Electrical pH meter to BS3445;
pH 7-10.5 7-11 n/a
range pH 7 to 14
*2% prior to concreting if working loads are to be pertly resisted by end bearing

33
 Literature Review / 34

Figure 2.1 boundary of tectonic plates in the past and Korat plateau (after Peangta, 2007)

Figure 2.2 Classification of rock material strength (after Kulhawy and Phoon, 1993)

34
 Literature Review / 35

Figure 2.3 Engineering classification based on modulus ratio (after Deere and Miller, 1966)

Figure 2.4 Modulus ratio ranges for some Triassic rock (after Hobbs, 1974)

35
 Literature Review / 36

Figure 2.5 Adhesion factor for bored and driven piles (after Weltman and Healy, 1978)

Figure 2.6 Adhesion factors from the others approach comparing to Weltman and Healy
(1978)

36
 Literature Review / 37

Figure 2.7 Design curves for unit side resistance friction and adhesion factor versus strength
(after Kulhawy and Phoon, 1993)

Figure 2.8 Shaft resistances (after Horvath, 1978)

37
 Literature Review / 38

Figure 2.9 Average bond strength (after Horvath, 1978)

Figure 2.10 Relationship of shaft resistances and normalized UCS (after Rowe and Armitage,
1984)

38
 Literature Review / 39

Figure 2.11 Relationship of shaft resistances and normalized uniaxial compressive strength
(after Carter and Kulhawy, 1988)

Su(CIUC)/pa , qu/2pa
Figure 2.12 Shaft resistances in regression approach averaged per site (after Kulhawy and
Phoon, 1993)

39
 Literature Review / 40

Figure 2.13 Relationship between α and qu for grouted piles and drilled shafts expressed in
solid line fitted by logarithm (Prakoso, 2002)

Figure 2.14 Adhesion factor as a function of rock strength (after Williams et al., 1981)

40
 Literature Review / 41

Figure 2.15 Modifying factor for rock mass stiffness (after Williams et al., 1980)

(a) (b)
Figure 2.16 (a) Relationship of RQD and Em/Ei (Zhang and Einstein, 2004)
(b) Relationship of RQD and σm/σi

41
 Literature Review / 42

Figure 2.17 Dimensions of rough shafts for definition of roughness factor, RF

Figure 2.18 Effect from degree of weathering on rock properties

(Kulhawy & Prakoso 2001, 2003)

42
 Literature Review / 43

Figure 2.19 Bearing capacity factor proposed by Meyerhof (1976)

Figure 2.20 Bearing capacity factor proposed by Pimpasugdi (1989)

43
 Literature Review / 44

Figure 2.21 Unit base resistance versus intact rock strength (after NCHRP, 2006)

Figure 2.22 Load distribution in each segment of bored pile

44
 Literature Review / 45

Figure 2.23 Bentonite filter cake (Flemming et al, 1977)

Figure 2.24 Construction time effect on capacity of pile shaft of bored piles in
Bangkok subsoil (Thasnanipan et al, 1998)

45
 Literature Review / 46

Figure 2.25 The mechanism of polymer for stabilization of borehole (Thasnanipan et al,
2000)

Figure 2.26 Correlation between friction factor and angle of internal friction for coarse
grained soil

46
 Literature Review / 47

Figure 2.27 Soft pile base from sediment (Flemming et al, 1977)

Figure 2.28 Tremie pipe embedded to concrete too deep (Flemming et al, 1977)

47
 Literature Review / 48

Figure 2.29 Tremie pipe too far from the bottom (Reese et al, 1985)

48
 Methodology / 49

Chapter 3
Methodology
3.1 Introduction
SRT Double Track Railway-Chira to Khonkaen Project is the first infrastructure project in
Northeast part of Thailand, which is a part of the country's transport development strategy for
the development of interurban rail networks or the development of dual track railway systems
by State Railway of Thailand (SRT). Construction commenced on 10 February 2016 and
expected to be completed by 2019. If the construction is completed, the efficiency of
transportation including the logistics of the country will be greatly increased. The project used
large-diameter bored pile constructions which the piles are placed on sedimentary rocks of
Korat plateau. The design data is limited and the properties of the rocks are highly variable as
discussed in section 2.3. The piles were used to carry the load for overpass and U-turn bridges
for local vehicles throughout 187 km length of the project to reduce the problem about area
separation and also for railway stations. Furthermore, the construction plan to construct 5 km
length of elevated railway for trains to reach in Khon Kaen Station and to solve the problem of
crossing between cars and trains because the area is a densely populated, the examples of
superstructures are shown in Figure 3.1. So, proper design is necessary to reduce the cost and
time of construction.

3.2 Information of the project

3.2.1 Project locations
The project, which is in the Northeast part of Thailand, is located along the railway from
Nakhon Ratchasima to Khon Kaen province. The bored piles were constructed along the
railway track with the distance around 187km long. The concept of double track railway
construction is to minimize the intersection of traffic between railway and road. So, 8
overpasses and 24 U-turns are planned to construct by distributing along the right side of the
existing track.
3.2.2 General geological conditions along the project line
As explained the characteristic of Korat plateau in section 2.2, the project is on Indochaina
plate underlain by sedimentary rocks as shown the location in Figure 3.2. The majority areas
of the project line is underlain by Maha Sarakham Formation of Khorat group (see Figure 3.3)
which is non-marine red beds in Mesozoic era and deposited in the continent region. The
sediments in Quaternary period deposited on the beds at the beginning and end of the project
with short distances (shown in yellow color).
Maha Sarakham formation (dark green color) is composed of mudstone, sandstone, siltstone
and rocksalt. The thickness of the rock layer is about 610 to 1,000 meters in some places, from
the current data available.
By the way, the sediments of Quaternary period are originated from Khorat plateau which has
a remarkable feature. It is believed to be a part of the lifting plate tectonic since Middle Tertiary
period to Quaternary period. During that time, the central part of Thailand sank and formed a
large basin. The northeast part lifted up as plateau and slightly tilt to the southeast. At the north

49
 Methodology / 50

of the Khorat plateau, there is a mountain range, the so-called Phu Phan separating the Khorat
Plateau into two basins: Sakhon Nakhon Basin, and Khorat Basin (Schuler, 2017).
Khorat basin is a large basin which have Mun River and Chee River flowing from Phanom
Dong Rak and Phu Phan mountain ranges, respectively, to the east and converging at Ubon
Ratchathani province before flowing down to Khong River eventually. This reason causes
sedimentation on Khorat basin. The sediments can be classified into 2 types: alluvial and
terrace deposits which overlaid on Mesozoic rocks.
3.2.3 Investigation
Soil/rock investigations were made by boring 158 holes by the owner of the project. Steel
casing dia. 100mm. was installed during boring to protect against soil collapse. The boring
process used the wash boring method. Soil sampling is generally kept every depth of 1.5 meters
to obtain the accurate data. The sampling procedures for this project are as follows:
Soft clay: using Shelby Tube Sampler every 1.5 m. depth to collect an undisturbed sample.
After sampling, use wax to prevent moisture loss and move samples to the lab with caution.
Stiff clay and sand: using Split Spoon Sampler to collect sample every 1.5 m. depth. During
sampling, count SPT number by following ASTM D 1586 which SPT number will be used in
analysis shear resistance further as shown in Table 3.1 and Figure 3.4.
Rock: using Rotary Drilling Machine with core barrel and diamond bit to collect samples
NMLC size. During coring, using bentonite for flushing.
The relationship of corrected SPT-N and φ is shown in Figure 3.4.
For clay, the undrained shear strength can be obtained from the simple relationship between
SPT-N and Su proposed by Terzaghi (1943) by Su = 6.25N.
3.2.4 Laboratory testing
Soil laboratory tests consist of physical properties tests of soils performed on representative
soil samples by using ASTM standard test methods. The tests and standard are chosen as
summarized in Table 3.2.
For rock samples, the quality of rock due to existing of fracture and discontinuity is indicated
by calculating Core Recovery Ratio (CR) and Rock Quality Designation (RQD) according to
the standard ASTM D 6032. The quality class can be classified by Table 2.3 in section 2.3. For
strength of rocks, the test procedure as ASTM D 3148 is adopted to find Uniaxial Compressive
Strength (UCS).
However, the test data obtained from the project owner is insufficient. This thesis plans to
perform additional tests to find out the stiffness and angle friction of rocks. The information of
the rocks planned to perform additional tests can be found in Table 3.3.
The specimens planned to perform UCS test will be mounted with strain gauges to measure the
horizontal and vertical displacements, which are used to find Poisson’s ratio.

50
 Methodology / 51

3.3 Bored pile construction

3.3.1 Quantity of bored pile in construction
In this project, many structures are planned to construct such as U-turn bridges, overpass
bridges, elevated railway or railway station. The foundations of those structures consist of
shallow foundation and both small and large diameter bored pile. The amount of foundation
works is summarized in Table 3.4.
3.3.2 Sequences of construction
Bored pile construction in rock is quite similar to bored pile construction in soil. The difference
is Auger and bucket are changed to rock auger and core barrel, respectively. In case of very
strong rock or high ratio of RQD, roller bit is used instead of core barrel. Teeth of roller bit is
made of carbon tungsten to increase performance of drillings.
General sequences of construction of this project can be explained step by step as demonstrated
in Figure 3.5. The description of the figure can be summarized as follows:
(a) The first is surveying by setting the bench mark on a bored pile location. A backhoe
is used to excavate the trench to be the guide line for the casing. Then, a temporary steel casing
is inserted into ground layer within the tolerances allowed to protect the first soft soil layer
collapse by using vibrator or called vibro hammer. During inserting, the vertical of casing is
controlled by both aiming on the plummet and using a hand level. The vibro hammer creates
vibration and puts the casing into the ground. In case of hard soil, the vibro hammer cannot
drive the casing, pre-boring is used to carry out.
(b) Drilling starts with using rock auger (see Figure 3.6). It is used not only drilling in
the soil as a normal auger but also scraping the hard soil and weathered rock. Because at the
tip of auger is attached with tungsten carbide teeth which is very stiff. Note that augers are
likely used for cohesive soils. After drilling, the soil is removed from the auger and continue
drilling.
(c) After auger drilling reaching to the unstable soil layer (below the tip of casing),the
bentonite slurry is added to the bored hole to prevent the side wall collapse until reaching the
top of casing, then, changing the drilling tool to bucket. Note that another function of the
solution is to reduce the noise and heat generated by the friction between the rock and the
drilling tools.
(d) The auger bucket is used to drill further under the bentonite slurry (see Figure 3.7).
During drilling, slurry level should not be lower than top of casing around 2 m. and should be
always added to maintain the head pressure. Note that before pouring the slurry, the properties
should be checked which will be explained in section 2.7. Continue drilling until reaching the
rock beds, the drilling tool is changed again to core barrel. If the rock is too strong, it might
return to use rock auger or cross cutter again to crush the rock, using the drilling tools
alternately until reaching the required depth. Cleaning the slurry is applied prior to lowering
rebar cages.
The slurry can be cleaned by using a submersible pump connected to the tremie pipes to
circulate the slurry back to the silo storage through desander which will remove sand from the

51
 Methodology / 52

slurry. This process may take a long time depending on sizes of the borehole. Adding bentonite
can be done to improve efficiency of the slurry.
In some areas, bentonite and polymer are mixed. There is no need to clean the slurry by
circulation. Because polymer will catch with soil particles and drop them to the bottom of
borehole. So, it is necessary to leave the hole for sediment settling. Then, the cleaning bucket
is used to clean the sediment. After these, properties of the slurry has to be checked again. If it
does not pass. The bentonite slurry needs to be improved as mentioned above.
(e) Rebar cage lowering is made after cleaning the slurry. The rebar cages are lowered
one by one by lapping on top of the borehole. The lapping point is fasten by using U-clips
according to the specification. In case of anchorage piles, lapping points have to be welded.
The rebar cages must be hung above the level of cut off.
(f) Then, tremie pipes are inserted to the hole. Concrete is poured through tremie pipes
under the slurry. The first concrete will be mixed with the slurry and sediments, which is
considered to be poor concrete. Therefore, the final concrete level must be higher than the cut
off level about 1.5-2 meters depending on conditions of the site to protect bleeding of concrete
and defects of pile head.
(g) After finish casting, the temporary casing is extracted by vibro hammer before
concrete sets. During extracting, the vertical of the temporary casing must be controlled within
the specified range 1:100. The gap above pile head is backfilled by the existing soil. The pile
should not be disturbed within 24 hrs, otherwise, the crack may be generated. Other risk
activities such as excavation or casing driving should be at least 6 times of pile diameter away
from pile.
3.3.3 Quality control
Quality control of construction can be divided into four categories: driving the casing, drilling,
properties of bentonite slurry and during pouring concrete.
3.3.3.1 Driving the casing
During driving the casing, the inclination of casing is controlled not to exceed 1:100 by both
aiming on the plummet and using a hand level. Driving is performed until the casing is
embedded to the firm layer. The top of casing should be set higher than the existing ground
level. After that, deviation of the casing is checked to be within 75 mm by using a total station.
3.3.3.2 Drilling
The inclination of borehole is checked during and end of drilling by using drilling monitoring
device called KODEN. The device generates the ultrasonic wave allowing monitoring to be
taken in the bentonite slurry. Ultrasonic waves are transmitted to hit the wall of borehole and
reflect back to the receiver. Then, the receiver interprets the signal and the figure of borehole
is drawn up on KODEN paper.
3.3.3.3 Properties of bentonite slurry
Quality control of bentonite slurry is very necessary. A poor quality slurry will create defects
to the pile, examples of defects such as pile head contaminated with sediments, reduction of
friction resistance or pile containing soft toe. Testing quality uses methods according to API

52
 Methodology / 53

standard. But the range of bentonite properties, which are recommended as given in Table 3.5,
have to be changed due to geologic conditions.
3.3.3.4 Pouring concrete
Concrete pouring under the slurry must be careful about mixing between sediment and
concrete. The first batch of concrete poured may be mixed with slurry. The plug, which is made
of foam balls and zinc plate, is used to block the contact between slurry and concrete. During
pouring, the tremie pipe must not be embedded into the concrete too deep to maintain the
concrete pressure which helps to push the concrete up consistently. In addition, the pressure of
the concrete also uses to remove the bentonite on the surface of the reinforcing bars and the
borehole wall, which increases the bond strength and friction resistance.

3.4 Static load test and instrumentation

3.4.1 Static load test
Pile load testing for SRT Double Track Railway-Chira to Khonkaen Project is planned to test
every U-turn and overpass bridges by both static and dynamic load test. This thesis focuses on
the interpretation of static load test mainly.
Static load testing had been completed already on sixteen bored piles. The tests were performed
on piles diameter 1.2 and 1.5 m., running along the route of the project, with ultimate load and
allowable load in the range of 1,625 to 2,500 ton and 650 to 1,000 ton, respectively. The testing
method used the technical specification of State Railway of Thailand which was adapted from
ASTM D 1143 standard. Loading steps performed three cycles: 1.25, 1.25 and 2.5 times of safe
working load. The test piles were embedded to both soil and rock, most piles were embedded
in either siltstone or sandstone which is the socket length ranging from 0.3 to 9.8 m. Details of
test piles were summarized as shown in Table 3.6.
The test used hydraulic jacks capacity 500 ton per unit to increase the load on piles by reaction
force of a test pile transferred to four anchorage piles. Five and Seven hydraulic jacks were
used for ultimate load 1,625-1,875 ton and 2,500 ton, respectively. The I-shape beams were
installed above the test pile and connected to the four anchorage piles to act as a reaction force
as illustrated in Figure 3.8.
Four dial gauges with resolution up to 0.01 mm and 5 cm of measurement length were installed
on pile heads at different points away from each other 90 degree to measure pile head
settlement. Conventional survey was adopted to recheck the pile head settlement comparing to
the gauges by using reference beam and automatic level.
The load distribution measuring devices had been installed throughout the pile length:
consisting of strain gauges and extensometers.
3.4.2 Geotechnical instrumentation
Measuring devices were installed in the piles at various depths to measure load distribution
along pile shafts and shrinkage of piles. Those devices are:
3.4.2.1 Strain gauge

53
 Methodology / 54

Strain gauge is used to measure the strain occurred in pile and then the strain value can be
converted to the axial force acting on the pile shaft. The type of strain gauge that the project
chosen is Vibrating Wire Strain Gauge (VWSG) of SISGEO as displayed in Figure 3.9, Model
VK4000VS00. Twelve strain gauges were installed in the rebar cages at six different levels,
meaning two strain gauges in each level (see an example in Table 3.7). Strain gauges at the top
and level are used as calibration against the applied loading and one set of strain gauges at the
bottom level. Note that the strain gauges were installed at the strata boundaries between the
soil/rock layers and at the mid points in thick layers. Accordingly, friction resistance of that
layer can be measured.
3.4.2.2 Extensometer
Extensometer is an equipment used to measure the shrinkage of piles. Extensometer tubes were
installed to the same level with strain gauges by ignoring installation at the top level (see Figure
3.10) because the length is too short and the movement was already measured by dial gauges.
The depth of extensometer tip is shown in Table 3.8. The extensometer devices or called strain
rods or telltales, which is made of steel, aluminum or fiber glass, were inserted to the tubes
during load testing.

3.5 Methods used in calculation

Interpretation of the data obtained from static load testing can be performed in several ways
such as pile settlement analysis or bearing capacity of pile. This thesis will analyze the data in
the following method:
3.5.1 Extrapolation method for failure load
Bearing capacity of test piles might not reach to the failure load. As a result, piles are not fully
mobilized. To obtain the fully mobilized back analysis parameters, extrapolation method is
adopted using Brinch-Hansen (1963), Chin (1970), Ahmad and Pise (1997), Mazurkiewicz
(1980) and Decourt (1999) as described in section 2.7.
3.5.2 Settlement prediction
Predicted pile head settlements can be calculated from Hooke’s law, Bowles (1996), Vesic
(1977) and Tomlinson (1995) as explained in section 2.6. The actual pile head settlements were
measured by conventional survey method and dial gauges installed on pile caps. The actual
pile shortenings are measured from extensometers. Therefore, the pile toe settlements are able
to calculate. Then, Hooke’s law and Tomlinson (1995) are adopted for pile shaft shortening
comparison.
3.5.3 Strain gauge interpretation
The strain value interpretation from a strain gauge is quite complicated. Because it comes from
interpretation of electrical resistance changing inside the strain gauge. When the load acts on
the pile, the strain gauge is compressed and shrinks, causing the electrical resistance change
which can be converted to the strain values. However, electrical theory is beyond the scope of
this thesis.

54
 Methodology / 55

Fellenius (2001) method is used to interpret the strains values obtained from strain gauges.
After that, axial force of each layer is determined. The actual load distribution and skin friction
graph can be plotted comparing to the design.
3.5.4 Load distribution plotting
Firstly, the actual axial load that transfers to each soil layer is measured by strain gauges and
calculated by Fellenius (2001) method. The axial load is consumed by skin friction resistance
of soil or rock layer, causing the axial load decreases with depths. The difference value between
axial loads of each layer is actual skin friction. Then, the actual load distribution curve and skin
friction can be plotted.
3.5.5 Elastic shortening measurement
The pile shortening values are obtained from extensometer. The design values can be calculated
by using the 1st term of theories in section 2.6.
3.5.6 Back calculation of α for clay and weak rock

The adhesion factor (α) for clay can be back calculated from ordinary approach of Tomlinson
(1995). The Su of clays is converted from SPT by using relationship of Bangkok clay from
Pitupakorn (1983). The Su and α are presented in the form of Kulhawy and Phoon (1993) and
Tomlinson (1995) approaches.
For weak rocks, they are not fully mobilized. The ultimate load of piles have to be extrapolated.
Adhesion factor (α) can be back calculated by considering uniaxial compressive strength of
rock as explained in section 2.4. The scatters of α are plotted comparing to Kulhawy and Phoon
(1993) and Williams et al (1980).
3.5.7 Back calculation of β for sand

Friction factor (β) for sand can be back calculated by using conventional equation proposed by
Tomlinson (1995). OCR of soils are applied in equation proposed by Schmidt (1967). The
graph of β is plotted comparing to the Schmidt’s line with various OCR.
3.5.8 Shaft friction comparison
Actual shaft friction is directly derived from strain gauges. For rock, the scatter of side frictions
are plotted comparing to Horvath (1978) and Horvath and Kenney (1979). For clay, shaft
friction is compared to Kulhawy and Phoon (1993). Note that the shaft friction relationships
are often proposed in the function of uniaxial compressive strength of rock.
3.5.9 End bearing on weak rock
Data of actual shaft frictions are derived from strain gauges. The applied loads are carried by
each layers of soil or rock. The remaining loads are transferred to the tip of piles. So, the actual
end bearing can be found. If bearing capacity of piles do not reach the failure criterion.
Extrapolation need to be adopted. The data obtained of end bearing can be compared to Zhang
and Einstein (1998).

55
 Methodology / 56

Table 3.1 Relationship between SPT-N with φ for sand and Su for clay (Peck et al, 1974)
(a) Sand

(b) Clay

Table 3.2 Testing and testing standards applied

56
 Methodology / 57

Table 3.3 Rock samples planned for additional test

NBH Depth of Pile Type Amount of samples

rock tip of UCS(1) Direct shear
investigated rock Amount Depth(m) Amount Depth(m)
27 14-19 Siltstone 1 17.5
34 10.5-15.5 14.5 Siltstone 3 13.5
34 15.5-20.5 Siltstone
44 16-21 19.8 Sandstone 1 21.0 3 17.0
44 21-28 Sandstone 2 26.0, 27.0
52 17-21 20.3 Siltstone 1 19.0 3 21.0
78 11-16 Sandstone 1 13.5
78 16-21 18.6 Sandstone 1 18.0 3 18.2
99 10.5-15.5 15.0 Siltstone 2 14.0, 15.5 3 15.5
99 15.5-20.5 Siltstone 1 16.5
130 15-20 Sandstone 2 18.0, 18.2
132 19-24 Sandstone 2 20.5, 20.7 3 22.5
134 14-19 15.0 Sandstone 2 14.0, 14.2 3 15.5
134 19-24 Sandstone 2 19.0, 19.2
148 4-9 Siltstone
148 9-14 14.0 Siltstone 3 9.5
148 14-19 Siltstone
148 19-24 Siltstone
148 24-29 Siltstone 1 26.0
148 29-34 Siltstone 1 30.5
148 34-39 Siltstone 1 38.5
148 39-44 Siltstone 1 43.5
total 22 24
(1) UCS performed on rock samples mounted with strain gauges

Table 3.4 amount of bored piles in the project (updated to 26/8/17)

Pile diameter Amount of

Type of structure
(m.) bored pile
1 364
1.2 1,924
U-Turn bridge
1.5 312
Test pile 130
1 147
Overpass
1.2 1,031
0.35 1,832
Small to large railway station
0.5 877
Elevated railway 1.2 932
1.2 144
Elevated large railway station
1.5 72
total 7,765

57
 Methodology / 58

Table 3.5 Recommended properties of bentonite slurry and testing methods

Recommended value
Item Testing method
During drilling During concreting
Density 1.03-1.15 g/ml 1.03-1.10 g/ml Mud density balance
Viscosity 30-80 sec/quart 30-60 sec/quart Marsh cone
pH 8-12 8-12 pH indicator
San content Less than 4% Less than 2% Sand screen
Note: Volume of a quart is equal to 946 ml.

Table 3.6 Details of test piles

No. Pile STA Dia. Ultimate Working Pile Socket Soil/rock at

location (m) load (t) load (t) Tip length Pile tip
1 NBH-027 293+300 1.2 1,750 700 9.297 0.297 Siltstone
2 NBH-030 297+180 1.2 1,750 700 36 - Clay
3 NBH-034 301+299.899 1.2 1,750 700 14.5 4.0 Siltstone
4 NBH-041 307+000 1.2 1,750 700 35.338 - Clay
5 NBH-044 311+100 1.2 1,750 700 19.8 3.3 Sandstone
6 NBH-052 318+000 1.2 1,750 700 20.3 8.3 Siltstone
7 NBH-078 345+014.447 1.2 1,750 700 18.6 7.6 Siltstone
8 NBH-099 379+030 1.2 1,750 700 15 4.5 Siltstone
9 NBH-101 381+000 1.2 1,750 700 15.5 - Clay
10 NBH-132 429+168 1.2 1,750 700 16.5 2.5 Sandstone
11 NBH-134 432+940 1.2 1,750 700 15 1.0 Sandstone
12 NBH-137 435+237.749 1.2 1,750 700 18.5 - Sand
13 NBH-138 439+171 1.2 1,750 700 35 - Sand
14 NBH-146 448+009 1.2 1,625 650 22 - Clay
15 NBH-148 449+700 1.2 1,875 750 14 9.5 Siltstone
16 NBH-148 449+700 1.5 2,500 1,000 14.3 9.8 Siltstone
Note: Data updated to 22 Aug 2017

Table 3.7 Example level of strain gauges installation of test pile NBH-034

Layer No. of VWSG Depth of VWSG (m)

S1 2 1.0 (or below pile cap)
S2 2 5.0
S3 2 8.0
S4 2 10.5
S5 2 12.0
S6 2 13.0
total 12
Note 1: Each depth of strain gauges is specified based on the given soil data. If the actual soil
layers differ from the given data, depth of each instrument shall be revised accordingly.

58
 Methodology / 59

Table 3.8 Example tip of extensometer of test pile NBH-034

Layer Depth of extensometer tip

(m, below the existing ground)
E2 5.0
E3 8.0
E4 10.5
E5 12.0
E6 13.0
(See Note 1 to be applied for tip of each extensometer)

U-turn bridge
Overpass bridge

Station Elevated railway

Figure 3.1 Superstructures planned to construct in the project

Figure 3.2 Location of Chira-Kohn Kaen project

59
 Methodology / 60

End Point

Start Point

Figure 3.3 Geological map of Chira-Khan Kaen project (DMR, 1999)

Symbol
Qf Fluvial deposit: flood plain, alluvium, terrace and colluvium.

KTpt Phu Thok Formation: sandstone, siltstone and claystone.

Maha Sarakham Formation: siltstone, claystone, sandstone, rocksalt and

KTms
gypsum.

KTkk Khok Kruat Formation: siltstone, sandstone, claystone and conglomerate.

Phu Phan Formation: sandstone, cross-bedded, siltstone and conglomerate

KTpp
sandstone.

60
 Methodology / 61

Figure 3.4 Corrected SPT values and friction angle (Peck, 1974)

61
 Methodology / 62

Figure 3.5 General bored pile construction sequences socketed in rock

62
 Methodology / 63

Figure 3.6 (left) Rock auger, (middle) Core barrel, (right) Tungsten carbide bullet tooth

Figure 3.7 (left) Drilling by auger, (right) Lowering rebar cages

63
 Methodology / 64

Figure 3.8 Static load test system

Figure 3.9 Vibrating Wire Strain Gauge of SISGEO, Model VK4000VS00

64
 Methodology / 65

Figure 3.10 Three extensometer tubes attached with a rebar cage

65
 Experimental results and discussions / 66

Chapter 4
Results and Discussions
The experimental results obtained from field and laboratory tests are analyzed and discussed
in this section. The data obtained consists of pile head settlement, strain, pile shortening,
applied load and rock strength parameters such as UCS and RQD. The expected results are pile
settlement analysis, skin friction of soils and rocks, behavior of transferred load along pile shaft
and back-analyzed parameters for pile design, elastic modulus of rocks and angle of friction of
rocks.
4.1 Soil and rock profiles, properties and parameters
4.1.1 Soil and rock profiles
In this project, 158 boreholes of investigation were carried out with collection of rock samples
for UCS test throughout the existing railway track. The average distance between boreholes
are around 1.2 km. It is found that the most areas of the project are underlain by sedimentary
rocks in Maha Sarakham Formation which is non-marine red beds and generated in Mesozoic
era. The rocks found mainly consist of reddish brown sandstone and siltstone. Rock salt is
occasionally found in some area. Soils found were generated from both transported soil and
residual soil, resulting in uncertainty of soil layers. They consist of clay, silt alternating with
silty sand. An example of soil and rock profile is shown in Figure 4.1.
It can be seen that the level of the soil and rock layers are not uniform and discontinuous. Some
boreholes can be found either sand or clay. In general, the clay layer is found alternating with
sand layer which is underlain by rock layers with varying depth. Some areas of the project,
rock is found at the shallow depth 4 meter below ground surface. Whilst some areas, the rock
cannot be found. Therefore, the practical construction may experience the problem of ground
condition changing all the time. Details of the soil and rock layers found throughout the project
can be summarized briefly as follow:
(1) At the beginning of the project to km.290 or NBH-025 (NBH-001 at km.268), Most
of the soils are clay or sand alternating with silty sand layer. The deepest investigated borehole
is around 60 meter. No rock layer is found in this area.
(2) From km.290 to the end of the project (km.451), the top soil is still clay and silt,
alternating with sand, underlain by sandstone and siltstone. The thickness of soil layer is
thinner. Rock layer is found at the depth ranging from 3-50 m. The example of rock found is
illustrated in Figure 4.2.
4.1.2 Soil and rock properties and strength parameters
The project performed the in-situ test on soils since the beginning of investigation by using
SPT (Standard penetration test). The number of SPT or SPT-N was counted and initially
converted to Undrain shear strength (Su) for clay using Terzaghi (1943) approach by Su = 6.25N
(kN/m2) and Friction angle (φ) for sand using the relationship of Peck (1974). SPT values of
hard clay can be up to 100 blows/ft due to weathering of rock. The soil samples were kept as
disturbed samples for performing tests in laboratory, the tests are as follow: Natural water
content test, Atterberg limit tests, Soil classification and density test, which every tests
followed the ASTM standard.

66
 Experimental results and discussions / 67

Several types of soil are found in this project, for clay, ranging from soft clay to hard clay and
for sand, consisting of loose sand to very dense sand but generally the subsoil layers found are
silty clay alternating with the sand layer. The groundwater levels found are uncertain, which is
in the range of 1-8 m. from ground surface.
For rock, the sample collection was kept in NMLC size using rotary drilling machine. The
example of rock cored for NBH-034 is shown in Figure 4.2. All rock samples were calculated
to find the quality index by using core recovery ratio (CR) and rock quality designation (RQD)
proposed by Deere et al (1967) and also tested to find Uniaxial Compressive Strength (UCS)
according to ASTM standard D 3148. The rock of NBH -034 contains many fractures, RQD
values are very changeful and ranging from 14 to 49%. The others parameter RQD and UCS
of rock samples tested are displayed in Table 4.1. Values of UCS obtained from the test are
inconstant. Namely, the average UCS is equal to 23.71 MPa (13.18-42.39 MPa) and 21.95 MPa
(9.77-33.8 MPa) for siltstone and sandstone, respectively. Another rock occasionally found in
this project is rock salt, which has average UCS values 20.47 MPa (17.54-23.40 MPa).
However, UCS was performed on intact rock, which does not contain discontinuity and fracture
like rock mass. As a result, UCS values obtained are very high. So, pile bearing capacity design
should not only consider compressive strength of rock, but also fractures inside the rock mass,
which is the major factor in the design. From Table 4.1, it can be seen that RQD values are
very changeful. Fresh rocks were rarely found. AASHTO (1996) proposed the strength
reduction coefficient of rock mass (Nms) to calculate the end bearing of pile when Nms is equal
to 0.32 and 0.38 for siltstone and sandstone which have RQD in the range of 75-90%,
respectively. The detail of Nms was already explained in section 2.5. To calculate the skin
friction, a pile is socketed in rock with changeable RQD (see Figure 4.2). Consideration of rock
fracture is very necessary. William et al (1980) proposed the modifying factor or correlation
factor (βm) related to the discontinuity of the rock mass to decrease the strength of intact rock.
O’Neill and Reese (1999) also proposed an empirical reduction factor (αE) to decrease pile
capacity socketed in rock due to discontinuity. In case of no the rock fracture data available,
the skin friction can conveniently use the lowest bound in Table 2.14, namely fs = 0.2(qu)0.5.
The details are described in section 2.4.
Figure 4.3 is shown the depths of test piles socketed in difference base rock or soil layer. The
shorter piles are the piles that are socketed in rock. The major load is carried by skin friction.
The length of socket is vary depending on pile capacity and ground condition. The socket length
is shown in Figure 4.4. It can be seen that some piles socketed in rocks are embedded very deep
due to disintegration of rock when touching the slurry. The rocks are slaking due to stress relief.
Piles are decided to drill deeper until they have enough bearing capacity. The figure also shows
degree of weathering of rock beside bored piles. It can be seen that bored placed on rocks with
higher degree of weathering will be longer due to decrease of skin friction effected by degree
of weathering of rock. For bored pile no. NBH-027 and NBH-134, socketed length of piles are
very short because the piles are placed on fresh rock. Whilst others have to be longer to
maintain bearing capacity of piles.
The longer piles shown in Figure 4.4 are embedded in both sand or clay layer, which the tip of
piles are placed on either very dense sand or hard clay. The piles are acting as frictional piles.
The pile length can be up to 40m.

67
 Experimental results and discussions / 68

4.1.3 The additional testing results for rocks

The additional tests were performed on rock samples as planned in Table 3.3. Uniaxial
compressive strength test according to ASTM D 3148 was performed on rock samples mounted
with strain gauges to measure strains that occurred inside the samples. The relationship of stress
and strain both directions were plotted to find elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio of rocks. The
results are shown in Table 4.2-4.3.
It will be seen that UCS values are very changeful and uncertain. UCS values are in the range
of 5.02-23.71 MPa in average value of 12.77 MPa, which are lower than those values from first
investigation which may be effected by water content changing. All samples failed in tension
failure mode. The average of elastic modulus of rocks (E50) are around 250 times of UCS for
both rocks. Poisson’s for sandstone is higher than siltstone which have the average values 0.39
and 0.15, respectively. Some sandstone samples have Poisson’s ratio very high due to highly-
increasing rate of radial strain.
Direct shear test was performed to find angle of friction of rock to have an idea about rock
strength. The results were shown in Table 4.4-4.5. The Minimum angle of friction was 6.81
degree, which obtained from test on soft rock in NBH-078. According to UCS test, rock on
NBH-078 also got the lowest UCS value. The average angle of friction was around 30 degree
for both rocks which is slightly higher than their original materials.

4.2 Pile settlement

The actual pile settlement occurred from two parts, namely the elastic shortening of pile and
the elastic-plastic deformation of the soil or rock beneath the pile base. The load acting on pile
head is carried by skin friction and then transferred to the pile base. The elastic shortening can
be predicted by using skin friction along pile shaft and pile toe settlement can be predicted by
base load transferred.
4.2.1 Elastic shortening from extensometer and toe movement
Pile shortening values measured from extensometers installed in the test piles are plotted to see
in Appendix A. The values of pile shortening and toe movement for maximum test load were
shown in Table 4.6. Note that the values of toe movement were calculated from δh-δs = δt.
Average ratio of pile shortening and pile head settlement for this project was around 0.7.
Comparison to the theory was made by using 1st term of pile settlement in Equation 2.45 from
Tomlinson (1995) and Bowles (1996) as presented in Figure 4.5-4.6. Note that the 1st settlement
term of Vesic (1977) and Hooke’s law are the same with Tomlinson (1995) and Bowles (1996),
respectively. The values of theoretical and actual pile shortening were plotted in y-axis and x-
axis, respectively. It will be seen that shaft shortening of piles having tip in soil were about 0.8
and 0.55 of 1st term of Tomlinson and Bowles, respectively. For piles socketed in siltstone, the
actual shortening values were according to Tomlinson around 1.0 and 0.75 for Bowles. Whilst,
the shortening values of piles socketed in sandstone were consistent to Bowles’s theory and
about 1.2 for Tomlinson. The theoretical shortening values have higher trend than in the field.
The calculation used the loads transferred along pile and to pile base, which are not correct.
The loads obtained from calculation using α and β method of Tomlinson (1995). The rocks
were assumed as a clay, then skin friction and end bearing were calculated. Those values are

68
 Experimental results and discussions / 69

likely lower than the actual values. Another reason from constant values of pile stiffness that
were used to calculate, the actual pile stiffness will decrease when taking higher load. As a
result, the theoretical pile shortening was inaccurate.
Note that the adjustment of pile shortening is the average to adjust the 1st term of settlement
only. The actual pile shortening values can be found from extensometers. To obtain the pile
head settlement close as to the reality, the 2nd of settlement should be considered either. In
section 2.6, prediction of pile toe movement concerns about the elastic modulus and Poisson’s
ratio of soil or rock under the pile tip. Those parameters can be found from the laboratory.
4.2.2 Pile head settlement
The Applied load and actual pile head settlement of 16 test piles are plotted and shown in
Figure 4.7. The data shows that the most pile head settlements are in the range of 5-10 mm at
the maximum load, 17,500 kN for pile diameter 1.2m. and 25,000 kN for pile diameter 1.5m.
To further analyze, the applied load and pile head settlement are normalized by the safe
working load and pile diameter, respectively as shown in Figure 4.8. It is easier to see that the
most piles have settlement lower than 1% of the pile diameter. Eurocode 7 suggested that pile
was in failure criterion when pile head settlement equal to 10% of diameter. Therefore, all piles
in this project can carry the load further. The graph also shows that the first range of settlements
of all piles increase steadily until the applied loads are around 2.25 times of safe working load.
Then, the settlements suddenly increase up, which means that at this ratio, the axial loads start
to transfer to the base of piles, resulting in the soil or rock beneath the piles start deformation.
The pile toe movements occur very small. Note that the pile toe movements can be found from
different values of pile head settlements and pile shortenings. Ng et al (2001) reported that the
mobilization of pile toe was identified to be 4.5% of pile diameter. Therefore, it can be
identified that all piles in this thesis are not fully mobilized. Hence, the actual back-calculated
parameters and end bearing for rock should be over than the values reported in this thesis. The
graph also shows the difference of pile settlements between rock and soil. The group of piles
socketed in rock have settlement values lower than piles embedded in soil which range from
0.3-0.7%D for piles in rock and 0.6-1.8%D for piles in soils.
The settlement prediction can be calculated from equation proposed in section 2.6. In those
equations, pile settlements are normally predicted in two terms, elastic pile shortening and toe
movement except for Vesic’s approach that considered movement along pile shaft. The elastic
modulus of clay, sand and rock were initially assumed to be 1000Su, 200N and 250UCS,
respectively. Poisson’s ratio was initially assumed to be 0.3, 0.30 and 0.5 for sand, rock and
clay, respectively. The analytical graphs are demonstrated in Appendix B. To make the
calculated graph as close to the actual values as much as possible, second term of settlement
can be adapted by using the actual parameters that obtained from the laboratory such as RQD,
Poisson’s ratio and elastic modulus of rock according to Table 4.2-4.3. Note that whole mass
of rock beneath pile tip is subjected by applied load, elastic modulus of rock mass should be
considered instead of intact. It will be seen that most graphs for piles embedded in soils have
estimated settlements over than the actual values which is effected by theory used in design.
When designing, the values of SPT for clay and angle of friction for sand used were limited to
60 and 44 degree (Peck et al, 1974). The theory was not allowed to use higher than those values.
SPT for hard clay in this project can be up to 100blows/ft. Therefore, the load transferred along
pile shaft and to the pile base might not be close to the actual values. For piles socketed in

69
 Experimental results and discussions / 70

rocks, every graph corresponds to the theory except NBH-078 and NBH-044. Extrapolation
methods cannot be adopted to these graphs because very insignificant loads are transferred to
the pile tip. Only one method from Mazurkiewicz can be adopted, which the failure loads
extrapolated from this method is very conservative. As a result, settlement values predicted for
both piles are in the linear elastic range. Note that toe movements for every graphs of piles
placed on rocks considered rock mass properties using the approach from Zhang and Einstein
(2004).

4.3 Strain gauges data analysis

The data of strain gauges obtained from the tests can be seen in Appendix C. The graphs were
plotted with applied loads against measured strain values obtained from each strain gauges.
Two strain gauges were installed each layers of piles. To be consistent with Fellenius’s method,
the stiffness of piles have to be found.
4.3.1 Evaluation of pile stiffness
To calculate axial forces, the stiffness of piles have to be found. Pile stiffness (EA) is equal to
ratio of applied load (P) and strain (ε) which is the slope of the graph Appendix C. The
relationship of applied load (P) and strain (ε) is shown in Equation 2.58. The relationship of
pile stiffness (EA) and strain (ε) are plotted and shown in Appendix D. It will be seen the pile
stiffness trends are uncertain. The average trend line of pile stiffness is chosen using
engineering judgment. Note that some strain gauges were damaged during testing, some pile
stiffness data is not available. The pile stiffness adopted by Fellenius’s method are also
presented in Appendix D. Then, Fellenius’s method is adopted to convert strain values to axial
forces according to Equation 2.59-2.60.
4.3.2 Mobilized skin friction
The axial forces at the boundary of each layers are calculated from Equation 2.60. The
difference between axial forces are mobilized skin friction of that considered layer. The last
axial force is considered to be base load transferred to pile tip. The axial force can be plotted
as the so-called the load distribution curve by varying the applied load and depth of pile as
shown in Appendix E. The skin frictions are also plotted against layer displacements as seen
in Appendix G. The fully mobilized skin frictions are chosen from maximum mobilized skin
friction in the displacement range of 0-10 mm and demonstrated in Table 4.7. Note that the
skin friction for rocks are not fully mobilized. To obtain the fully mobilized values, the T-Z
curve need to be extrapolated.
Actual and design unit skin frictions are plotted for comparison as illustrated in Appendix H.
It appears that the most unit skin friction for rocks and soils adjacent to rocks layer are
underestimated due to improper design method. To make an optimization, the extrapolated skin
friction needs to be found.
4.3.3 Mobilized end bearing
The load transferred to pile tip can be considered as bearing capacity of pile by ignoring the
skin friction below the last strain gauge. End bearing capacity and toe movement at every step
of applied load is plotted and shown in Appendix I. Note that this method can be applied to the

70
 Experimental results and discussions / 71

piles socketed in siltstone only. Very insignificant axial load transferred to the pile tip for the
others. In Appendix I, It can be seen that toe movement of every pile is very insignificant. Ng
et al (2001) stated that pile failure when pile toe settlement reaches 4.5% of pile diameter,
which equals to 54 mm for a pile with diameter 1.2m. In this state of all piles in this project,
piles are considered not in failure criterion. So, extrapolation have to be adopted which will be
explained in next section.

4.4 Data analysis

4.4.1 Extrapolation method of failure load
All piles in this project were tested until reaching the design ultimate load (2.5 times of working
load). As a result, rock layer were not fully mobilized (all soil layer already fully mobilized).
To obtain the fully mobilized parameters, extrapolation method are adopted to find failure
bearing capacity. The graphs and results from extrapolation are shown in Appendix F and Table
4.8-4.9. The detail of those literature are explained in section 2.7. In the table, it will be seen
that Decourt’s method gives the highest values of the failure load. Whilst, the values obtained
from Mazurkiewicz’s method are the most conservative results and applicable to all test piles.
Ahmad and Pise’s method that adapted from Chin’s method is close to the average values the
most. Hansen’s method is applicable just to eleven pile load tests. The values obtained from
this method are close to Decourt’s method.
To analyze further, the average values of failure load from those approaches are chosen to find
the extrapolated end bearing capacity of each piles. Before that, the graphs of skin friction and
displacement (T-Z curve) from strain gauges need to be plotted as shown in Appendix G. It
can be seen that all soil layers are fully mobilized except rock layers. To extrapolate the T-Z
curve of pile in rocks, the skin friction at 5 mm of displacement is defined to be fully mobilized
skin friction (Horvath, 1982). The hyperbolic relationship is adopted to fit the curve for the
available data. The values of skin friction at 5 mm. of displacement are chosen. The fully
mobilized skin friction for piles in rock layers are plotted as blank scatters. Subsequently,
mobilized skin friction in Table 4.7 can be changed to Table 4.10. T-Z curve are also plotted
separately for both siltstone and sandstone as demonstrated in Figure 4.9-4.10, respectively. It
can be easily seen that skin frictions of siltstone are vary in the range of 22-120 T/m2, which
depends on the strength and degree of weathering of rock. Whilst most skin frictions of
sandstone are in between 27-37 T/m2, except skin friction for NBH-132 which is the highest
value and equals to 95 T/m2. This is consistent with σi, which the highest value is found in
bored hole no. NBH-132.
The mobilized end bearing and toe movement curve (Q-Z curve) are plotted either. The end
bearing capacity of piles are obtained from last axial forces from actual load distribution from
strain gauges by ignoring skin friction below the last strain gauge. The load distribution plots
are shown in Appendix E. Whilst, toe movement values are given by the difference of pile head
settlement and pile shortening that obtained from static load tests. Q-Z curve for seven piles
are shown in Appendix I and also plotted together in Figure 4.11. The others are not plotted
because of insignificant transferred base load. In Appendix I, It will be seen that the loads
transferred to the base of piles are pretty insignificant. Insufficient data cannot be used to

71
 Experimental results and discussions / 72

further analyze. Hyperbolic fitting is not proper to adopt. Therefore, extrapolated end bearing
of piles have to be found using another method.
The extrapolated end bearing can be indirectly calculated using different values of extrapolated
fully mobilized skin friction and extrapolated ultimate failure load. Both values obtain from
hyperbolic fitting and extrapolation method, respectively. The results can be applicable only 5
piles socketed in siltstone. Very insignificant loads were transferred to pile tip for the others.
The reasonable values are shown in Table 4.11. The extrapolated end bearing are in the range
of 464.5 - 703.5 t/m2.
4.4.2 Back calculated parameters
The back analysis to find friction parameters can be separated into two cases. For soils, both
clay and sand were fully mobilized after being subjected with the loads from static load test.
The skin frictions obtained from strain gauges were close to the actual values. Therefore, there
is no need to extrapolate. For rocks, the slight loads were transferred to base rocks. The
extrapolation of mobilized skin friction and ultimate bearing capacity was adopted for this case.
4.4.2.1 Adhesion factor (α) for clay and weak rock

Adhesion factors (α) from clay were plotted in Tomlinson’s pattern (see Figure 4.12). Skin
frictions obtained from strain gauges and undrain shear strength converted from SPT using the
semi-empirical relationship Su = 0.685N for CH clay and Su = 0.520N for CL clay (Pitupakorn,
1983). Two approaches were adopted to compare to the measured results. It can be seen that
some scatters of adhesion factor (α) were significantly larger than one and the approaches
because clay may be transformed from the weathered rock, resulting in higher friction capacity
than normal. The graph looks scattered because the data was analyzed from the whole length
of the project (187 km. long).
Another adhesion factor pattern was proposed by Kulhawy (1993) using logarithm scale. The
graph is demonstrated in Figure 4.13. The graph is plotted in logarithm scale on both X and Y
axis. Undrained shear strength of clay is normalized by atmospheric pressure (pa). Adhesion
factors are back calculated from Equation 2.2. Note that all values of unit skin friction for clay
were fully mobilized and all scatters were plotted for whole distance of the project. The graph
looks more convenient than the previous approach. The equation of adhesion factor for clay of
this project is:
α = 0.6(Su/pa)-0.5
Which x is equal to 0.6, whilst x is equal to 0.5 from Kulhawy’s suggestion for clay. To cover
90% of the data points, the upper and lower bound x value would be about 1.2 and 0.3,
respectively.
For weak rocks, adhesion factor is more complicated to back analyze. The rock strength can be
effected from many factors such as fractures including weathering of rocks. The rock can
behave as anisotropic material. The strength of in-situ rocks are always lower than intact. To
take into account this condition, the strength of intact rocks should be decreased. The initial
analysis uses the reduction factor effected from weathering of rock proposed by Prakoso
(2007). The results are shown in Figure 4.14.

72
 Experimental results and discussions / 73

Adhesion factor (α) was back calculated using Equation 2.3. The unit skin friction values were
chosen from both extrapolated and fully mobilized skin friction. Uniaxial compressive strength
of intact rock (σi) was reduced according to degree of weathering of rock. The new UCS or
uniaxial compressive strength of rock (σc) was normalized by atmospheric pressure. The
scatters were plotted from both extrapolated and fully mobilized data. The regression equation
of adhesion factor for siltstone is given by:
α = 1.02(σc/2pa)-0.5
Which is can be conveniently used to
α = (σc/2pa)-0.5
Which corresponds to Kulhawy and Phoon (1993)’s approach that x is equal to 1 to 3 for weak
rocks. For sandstone, the regression line is:
α = 0.50(σc/2pa)-0.5
That x value is equal to the value from clay proposed by Kulhawy and Phoon (1993). Adhesion
factors from clay and rock can be plotted together. The results are shown in Figure 4.15.
In general, the rock mass strength depends on the primary discontinuity. Some authers
proposed method to consider this condition using RQD. Williams et al. (1980) proposed rock
mass factor (j) to reduce the strength of intact rock considering fracturing state. The detail of
this method was explained in section 2.4. The results are shown in Figure 4.16. Adhesion
factors is back calculated from Equation 2.23 using the rock mass strength. The data is plotted
between adhesion factor and intact strength of rock. Only x-axis is taken logarithm scale. The
data scatters are compared to the other approach, including Horvath (1978) and William et al
(1980). It can be seen that the majority of data is lower than the approaches. The value of
adhesion factor is around 0.04-0.05. Only two points from extrapolation follow William et al
(1980)’s trend. Limitation of this approach is at modifying factor (βm). The lowest value of βm
is 0.4, whilst the reduction factor from Prakoso (2007) is unlimited. It means that this approach
is not applicable for rocks containing highly fractured and weathered state. The approach is not
allowed to reduce the rock strength appropriately.
However, the strength of rocks are not only dependent on two mentioned factors but
also many factors such as water content, scale effect, plane of weakness or even joint roughness
which is not mentioned in this thesis.
4.4.2.2 Shaft friction resistance (fs) for weak rock
Many authors ignored about consideration of adhesion factors by going directly to unit skin
friction (fs). The study of fs were developed as Equation 2.6 as explained in section 2.4. For
this project, the relationship of fs and σc are plotted as can be seen in Figure 4.17. Both axis is
normalized by atmospheric pressure to eliminate the unit. The suggested correlation for
siltstone is given:
fs/pa = 1.02(σc/2pa)0.5
For sandstone, the regression line corresponds to:
fs/pa = 0.50(σc/2pa)0.5

73
 Experimental results and discussions / 74

Another form of this relationship was initially proposed by Horvath (1978). The relation of fs
and σc was plotted in normal scale, obviously in Figure 2.8. The results for this project
compared to Horvath (1978) is evidently shown in Figure 4.18. Horvath (1978) proposed the
lowest line of skin friction when:
fs = 0.025σc
Which is matching pretty well with sandstone in this project. The values of skin friction of
siltstone is given by:
fs = 0.075σc
To consider strain weakening of rocks, unit skin friction should be lower when the rocks is
taken the higher load. Then, the fitting curves are applied using square root relation as shown
the result in Figure 4.19. The fitting curve for siltstone is suggested the following:
fs = 0.23σc0.5
For sandstone, the relationship is suggested the following:
fs = 0.11σc0.5
Note that two those proposed linear equations should not be used when σc higher than 15 and
25 MPa for siltstone and sandstone, respectively. Square root equations should be adopted
instead when σc is higher than the above.
4.4.2.3 Friction factor (β) for sand
Skin friction for sand is simple. Effective overburden pressure (σ’v) obtain from calculation.
Only skin friction is given from strain gauges. The coefficient of skin friction for coarse grained
soils (β) can be back calculated from Equation 2.30.
β and angle of friction values are plotted and shown in Figure 4.20. Schmidt (1967) is adopted
for comparison by varying OCR values. The graph demonstrated that major points for dense
and very dense sand follow the 5 OCR line. While medium dense sand relate to 1 OCR line.
4.4.2.4 End bearing in weak rock
The actual loads transferred to the pile base are shown in Q-Z curve in Appendix I. The
extrapolated end bearings are shown in Table 4.11 and plotted against uniaxial compressive
strength of rock (σc) as seen in Figure 4.21. The σc can be found by using relationship of RQD
and σc/σi from Zhang and Einstein (2004) to reduce strength of intact rock. When the load
transfers to the pile base, whole rock mass beneath pile is subjected. Then, rock fracture state
is taken into consideration. RQD of rocks were chosen at the bottom the pile tip. The result in
the graph is shown that the most points are according to Zhang and Einstein (1998)’s approach.
Only one point is disparate. To cover most points, the suggested line for this project is proposed
as follow:
qpu = 4.0(σc)0.5
It’s very necessary to consider the factors that effects to strength of rock, especially for weak
rocks. All weak rocks are susceptible to alteration. The relevant factors need to be considered
thoroughly for the better results.

74
 Experimental results and discussions / 75

Table 4.1 Rock parameters from investigation

No. Borehole Rock type Depth of Depth of UCS Density RQD RQD
No. rock rock sample (MPa) (t/m3) (%) av.
found (%)
1 NBH-27 Siltstone 9-19 11.0 - 12.0 29.20 2.39 0.0-70.0 42.55
2 NBH-30 Rock salt 28-32 31.0 - 32.0 17.54 2.24 - -
3 NBH-34 Siltstone 10.5-20.5 11.5 - 12.5 13.18 2.26 15.0-54.0 30.35
4 NBH-41 Rock salt 43.5-46.5 43.5 - 44.5 23.40 2.23 - -
5 NBH-44 Sandstone 16.5-28 16.0 - 17.0 18.98 2.14 20.0-90.0 59.57
6 NBH-49 Siltstone 9-19 14.0 - 15.0 20.97 2.26 20.0-77.0 41.85
7 NBH-50 Siltstone 10.5-20.5 19.0 - 20.0 23.13 2.30 23.0-74.0 58.95
8 NBH-52 Siltstone 12-21 12.0 - 13.0 19.00 2.30 0.0-60.0 32.00
9 NBH-61 Siltstone 13-20.5 16.0 - 17.0 23.34 2.48 0.0-63.0 36.73
10 NBH-76 Siltstone 13.5-23.5 16.0 - 17.0 42.39 2.37 0.0-46.0 30.15
11 NBH-78 Sandstone 11-21 13.0 - 14.0 12.70 2.05 22.0-96.0 51.35
12 NBH-80 Siltstone 13.5-23.9 16.0 - 17.0 38.41 2.44 62.0-94.0 81.91
13 NBH-81 Siltstone 12-22 13.0 - 14.0 31.07 2.47 82.0-98.0 90.00
14 NBH-92 Siltstone 13-23 13.0 - 14.0 21.21 2.28 50.0-100.0 65.50
15 NBH-93 Siltstone 14-24 18.0 - 19.0 18.54 2.37 0.0-88.0 57.40
16 NBH-97 Siltstone 19-29 26.0 – 27.0 24.42 2.36 10.0-83.0 50.15
17 NBH-99 Siltstone 10.5-20.5 17.5 - 18.5 30.71 2.41 42.0-99.0 76.80
18 NBH-101 Siltstone 21-31 26.0 – 27.0 26.12 2.44 15.0-75.0 47.10
19 NBH-102 Siltstone 9-19 18.0 - 19.0 16.95 1.92 27.0-98.0 58.55
20 NBH-103 Siltstone 7.5-17.5 13.5 - 14.5 23.19 2.41 60.0-100.0 86.90
21 NBH-107 Sandstone 10-52 50.5 - 51.5 23.41 2.34 - -
22 NBH-111 Siltstone 30-40 30.4 - 30.6 27.19 2.43 0.0-27.0 50.40
23 NBH-113 Siltstone 8-18 13.0 - 14.0 15.61 2.28 13.0-74.0 58.90
24 NBH-124 Siltstone 11-21 16.0 - 17.0 35.52 2.45 67.0-100.0 99.90
25 NBH-125 Siltstone 9-19 15.0 - 16.0 25.52 2.45 35.0-100.0 59.90
26 NBH-127 Sandstone 23-33 26.0 – 27.0 29.07 2.32 54.0-100.0 82.90
27 NBH-130 Sandstone 10-20 15.0 - 16.0 33.80 2.09 80.0-100.0 88.60
28 NBH-132 Sandstone 14-24 17.0 - 18.0 31.46 2.09 42.0-100.0 77.65
29 NBH-134 Sandstone 14-24 22.0 - 23.0 21.60 2.41 58.0-100.0 86.10
30 NBH-136 Sandstone 10-20 11.0 - 12.0 25.84 2.15 49.0-100.0 87.70
31 NBH-137 Sandstone 21-31 28.0 - 29.0 17.92 2.11 15.0-100.0 55.80
32 NBH-138 Sandstone 16.5-30 19.0 - 20.0 16.63 1.97 10.0-75.0 45.00
33 NBH-139 Sandstone 16-24.5 16.0 - 17.0 9.77 1.93 42.0-83.0 55.35
34 NBH-144 Sandstone 10.5-20.5 12.5 - 13.5 24.28 2.38 0.0-98.0 68.65
35 NBH-145 Sandstone 7.5-17.5 13.5 - 14.5 19.87 2.08 83.0-100.0 95.35
36 NBH-146A Siltstone 6-48 21.0 - 22.0 15.13 - 4.0-96.0 57.92
37 NBH-147 Siltstone 7.5-22.5 9.0 - 10.0 16.99 2.29 15.0-62.0 31.30
38 NBH-148 Siltstone 4.5-45.50 12.0 - 13.0 21.14 - 0.0-70.0 34.28
39 NBH-149 Siltstone 7.5-19.2 11.0 - 12.0 16.25 2.29 15.0-67.0 37.05
40 NBH-150 Siltstone 9.5-19.5 16.0 - 17.0 20.88 2.40 15.0-79.0 46.45
41 NBH-151 Siltstone 11-21 20.0 - 21.0 20.32 2.32 0.0-40.0 6.00

75
 Experimental results and discussions / 76

Table 4.2 Results from uniaxial compressive strength test mounted with strain gauges

Table 4.3 Summary of uniaxial compressive strength test results mounted with strain gauges

Table 4.4 Results from direct shear tests

Depth of Friction Shear

Amount
No. NBH Type of rock sample Angle Strength
of sample
(m) (Degree) (MPa)
1 34 Siltstone 3 13.5 56.03 0.01
2 44 Sandstone 3 17 27.55 1.66
3 52 Siltstone 3 21 36.80 2.78
4 78 Sandstone 3 18 6.81 1.43
5 99 Siltstone 3 15.5 18.61 4.15
6 132 Sandstone 3 22.5 34.72 6.08
7 134 Sandstone 3 15,5 47.72 1.04
8 148 Siltstone 3 9.5 22.79 1.47
Average 31.38 2.33

76
 Experimental results and discussions / 77

Table 4.5 Summary of direct shear test results

Type Friction Angle Shear strength

of Min Max Average Min Max Average
rock (Degree) (Degree) (Degree) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa)
Siltstone 18.61 56.03 33.56 0.01 4.15 2.10
Sandstone 6.81 47.72 29.20 1.04 6.08 2.56
All 6.81 56.03 31.38 0.01 6.08 2.33

Table 4.6 Actual pile shortening values of test piles

No. Pile Dia. Ultimate Pile Socket Soil/rock δh δs δt

location (m) load (t) Tip Length at pile tip (mm) (mm) (mm)
NBH (m) (m)
1 027 1.2 1,750 9.297 0.297 Siltstone 11.09 5.9 5.19
2 030 1.2 1,750 36 - Clay 20.86 10.03 10.83
3 034 1.2 1,750 14.5 4.0 Siltstone 8.11 5.52 2.59
4 041 1.2 1,750 35.338 - Clay 11.02 8.23 2.79
5 044 1.2 1,750 19.8 3.3 Sandstone 7.63 6.3 1.33
6 052 1.2 1,750 20.3 8.3 Siltstone 7.17 5.64 1.53
7 078 1.2 1,750 18.6 7.6 Siltstone 5.04 4.9 0.14
8 099 1.2 1,750 15 4.5 Siltstone 4.05 3.03 1.02
9 101 1.2 1,750 15.5 - Clay 5.84 5.08 0.76
10 132 1.2 1,750 16.5 2.5 Sandstone 8.59 6.38 2.21
11 134 1.2 1,750 15 1.0 Sandstone 11.05 6.5 4.55
12 137 1.2 1,750 18.5 - Sand 7.08 5.21 1.87
13 138 1.2 1,750 35 - Sand 9.94 7.18 2.76
14 146 1.2 1,625 22 - Clay 5.74 5.12 0.62
15 148 1.2 1,875 14 9.5 Siltstone 5.65 4.57 1.08
16 148 1.5 2,500 14.3 9.8 Siltstone 8.43 5.1 3.33

Table 4.7 Ranges of mobilized skin friction for each types of soil or rock

Soil of rock type Unit skin friction (T/m2)

Stiff clay 2.5-15.0
Hard clay 15.0-84.0
Loose sand 6.0-8.0
Dense sand 8.0-75.0
Rock salt 20.0
Siltstone 20.0-120.0
Sandstone 17.5-85.0

77
 Experimental results and discussions / 78

Table 4.8 Summary of extrapolated ultimate failure load

Test Ahmad
Working Max. test Decourt Mazur. Hansen
Pile and Pise Av.
No. load load 1999 1980 1963
No. 1998
(ton) (ton)
NBH Extrapolated ultimate failure load (ton)
1 034 700 1,750 2,900 2,823 2,000 2,490 2,553
2 041 700 1,750 2,500 1,882 2,000 2,204 2,147
3 052 700 1,750 3,000 3,623 1,950 2,970 2,886
4 138 700 1,750 2,900 1,689 2,050 N/A 2,213
5 146 650 1,625 3,200 2,989 2,000 N/A 2,730
6 148 750 1,875 N/A(1) 2,920 2,150 N/A 2,535
7 148 1,000 2,500 3,700 2,550 2,750 3,138 3,034
8 044 700 1,750 N/A N/A 1,950 N/A 1,950
9 030 700 1,750 2,000 2,103 1,900 1,790 1,948
10 027 700 1,750 2,100 1,872 2,150 1,964 2,021
11 078 700 1,750 N/A N/A 2,000 N/A 2,000
12 134 700 1,750 2,100 1,987 1,900 1,927 1,979
13 137 700 1,750 3,000 2,266 2,000 2,770 2,509
14 132 700 1,750 3,000 2,094 2,000 2,966 2,515
15 099 700 1,750 2,300 1,919 2,000 2,030 2,062
16 101 700 1,750 3,300 2,548 2,050 3,959 2,964
(1)N/A is not applicable

Table 4.9 Average of factor safety

Ahmad
Test Pile Decourt Mazurkiewicz Hansen
No. and Pise Average
No. NBH 1999 1980 1963
1998
1 034 4.14 4.03 2.86 3.56 3.65
2 041 3.57 2.69 2.86 3.15 3.07
3 052 4.29 5.18 2.79 4.24 4.12
4 138 4.14 2.41 2.93 N/A 3.16
5 146 4.92 4.60 3.08 N/A 4.20
6 148 N/A 3.89 2.87 N/A 3.38
7 148 3.70 2.55 2.75 3.14 3.03
8 044 N/A N/A 2.79 N/A 2.79
9 030 2.86 3.00 2.71 2.56 2.78
10 027 3.00 2.67 3.07 2.81 2.89
11 078 N/A N/A 2.86 N/A 2.86
12 134 3.00 2.84 2.71 2.75 2.83
13 137 4.29 3.24 2.86 3.96 3.58
14 132 4.29 2.99 2.86 4.24 3.59
15 099 3.29 2.74 2.86 2.90 2.95
16 101 4.71 3.64 2.93 5.66 4.23
Average 3.86 3.32 2.86 3.54 3.32

78
 Experimental results and discussions / 79

Table 4.10 Range of extrapolated unit skin friction of rock

Rock type Extrapolated unit skin friction (T/m2)(1)

Rock salt 20.0
Siltstone 22.0 – 120.0
Sandstone 27.0 – 95.0
(1)Consider at 5mm. of displacement

Table 4.11 Extrapolated end bearing of piles socketed in siltstone

Measured end bearing Extrapolated end bearing

Test pile No.
capacity (t/m2) capacity (t/m2)
NBH-034 283.27 464.51
NBH-052 89.25 547.08
NBH-148 533.7 685.36
NBH-148 300.47 516.09
NBH-027 608.31 703.50

79
 Experimental results and discussions / 80

Figure 4.1 Soil and rock profile for NBH-033 to 039

Depth RQD
(m) (%)
10.5-12.0 49
12.0-13.5 43
13.5-15.0 22
15.0-17.0 20
17.0-18.0 52
18.0-19.5 14
19.5-20.5 20

Figure 4.2 Rock sample for NBH-034

80
 Experimental results and discussions / 81

Figure 4.3 Soil and rock profiles

81
 Experimental results and discussions / 82

Figure 4.4 Piles socketed in different level of soil/rock layer

82
 Experimental results and discussions / 83

Figure 4.5 Actual pile shaft shortening comparing to Tomlinson (1995)

Figure 4.6 Actual pile shaft shortening comparing to Bowles (1996)

83
 Experimental results and discussions / 84

Figure 4.7 Applied load VS Pile head settlement of 16 test piles

Rock

Soil

Figure 4.8 Normalized Applied load VS Pile head settlement of 16 test piles

84
 Experimental results and discussions / 85

Figure 4.9 Mobilized skin friction from strain gauges – TZ curve for siltstone

Figure 4.10 Mobilized skin friction from strain gauges – TZ curve for sandstone

85
 Experimental results and discussions / 86

Figure 4.11 Mobilized end bearing from strain gauges – QZ curve for siltstone

Figure 4.12 Adhesion factors for clay (Tomlinson’s pattern)

86
 Experimental results and discussions / 87

Figure 4.13 Adhesion factors for clay (Kulhawy’s pattern)

Figure 4.14 Adhesion factors for weak rock (Kulhawy’s pattern)

87
 Experimental results and discussions / 88

Figure 4.15 Adhesion factors for clay and weak rock (Kulhawy’s pattern)

Figure 4.16 Adhesion factors for weak rock (William’s pattern)

88
 Experimental results and discussions / 89

Figure 4.17 Side friction resistance for weak rock versus uniaxial compressive
strength of rock (normalized by atmospheric pressure)

Figure 4.18 Side friction resistance for weak rock versus uniaxial compressive
strength of rock (linear fitting)

89
 Experimental results and discussions / 90

Figure 4.19 Side friction resistance for weak rock versus uniaxial compressive
strength of rock (square root fitting)

Figure 4.20 Friction factor for coarse-grained soil varying OCR

90
 Experimental results and discussions / 91

Figure 4.21 Extrapolated ultimate end bearing capacity of piles socketed in siltstone
VS uniaxial compressive strength of rock

91
 Conclusion and recommendations / 92

Chapter 5
Conclusion and Recommendations
This project performed static load tests on 16 test piles, each pile installed strain gauges to find
axial force and extensometers to find pile shortening. Every pile was taken load 2.5 times of
working load. As a result, all piles did not reach the failure criterion. The load test results were
used to back-calculated needed parameters for pile design. Extrapolation method was carried
out to find out the fully mobilized parameters. The results were analyzed and compared to other
approach such as Horvath (1978), Kullhawy and Phoon (1993) and Tomlinson (1995), which
can be summarized as follow:

5.1 Soil and rock profiles, properties and parameters

5.1.1 The soils found in this project are clay and sand, laying alternately underlain by
sedimentary rock originated by alluvial deposition. No soft clay is found in this area. The type
of rocks are siltstone and sandstone, which have uniaxial compressive strength of intact rock
around 23.71 MPa (13.18-42.39 MPa) and 21.95 MPa (9.77-33.8 MPa) for siltstone and
sandstone, respectively. Degree of weathering of rock are ranging from fresh to completely
weathered rock. No rocks are found at the firstly range (KM.268 to KM.290) of the project.
For KM.290 to KM.451, rocks found are in the depth around 3-50m. below ground surface.
For soils, the strength were collected by SPT only.
5.1.2 Average elastic modulus of intact rock (E50) are 3.66 GPa and 2.83 GPa for siltstone and
sandstone, respectively or around 250 times of σci for both rocks. Poisson’s ratio of siltstone is
lower than sandstone, which are 0.15 and 0.39 in average, respectively.
5.1.3 The average value of angel of friction for both rocks by direct shear test is 31 degree.

5.2 Pile settlement

5.2.1 Most piles in this project have the range of pile head settlement 5-10 mm with 2.5 times
of working load. All piles have not reached the failure criterion. All soil layers are fully
mobilized after taking load. Rock layers need extrapolation for further analysis.
5.2.2 16-piles with diameter 1.2 and 1.5 m. were performed static load test with 2.5 times of
working load. The maximum test loads are 1,750 and 2,500 ton, respectively. After
extrapolation, the average ultimate failure loads are around 2,350 and 3,000 ton or 3.4 and 3.0
for factor of safety.

5.3 Back-calculated parameters

5.3.1 The regression line of adhesion factor for clay is α = 0.6(Su/pa)-0.5, which is a little bit
higher than Kulhawy and Phoon (1993). For siltstone, α = 1.02(σc/2pa)-0.5, which corresponds
to Kulhawy and Phoon (1993)’s approach that x is equal to 1 to 3 for weak rocks. For sandstone,
α = 0.50(σc/2pa)-0.5, which is similar to adhesion factor for clay proposed by Kulhawy and
Phoon (1993).

92
 Conclusion and recommendations / 93

5.3.2 Skin friction for siltstone and sandstone are in the function of uniaxial compressive
strength of rock, which can be summarized in Table 5.1. Skin friction needs to consider degree
of weathering of rock.
Note that linear fitting relationships should not be used when σc is higher than 15 MPa for
siltstone and 20 MPa for sandstone. Skin friction should be limited due to strain weakening of
rocks, suggested to use square root fitting relationship for higher σc.
5.3.3 Correlations of end bearing and uniaxial compressive strength of rock for siltstone from
extrapolation is qp = 4.0(σc)0.5 by considering RQD below pile tips.

5.4 Recommendations
The recommendations are suggested for next studies:
5.4.1 Skin friction of rock for pile design needs to consider degree of weathering of rock. The
rocks in this project are not the fresh rock and contain many fractures.
5.4.2 Rock mass properties need to be considered for settlement prediction and pile capacity.
5.4.3 To obtain actual fully mobilized skin frictions with limitation of cost for the future
project, static load test should be performed on small piles until reaching failure criterion.
5.4.4 Adhesion factors in this thesis were back-calculated from whole length of the project and
some scatters were extrapolated. The forthcoming static load test should be performed on
specific location to find out the actual pile capacity.
5.4.5 When doing investigation, it is very necessary to find out what is the right parameters for
design or even settlement prediction such as Poisson’s ratio and elastic modulus of intact rock
(E50). Lack of engineering information, it means lack of data in design either, meaning the
project is charged for the higher cost of higher safety. The forthcoming project need to figure
out what has to be done.

Table 5.1 Summary the results of skin friction for rocks

Method Siltstone Sandstone

Log plotting fs/pa = 1.02(σc/2pa)0.5 fs/pa = 0.50(σc/2pa)0.5
Linear fitting fs = 0.075σc fs = 0.025σc
Square root fitting fs = 0.23σc0.5 fs = 0.11σc0.5

93
 References
AASHTO. 1996. Standard specifications for highway bridges, American Association of. State
Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C., 16th Edition, pp. 677.
Ahmed, F. and Pise, P.J. 1999. Pile Load Test Data-Interpretation & Correlation Study,
Indian Geotechnical Conference, Vadodara, 17-20 December 1997, pp. 443-446.
API. 1984. API Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed
Offshore Platforms, 15/e, American Petroleum Institute, API RP2A.
Bengt, H.F. 1980. The Analysis of Results from Routine Pile Load Tests, Ground
Engineering, pp.19-31.
Bieniawski, Z.T. 1978. Determining rock mass deformability: experience from case histories.
International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts;
15(5):237-47.
Boonyarak T. 2001. Behavior of polymer slurry for wet-process bored pile construction in
Bangkok subsoil. Master Thesis, Chulalongkorn university, Bangkok.
Bowles, J.E. 1996. Foundation Analysis and Design. 5th Edition, The McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc., New York.
Braja, M.D. 2014. Principles of Foundation Engineering, 8th edition, Cengage learning,
United States of America.
Brinch-Hansen. 1963. Discussion on Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Response, American Society
of Civil Engineering, ASCE, Journal for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Vol.97, SM6, pp. 931-932.
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION Code of practice for site investigations (BS 5930,
BSI, London, 1999)
BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION Code of practice for site investigations (BS 8004,
BSI, London, 1986)
Bunopas, S. 1981. Paleogeographic history of western Thailand and adjacent parts of
Southeast Asia — a plate tectonic interpretation. Doctoral Thesis, Victoria University of
Wellington, New Zealand, pp. 810.
Bunopas S. and P. Vella. 1983. Tectonic and geologic evolution of Thailand, Workshop on
stratigraphic of Thailand and Malaysia, Department of Mineral Resources, Thailand.
Chin, F.K. 1970. Estimation of the Ultimate Load of Piles Not Carried to Failure, Proc.2nd
Southeast Asia. Conference on soil Engineering, pp. 81-90.
Coon, R.F. and Merritt A.H. 1970. Predicting in situ modulus of deformation using rock
quality indexes. In: Determination of the in situ modulus of deformation of rock. ASTM
International; p. 154-73.
Cripps, J.C. and Taylor, R.K. 1981. The engineering properties of mudrocks, Q.J. Engg
Geol.14, No.4, 325-346.

94
Robin F., David, S., Patrick M.G., and Graeme B. 2005. Geotechnical Engineering of Dams,
Taylor & Francis.
Decourt, L. 1999. Behavior of foundations under working load conditions. Proceedings of the
11th Pan-American Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Foz-
DoIguassu, Brazil, August 1999, Vol. 4, pp. 453 488.
Deere, D.U. 1964. Technical description of rock cores for engineering purposes, Rock
Mechanics and Engineering Geology, Vol. 1, pp. 17–22.
Deere, D.U. and Miller, R.P. 1966. Engineering classification and index properties for intact
rock, Technical Report No. AFWL-TR-65-116, Air Force Weapon Laboratory, New Mexico.
Deere D.U., Hendron A.J., Patton F.D. and Cording E.J. 1967. Design of surface and near
surface construction in rock. In Failure and Breakage of Rock: Proceedings of the 8th U.S.
Symposium on Rock Mechanic. New York: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and
Petroleum Engineers, Inc.; p. 237-302.
Deere, D.U., Peck, R.B., Parker, H.W., Monsees, J.E. and Schmidt, B. 1970. Design of
Tunnel Support Systems, Highway Research Record, No.339, Highway Research Board, pp.
26-33.
Deere, D.U. 1989. Rock quality designation (RQD) after 20 years. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers Contract Report GL-89-1. Vicksburg, MS: Waterways Experimental Station.
Ebisu S., Aydan O., Komura S. and Kawamoto T. 1992. Comparative study on various rock
mass characterization methods for surface structures. In: Rock Characterization: ISRM
Symposium, Eurock ’92. London, UK: Thomas Telford; pp. 203-8.
FHWA (U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration). 2010. Drilled
Shafts Construction Procedures and LRFD Design Methods, National Highway institute, pp.
402.
Flemming, W.G.K. and Sliwinski, Z.J. 1977. The use and influence of bentonite in bored pile
construction, CIRIA report PG3.
Gercek, H. 2007. Poisson’s ratio values for rocks. International Journal of Rock Mechanics
and Mining Sciences, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 1–13.
Goodman, Richard E. 1980. Introduction to rock mechanics (first edition), New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Goodman, Richard E. 1989. Introduction to rock mechanics (second edition), New York:
John Wiley & Sons.
Hobbs, N.B. 1974. Factors affecting the prediction of settlement of structures on rock with
particular reference to the Chalk and Trias, Settlement of Structures (Proc. Conf. British
Geotechnical Society at Cambridge, Pentech Press, London,579-654)
Hobbs, N.B. 1974. General report and state-of-the-art review, Proceedings of a Conference
on Settlement of Structures, Pentech Press, Cambridge, pp. 579-609.

95
Hoek E. 2006. ROCK ENGINEERING Course notes by Evert Hoek, Canada: Evert Hoek
Consulting Engineer Inc.
Horvath, R.G. 1978. Field load test data on concrete-to-rock bond strength for drilled pier
foundations, Publication 78-07, University of Toronto, Toronto.
Horvath, R.G. & T.C. Kenney. 1979. Shaft resistance of rock-socketed drilled piers. In
Symposium on Deep Foundations, Atlanta, Oct. 1979, ed. F.M. Fuller, 182- 214. New York:
ASCE
Horvath, R.G., Kenney, T.C., and Trow, W.A. 1980. Results of tests to determine shaft
resistance of rock-socketed drilled piers, Proc. Int. Conf. on Structural Foundations on Rock,
Sydney, Australia, 1, 349-361.
Horvath, R.G. 1982. Behavior of rock-socketed drilled pier foundations, Ph.D. Thesis.
University of Toronto, Toronto.
Horvath, R.G., Kenney, T.C., and Kochiki, P. 1983. Methods of improving the performance
of drilled piers in weak rock, Proc. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 20, 758-772.
Institution of Civil Engineers. 2007. Specification for piling and embedded retaining walls
(2nd edition), Thomas Telford, London.
Jaky, J. 1944. The coefficient of earth pressure at rest, Journal of the Society of Hungarian
Architects and Engineers (in Hungarian), Vol.8, No.22, pp. 355-358.
Kulhawy, F.H. and Goodman R.E., 1987. Foundations in rock. In: Bell FG, editor. Ground
Engineer’s reference book, chapter 15. London, UK: Butterworths.
Kulhawy, F.H. 1992. Limiting tip and side resistance, fact or fallacy, Symposium on Analysis
and Design of Pile Foundations, American Society of Civil Engineers, San Francisco,
Proceedings, 80-98.
Kulhawy, F.H. and J.P. Caster. 1992. Socketed foundations in rock masses, In Engineering in
Rock Masses, ed. F.G. Bell, 509-529. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Kulhawy, F.H. and Phoon, K.K. 1993. Drilled shaft side resistance in clay soil to rock. Proc.
on Conf. on design and performance of deep foundation: piles and piers in soil and soft rock.
Geotechnical Special Publication No.38. ASCE: 172-183.
Kulhawy, F.H. & Prakoso, W.A. 2001. Foundations in Carbonate Rocks & Karst.
Foundations & Ground Improvement (GSP 113), Ed. T.L.Brandon. Reston: ASCE: 1-15.
Kulhawy, F.H. & Prakoso, W.A. 2003. Variability of Rock Index Properties. Proc. Soil &
Rock America, Ed. P.J.Culligan et al. Cambridge (MA): 2765-70.
Kulhawy, F.H. and Prakoso, W.A. 2007. Issues in evaluating capacity of rock socket
foundations. In: Proceedings of the 16th SE Asian geotechnical conference, Kuala Lumpur,
51-61.
Masterton, G., Gannon, J. A., Wallace, W. A., & Muir Wood, D. 1999. Piled Foundations in
Weak Rock. London: CIRIA.

96
Meigh, A.C. and Wolski, W. 1979. Design parameters for weak rocks. In: Proceeding of the
seventh European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, vol. 5. British
Geotechnical Society, Brighton, pp. 59–79.
Meyerhof, G.G. 1976. Bearing capacity and settlement of pile foundations, Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 102, No.
GT3, pp.197-228.
Morris, D.A. and A.I. Johnson, 1967. Summary of hydrologic and physical properties of rock
and soil materials as analyzed by the Hydrologic Laboratory of the U.S. Geological Survey,
U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1839-D, 42p.
NAVFAC (Naval Facilities Engineering Commands). 1986. Design Manual 7.02 Foundations
and Earth Structures. Alexandria, Virginia, pp. 219.
NCHRP (National Cooperative Highway Research Program). 2006. Rock-Socketed Shafts
for Highway Structure Foundations, WASHINGTON, D.C: The National Academies Press.
Ng, C., Tau, T., Li, J., and Tang, W. 2001. New failure criterion for large diameter bored
piles in weathered geomaterials. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)1090-
0241(2001)127:6(488), 488-498.
O'Neill, M.W., and Reese, L.C. 1999. Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and Design
Methods, Publication No. FHWA-IF-99-025, Federal Highway Administration, Washington,
D.C.
Peangta, S. 2007. Foundations of structural geology, Khon Kaen: Faculty of technology,
Khon Kaen University.
Peck, R.B., Hanson, W.E. and Thornburn, T.H. 1974. Foundation Engineering. 2nd edition,
John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Pells, P.J.N. and Turner, R.M. 1980. End-bearing on rock with particular reference to
sandstone, Proc. Int. Conf. on Structural Foundations on rock, Sydney, Australia, 1, pp. 181-
190.
Pells, P. J. N. and Mostyn, G. 1998. Foundation on sandstone and shale in the Sydney legion,
Australian Geomechanics, Australia.
Pimpasugdi, S. 1989. Performance of Bored, Driven and Auger Press Piles in Bangkok
Subsoils. Master Thesis, GT-88-12, AIT, Bangkok.
Pitupakorn, W. 1983. Prediction of pile carrying capacity from standard penetration test in
Bangkok metropolis subsoil, Master thesis, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok.
Prakoso, W.A. 2002. Reliability-based design of foundations in rock masses. PhD
Dissertation. Ithaca: Cornell University.
Reese, L. C. and Tucker, K. L. 1985. Bentonite slurry in constructing drilled piers, Drilled
piers and caisson II, ASCE convention, Denver, Colorado, USA.
Robin, F., Patrick M.G. and David, S. 1992. Geotechnical Engineering of Embankment
Dams, A.A.Balkema.

97
Rosenberg, P. and Journeaux, N.L. 1976. Friction and end bearing tests on bedrock for high
capacity socket design, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 13, No.3, 324-333.
Rowe, R.K., and Armitage. H.H. 1984. Design of piles socketed into weak rock, Report
GEOT-11-84, London: Univ. of Western Ontario.
Rowe, R.K., and Armitage. H.H. 1987b. A design method for drilled piers in soft rock,
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 24, 126-142.
Schmidt, B. 1966. Discussion of earth pressures at rest related to stress history. Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, 3, 239-242.
Sivakugan, Nagaratnam, Shukla, Sanjay Kumar, and Das, Braja M. 2012. Rock Mechanics:
an introduction. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
Thasnanipan N., Rujikajorndet P., and Tanseng P. 2000. Polymer in wet process bored piles
construction in Bangkok suboil, 6th National Convention on Civil Engineering.
Thasananipan N., Baskaran G., and Anwar, M.A. 1998. Effect of construction time and
bentonite viscosity on shaft capacity of bored piles, 3rd Intl. Geotechnical seminar on deep
foundations on bored and auger piles, Ghent, Belgium, Balkema, pp. 171-177.
Terzaghi, K. 1943. Theoretical Soil Mechanics. Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.
Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R.B. 1948. Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, John Wiley and
Sons, New York. 566 p.
Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R.B. 1967. Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, John Wiley ans
Sons, New York. 729 p.
Tomlinson, M.J. 1995. Foundation Design and Construction, 6th edn, Longman Scientific and
technical, Essex, England.
Schuler, U. 2017. NE-Thailand (Isan), Geosciences.
Vesic, A.S. 1977. Design of Pile Foundations, National Cooperative Highway Research
Program Synthesis of Practice No.42, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
Weltman, A.J. and Healy, P.R. 1978. Piling in boulder clay and other glacial tills,
Construction Industry Research and Information Association, Report PG5.
Williams, A.F and Pells, P.J.N. 1981. Side resistance rock sockets in sandstone, mudstone,
and shale, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 18, No.4.
Williams, A.F., Johnston, I.W., and Donalds, I.B. 1980. The Design of Socketed Piles in
Weak Rock, Int. Conf. Structural Foundations on rock, Sydney Balkema.
Wyllie, D.C. 1999. Foundations on Rock, 2nd edition, Spon.
Zhang, L., and Einstein, H.H., 1998. End bearing resistance of drilled shafts in rock. Journal
of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering (ASCE) 124 (7), 574–584.
Zhang, L., and Einstein, H.H., 2004. Using RQD to estimate the deformation of rock masses.
Int. Journal of Rock Mechanics & Mining Sciences, vol. 41, 337-341.

98
Zhang, L., 2008. Predicting the end bearing capacity of rock socketed shafts. In: Proceedings
of the Third Annual & 11th International Conference on Deep Foundations, October 15–17,
Deep Foundations Institute, New York, USA, pp. 307–316.
Zhang, L., 2010. Estimating the strength of jointed rock masses. Rock Mechanics and Rock
Engineering, 43(4), 391-402.

99
 APPENDIX A
Figure A1 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-034 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A2 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-041 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A3 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-052 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A4 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-138 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A5 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-146 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A6 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-148(1.2) analyzed from extensometer
Figure A7 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-148(1.5) analyzed from extensometer
Figure A8 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-044 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A9 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-030 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A10 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-027 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A11 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-078 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A12 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-134 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A13 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-137 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A14 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-132 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A15 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-099 analyzed from extensometer
Figure A16 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-101 analyzed from extensometer

100
Pile location: NBH-034, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A1 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-034 analyzed from extensometer

101
Pile location: NBH-041, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A2 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-041 analyzed from extensometer

102
Pile location: NBH-052, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A3 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-052 analyzed from extensometer

103
Pile location: NBH-138, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A4 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-138 analyzed from extensometer

104
Pile location: NBH-146, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A5 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-146 analyzed from extensometer

105
Pile location: NBH-148(1.2), Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A6 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-148(1.2) analyzed from extensometer

106
Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.50 m

Figure A7 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-148(1.5) analyzed from extensometer

107
Pile location: NBH-044, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A8 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-044 analyzed from extensometer

108
Pile location: NBH-030, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A9 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-030 analyzed from extensometer

109
Pile location: NBH-027, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A10 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-027 analyzed from extensometer

110
Pile location: NBH-078, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A11 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-078 analyzed from extensometer

111
Pile location: NBH-134, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A12 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-134 analyzed from extensometer

112
Pile location: NBH-137, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A13 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-137 analyzed from extensometer

113
Pile location: NBH-132, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A14 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-132 analyzed from extensometer

114
Pile location: NBH-099, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A15 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-099 analyzed from extensometer

115
Pile location: NBH-101, Elastic Shortening from Extensometer
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure A16 Elastic shortening of pile no. NBH-101 analyzed from extensometer

116
 Appendix B / 117

APPENDIX B
Figure B1 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-034
Figure B2 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-041
Figure B3 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-052
Figure B4 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-138
Figure B5 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-146
Figure B6 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-148
Figure B7 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-148(1.5)
Figure B8 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-044
Figure B9 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-030
Figure B10 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-027
Figure B11 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-078
Figure B12 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-134
Figure B13 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-137
Figure B14 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-132
Figure B15 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-099
Figure B16 Load - estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-101

117
 Appendix B / 118

Pile location: NBH-034, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B1 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-034

118
 Appendix B / 119

Pile location: NBH-041, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B2 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-041

119
 Appendix B / 120

Pile location: NBH-052, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B3 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-052

120
 Appendix B / 121

Pile location: NBH-138, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B4 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-138

121
 Appendix B / 122

Pile location: NBH-146, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B5 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-146

122
 Appendix B / 123

Pile location: NBH-148(1.2), Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B6 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-148

123
 Appendix B / 124

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B7 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-148(1.5)

124
 Appendix B / 125

Pile location: NBH-044, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B8 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-044

125
 Appendix B / 126

Pile location: NBH-030, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B9 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-030

126
 Appendix B / 127

Pile location: NBH-027, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B10 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-027

127
 Appendix B / 128

Pile location: NBH-078, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B11 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-078

128
 Appendix B / 129

Pile location: NBH-134, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B12 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-134

129
 Appendix B / 130

Pile location: NBH-137, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B13 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-137

130
 Appendix B / 131

Pile location: NBH-132, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B14 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-132

131
 Appendix B / 132

Pile location: NBH-099, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B15 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-099

132
 Appendix B / 133

Pile location: NBH-101, Pile Head Settlement VS Applied Load

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure B16 Load – estimated settlement of bored pile no. NBH-101

133
 Appendix C / 134

APPENDIX C
Figure C1 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-034)
Figure C2 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-041)
Figure C3 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-052)
Figure C4 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-138)
Figure C5 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-146)
Figure C6 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-148)
Figure C7 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-148,1.5)
Figure C8 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-044)
Figure C9 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-030)
Figure C10 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-027)
Figure C11 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-078)
Figure C12 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-134)
Figure C13 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-137)
Figure C14 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-132)
Figure C15 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-099)
Figure C16 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-101)

134
 Appendix C / 135

Pile location: NBH-034, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C1 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-034)

135
 Appendix C / 136

Pile location: NBH-041, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C2 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-041)

136
 Appendix C / 137

Pile location: NBH-052, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C3 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-052)

137
 Appendix C / 138

Pile location: NBH-138, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C4 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-138)

138
 Appendix C / 139

Pile location: NBH-146, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C5 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-146)

139
 Appendix C / 140

Pile location: NBH-148 D1.2 m, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C6 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-148 D1.2 m.)

140
 Appendix C / 141

Pile location: NBH-148 D1.5 m., Strain values from Strain gauges
Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C7 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-148 D1.5 m.)

141
 Appendix C / 142

Pile location: NBH-044, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C8 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-044)

142
 Appendix C / 143

Pile location: NBH-030, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C9 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-030)

143
 Appendix C / 144

Pile location: NBH-027, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C10 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-027)

144
 Appendix C / 145

Pile location: NBH-078, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C11 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-078)

145
 Appendix C / 146

Pile location: NBH-134, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C12 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-134)

146
 Appendix C / 147

Pile location: NBH-137, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C13 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-137)

147
 Appendix C / 148

Pile location: NBH-132, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C14 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-132)

148
 Appendix C / 149

Pile location: NBH-099, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C15 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-099)

149
 Appendix C / 150

Pile location: NBH-101, Strain values from Strain gauges

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Figure C16 Strain values from strain gauges (NBH-101)

150
 Appendix D / 151

APPENDIX D
Figure D1 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-034)
Figure D2 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-041)
Figure D3 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-052)
Figure D4 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-138)
Figure D5 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-146)
Figure D6 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-148)
Figure D7 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-148,1.5)
Figure D8 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-044)
Figure D9 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-030)
Figure D10 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-027)
Figure D11 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-078)
Figure D12 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-134)
Figure D13 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-137)
Figure D14 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-132)
Figure D15 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-099)
Figure D16 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness (NBH-101)

151
 Appendix D / 152

Pile location: NBH-034, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gage layer (S3-S6) not have a clear converge
point thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and
pile stiffness at layer S3-S6 equal pile stiffness at S2

Figure D1 Calibration chart for finding The New Pile Stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 3.913E-04 3.533 1.956E-04 3.533
S3 -9.24E-05 4.280 -4.618E-05 4.280
S4 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481
S5 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481
S6 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481

152
 Appendix D / 153

Pile location: NBH-041, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S4-S6) not have a clear converge point
thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S4-S6 equal pile stiffness at S2
3) Strain Gauge S2-2,S3-2,S4-2,S5-2 and S6-1 is damage
before testing

Figure D2 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -1.839E-03 4.464 -9.197E-04 4.464
S3 4.389E-03 4.481 2.195E-03 4.481
S4 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481
S5 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481
S6 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481

153
 Appendix D / 154

Pile location: NBH-052, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S4-S6) not have a clear converge point
thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S4-S6 equal pile stiffness at S2
2) Strain Gauge layer S3 was omitted

Figure D3 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -1.400E-03 4.420 -7.001E-04 4.420
S4 Unknown -7.001E-04 4.420
S5 Unknown -7.001E-04 4.420
S6 Unknown -7.001E-04 4.420

154
 Appendix D / 155

Pile location: NBH-138, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S4-S6) not have a clear
converge point thus assume this test pile is prismatic
member and pile stiffness at layer S4-S6 equal pile
stiffness at S3

Figure D4 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -9.107E-04 4.030 -4.554E-04 4.030
S3 2.342E-03 4.466 1.171E-03 4.466
S4 Unknown 1.171E-03 4.466
S5 Unknown 1.171E-03 4.466
S6 Unknown 1.171E-03 4.466

155
 Appendix D / 156

Pile location: NBH-146, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S3-S6) not have a clear
converge point thus assume this test pile is prismatic
member and pile stiffness at layer S3-S6 equal pile
stiffness at S2

Figure D5 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -2.011E-03 4.269 -1.005E-03 4.269
S3 Unknown -1.005E-03 4.269
S4 Unknown -1.005E-03 4.269
S5 Unknown -1.005E-03 4.269
S6 Unknown -1.005E-03 4.269

156
 Appendix D / 157

Pile location: NBH-148(1.2), Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S5-S6) not have a clear converge point
thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S5-S6 equal pile stiffness at S3
2) Strain Gauge layer S4 was omitted

Figure D6 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -1.976E-03 5.163 -9.882E-04 5.163
S3 -2.446E-03 4.685 -1.223E-03 4.685
S5 Unknown -1.223E-03 4.685
S6 Unknown -1.223E-03 4.685

157
 Appendix D / 158

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S5-S6) not have a clear
converge point thus assume this test pile is prismatic
member and pile stiffness at layer S5-S6 equal pile
stiffness at S2
2) Strain Gauge layer S2-1,S3,S4 and S5-2 omitted

Figure D7 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -2.759E-03 5.129 -1.380E-04 5.129
S5 Unknown -1.380E-04 5.129
S6 Unknown -1.380E-04 5.129

158
 Appendix D / 159

Pile location: NBH-044, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S4-S6) not have a clear
converge point thus assume this test pile is prismatic
member and pile stiffness at layer S4-S6 equal pile
stiffness at S3

Figure D8 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 1.626E-03 3.011 8.131E-04 3.011
S3 3.938E-03 2.038 1.969E-03 2.038
S4 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481
S5 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481
S6 Unknown 2.195E-03 4.481

159
 Appendix D / 160

Pile location: NBH-030, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S4-S6) not have a clear converge point
thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S5-S6 equal pile stiffness at S3
2) Strain Gauge S1-1 and S6-2 is damaged before testing

Figure D9 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 1.075E-02 1.853 5.374E-03 1.853
S3 1.351E-02 1.314 6.757E-03 1.314
S4 Unknown 6.757E-03 1.314
S5 Unknown 6.757E-03 1.314
S6 Unknown 6.757E-03 1.314

160
 Appendix D / 161

Pile location: NBH-027, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S4-S6) not have a clear
converge point thus assume this test pile is prismatic
member and pile stiffness at layer S4-S6 equal pile
stiffness at S3
2) Strain Gauge S1-1 is damaged before testing

Figure D10 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -1.165E-03 4.927 -5.823E-04 4.927
S3 7.529E-04 3.952 3.764E-04 3.952
S4 Unknown 3.764E-04 3.952
S5 Unknown 3.764E-04 3.952
S6 Unknown 3.764E-04 3.952

161
 Appendix D / 162

Pile location: NBH-078, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S4-S6) not have a clear converge
point thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and
pile stiffness at layer S4-S6 equal pile stiffness at S3

Figure D11 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -1.666E-03 4.032 -8.330E-04 4.032
S3 -2.690E-03 5.179 -1.345E-03 5.179
S4 Unknown -1.345E-03 5.179
S5 Unknown -1.345E-03 5.179
S6 Unknown -1.345E-03 5.179

162
 Appendix D / 163

Pile location: NBH-134, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S4-S6) not have a clear converge
point thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S4-S6 equal pile stiffness at S3
2) Strain Gauge S2-2 is damaged before testing

Figure D12 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -4.441E-03 6.006 -2.221E-03 6.006
S3 1.642E-03 4.407 8.209E-04 4.407
S4 Unknown 8.209E-04 4.407
S5 Unknown 8.209E-04 4.407
S6 Unknown 8.209E-04 4.407

163
 Appendix D / 164

Pile location: NBH-137, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S5-S6) not have a clear converge point
thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S5-S6 equal pile stiffness at S3
2) Strain Gauge S4 and S5-2 is damaged before testing

Figure D13 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -3.234E-03 5.186 -1.617E-03 5.186
S3 -1.218E-03 4.212 -6.091E-04 4.212
S5 Unknown -6.091E-04 4.212
S6 Unknown -6.091E-04 4.212

164
 Appendix D / 165

Pile location: NBH-132, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S5-S6) not have a clear converge
point thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S5-S6 equal pile stiffness at S4
2) Strain Gauge S1-1 and S4-2 is damaged before testing
3) Strain Gauge layer S3 was omitted.

Figure D14 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -1.370E-03 3.471 -6.848E-04 3.471
S4 -4.347E-03 5.502 -2.174E-03 5.502
S5 Unknown -2.174E-03 5.502
S6 Unknown -2.174E-03 5.502

165
 Appendix D / 166

Pile location: NBH-099, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gauge layer (S5-S6) not have a clear converge
point thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S5-S6 equal pile stiffness at S3
2) Strain Gauge S2-1,S2-2 is damaged before testing

Figure D15 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 7.721E-04 4.263 3.861E-04 4.263
S4 Unknown 3.861E-04 4.263
S5 Unknown 3.861E-04 4.263
S6 Unknown 3.861E-04 4.263

166
 Appendix D / 167

Pile location: NBH-101, Evaluation of Pile Stiffness

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Remark
1) Strain gage layer (S3-S6) not have a clear converge point
thus assume this test pile is prismatic member and pile
stiffness at layer S5-S6 equal pile stiffness at S2
2) Strain Guage S4 is damaged before testing

Figure D16 Calibration chart for finding the new pile stiffness

VWSG Approx. Fit Line Eqn of Converge Coefficient of New Pile

Point in Tangent Modulus Vs. µStrain Stiffness
No. Slope Intercept 0.5D C
S1 Unknown - -
S2 -2.222E-03 4.693 -1.111E-03 4.693
S3 Unknown -1.959E-03 5.621
S5 Unknown -1.959E-03 5.621
S6 Unknown -1.959E-03 5.621

167
 Appendix E / 168

APPENDIX E
Figure E1 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-034)
Figure E2 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-041)
Figure E3 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-052)
Figure E4 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-138)
Figure E5 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-146)
Figure E6 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-148)
Figure E7 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-148,1.5)
Figure E8 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-044)
Figure E9 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-030)
Figure E10 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-027)
Figure E11 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-078)
Figure E12 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-134)
Figure E13 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-137)
Figure E14 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-132)
Figure E15 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-099)
Figure E16 Load distribution along pile shaft (NBH-101)

168
 Appendix E / 169

Pile location: NBH-034, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E1 Load distribution along pile shaft

169
 Appendix E / 170

Pile location: NBH-041, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E2 Load distribution along pile shaft

170
 Appendix E / 171

Pile location: NBH-052, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E3 Load distribution along pile shaft

171
 Appendix E / 172

Pile location: NBH-138, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E4 Load distribution along pile shaft

172
 Appendix E / 173

Pile location: NBH-146, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E5 Load distribution along pile shaft

173
 Appendix E / 174

Pile location: NBH-148(1.2), Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E6 Load distribution along pile shaft

174
 Appendix E / 175

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.50 m

Figure E7 Load distribution along pile shaft

175
 Appendix E / 176

Pile location: NBH-044, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E8 Load distribution along pile shaft

176
 Appendix E / 177

Pile location: NBH-030, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E9 Load distribution along pile shaft

177
 Appendix E / 178

Pile location: NBH-027, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E10 Load distribution along pile shaft

178
 Appendix E / 179

Pile location: NBH-078, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E11 Load distribution along pile shaft

179
 Appendix E / 180

Pile location: NBH-134, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E12 Load distribution along pile shaft

180
 Appendix E / 181

Pile location: NBH-137, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E13 Load distribution along pile shaft

181
 Appendix E / 182

Pile location: NBH-132, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E14 Load distribution along pile shaft

182
 Appendix E / 183

Pile location: NBH-099, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E15 Load distribution along pile shaft

183
 Appendix E / 184

Pile location: NBH-101, Load Distribution from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure E16 Load distribution along pile shaft

184
 Appendix H / 185

APPENDIX F 1
Extrapolation by Decourt method (1999)
Figure F 1.1 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-034
Figure F 1.2 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-041
Figure F 1.3 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-052
Figure F 1.4 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-138
Figure F 1.5 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-146
Figure F 1.6 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148(1.5)
Figure F 1.7 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-030
Figure F 1.8 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-027
Figure F 1.9 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-134
Figure F 1.10 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-137
Figure F 1.11 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-132
Figure F 1.12 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-099
Figure F 1.13 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-101

185
 Appendix H / 186

Pile location: NBH-034, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.1 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-034 (Decourt, 1999)

186
 Appendix H / 187

Pile location: NBH-041, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.2 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-041 (Decourt, 1999)

187
 Appendix H / 188

Pile location: NBH-052, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.3 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-052 (Decourt, 1999)

188
 Appendix H / 189

Pile location: NBH-138, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.4 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-138 (Decourt, 1999)

189
 Appendix H / 190

Pile location: NBH-146, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.5 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-146 (Decourt, 1999)

190
 Appendix H / 191

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.50 m

Figure F 1.6 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148(1.5) (Decourt, 1999)

191
 Appendix H / 192

Pile location: NBH-030, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.7 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-030 (Decourt, 1999)

192
 Appendix H / 193

Pile location: NBH-027, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.8 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-027 (Decourt, 1999)

193
 Appendix H / 194

Pile location: NBH-134, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.9 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-134 (Decourt, 1999)

194
 Appendix H / 195

Pile location: NBH-137, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.10 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-137 (Decourt, 1999)

195
 Appendix H / 196

Pile location: NBH-132, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.11 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-132 (Decourt, 1999)

196
 Appendix H / 197

Pile location: NBH-099, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.12 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-099 (Decourt, 1999)

197
 Appendix H / 198

Pile location: NBH-101, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.13 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-101 (Decourt, 1999)

198
 Appendix H / 199

APPENDIX F 2
Extrapolation by Ahmad and Pise (1997)
Figure F 2.1 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-034
Figure F 2.2 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-041
Figure F 2.3 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-052
Figure F 2.4 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-138
Figure F 2.5 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-146
Figure F 2.6 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148
Figure F 2.7 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148(1.5)
Figure F 2.8 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-030
Figure F 2.9 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-027
Figure F 2.10 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-134
Figure F 2.11 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-137
Figure F 2.12 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-132
Figure F 2.13 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-099
Figure F 2.14 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-101

199
 Appendix H / 200

Pile location: NBH-034, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.1 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-034 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

200
 Appendix H / 201

Pile location: NBH-041, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.2 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-041 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

201
 Appendix H / 202

Pile location: NBH-052, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.3 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-052 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

202
 Appendix H / 203

Pile location: NBH-138, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.4 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-138 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

203
 Appendix H / 204

Pile location: NBH-146, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.5 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-146 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

204
 Appendix H / 205

Pile location: NBH-148, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.6 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

205
 Appendix H / 206

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.50 m

Figure F 2.7 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148(1.5) (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

206
 Appendix H / 207

Pile location: NBH-030, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.8 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-030 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

207
 Appendix H / 208

Pile location: NBH-027, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.9 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-027 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

208
 Appendix H / 209

Pile location: NBH-134, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.10 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-134 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

209
 Appendix H / 210

Pile location: NBH-137, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 2.11 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-137 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

210
 Appendix H / 211

Pile location: NBH-132, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.12 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-132 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

211
 Appendix H / 212

Pile location: NBH-099, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.13 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-099 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

212
 Appendix H / 213

Pile location: NBH-101, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 1.14 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-101 (Ahmad and Pise,
1998)

213
 Appendix H / 214

APPENDIX F 3
Extrapolation by Mazurkiewicz (1980)
Figure F 3.1 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-034
Figure F 3.2 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-041
Figure F 3.3 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-052
Figure F 3.4 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-138
Figure F 3.5 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-146
Figure F 3.6 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148
Figure F 3.7 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148(1.5)
Figure F 3.8 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-044
Figure F 3.9 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-030
Figure F 3.10 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-027
Figure F 3.11 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-078
Figure F 3.12 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-134
Figure F 3.13 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-137
Figure F 3.14 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-132
Figure F 3.15 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-099
Figure F 3.16 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-101

214
 Appendix H / 215

Pile location: NBH-034, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.1 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-034 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

215
 Appendix H / 216

Pile location: NBH-041, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.2 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-041 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

216
 Appendix H / 217

Pile location: NBH-052, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.3 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-052 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

217
 Appendix H / 218

Pile location: NBH-138, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.4 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-138 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

218
 Appendix H / 219

Pile location: NBH-146, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.5 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-146 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

219
 Appendix H / 220

Pile location: NBH-148, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.6 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

220
 Appendix H / 221

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.50 m

Figure F 3.7 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148(1.5) (Mazurkiewicz,

1980)

221
 Appendix H / 222

Pile location: NBH-044, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.8 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-044 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

222
 Appendix H / 223

Pile location: NBH-030, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.9 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-030 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

223
 Appendix H / 224

Pile location: NBH-027, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.10 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-027 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

224
 Appendix H / 225

Pile location: NBH-078, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.11 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-078 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

225
 Appendix H / 226

Pile location: NBH-134, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.12 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-134 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

226
 Appendix H / 227

Pile location: NBH-137, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.13 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-137 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

227
 Appendix H / 228

Pile location: NBH-132, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.14 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-132 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

228
 Appendix H / 229

Pile location: NBH-099, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.15 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-099 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

229
 Appendix H / 230

Pile location: NBH-101, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 3.16 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-101 (Mazurkiewicz, 1980)

230
 Appendix H / 231

APPENDIX F 4
Extrapolation by Hansen (1963)
Figure F 4.1 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-034
Figure F 4.2 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-041
Figure F 4.3 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-052
Figure F 4.4 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148(1.5)
Figure F 4.5 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-030
Figure F 4.6 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-027
Figure F 4.7 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-134
Figure F 4.8 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-137
Figure F 4.9 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-132
Figure F 4.10 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-099
Figure F 4.11 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-101

231
 Appendix H / 232

Pile location: NBH-034, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.1 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-034 (Hansen, 1963)

232
 Appendix H / 233

Pile location: NBH-041, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.2 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-041 (Hansen, 1963)

233
 Appendix H / 234

Pile location: NBH-052, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.3 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-052 (Hansen, 1963)

234
 Appendix H / 235

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.4 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-148(1.5) (Hansen, 1963)

235
 Appendix H / 236

Pile location: NBH-030, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.5 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-030 (Hansen, 1963)

236
 Appendix H / 237

Pile location: NBH-027, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.6 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-027 (Hansen, 1963)

237
 Appendix H / 238

Pile location: NBH-134, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.50 m

Figure F 4.7 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-134 (Hansen, 1963)

238
 Appendix H / 239

Pile location: NBH-137, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.8 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-137 (Hansen, 1963)

239
 Appendix H / 240

Pile location: NBH-132, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.9 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-132 (Hansen, 1963)

240
 Appendix H / 241

Pile location: NBH-099, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.10 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-099 (Hansen, 1963)

241
 Appendix H / 242

Pile location: NBH-101, Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure F 4.11 Extrapolation of ultimate bearing capacity for NBH-101 (Hansen, 1963)

242
 Appendix F / 243

APPENDIX G
Figure G1 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-034)
Figure G2 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-041)
Figure G3 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-052)
Figure G4 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-138)
Figure G5 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-146)
Figure G6 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-148)
Figure G7 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-148,1.5)
Figure G8 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-044)
Figure G9 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-030)
Figure G10 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-027)
Figure G11 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-078)
Figure G12 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-134)
Figure G13 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-137)
Figure G14 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-132)
Figure G15 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-099)
Figure G16 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve (NBH-101)

243
 Appendix F / 244

Pile location: NBH-034, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G1 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

244
 Appendix F / 245

Pile location: NBH-041, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G2 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

245
 Appendix F / 246

Pile location: NBH-052, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G3 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

246
 Appendix F / 247

Pile location: NBH-138, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G4 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

247
 Appendix F / 248

Pile location: NBH-146, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G5 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

248
 Appendix F / 249

Pile location: NBH-148(1.2), Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G6 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

249
 Appendix F / 250

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.50 m

Figure G7 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

250
 Appendix F / 251

Pile location: NBH-044, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G8 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

251
 Appendix F / 252

Pile location: NBH-030, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G9 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

252
 Appendix F / 253

Pile location: NBH-027, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G10 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

253
 Appendix F / 254

Pile location: NBH-078, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G11 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

254
 Appendix F / 255

Pile location: NBH-134, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G12 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

255
 Appendix F / 256

Pile location: NBH-137, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G13 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

256
 Appendix F / 257

Pile location: NBH-132, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G14 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

257
 Appendix F / 258

Pile location: NBH-099, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G15 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

258
 Appendix F / 259

Pile location: NBH-101, Mobilized Skin Friction from Strain Gauge

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure G16 Mobilized skin friction from VWSG – TZ curve

259
 Appendix / 260

APPENDIX H
Figure H1 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-034)
Figure H2 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-041)
Figure H3 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-052)
Figure H4 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-138)
Figure H5 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-146)
Figure H6 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-148)
Figure H7 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-148,1.5)
Figure H8 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-044)
Figure H9 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-030)
Figure H10 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-027)
Figure H11 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-078)
Figure H12 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-134)
Figure H13 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-137)
Figure H14 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-132)
Figure H15 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-099)
Figure H16 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction (NBH-101)

260
 Very stiff clay

Medium dense sand

Hard clay

261
Silt stone

Figure H1 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-034, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 261
 Very stiff clay

Hard clay
Very stiff clay

262
Hard clay

Figure H2 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-041, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 262
 Very stiff clay
Loose sand
Hard clay
Very stiff clay

Hard clay

263
Silt stone

Figure H3 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-052, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 263
 Medium dense sand
Hard clay

Very stiff clay

Very dense sand

264
Medium dense sand
Sand stone

Figure H4 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-138, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 264
 Very dense sand

Very stiff clay

265
Hard clay

Medium dense sand

Silt stone

Figure H5 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-146, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 265
 Appendix / 266

Pile location: NBH-148(Dia.1.2), Load distribution comparing to skin friction

Figure H6 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Medium dense sand
Very stiff clay

Hard clay

Silt stone

266
 Appendix / 267

Pile location: NBH-148(Dia.1.5), Load distribution comparing to skin friction

Figure H7 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Very stiff clay

Hard clay

Silt stone

267
 Dense sand

Hard clay

Very dense sand

Hard clay

Very dense sand

268
Hard clay

Sand stone

Figure H8 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-044, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 268
 MEDIUM DENSE SAND

MEDIUM STIFF CLAY

MEDIUM DENSE SAND

VERY STIFF CLAY

Hard clay

269
ROCK SALT

Hard clay

Figure H9 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-030, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 269
 Stiff clay

Hard clay

Very stiff clay

Hard clay

270
Silt stone

Figure H10 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-027, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 270
 Very stiff clay

Very dense sand

271
Siltstone

Figure H11 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-078, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 271
 Very stiff clay

Hard clay

272
Sand stone

Figure H12 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-134, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 272
 Loose sand

Medium dense sand

Hard clay

273
Very dense sand

Sand stone

Figure H13 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-137, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 273
 Very dense sand

Hard clay

Very stiff clay

Very dense sand

274
Hard clay

Sand stone

Figure H14 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-132, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 274
 Medium dense sand
Very stiff clay
Medium dense sand

Very stiff clay

Hard clay

275
Siltstone

Figure H15 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Pile location: NBH-099, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction
Appendix / 275
 Appendix / 276

Pile location: NBH-101, Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Figure H16 Load distribution comparing to unit skin friction

Hard clay
Stiff clay

276
 Appendix H / 277

APPENDIX I
Figure I1 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve (NBH-034)
Figure I2 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve (NBH-052)
Figure I3 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve (NBH-148)
Figure I4 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve (NBH-148,1.5)
Figure I5 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve (NBH-027)
Figure I6 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve (NBH-078)
Figure I7 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve (NBH-099)

277
 Appendix H / 278

Pile location: NBH-034, Mobilized end bearing

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure I1 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve

278
 Appendix H / 279

Pile location: NBH-052, Mobilized end bearing

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure I2 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve

279
 Appendix H / 280

Pile location: NBH-148(1.2), Mobilized end bearing

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure I3 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve

280
 Appendix H / 281

Pile location: NBH-148(1.5), Mobilized end bearing

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.50 m

Figure I4 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve

281
 Appendix H / 282

Pile location: NBH-027, Mobilized end bearing

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure I5 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve

282
 Appendix H / 283

Pile location: NBH-078, Mobilized end bearing

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure I6 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve

283
 Appendix H / 284

Pile location: NBH-099, Mobilized end bearing

Project: SRT Double Track Railway – Nakhon Ratchasima (Chira Junction) to Khon Kaen

Bored Pile Dia 1.20 m

Figure I7 Mobilized end bearing – QZ curve

284