Pile Dynamic Formula - 2

1
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Load Tests on Piles Load Tests on Piles
43
Note:
Piles used for initial testing are loaded to failure or at least twice the
design load. Such piles are generally not used in the final construction.
Load Tests on Piles Load Tests on Piles
44
Note:
During this test pile should be loaded upto one and half times the
working (design) load and the maximum settlement of the test should
not exceed 12 mm.
These piles may be used in the final construction
Vertical Load Test: Maintained Load Test Vertical Load Test: Maintained Load Test
The test can be initial or routine
test
The load is applied in increments
of 20% of the estimated safe
load. Hence the failure load is
reached in 8-10 increments.
Settlement is recorded for each
45
Settlement is recorded for each
increment until the rate of
settlement is less than 0.1 mm/hr.
The ultimate load is said to have
reached when the final settlement
is more than 10% of the diameter
of pile or the settlement keeps on
increasing at constant load.
2
After reaching ultimate load, the
load is released in decrements of
1/6
th
of the total load and
recovery is measured until full
rebound is established and next
unload is done.
46
After final unload the settlement
is measured for 24 hrs to
estimate full elastic recovery.
Load settlement curve depends
on the type of pile
Ultimate Load Ultimate Load
De Beer (1968):
Load settlement curve is plotted in a log-
log plot and it is assumed to be a bilinear
relationship with its intersection as failure
load
47
load
Chin Fung Kee (1977):
Assumes hyperbolic curve.
Relationship between settlement
and its division with load is taken
as to be bilinear with its
intersection as failure load
Ultimate Load Ultimate Load
Mazurkiewicz method:
Assumes parabolic curve.
After initial straight portion
EQUAL settlement lines are
dra n to intersect load a is
48
drawn to intersect load axis.
Intersection of lines at 45 from
points on load axis and next
settlement line are joined to form
a straight line which intersects
the load axis as failure load.
3
Vertical Load Test: Maintained Load Test Vertical Load Test: Maintained Load Test Safe Safe
Load as per IS: 2911 Load as per IS: 2911
Safe Load for Single Pile:
49
Safe Load for Pile Group:
Elastic Settlement of Piles Elastic Settlement of Piles
Total settlement of pile under
vertical working load
50
depends on the distribution of frictional resistance over the length of
pile. =0.5 for uniform or parabolic (peak at mid point) and 0.67 for
triangular distribution.
51
Vesics (1977) semi-empirical method
4
2 035
L
I +
52
Vesics (1977) semi-empirical method
2 0.35
ws
I
D
= +
Empirically by
Vesic (1977)
0.93 0.16 .
s p
L
C C
D

= +

Vertical Load Test: Constant Rate of Penetration Test Vertical Load Test: Constant Rate of Penetration Test
This test is only used as initial test to determine rapidly
the ultimate bearing capacity of the pile and can not be
performed as routine test.
Load-settlement curve can not be used to predict the
settlement under working load conditions.
53
The rate of penetration is taken as 0.75 mm/min for
friction piles and 1.5 mm/min for predominantly end
bearing piles.
Test is continued until the deformation reaches 0.1D or
a stage where further deformation does not increase
load significantly.
The final load at the end of test is taken as ultimate load
capacity of pile.
Vertical Load Test: Cyclic Load Test Vertical Load Test: Cyclic Load Test
Proposed by Van Weele
(1957) with the aim of
determining strength in
friction and bearing
separately.
Generally performed as initial
test by loading the pile to
lti t it
54
ultimate capacity
Safe load for pile is
determined as
5
During this test, loading
stages are performed as
in the maintained load
test.
After each loading, the
pile is again unloaded to
previous stage and
deformation is measured
55
deformation is measured
for 15 min. Then, load is
again increased up to
next loading step. The
process continues until
failure load.
The recovered
settlement is treated as
elastic component and
the permanent
deformation as plastic.
Elastic recovery in each step is plotted against the load which
comprises of the elastic deformation
(a) for mobilizing friction,
(b) for mobilizing bearing, and
(c) due to the deformation of the pile itself. Curve C
1
.
Assuming that elastic shortening of pile is zero, draw a line from
56
the origin parallel to the straight portion of the curve, which gives
approximate value of the bearing and frictional resistance, as
shown in the adjacent figure.
Assuming that elastic shortening of pile is zero, draw a line from
the origin parallel to the straight portion of the curve, which gives
approximate value of the bearing and frictional resistance, as
shown in the adjacent figure.
Elastic compression of pile may be determined as
F is taken as varying
linearly from top to
bottom, so average = F/2
57
g
Elastic compression of sub-grade can be obtained by subtracting the
elastic compression of pile from total elastic recovery. If this value as
calculated comes out to be negative it is ignored.
This new value of deformation is plotted against the load Curve C
2
.
Bearing and frictional resistance are again evaluated as described on the
last slide. This process is repeated 3 to 4 times to obtain reasonable
values of frictional and bearing resistance of pile
6
Tapered Tapered
Piles Piles
Driven tapered piles
with larger dimension
at the top are
believed to be more
effective in sand
deposits.
Force components
ti th il
58
acting on the pile are
given below.
Tapered Tapered
Piles Piles
Value of K for
tapered piles is
recommended
between 1.7K
o
to
2.2K
o
by Bowels.
Meyerhof (1976)
suggested K1 5
59
suggested K1.5.
Blanchet (1980)
suggested K=2K
o
.
The frictional
resistance of
these piles is
relatively larger
than that of
straight piles as
indicated in the
adjacent plot.
Stepped Tapered Pile Stepped Tapered Pile
( )
2 2
1
4
ledg i i
A r r
=
ledg
L
D
60
si i i
A D L =
. . .
ledg ledg ledg q
Q A L N =
i
L
i
D
1 sin
o i
K = 2 .tan
o i
K =
. .
si si
Q A q =
7
Uplift Piles in Clays Uplift Piles in Clays
Uplift resistance of pile is mainly provided by
its friction resistance and self weight.
Uplift capacity of pile with bottom bulb is taken
as minimum of the following two equations by
Meyerhof and Adams (1968)
.
u s s p
Q f A W = +
u
Q
p
W
s
f
D
Q A K W W + + Q
61
. .
u u s s p
Q c A K W W = + +
( )
2 2
2.25 .
u b u p
Q D D c W = +
p
W
s
f
s
W
D
u
Q
b
D
Uplift Piles in Other Soils Uplift Piles in Other Soils
Meyerhof and Adams (1968): Minimum of the three equations below
2
. . . . . . .tan
2
u b b u p
Q c D L s D L K W
= + +
2

( ) .tan . . .
u h b p
Q c D L W = + +
L H
1 with its maximumvalue of 1
b b
mL mH
s
D D

= + +

62
( )
2
2
. . . . . . . .tan
u b b u p
Q c D H s D L L H K W

= + +

( )( )
2 2
. . .
4
b
u c v q s s p
Q D D c N N A f W
= + + +
L > H
Bearing capacity
failure
Dynamic Pile Formula Dynamic Pile Formula
Sanders (1850): W =
H =
S =
u
Q =
Weight of hammer
Height of fall
Pile resistance or Pile capacity
Pile penetration for the last blow
Wellington (1898):
63
Engineering News Formula
C = A constant accounting for energy loss
during driving
[1 in. or 25.4 mm for drop hammer]
[0.1 in or 2.54 mm for steam hammer]
A factor of safety FS = 6 is recommended for estimating the allowable capacity
Note: Dynamic pile formula are not used for soft clays due to pore pressure evolution
8
Efficiency of Pile Driving Efficiency of Pile Driving
Based on the Newtons law of
conservation of momentum.
Assuming that coefficient of restitution
of hammer to pile is zero and hammer
moves along the pile after impact
( )
1 2
. . W v W P v = +
1 2
.
W P
v v
W
+
=

Efficiency as the ration on energy
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Heavier hammer
or lighter piles
give better
efficiency
e = 0
64
Efficiency as the ration on energy
after and before the impact
2
2
2
2
2
1
.
2
1
.
2
W P
v
g W
W P
W W P
v
g W
+

= =
+ +

0
0.1
0 1 2
W/P
efficiency
Efficiency of blow with a non-zero value of the coefficient of restitution e.
2
2
For
W Pe W Pe
P W
W P W P
+
> =

+ +
2
For
W Pe
W P
W P
+
> =
+
negligible
Dynamic Pile Formula: Modified Dynamic Pile Formula: Modified Hiley Hiley Formula Formula
W =
H =
S =
u
Q =
Weight of hammer
Height of fall
Pile resistance or Pile capacity
Pile penetration for the last blow
=Hammer fall efficiency
Efficiency of blow =
65
Efficiency of blow =
Sum of temporary elastic compression
of pile, dolly, packing, and ground
C =
Hammer Fall Efficiency:
Dynamic Pile Formula: Modified Hiley Formula Dynamic Pile Formula: Modified Hiley Formula
Coefficient of Restitution:
66
Factor of Safety for Hileys Formula:
9
Dynamic Pile Formula: Modified Hiley Formula Dynamic Pile Formula: Modified Hiley Formula
Temporary Elastic Compression Temporary Elastic Compression
Driving without helmet or dolly but only a cushion or pad
f 25 thi k h d
1
1761
R
C =
67
of 25 mm thick on head.
1
1.761
3.726
5.509
C
A
R
A
R
A
=
=
Driving of concrete or steel piles with helmet and short
dolly without cushion.
Concrete pile driven with only 75 mm packing under
helmet and without dolly.
2
.
0.657
R L
C
A
=
3
0.073 2.806
p
R
C
A
= +
p
A = Overall cross-sectional area of pile at toe in cm
2
Dynamic Pile Formula: Simplex Formula for Dynamic Pile Formula: Simplex Formula for
Frictional Piles Frictional Piles
Frictional resistance of the pile is brought into the empirical relationship in
this formula by measuring the total number of blows for driving the full
length of pile.
68
Ultimate driving resistance in kN R
Length of pile in meters.
Weight of hammer in kN. W
H
p
N
L
Total number of blows to drive the pile
s
Height of free fall in meters.
Average set i.e. penetration in cm for last blow being the
average of last four blows.
Dynamic Pile Formula: Janbu Formula Dynamic Pile Formula: Janbu Formula
Ultimate capacity (FS) U
R
( )
( )
1 1 k C C
Efficiency factor (0.7 to 0.4, depending on driving conditions)
. . W H
Units: kN and m.
69
Weight of hammer/ram
( ) 0.75 0.15
d
C P W = +
W
( )
1 1
U d c d
k C C = + +
P Weight of pile
Area of pile
H
A
2
. .
. .
c
W H
AE S
=
E
Height of free fall in meters.
Elastic modulus of pile
Set per blow as for Simplex formula s
L Length of pile
Hammer fall efficiency as mentioned for modified Hileys formula

Pile Dynamic Formula - 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pile Dynamic Formula - 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

You might also like