Proceedings of the Eleventh (2001) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference Stavanger, Norway, June 17-22, 2001

Copyright 2001 by The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers ISBN 1-880653-51-6 (Set); ISBN 1-880653-53-2 (VoL 11); ISSN 1098-6189(Set)

Capacity of Driven Piles in Clays and Sands on the Basis of Pile Load Tests
Carl J.F. Clausen
Consultant

Per Magne Aas

Norwegian Geotechnical Institute Oslo, N o r w a y

ABSTRACT The axial bearing capacity of a driven pile can only to a limited extent be determined by theoretical analyses, because the stresses acting against the pile, and the mechanical properties of the severely disturbed pile/soil contact zone, are not known. A practical design method must therefore be based upon a semi-empirical approach, calibrated against results from representative pile loading tests. The paper describes pile test data bases established by NGI. Comparisons between measured and calculated capacities, using the current API method and the recently developed Imperial College method, Jardine & Chow (1996), are presented. Consequences for the design of offshore piles are addressed KEY W O R D S : pile, bearing capacity, pile load tests, analysis. INTRODUCTION This paper presents the results of a study of the axial bearing capacity of driven piles based upon measured pile capacities. The results of this study are intended used in connection with the design and re-assessment of foundation piles for offshore platforms. Several similar studies have been carried out during the last 30 years, for example, given in chronological order: Piles in Clay Vijayvergiya & Focht (1972), Burland (1973), Meyerhof (1976), Flaate & Seines (1977), Kraft et al (1981), Dennis & Olson (1983a), Semple & Rigden (1984), Randolph & Murphy (1985), Toolan & Ims (1988), Karlsrud et al (1992), Nowacki et al (1992), Mirza (1995), Kolk & Velde (1996), Chow (1996) and Jardine & Chow (1996). Piles in Sand Dennis & Olson (1983b), Focht & O'Neill (1985), Briaud & Tucker (1989), Olson (1988), Toolan & Ires (1988), Tang et al (1990), Toolan et al (1990), Randolph et al (1994), Chow (1996), Jardine & Chow (1996) and Kiefa (1998). Each of the above studies represents a selection among available pile tests, and the conclusions drawn depend on some degree of personal interpretation of less than perfect data. It was therefore decided to return to the pile test source data. The aim was to (1) establish an

independent evaluation and interpretation of published pile load tests, (2) compare the measured pile capacities to those predicted bl, commonly used methods, and (3) develop a revised calculation method that better "predicts" the actual load test data. This latter method is still under development. DATA BASES Piles in Clay Three data bases were established. Data bases Clay-1 and Clay-2 include the pile tests presented by Flaate & Selnes (1977) and by Semple & Rigden (1984), respectively. Data base Clay-3 includes the pile test source data collected as a part of the studies reported herein. This data base was used to establish a number of alternative calculation methods. The two data bases Clay-1 and Clay-2 could then be used to check how well a given alternative method could "predict" the capacity of piles that were not used to calibrate the method itself. The data base Clay-3 contains 121 individual pile tests from 47 different sites. All test results are from published sources. A sub-set of 43 piles of Clay-3, referred to as "super piles", was established. These piles were considered to include the most important and best documented tests. The range covered by the Clay-3 pile tests in terms of pile tip depth and clay strength ratio Su / P'o is indicated on Figure 1. This data base includes the detailed soil variation with depth for each of the pile test sites. During the work it became evident that in order to allow meaningful comparisons, it was necessary to include corrections for (1) the method used for clay undrained strength determination, and (2) the time between pile driving and pile testing. The approach selected was to use the API RP2A reference strength, SuUu, determined by unconsolidated undrained triaxial tests. Procedures for strength conversions from one test type to another were selected based upon results presented by Chen & Kulhawy (1993) and Bjerrum (1973). The reference time between driving and test loading was taken as 100 days. Measured capacity corrections due to time were made based upon results contained in data base Clay-3 and those presented by Karlsrud et al (1992).

581

Strength 0.1
0

ratio 1

Su/po" 10

20

. . . .

~_=_

_'=~

~_ ~

_ sc~r4~ =st~

~IZ ~ 7 ~ + r West Sole ,,~ ~, . . . . . k~nebaelt

I t. _

40

. . . .

s_~+_ _

--

Arrow

Lake .

m+

=2
C3

Pentle
.

comparisons between results from the same pile test contained in different data bases. The data base Sand-4 contains 85 individual pile tests from 30 different sites. All test results are from published sources. A sub-set of 34 piles from Sand-4, referred to as "super piles", was established. The data from these pile tests include in situ cone penetrometer tests (CPT). Figure 2 shows the range covered by the data base Sand-4 in terms of pile tip depth and average sand relative density. The data base contains the variation in soil properties with depth. For the piles in sand a key parameter is the relative density Dr. Dr values were derived from the measured CPT tip resistance values, using the Lunne et al (1997) recommendations, which are based upon Baldi et al (1986). RESULTS

so

L+vomo
. .

m,~7 W e s t O e l a

80 Long Beach

The measured capacities for the super piles have in the following been compared with the capacities calculated by the API (1993) and Jardine & Chow (1996) methods. These two methods are referred to as API-93 and ICM-96, respectively.
Piles in

t.
100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Empire

Clay

s+:

The ratio calculated/measured capacities for the 43 super piles in the data base Clay-3 are shown in Table 1 below. Table 1. Comparison between calculated and measured capacities, piles in clay

120

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Figure 1. Range covered by database Clay-3 in terms of average strength ratio and pile tip depth. Numbers shown are the site Ids.
Piles in Sand

Method

Calculated / Measured capacity (C/M) Average Standard dev. 0.54 (0.28) 0.71 (0.28)

Four data bases were established. Sand-l, Sand-2 and Sand-3 include the pile tests presented by Olson (1988), Randolph et al (1994) and Chow (1996). Data base Sand-4 includes the pile test source data collected for the studies reported herein. Since many of the published pile load tests in sand are included in several of the four data bases established, an efficient data control was possible by direct
Average 10
I I

API-93 ICM-96

1.10 (0.93) *) 1.03 (0.81)

Sand Relative 40
I r~

Density, Dr in % 60
~ I

20
i i

30

~0
I IQ 174

70
I I I

Bo
I I I

90
I I

loo

*) Values in ( ) disregard 8 pile tests in normally consolidated clay of low plasticity.

The reason for the large scatter in the results is mainly that the two methods do not predict the very low skin friction measured on piles in normally consolidated clays of low plasticity. If such piles are removed from the data set, the results shown in parenthesis in the above table are reached. It should be noted that the ICM-96 method is based upon clay over-consolidation ratio rather than the undrained shear strength. The low average C/M of 0.81 may reflect the conversion from suuu to OCR used herein, rather than a short-coming of the method as such. The back-figured (x-values ( a = x ski, / SuUU ) from the super piles are plotted against average strength ratio ~ = suUu / P'o on Figure 3, where P'o is the average initial vertical effective stress along the pile. For clays with an average ~ < 0.75 the measured a-values are lower than predicted by AP1, even for clays with plasticity higher than 20 %. The Lierstranda pile tests, Karlsrud et al (1992), have an average plasticity of 12-21%. In these soft clays there seem to be no effect of whether the pile is open or closed. For clays with ~ > 0.75 most tests give higher s-values than predicted by APt-93. However, there seem to be an effect of the pile tip condition for the strong clays. Piles driven closed-ended have higher covalues than open piles. This matter is further investigated on Figure 4. At the five different sites shown on this plot, data from pile pairs exist, where one pile was driven open-ended, the other was driven closed-

p"

I
I I

' - - r T - ' - -; - - ' -- = - T 7~ k' F 7-,~-1 F F ' - i- - i - -+ - h - + ~ 5 to = . . . . .

r

" - - ' - - ' - , - - ' - - ' - - - ' - - - ' - - ' - i 17~ i r2 17o=

L_
i ~11 i

, ,s . i

,
+

07+, +
I ~

-,. . . . . . +.~, , + ,
~ i

P'+ #+ , - , l - ~ - - ~.-~,- 4 ~ ,++,+ +l ,

~ l ~ I ~727 7 o I +I

, + - + - - +- I I

,~
~ 17o~+

, ,
,

, ,
, I

7~ I I "

r*, ,
~

, ,

, ,

20
E .=~"

"-----:--q
,

--T---

---1----I

. . . .

T---T'~

25

. . . . . .

,-

- q - - '

- - T "-,--

-i-

- "i - - T . . . .

3+

....

i , i- - _i___

i i , ~ - + + - - ~ i i ~ I I I

i I - p - - l - - ~ I I I I

l I I

+ - + + . . . . : zxl

..........

~-- ~ - - $ ~ - r - - , - - - , - - ~ . . . .
i
i

i
i

i
I

I
~

00penlComp
C~+edlComp lo=dlT~ - , - - ~ - - + + I 1
+ i I

so

O i , , ~, a -i---+--~--+--~---~~0 I
00~++ I

i l

, +

~ L ~ i

i
~--

I
i

I
I

I
I

Tests 730-I, -~ and -3 have d e p l h s 6 7 rn, 7 8 m a n d 9 4 rn

Figure 2. Range covered by database Sand-4 in terms of pile tip depth and average relative density. Numbers shown are the site lDs.

582

ended. There is a clear trend in these results. As the clay strength ratio suUU/p'o increases, the closed pile gets a higher skin friction than the open pile. The reason for this effect is, in the opinion of the authors, likely to be the long-term effective lateral stress increases caused by the soil volume pushed sideways by the penetrating closed-ended pile. In soft (and thus sensitive) clays this beneficial effect seems to be lost as the highly strained zone outside the pile consolidates.
o . Empire
~-oo
Onsoy

Table 2. Comparison between calculated and measured capacities, piles in sand

Method Loading C/M C a p a c i t y Average Standard dev. 0.34 0.81 0.17 0.26

API-93
. . . . . . . . . i- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
i

Comp. Tens.

23 11 23 11

0.76 1.15 0.87 1.05

ICM-96

Cornp. Tens.

:"
Haga
West Delta

Canons Park

. . . . .Pentre LDPT"2 . . . . . . . . . ... o

0.6

-.-'i. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Houston Cowden o I- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i i i l

ri

Penlre N G ~ o . . . . . . . . . . . . o- . . . . . . . . . LlVOmO Long Beach o

o- - - I- I

Tilbrook NGI

West

Sole

0.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

o
Tilbrook LDPT o Tilbrool( NGt I
+

L+s,,oo+~~%0r~
0.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Open piles

'
i

Closed

piles

AP[ (1993)
i i i

f ] )

o.1 Slrength Ratio $u.UU / I~' {lag scale}

lO

Figure 3. Measured c~-values for the super piles

1.40 --T- . . . . . . . . . . . .

i. . . . . . . . .
I Tilbrook, NGI

1 30

. . . . . . . . . . . .

] i .

o . . . . . . .

1.20 - - '

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

c~-,,,,"~

The ICM-96 method "predicts" the super piles in sand much better than the API-93 method, both in compression and in tension. When plotted against pile tip depth, the API-93 C/M ratios show a clear skewness, with too low calculated capacities for short piles. The same observation was made earlier by Toolan et al (1900) and Jardine & Chow (1996). It is important to separate between piles loaded in compression and in tension when making comparisons of this type. If both pile types are grouped together, a given method may result in an average C/M ratio close to 1.0 as a result of compensating errors between compression and tension piles. The results in Table 2 indicate that this may be the case for the API,93 results, and to a lesser extent the ICM-96 results. The C/M values calculated by the ICM-96 method are plotted against pile tip depth on Figure 5. A key pile test is the one labelled 719 at a depth of 38 m with C/M = t .37. This test is the Leman BD conductor pile described by Toolan et al (1990) and Jardine & Overy (1996). For this site there is considerable disagreement as to the sand relative density. Toolan et al (1990) give a value of 83 %, Chow (1996) gives 50 %, Jardin & Overy (1996) give 50-70 %, and the procedures selected for the present study give 88 %. This large range in D r values demonstrates the importance of being consistent, i.e. the D r values calculated for a given site must be established using exactly the same procedures as those used to calibrate the selected calculation method.
Calculated / Measured 0 o
. . . .

"+
1.10

............. _
1.00
"Lierstranda

'l

Capacity 1.5 2
. . . . i i

o.s
I ii . . . . 7~

1
i . . . .

t.`,+

o~

. ~

i ]

0
5 . . . . . . .

7~,
I. . . .

Data Base Sand-4,

-

Super

Piles

;,o2
7,~

-Tr,s

~ z ~ 0 ~,,'z~ s Q
"l'

Present

Study ICM-96 34

I i 10 . . . . . . . I ~ 0.6 I I 0.8 I I 2 t I 4 15 E .=. . . . . . .

7o4

7e~

Caleulallonmethod: Data points=

0.90
0.2

i _ -r'zz - r E
t 72a

- J - :~3~ 7z4 I I . . . .

I 0.4

7:; , I 7o~
~

Average C#d = 0.930 Standard deviaU0n = 0.213 N u m b e r s s h o w n a r e t h e site IDs

~ . + r z la l I +

Strength ratio su/Po'

I'~

Q,- r~A,

Figure 4. Effect of pile driven open- or closed-ended on the measured skin friction for directly comparable piles
Piles in Sand

~+~ .............
t~ i=

~ .................
7+ml ,++

25

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

_t . . . . . . .
i l

~+o,_ . . . . . . . .
O A O Open / Comp Open / Tens . Closed / Comp . Closed I Tens t I- - I I
i I_ _ _

The ratio calculated/measured capacities for the 34 super piles in data base Sand-4 are shown in Table 2 below.
30 . . . . . . . I. . . . . . t I II ;
i 40 . . . . . . .

I I ~,~k . IL l

35

. . . . . . .

-r~" -

= "7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I ~ ~s
~ . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I. . . . . .

Figure 5. Database Sand-4, super piles, calculated / measured capacity versus depth, ICM-96 method

583

IDEALIZED SOIL PROFILES It is of considerable interest to compare how the two calculation methods considered, API-93 and ICM-96, predict pile capacities under a set of idealised conditions. In such comparisons there is no personal judgement involved. The outcome is a pure calculation result, found by using the different methods for uniquely defined soil profiles. The pile considered is an OD = 96" (2.438 m) pile with an average wall thickness of 60 ram. This pile shall carry a design toad (safety factors are included) of 54 MN in compression and 36 MN in tension. In the following the required tip penetration depth of this pile will be calculated for a wide range in soil conditions. Clay Profiles The clay profiles considered include a normally consolidated (NC), a weakly over-consolidated (WOC), and an over-consolidated (OC) profile, all with a plasticity of 25 %. The undrained shear strengths are given in terms of the following parameters:

Dense sand, Dr = 75 % '~' = 9.5 kN/m 3, qcpt = 15 " (z/10 m) '5 Very dense sand, D r = 90 % 'y' = 10.0 kN/m 3, qcpt = 25 (z/10 m) 0s The required pile tip penetrations are plotted against sand relative density on Figure 7. For this example it is found that the ICM-96 method governs the required pile length for relative densities lower than 80 %. For very dense sands, with a Dr of 90 %, the 1CM-96 method leads to pile lengths that are l 0-15 m shorter than found by API-93.
Sand retative density, % 25 50 75
q

100

20-

C'~

P'o + A(yp
E 40-

OD = 96" (2,438 m) t = 60 mm F, compression = 54 MN F, tension = 36 MN Compression] Tension / .....

-

OCR s~tJu

= ~ ' ~ / P'o = 0.25 P'o' O CR's5 '~ = 8 kN/m 3 , a ~ ' r ~ = 0 kPa ~ = 9 kN/m 3 , mO"pc = 200 kPa ~' =10 kN/m 3, AO"pc = 1000 kPa

. . . . . . . _~'/~ - . . . . .

--

NC profile : WOC profile : OC profile :

60 "5
rr

80

-gy : ..........
d~ . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The required pile tip penetrations are plotted against the preconsolidation Ao'0 on Figure 6. For this case it is observed that the ICM-96 method leads to the longest piles for normally consolidated clay, 89 m as compared to 80 m for API-93. As the pre-consolidation increases, the difference between the two methods is reduced.
Ao"~ = 0 kPa Ao'~ = 2 0 0 kPa Ao'~ = 1 0 0 0 kPa

100

120

NC

WOC

OC

I
OD = 96" (2.438 m) t = 60 mm Design load compression = 54 MN

Figure 7. Required pile tip depths for example platform with OD = 96" piles C O N S E Q U E N C E S F O R DESIGN Piles in Clay The detailed results show that the present API-RP2A calculation method has at least two important short-comings: 1. The method fails to predict the low observed skin friction on piles in normally consolidated clays of low plasticity. 2. For piles in over-consolidated clays there is an effect of piles driven open- or closed-ended. A closed pile develops a skin friction that seem to be 10-30 % higher than an open pile, depending upon the Su / P'o ratio. The comparisons between the ICM-96 and the API-93 methods for piles in clay presented above, indicate that ICM-96 leads to slightly longer piles than API-93. This comparison is however not of general validity since (1) it was made for a clay plasticity of 25 %, and (2) the clay OCR values needed by ICM-96 were calculated from the undrained shear strengths SuUu. The method as such leaves considerable freedom to the designer for how to develop the soil parameters needed to calculate pile skin friction. It is therefore believed by the authors that the ICM-96 method should be used in combination with other methods for the design of piles in clay. Based upon practical experience from a large number of offshore platforms supported by piles driven into clays, during a period of more than 30 years, there is no indication that the piles have a capacity lower than they should. This observation could mean that there is an important effect of time upon pile capacity, which is not directly included in the present design practice. In addition, most platforms

E
J=

25

g "O
e~

_e

50

- -

g
rr

75

",lc.96 M

100 - -

Figure 6. Required pile tip depths for different clay pre-consolidation levels Sand Profiles The sand profiles considered are characterised by a CPT tip resistance that varies with the depth z below the sea floor. The following three profiles were selected : Loose to medium dense sand, D r ~ 40 %, = 9.0 kN/m 3, q cot = 5 (z/l 0 m) 0.s

584

have not yet been exposed to their maximum environmental design loads. It is therefore believed that, even if the present API calculation method gives capacities somewhat higher than those measured in pile tests in clay, a change in design procedures that would lead to longer piles is not justified in general. Under special conditions, however, which includes normally consolidated clays of low plasticity, revised design methods, that better reflect the observed capacities, should be used. Piles in Sand For piles in sand, longer than 15-20 m and loaded in tension, the comparisons between measured and calculated capacities strongly support the practice of some North Sea designers and certifying authorities not to use the present API recommendations. The API code also seems to over-estimate the capacity of long piles in loose and medium dense sand loaded in compression. ICM-96 seems to predict the measured super pile capacities much better than API-93. For piles in loose and medium sand the use of ICM-96, rather than API-93, would therefore represent a natural choice. For long piles in dense sands the published results studied by the authors only include a few data points. One key data point, the Leman BD (see above), indicates that the tensile capacity in dense to very dense sands is lower than predicted by API. However, in a recent paper by Gebara et al (2000) it is stated that, based upon the Euripides pile test data, the tensile capacity of the Valhall piles could be increased by 31-37 % as compared to the API RP2A 20 t~ edition. The Euripides pile test programme is described by Zuidberg & Vergobbi (1996). These results are expected to be released end 2001. The limited information available for long piles in very dense sand at this stage therefore seems to he conflicting. In order to resolve this matter, it will be necessary to return to the Leman BD source data, and to carefully study the Euripides soil and pile test results when published. Pile load test data presented by Chow et al (1998) indicates that the capacity of piles in sand increases with time. Such effects, if they can be relied upon for design purposes, could justify the continued use of the API-93 calculation method under certain circumstances. CONCLUSIONS Based upon comparisons between the measured and the calculated capacities of piles from two thoroughly controlled data bases the following conclusions are drawn: 1. The API (1993) calculation method should not be used for soil profiles that include important amounts of normally consolidated clays of low plasticity. 2. Closed-ended piles develop higher skin friction than open-ended piles when driven into over-consolidated clays. 3. The capacity of long piles in sand loaded in tension is likely to be over-predicted by the API (1993) method, at least for piles longer than 15-20 m in loose to dense sands. Conflicting data seems to exist for piles in very dense sand. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The work presented above was sponsored by the Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Norsk Hydro and Statoil. The authors are grateful for the support and the permission to publish a summary of the results.

REFERENCES

American Petroleum Institute (1993) "Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms Working Stress Design." API RP 2A-WSD, 20th Edition, Washington, 1 July 1993. Baldi G., R. Bellotti, V. Ghionna, M. Jamiolkowski and E. Pasqualini (1986) "Interpretation of CPT's and CPTU's; 2nd part : Drained Penetration of Sands." Fourth International Geotechnical Seminar, Singapore, pp. 143-156. Bjerrum L. (1973) "Problems of Soil Mechanics and Construction on Soft Clays". State-of-the-Art Report, Session IV, Proc. 8th Int. Conf. SMFE, Moscow 1973. Also in NGI Publ. 100. Briaud J-L., L-M.- Tucker & E. NG (1989) "Axially Loaded 5 Pile Group and Single Pile in Sand." Proceedings, 12th ICSMFE, Rio de Janeiro 1989, Vol. 2, p.l121. Burland J.B. (1973) "Shaft Capacity of Piles in Clay - A Simple Fundamental Approach." Ground Engineering, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1973. Chen Y.-J. & F.H. Kulhawy (1993)"Undrained Strength Interrelationships Among CIUC, UU and UC Tests." ASCE, JGE, Vol. 119, No. 11, Nov. 1993. Chow F.C. (1996) "Investigations into Displacement Pile Behaviour for Offshore Foundations." Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. of London (Imperial College). Chow F.C., R.J. Jardine, F. Brucy & J.F. Nauroy (1998) "Effects of Time on Capacity of Pipe Piles in Dense Marine Sand." ASCE, JGGE, Vol. 124, No. 3, March 1998, pp. 254-264. Dennis N.D. & R.E. Olson (1983a) "Axial Capacity of Steel Pipe Piles in Clay." Proc., Geotechnical Practice in Offshore Engineering, Austin, Texas, April 1983. Dennis N.D. & R.E. Olson (1983b) "Axial Capacity of Steel Pipe Piles in Sand." Proc., Geotechnical Practice in Offshore Engineering, Austin, Texas, April 1983. Flaate K. & P. Seines (1977) "Side Friction of Piles in Clay." Proc. 9th Int. Conf. SMFE, Tokyo 1977. Also in NGI Pub1. No. 118. Focht J.A. & M.W. O'Neill (1985) "Piles and Other Deep Foundations". Proc. 1 lth ICSMFE, San Francisco, Vol. 1, pp 187-209. Gebara J.M., D. Dolan, S. Pawsey, P. Jeanjean & K.H. Dahl-Stamnes (2000) "Assessment of Offshore Platforms under Subsidence - Part I : Approach." Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Vol. 122, Nov. 2000, p.260. Jardine RJ. & F.C. Chow (1996) "New Design Methods for Offshore Piles." Marine Technology Directorate Ltd., Publication MTD 96/103, London 1996. ISBN 1 870553 31 4. Jardine R.J. & R.F. Overy (1996) "Axial Capacity of Offshore Piles Driven in Dense Sand." OTC paper no. 7973, Houston, May 1996.

585

Karlsrud K., B. Kalsnes & F. Nowacki (1992) "Response of Piles in Soft Clay and Silt Deposits to Static and Cyclic Axial Loading Based on Recent Instrumented Pile Load Tests." Society of Underwater Testing, London, Sept. 1992. Also in NGI Publ. No. 188. Kolk H.J. & E.v.d. Velde (1996) "A Reliable Method to Determine Friction Capacity of Piles Driven into Clays." OTC Paper No. 7993, Houston, May 1996. Kraft L.M., J.A. Focht & S.F. Amerasinghe (1981) "Friction Capacity of Piles Driven Into Clay." ASCE, JGED, Vol. 107, No. G T l l , Nov. 1981. Lunne T., P.K. Robertson & J.J.M. Powell (1997) "Cone Penetration Testing in Geotechnical Practice." Blackie Academic & Professional, ISBN 0 751 40393 8, London 1997. Meyerhof G.G. (1976) "Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations." ASCE, JGED, Vol. 102, No. GT3, March 1976 Mirza U.A.A. (1995) "A Simple Approach for Calculating Pile Skin Friction in Clays." Pre-print, ISOPE Conf., Holland 1995. Nowacki F., K. Kadsrud and P. Sparrevik (1992) "Comparison of Recent Tests on OC Clay and Implications for Design." Proc. LargeScale Pile Tests in Clay, ICE, London 1992. Published by Thomas Telford Ltd, edited by J. Clarke. Olson R.E. (1988) "Comparison of Measured Axial Load Capacities of Steel Pile Piles in Sand with Capacities Calculated Using the 1986 API Recommended Practice (RP2A)". Final report to the Americal Petroleum Institute, Project PRAC 86-294, Austin, Texas, March 1988. Randolph M.F. & B.S. Murphy (1985) "Shaft Capacity of Driven Piles in Clay." OTC Paper 4883, Houston, May 1985. Randolph M.F., J. Dolwin & R. Beck (1994) "Design of Driven Piles in Sand." Geotechnique, Vol. 44, No. 3, September 1994, p.427. Semple R.M. & W.J. Rigden (1984) "Shaft Capacity of Driven Pipe Piles in Clay." Proceedings, Symposium on Analysis and Design of Pile Foundations, ASCE, edited by J.R. Meyer, p.59. Tang W.H., D.L. Woodford & J.H. Pelletier (1990) "Performance Reliability of Offshore Piles," OTC Paper 6379, Houston, May 1990. Toolan F.E. & B.W. Ims (1988) "Impact of Recent Changes in the API Recommended Practice for Offshore Piles in Sand and Clays." Preprint, Oceanology International 88. Toolan F.E., M.L. Lings & U.A. Mirza (1990) "An Appraisal of API RP2A Recommendations for Determining Skin Friction of Piles in Sand." OTC Paper 6422, Houston, May 1990. Vijayvergiya V.N. & J.A. Focht Jr. (1972) "A New Way to Predict Capacity of Piles in Clay." Offshore Technology Conference, Houston May 1972, Paper OTC 1718. Zuidberg H.M. & P. Vergobbi (1996) "EURIPIDES, Load Tests on Large Driven Piles in Dense Silica Sands." OTC paper no. 7977, Houston, May 1996.

586