You are on page 1of 72

[Geotech] SEMINAR MONDAY APRIL 29TH,2013

Georgia Tech, Atlanta

Pressuremeter testing and
foundation design
Roger FRANK
Université Paris-Est, Navier, CERMES (ENPC-LCPC), Paris
R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design, GT Seminar, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, 29 April 2013

Contents
Introduction to design rules. Why use
the MPT ? 
Shallow foundations 
Axial capacity of piles 
Transverse capacity of piles 
Conclusions 

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design, GT Seminar, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, 29 April 2013

Main references   

-

-

- 

Work of Ménard (1954-1967), Cambefort, Gambin, Cassan, etc.
Work of Laboratoires des ponts et chaussées (LPCs) from
1963-… by Amar, Baguelin, Bustamante, Canépa, Frank,
Garnier, Jézéquel and others
3 synthetical papers:
Gambin, M., Frank, R. (2009) "Direct Design Rules For Piles Using
Ménard Pressuremeter Test", Proc Int Foundation Congress and
Equipment Expo’09 (IFCEE’09), Orlando, Florida, ASCE
Canépa, Y., Garnier J. (2004). "Etudes expérimentales du comportement
des fondations superficielles - Etat de l'art", Proc. Int Symp. Fondsup
2003
Bustamante M., Frank R. (1999) "Current French design practice for
axially loaded piles". Ground Engineering (note : MPM & CPT)

Foundation engng code for public works (Fascicule 62-V, 1993)
and course taught at Ecole nationale des ponts et chaussées –
under rere-drafting to match Eurocode 7…
7…
R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design, GT Seminar, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, 29 April 2013

GT Seminar.Contents  Introduction to design rules. Why use the MPM? Shallow foundations  Axial capacity of piles  Transverse capacity of piles  Conclusions  R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. Atlanta. 29 April 2013 .

Georgia Tech.The Ménard pressuremeter test (MPT) R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. Atlanta. 29 April 2013 .

8 R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Atlanta.XPRESSIO 1200 VS + 2V1 1000 800 EM = 23 MPa 600 Pl = 1.7 MPa 400 p2 200 pf p1 0 0 0. Georgia Tech.DOCUMENT APAGEO .4 1.6 1. 29 April 2013 . GT Seminar.2 1.4 0.2 0.8 1 1.6 0.

Pressuremeter soil profile R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Atlanta. GT Seminar. 29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech.

29 April 2013 . Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech.

Atlanta. GT Seminar.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech.

29 April 2013 .po) R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.Bearing capacity : the pressuremeter ‘faith’ qu = qo + kp (ple . Georgia Tech. Atlanta. GT Seminar.

29 April 2013 . Atlanta. Georgia Tech. GT Seminar. The pressuremeter test can be performed in all types of soils and soft rocks  It provides the soil engineer with both a failure parameter and a deformation parameter measured in situ R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.

Use of in situ test results  The direct method (‘semi-empirical’) should be preferred i. Atlanta.qc. 29 April 2013 .N.e direct rules for determining the bearing capacity of foundations from the test results : Rd. GT Seminar. etc. Georgia Tech. (and possibly the displacements) Specific advantages of the Pressuremeter with the limit pressure pLM :  bearing capacity of shallow foundations (qp)  axial bearing capacity of deep foundations (qp and qs) With the pressuremeter modulus EM :  settlement of shallow foundations (s)  analysis of the behaviour of deep foundations under transverse loading R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.

Contents  Introduction to design rules. 29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech. GT Seminar. Atlanta. Why use the MPM ?  Shallow foundations Axial capacity of piles  Transverse capacity of piles  Conclusions  R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.

29 April 2013 . GT Seminar. Atlanta. Georgia Tech.Tests at Jossigny & La Benne (1980s) R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.

29 April 2013 . Atlanta. GT Seminar.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech.

Georgia Tech. GT Seminar.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Atlanta. 29 April 2013 .

29 April 2013 . GT Seminar.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Atlanta. Georgia Tech.

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Atlanta. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 .

GT Seminar.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 . Atlanta.

29 April 2013 .R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. Atlanta. GT Seminar.

29 April 2013 . GT Seminar. Atlanta. Georgia Tech.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 . Atlanta.

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design, GT Seminar, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, 29 April 2013

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design, GT Seminar, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, 29 April 2013

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design, GT Seminar, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, 29 April 2013

Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. 29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech.

Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 .

29 April 2013 . Atlanta. Georgia Tech.LCPC Centrifuge (Nantes) 1985 -… R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar.

Georgia Tech. GT Seminar.Bearing factors .strip and square footings (AFNOR. Atlanta. 29 April 2013 . 2013) R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.

Atlanta.v = 2. De/Be With (model factor) γRD ≈ 1. 29 April 2013 .3 for SLS R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech.2 and γR. GT Seminar.v = 1. d/Be.Design bearing capacity Reference stress qréf : iδβ reduction factor depends on β. δ.4 for ULS γR.

Atlanta. 29 April 2013 . GT Seminar.Pressuremeter method for settlement prediction R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech.

Ménard’s formula for settlement years) is the volumetric settlement is the deviatoric settlement Rheological coefficient α R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Atlanta. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 .

Atlanta. GT Seminar.Selection of moduli Ec and Ed Ec = E 1 and R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 .

LPCs 1978-1987 R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 . Atlanta. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech.

Why use the MPM ?  Shallow foundations   Axial capacity of piles Transverse capacity of piles  Conclusions  R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 .Contents Introduction to design rules. GT Seminar. Atlanta.

Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 . Atlanta.Pile load tests at Dunkirk (1985) R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar.

Atlanta. Georgia Tech. GT Seminar. 29 April 2013 .R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 . GT Seminar. Atlanta.

Atlanta. 29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar.

Atlanta. Georgia Tech.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. 29 April 2013 .

Atlanta. 29 April 2013 .R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. GT Seminar.

Georgia Tech. Atlanta. GT Seminar.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 .

Atlanta. Georgia Tech.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. 29 April 2013 .

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. Atlanta. 29 April 2013 . GT Seminar.

GT Seminar. Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech.

29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech. Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar.

Atlanta. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 .Revised MPM rules for bearing capacity : kp R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar.

29 April 2013 . Atlanta.Revised MPM rules for bearing capacity : qs R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. GT Seminar.

GT Seminar. Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech.

Georgia Tech.0 EM/(2ro) and kq = 11.0 EM/(2ro) for granular soils kτ = 0.8 EM/(2ro) and kq = 4. GT Seminar.8 EM/(2ro) R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.Settlement of piles t-z curves from Ménard pressuremeter modulus EM (laws of Frank-Zhao. Atlanta. 29 April 2013 . 1982) for fine grained soils : kτ = 2.

Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 .

Georgia Tech. Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 . GT Seminar.

29 April 2013 2.0 40 2 EM moyen 2 4 EM-Forage100 4 1.5 8 10 10 12 12 14 14 16 16 pLM moyen pLM-Forage100 pLM-Forage10 pLM-Forage20 R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech.2nd example : CFA pile in silt and clay (Northern France) B = 0.5 6 z (m ) z (m ) EM-Forage-10 EM-Forage20 8 1. GT Seminar.0 0 0 6 0. Atlanta. D = 12 m pLM(MPa) EM(MPa) 0 10 20 30 0.0 .5 m .

29 April 2013 . et Gianeselli L. 30 Bahar et al. 40 45 Mecsi Monnet 50 R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech. Atlanta. 35 Robas et Kuder Said et al.0 Charge en tête / vertical load (kN) 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 5 déplacement / settlement (mm) 10 15 20 25 Pieu test/pile tested (Bustamante M.) Antoinet et al.

Georgia Tech. GT Seminar. 29 April 2013 .Contents Introduction to design rules. Why use the MPM (and CPT) ?  Shallow foundations  Axial capacity of piles   Transverse  capacity of piles Conclusions R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Atlanta.

Georgia Tech. Atlanta.Transverse load tests at Plancoët (1975-…) R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 . GT Seminar.

Georgia Tech. Atlanta. 29 April 2013 .R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar.

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 . Georgia Tech. Atlanta. GT Seminar.

29 April 2013 . GT Seminar. Georgia Tech. Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.

Georgia Tech. GT Seminar. Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 .

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. GT Seminar. 29 April 2013 . Atlanta.

29 April 2013 . Atlanta.R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. Georgia Tech.

Georgia Tech. Atlanta. GT Seminar.65)α + 3α EsM = Ménard reaction modulus R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.P-y curves Short duration Accidental actions with Kf = 2ESM EsM = EM 18 --------------------------------------------4(2.65 B/Bo)α Bo/B + 3α 18 or EM -------------------------4(2. 29 April 2013 .

+ P(y . Georgia Tech. GT Seminar.g(z) method d4y EI ---. Atlanta.g) = 0 dz4 R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 .

Reaction curve for long duration loads R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Atlanta. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 . GT Seminar.

29 April 2013 . Atlanta.Pile of Provins (1974) R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. GT Seminar.

29 April 2013 .R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech. GT Seminar. Atlanta.

R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. 29 April 2013 . GT Seminar. Atlanta. Georgia Tech.

29 April 2013 .Contents Introduction to design rules. GT Seminar. Atlanta. Why use the MPM (and CPT) ?  Shallow foundations  Axial capacity of piles  Transverse capacity of piles   Conclusions R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. Georgia Tech.

Atlanta. Georgia Tech. GT Seminar. R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design.    The pressuremeter allows the determination of the bearing capacity and of the displacement of foundations The base capacity is based on the analogy with the cavity expansion theory (sounder than limit equilibrium approaches) The shaft friction of piles is determined essentially in an empirical manner (numerous full scale load test results) MPM results yield easily p-y and t-z curves. 29 April 2013 .

Atlanta. Georgia Tech. 29 April 2013 .Eurocode 7 issues/challenges …  All design rules compatible with Eurocode 7 should be based on pile load test results  Important role of displacement of foundations of structures (more than safety with regard to ground failure)  Are we ready of SLS checks only based on displacements? … and is the structural engineer ready himself ? R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar.

Thank you for your attention ! R Frank Pressuremeter testing and foundation design. GT Seminar. 29 April 2013 . Atlanta. Georgia Tech.