769 views

Uploaded by Khemerakh

Talking about Foundation Design

save

You are on page 1of 79

** Present by Mr. Sieng PEOU
**

Master science of geotechnical

engineering

Tel

Tel--011 874 974

email: sieng_2000@yahoo.fr

Type of foundation

Shallow foundation

1-Spread footing : support the load from

building by column

2-Strip footing : support the load from

building by walls

3-Mat foundation: combined all footing

1

Type of foundation

Deep foundation

1- End bearing pile : pile stand on

rocks or very dense soils, so we

have only end bearing capacity

2- Combined bearing pile : pile stand

on normal soils, so we have end

bearing capacity and skin friction

3- Floating pile : pile stand on very

loose or very soft soil, so we have

only skin friction

Spread footing

Q

B

2

Strip footing

q

B

Mat foundation

B

3

End bearing pile

**Soft soil layer
**

Pile

Rock layer

Combined bearing pile

**Soft soil layer
**

Pile

Stiff soil layer

4

Floating pile

**Soft soil layer
**

Pile

**Bearing capacity for Shallow
**

foundation

Type of failure

1-General shear failure for dense soil,we

can use C & φ for design soils bearing

capacity

2-Local shear failure for loose soil, we can

use C’=2/3 C & φ’=arctg(2/3tg

arctg(2/3tgφ) φ) for

design soils bearing capacity

3-Punching shear failure for very loose

soil,not recommended

5

General shear failure

Q

D

Shear line

**Local shear failure
**

Q

D

Shear line

6

Punching shear failure

Q

D

**Failure mechanisms and derivation of
**

equations

7

Failure mechanisms and derivation of

equations

A relatively undeformed wedge of soil below the foundation

forms an active Rankine zone with angles (45º + φ'/2).

The wedge pushes soil outwards, causing passive Rankine

zones to form with angles (45º - φ'/2).

The transition zones take the form of log spiral fans.

(φ = 0) the transition zones become

For purely cohesive soils (φ

circular for which Prandtl had shown in 1920 that the solution

is qf = (2 + π) Cu = 5.14 Cu

This equation is based on a weightless soil. Therefore if the

soil is non-

non-cohesive (c=0) the bearing capacity depends on

the surcharge qo. For a footing founded at depth D below the

surface, the surcharge qo = γD. Normally for a shallow

foundation (D<B), the shear strength of the soil between the

surface and the founding depth D is neglected.

**Semi--circular slip mechanism
**

Semi

**Moment causing rotation
**

= load x lever arm

= [(q - qo) x B] x [½B]

Moment resisting rotation

= shear strength x length of arc x lever arm

= [s] x [π.B] x [B]

At failure these are equal:

(q - qo ) x B x ½B = s x π.B x B

Net pressure (q - qo ) at failure

= 2 π x shear strength of the soil

This is an upper-

upper-bound solution.

8

Circular arc slip mechanism

Moment causing rotation

= load x lever arm

= [ (q - qo) x B ] x [B/2]

Moment resisting rotation

= shear strength x length of arc x lever arm

[2α R] x [R]

= [s] x [2α

At failure these are equal:

(q - qo) x B x B/2 = Cu x 2 α R x R

Since R = B / sin α :

4α /(sin α)²

(q - qo ) = Cu x 4α

The worst case is when

tan

tanαα=2

=2αα at α = 1.1656 rad = 66.8 deg

The net pressure (q - qo) at failure

= 5.52 x shear strength of soil

**Ultimate bearing capacity
**

qu

σ

Settlement

9

Bearing capacity for strip footing

general equation

After Terzaghi (1943)

qd = CNc + γs DNq +0.5 γBNγγ

φ

N q = tan 2 ( 45 + )eπ tan φ Re issner1924

2

φ Prandtl 1921

Nc = (Nq – 1 ) . Cotgφ

Nγγ = 2(Nq + 1)tgφ

φ Caquot and Kerisel 1953 Vessic 1973

**Bearing capacity for footing
**

From TSA equation

After Vessic (1973)

qd = 5.14 Cu(1+0.2B/L) + γs D

Cu:Undrained cohesion

B: Width of footing

L: Length of footing

10

Bearing capacity for footing

From TSA equation

After Skemton (1951)

qd = 5 Cu(1+0.2B/L)(1+0.2D/B) + γs D

D/B<2.5

Cu:Undrained cohesion

B: Width of footing

L: Length of footing

D: Depth of footing

**Bearing capacity for footing
**

From TSA equation

After Meyerhof (1951 to 1963)

qd = 5.14 Cu(1+0.2B/L)(1+0.2D/B) + γs D

D/B<2.5

Cu:Undrained cohesion

B: Width of footing

L: Length of footing

11

Bearing capacity for footing

From ESA equation

After Vessic (1973)

qd = γs D Nq(1+B/L.tgφ

φ)+0.5γγBNγ(1-0.4B/L)

**φ: Internal friction angle
**

B: Width of footing

L: Length of footing

**Bearing capacity for footing
**

From ESA equation

After Meyerhof (1951 to 1963)

qd = γs D Nq.Sq.dq+0.5γγBNγSγdγ

Sq=Sγ=1+0.1ΚPB/L ; Kp= tg2(45+φ/

φ/2)

φ/

dq=dγ=1+0.1Kp0.5D/B

φ)

Nq the same Nq Terzaghi ; Nγ=(Nq-1)tg(1.4φ)

**φ: Internal friction angle
**

B: Width of footing

L: Length of footing

12

Bearing capacity for footing

From general equation

After Meyerhof (1963)

qd = C.Nc.Fcs.Fcd.Fci+γγs D Nq. Fqs.Fqd.Fqi +0.5γγBNγ Fγs.Fγd.Fγi

qnet =C.Nc.Fcs.Fcd.Fci+γγs D (Nq-1). Fqs.Fqd.Fqi +0.5γγBNγ Fγs.Fγd.Fγi

**Nq by Reissner1924 ; Nc by Prandtl1921 ; Nγ by Caquot and
**

Kerisel 1953 and by Vessic 1973

φ: Internal friction angle

B: Width of footing

L: Length of footing

Bearing factor

Shape factor by De Beer 1970

Fcs=1+B/L.Nq/Nc

Fqs=1+B/L.tg

=1+B/L.tgφφ

Fγs=1-0.4.B/L

Depth factor by Hansen 1970

Condition D/B<1

Fcd=1+0.4D/B

Fqd=1+2.tg

=1+2.tgφφ(1-

(1-sin

sinφφ)2D/B

Fγd=1

13

Bearing factor

Depth factor by Hansen 1970

Condition D/B>1

Fcd=1+0.4.arctg(D/B)

Fqd=1+2.tg

=1+2.tgφ φ(1-

(1-sin

sinφφ)2.arctg(D/B)

Fγd=1

Inclined factor by Meyerhof 1963 Meyerhof and

Hanna 1981

=(1--α/

Fci=Fqi=(1 α/90)

90)2

=(1--α/φ

Fγi=(1 α/φ))2

**Bearing capacity of mat foundation
**

The gross ultimate bearing capacity of a mat

foundation can be determined by the same

equation used for shallow foundation.

A suitable factor of safety should be used to

calculate the net allowable bearing capacity.For

rafts on clay, the factor of safety should not be

less than 3 under dead load and maximum live

load.However, under the most extreme

conditions,the factor of safety should be at least

1.75 to 2. For rafts constructed over sand,a

factor of safety of 3 should normally be used.

14

Ultimate bearing capacity equation

for mat foundation on saturated clay

0.195B Df

qnet(u ) = 5.14Cu (1 + )(1 + 0.4 )

L B

**Allowable bearing capacity
**

Net ultimate bearing capacity

qnet=qd-γs.D

Net allowable bearing capacity

qnetall=qnet/FS

Gross allowable bearing capacity

qall=qnetall+γs.D

15

Verify the stable of footing

Q

Qs

Qf

Qtotal=Q+Qf+Qs

B&L

Q- load apply by column

Qf –load of footing

Qs –load of soil above footing

Verify stable of footing

Q

all

q net = We find value of B

BL

And verify the stable of

footing from equation

Q total

q all >

BL

16

When effect water table

D1

D Water level case I

D2

d B

Water level case II

**When effect water table
**

1-In case I if the water table is located so that

0<D1<D, so we will change the factor

γs.D γ.

γ.D

D1+D2(γsat

sat--γw)

Also value γ in the last term of the equation has

to be replaced by γ’= (γ (γsat

sat--γw)

2-In case II for a water table located so 0<d<B

value γ in the last term of the equation has to be

replaced by γcal= γ’+d/B.(

’+d/B.(γγ−γ’)

17

Stable of footing when effect

inclined load

qall>V/(BL) Q

H

Tall>H α

D

V=Q.Cos α T Q V

B

Η=Q.Sin

Η= α

φ)+2/3.C.B.L.

T=V.tg(2/3φ

Tall=T/1.5

**When effect 0ne way bending
**

moment

We change B to B’ for calculate bearing capacity

Q

B’=B-2eB

MB

eB=MB/Q

B

18

Verify stable of footing when

effect one way bending moment

When eB<B/6 qall > qmax

Q

MB

Q 6e Q 6e

qmin = (1 − B ) qmax = (1 + B )

BL B BL B

**Verify stable of footing when
**

effect one way bending moment

When eB>B/6 qall > qmax

Q

MB

4Q

qmax =

3L( B − 2eB )

Not recommended

19

Foundation with two way

Eccentricity

For calculate bearing capacity we have to change:

Q

B to B’=B-2eB ML

L to L’=L-2eL MB

A’=B’*L’ L

eB=MB/Q

eL=ML/Q B

**Verify stable of footing when
**

effect two way bending moment

Qult= qu’.A’

Case eL/L>1/6

eB/B>1/6

B1=B(1.5-3eB/B)

L1=L(1.5-3eL/L)

B’=A’/L

20

Verify stable of footing when effect

two way bending moment

Qult= qu’.A’

Case 1/6<eL/L<0.5

0<eB/B<1/6

A’=0.5(L1+L2)B

B’=A’/L1

**Verify stable of footing when effect
**

two way bending moment

Qult= qu’.A’

Case eL/L< 1/6

1/6<eB/B< 0.5

A’=0.5(B1+B2)L

B’=A’/L

21

Verify stable of footing when effect

two way bending moment

Qult= qu’.A’

Case eL/L< 1/6

eB/B< 1/6

A’= L2B+0.5(B+B2)(L-L2)

B’=A’/L

Footing on two layer

D γs

c1 γ1 φ1 d1

B

c2 γ2 φ2

22

Bearing capacity of footing

on two layer

1- Determine influenced thickness

H=0.5Btg(45+φ

H=0.5Btg(45+ φ1/2)

If H<d1 : our footing not effect on second layer,

so we calculate the soils bearing capacity by

using values C1,γ1,φ1

If H>d1 : our footing effect on second layer, so

we calculate the soils bearing capacity by using

condition as follows:

**Bearing capacity of footing on
**

two layer

From TSA condition

1- Design CR=CU2/CU1

1,5d1

If CR<1 : Nc = + 5,14CR < 5.14 for strip footing

B

3d1

Nc = + 6,05CR < 6.05 for spread footing

B

**so we calculate the soils bearing capacity by using
**

equation

qnet=C u1NC

If CR>0.7 the value of NC is decrease 10%

23

Bearing capacity of footing

on two layer

If CR>1 :

0,5 B 1,1B

for strip footing N1 = + 4,14 N2 = + 4,14

d1 d1

**for spread footing N1 =
**

0,33B

+ 5,05 N2 =

0,66B

+ 5,05

d1 d1

N1 × N 2

Nc = ×2

N1 + N 2

so we calculate the soils bearing capacity by

using equation

qnet=C u1NC

**Bearing capacity of footing
**

on two layer

From general equation 1

1- Determine the average values of soils

parameter

d1φ1 + ( H − d1 )φ 2 d1c1 + ( H − d1 )c 2

φ'= c' =

H H

**2- Determine the soils bearing capacity by
**

using values

C’ and φ’

24

Bearing capacity of footing

on two layer

From general equation 2

1- Determine the bearing capacity for first layer

qnet1 = C1.Nc.Fcs.Fcd.Fci+γγs D (Nq-1). Fqs.Fqd.Fqi +0.5γγ1BNγ Fγs.Fγd.Fγi

**2- Determine the soils bearing capacity for
**

second layer

qnet2= C2.Nc.Fcs.Fcd.Fci+(γγs D+γγ1d1) (Nq-1). Fqs.Fqd.Fqi +0.5.γγ2.BNγ Fγs.Fγd.Fγi

**Bearing capacity of footing
**

on two layer

From general equation 2

3- Determine the bearing capacity

P × PV K s tan φ1 Pd1C1 < q

qnet = qnet 2 + + net1

Af Af

P = 2(B+L)

Pv = 0.5 γ1 d12+ γs D d1

Ks =1

=1--sin

sinφφ1

Af =BL

25

Bearing capacity from in situ

test

From static cone penetration test

qc

1- for B<1.22m q allowable =

15

qc 3,28 B + 1

2- for B>1.22m qallowable = ( )2

25 3,28 B

**From dynamic cone penetration test
**

qallowable = Rd

20

**Bearing capacity from in situ test
**

From standard penetration test SPT

1- for B<1.22m and settlement 25mm

q all ( KPa ) = 11 , 98 N cor

but after Bowles 1977 D S

q all = 19 ,16 N cor 1 + 0 ,33

B 25

**2- for B>1.22m and settlement 25mm
**

2

3, 28 B + 1

q all ( KPa ) = 7 ,99 N cor

3, 28 B

but after Bowles 1977 2

3, 28 B + 1 D S

q all = 11,98 N cor 1 + 0,33

3, 28 B B 25

D

1 + 0 , 33 < 1 , 33

B

26

Combined footing

Rectangular combined footing

Q1 Q1+Q2 Q2

L1 X L3 L2

Section

q

Plan B

L

**Design dimension of rectangular
**

combined footing

Q1 + Q 2

Determine the area of the footing A =

q all ( net )

**Determine the location of the resultant of the
**

column loads Q 2 .L 3

X =

Q1 + Q 2

For uniform distribution of soil pressure under

the foundation, the resultant of the column

loads should pass through the centroid of the

foundation.Thus,

L = 2(L1 + X )

27

Design dimension of rectangular

combined footing

**Once the length L is determined,obtain the
**

value of L1

L1 = L − L 2 − L 3

**Note that the magnitude of L2 will be known and
**

depends on the location of the property line

The width of the foundation then is A

B=

L

Combined footing

Trapezoidal combined footing

Q1 Q1+Q2

Q2

X

L2 L3 L1

Section

Plan

B1 B2

L

28

Design dimension of trapezoidal

combined footing

Q1 + Q 2

Determine the area of the footing A =

q all ( net )

B1 + B2

And we have relation A= L

2

**Determine the location of the resultant of the
**

column loads Q 2 .L 3

X =

Q1 + Q 2

**Design dimension of trapezoidal
**

combined footing

**From the property of a trapezoid, we have
**

B + 2 B2 L

X + L 2 = 1

1B + B 2 3

**With Known values of A,L,X and L2 we can find
**

values of B1 and B2, Note that for a trapezoid,

L L

< X + L2 <

3 2

29

Combined footing

Cantilever footing

Q1 Q2

S

Section

R2

e R

1

L1 B2

Plan

Design dimension of

Cantilever footing

Design arm moment for soils reaction

strength R1

S’=S--e (value of e is proposed by designer)

S’=S

Design soils reaction strength

R1 = Q1

S

S'

R2 = Q2 −

Q1.e

S'

R2 = Q1 +Q2 − R1

30

Design dimension of

Cantilever footing

Design the dimension of first footing

R1 C A1

A1 = all

L1 = 2 e + B1 =

q net 2 L1

C is length of column

Design the dimension of second footing

R2 A2

A2 = all B2 =

q net L2

Rock quality

Rock quality designation(RQD) is an index or

measure of the quality of a rock mass(Stagg and

Zienkiewicz 1968) used by many engineers.RQD

is computed from recovered core samples as

∑ length of intact pieces of core > 100mm

RQD =

Length of core advance

**A core advance of 1500mm produced a sample
**

length of 1310mm consisting of dust,gravel,and

intact pieces of rock.The sum of length of pieces

100mm or larger in length is 890mm.The recovery

ratio Lr=1310/1500=0.87 and RQD=890/1500=0.59

31

Allowable Bearing capacity of

rock

The allowable bearing capacity is

depending on geology,rock type,and

quality(as RQD).

If RQD>0.8 would not require as high an

FS as for RQD=0.4.

We take FS from 6 to 10 for RQD less

than about 0.75

**Bearing capacity for sound
**

rock

φ

N q = tan 6 ( 45 + )

2 Φ=45 degree for most rock except

φ limestone or shale where values

N c = 5 tan 4 (45 + ) between 38 to 45 degree.

2

Similarly we could in most cases

Nγ = N q + 1 estimate Cu=5MPa as a conservative

value.

And finally we may reduce the ultimate

For calculate bearing capacity bearing capacity base on RQD as:

we use equation Terzaghi qult=qult(RQD)2

32

Rang of properties for selected rock

groups;data from several sources

Type of Unit wt.(KN/m3) E(MPa.103) µ qu((Mpa)

rock

Basalt 28 17

17--103 0.27-

0.27-0.32 170-

170-415

Granite 26.4 14

14--83 0.26-

0.26-0.30 70

70--276

Schist 26 7-83 0.18

0.18--0.22 35

35--105

Limestone 26 21

21--103 0.24-

0.24-0.45 35

35--170

Porous - 3-83 0.35

0.35--0.45 7-35

limestone

Sandstone 22.8--23.6

22.8 3-42 0.20

0.20--0.45 28

28--138

Shale 15.7

15.7--2.2 3-21 0.25

0.25--0.45 7-40

concrete 15.7--23.6

15.7 variable 0.15 15

15--40

Settlement of shallow

foundation

There are two types of settlement

1-Immediate settlement or elastic settlement Se

for sandy soils

2-Consolidation settlement Sc for fine grained

soils

2-1-Primary consolidation settlement for soils

normal

2-2-Secondary consolidation settlement for

organics soils

33

Immediate settlement on sandy soils

Foundation could be considered fully flexible or

fully rigid

1-A uniformly loaded, perfectly flexible

foundation resting on an elastic material such

as saturated clay will have a sagging profile as

shown in figure 1,because

1,because of elastic

settlement.

2-If the foundation is rigid and is resting on an

elastic material such as clay,it will undergo

uniform settlement and the contact pressure will

be redistributed as shown in figure 2. 2.

Type of foundation settlement

Settlement profile

Figure 1

Settlement profile

Figure 2

34

Calculate immediate

settlement

Q

D

q0

µ−Poisson’s ratio

H

E-Modulus of elasticity

Soil

Rock

Calculate immediate

settlement

At corner of the flexible foundation Se = Bq0 (1 − µ 2 ) α

E 2

Bq0

At center of the flexible foundation Se = (1 − µ 2 )α

E

1 1 + m 2 + m 1 + m 2 + 1 L

α = ln + m ln m=

π 1 + m 2 − m 1 + m 2 − 1

B

Average settlement for flexible foundation

Bq0

Se = (1− µ 2 )αav

E

Settlement for rigid foundation

Bq0

Se = (1− µ 2 )αr

E

35

Value of α

Shape of Flexible foundation Rigid

foundation Center Corner Average foundation

Circular 1 0.64 0.85 0.79

Square 1.12 0.56 0.95 0.82

Rectangular

L/B=1.5 1.36 0.68 1.15 1.06

L/B=5.0 2.1 1.05 1.83 1.7

L/B=10 2.54 1.27 2.25 2.1

Immediate settlement of

foundation on saturated clay

Janbu et al.(1956)proposed an equation

for evaluating the average settlement of

flexible foundations on saturated clay soils

(Poisson’s ratio µ=0.5)

q0 B

S e = A1. A2

E

36

Variation of A1 With H/B by Christian and

Carrier(1978)

H/B A1

Circle L/B

1 2 3 4 5

1 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36

2 0.47 0.53 0.63 0.64 0.64 0.64

4 0.58 0.63 0.82 0.94 0.94 0.94

6 0.61 0.67 0.88 1.08 1.14 1.16

8 0.62 0.68 0.90 1.13 1.22 1.26

10 0.63 0.70 0.92 1.18 1.30 1.42

20 0.64 0.71 0.93 1.26 1.47 1.74

30 0.66 0.73 0.95 1.29 1.54 1.84

**Variation of A2With D/B by Christian
**

and Carrier(1978)

D/B A2

0 1

2 0.9

4 0.88

6 0.875

8 0.87

10 0.865

12 0.863

14 0.86

16 0.856

18 0.854

20 0.85

37

Consolidation settlement

For normally consolidated clay σ’0 ≥ σ’p

Cc × H σ + ∆σ

S= . log . o W (%)

Cc = 0.2343 L .∫s

1 + eo σo 100

1

∆σ = (σ t + 4σ m + σ b )

6

σ 'P = 22 I P −0.48Cu By Mayne & Mitchell

**σ 'P = 7.04Cu 0.83 By Mitchell(1988)
**

0.689

N

σ 'P = 0.193σ 0 '. By Mayne & Kemper(1988)

σ 0 '

Consolidation settlement

For over consolidated clay σ’0<σ’p

1- σ'O + ∆σ ≤ σ'P

Cs . H σ + ∆σ W (%)

S = log o Cs = 0,0463 L .∫s

1 + eo σo 100

2- σ'O + ∆σ > σ'P

Cs.H σ' Cc.H σ ' + ∆σ

S= . log P + . log o

1 + eo σ o 1 + eo σ 'P

38

Tolerable Settlement of

building

Settlement analysis is an important part of

the design and construction of foundation

Large settlement of various component of

structure may lead to considerable

damage or may interfere with the proper

functioning of the structure.

Settlement of foundation

δi-total displacement at

point i

δij-different settlement

between point i and j

∆− relative deflection

δ

ηij= − ω angular

ij

l ij

distortion

∆/L=deflection ratio

39

Limiting angular distortion as recommended

by Bjerrum(Compiled from Wahls,1981)

damage Category of potential η

Danger to machinery sensitive to settlement 1/750

Danger to frames with diagonals 1/600

Safe limit for no cracking of building 1/500

First cracking of panel walls 1/300

Difficulties with overhead cranes 1/300

Tilting of high rigid building becomes visible 1/250

Considerable cracking of panel and brick walls 1/150

Danger of structure damage to general building 1/150

Safe limit for flexible brick walls L/H>4 1/150

Safe limit include a factor of safety

**Allowable settlement criteria:1955 U.S.S.R
**

Building code(compiled from walhls,1981)

Type of structure Sand and hard clay Plastic clay

η

Civil and industrial building column foundation

For steel and reinforced concrete structure 0.002 0.002

For end rows of columns with brick cladding 0.007 0.001

For structure where auxiliary strain does not arise during

Nonuniform settlement of foundation 0.005 0.005

Tilt of smokestacks,tower,silos,and so on 0.004 0.004

Crane ways 0.003 0.003

∆/L

Plain brick walls

For multistory dwelling and civil building

At L/H<3 0.0003 0.0004

At L/H>5 0.0005 0.0007

For one-

one-story mills 0.0010 0.0010

40

Allowable average settlement for different building

type(compiled from Wahls,1981)

Type of building Allowable average

settlement(mm)

Building with plain brick walls

L/H>2.5 80

L/H<1.5 100

**Building with brick walls,reinforced with 150
**

reinforced concrete or reinforced brick

Framed building 100

**Solid reinforced concrete foundation of 300
**

smokestacks,silos,towers,and so on

Deep foundation

Need for pile foundation

1-When the upper soils layers are highly compressible

and too weak to support the load transmitted by the

superstructure, piles are used to transmit the load to

underlying bedrock or stronger soil layer.

2-When subjected to horizontal force, pile foundations

resist by bending while still supporting the vertical load

transmitted by superstructure.This situation is

generally encountered in the design and construction

of earth-

earth-retaining structures and foundations of tall

structures that are subjected to strong wind and/or

earthquake forces.

41

Deep foundation

3-The expansive and collapsible soils may extend to a

great depth below the ground surface.These soils

swell and shrink as the water content increase and

decrease.If shallow foundations are used, the

structure may suffer considerable damage.The pile

have to extend into stable soil layer beyond the zone

of possible moisture change.

4-The foundation of some structures, such as

transmission towers,offshore platforms, and basement

mats below the water table, are subjected to uplifting

forces.Pile are sometime used for these foundations to

resist the uplifting force.

Deep foundation

5-Bridge abutments and piers are usually constructed

over pile foundations to avoid the possible loss of

bearing capacity that a shallow foundations might

suffer because of soil erosion at the ground surface.

Although numerous investigations, both theoretical

and experimental, have been conducted to predict the

behavior and the load-

load-bearing capacity of piles in

granular and cohesive soils,the mechanisms are not

yet entirely understood and never be clear.The design

of pile foundations may be considered somewhat of

an”art”as a result of the uncertainties involved in

working with some subsoil condition.

42

Types of piles

Different types of piles are used in construction

work,depending on the type of load to be

carried, the subsoil conditions,and the water

table.Pile can be divided into these categories:

-Steel piles

-Concrete piles

-Wooden(timber)piles

-Composite piles

43

Comparisons of piles made of different materials

Pile type Usual Maximum Usual load Approximate

length of length of (KN) maximum

pile(m) pile(m) load(KN)

Steel 15--60

15 Practically 300--1200

300 -

unlimited

Advantages: a-Easy to handle with respect to cutoff and extension to the

desired length

b-Can stand high driving stresses

c-Can penetrate hard layer such as dense gravel,soft rock

d-High load-

load-carrying capacity

disadvantages: a-Relatively costly material

b-High level of noise during pile driving

c-Subject to corrosion

d-H-piles may be damaged or deflected from the vertical

during driving through hard layers or past major obstructions

**Comparisons of piles made of different materials
**

Pile type Usual length Maximum Usual Approximate

of pile(m) length of load maximum

pile(m) (KN) load(KN)

Precast precast::10-

precast::10-15 precast::30 300-

300- precast::800-

precast::800-

concrete Prestressed: Prestressed: 3000 900

10--35

10 60 Prestressed:

7500--8500

7500

Advantages: a-Can be subjected to hard driving

b-Corrosion resistant

c-Can be easy combined with concrete superstructure

disadvantages: a-Difficult to achieve proper cutoff

b-Difficult to transport

44

Comparisons of piles made of different materials

Pile type Usual Maximum Usual load Approximate

length of length of (KN) maximum

pile(m) pile(m) load(KN)

Cased cast-

cast- 5-15 15

15--40 200-

200-500 800

in place

concrete

**Advantages: a-Relatively cheap
**

b-Possibility of inspection before pouring concrete

c-Easy to extend

disadvantages: a-Difficult to splice after concreting

b-Think casings may be damages during driving

**Comparisons of piles made of different materials
**

Pile type Usual Maximum Usual load Approximate

length of length of (KN) maximum

pile(m) pile(m) load(KN)

uncased 5-15 30

30--40 300-

300-500 700

cast--in place

cast

concrete

Advantages: a-Initially economical

b-Can be finished at any elevation

disadvantages: a-Voids may be created if concrete is placed rapidly

b-In soft soils,the sides of the hole may cave in thus

Squeezing the concrete

45

Comparisons of piles made of different materials

Pile type Usual Maximum Usual load Approximate

length of length of (KN) maximum

pile(m) pile(m) load(KN)

Wood 10--15

10 30 100-

100-200 270

Advantages: a-Economical

b-Permanently submerged piles are fairly resistant to decay

c-Easy to handle

disadvantages: a- Decay above water table

b-Can be damaged in hard driving

c-Low load

load--bearing capacity

d-Low resistance to tensile load when splices

**Typical concrete pile
**

Design bearing

Area of Minimum capacity (kN)

cross Number of strands effective Section Concrete strength

Pile D section Perimeter 12.7-mm 11.1-mm prestress modulus (MN/m²)

Shape* (mm) (cm²) (mm) diameter diameter force (kN) (m³ x 10-3)

34.5 41.4

S 254 645 1016 4 4 312 2.737 556 778

O 254 536 838 4 4 258 1.786 462 555

S 305 929 1219 5 6 449 4.719 801 962

O 305 768 1016 4 5 369 3.097 662 795

S 356 1265 1422 6 8 610 7.489 1091 1310

O 356 1045 1168 5 7 503 4.916 901 1082

S 406 1652 1626 8 11 796 11.192 1425 1710

O 406 1368 1346 7 9 658 7.341 1180 1416

S 457 2090 1829 10 13 1010 15.928 1803 2163

O 457 1729 1524 8 11 836 10.455 1491 1790

S 508 2581 2032 12 16 1245 21.844 2226 2672

O 508 2136 1677 10 14 1032 14.355 1842 2239

S 559 3123 2235 15 20 1508 29.087 2694 3232

O 559 2587 1854 12 16 1280 19.107 2231 2678

S 610 3658 2438 18 23 1793 37.756 3155 3786

O 610 3078 2032 15 19 1486 34.794 2655 3186

46

Practical list of typical air and steam hammers

Maker of Model Type of Rated energy Blows per Ram weight

hammer* no. hammer (kN-m) minute (kN)

V 3100 Single acting 407 58 449

V 540 Single acting 271 48 182

V 060 Single acting 244 62 267

MKT OS-60 Single acting 244 55 267

V 040 Single acting 163 60 178

V 400C Differential 154 100 178

R 8/0 Single acting 110 35 111

MKT S-20 Single acting 82 60 89

R 5/0 Single acting 77 44 78

V 200-C Differential 68 98 89

R 150-C Differential 66 95-105 67

MKT S-14 Single acting 51 60 62

V 140C Differential 49 103 62

V 08 Single acting 35 50 36

MKT S-8 Single acting 35 55 36

MKT 11B3 Double acting 26 95 22

MKT C-5 Double acting 22 110 22

V 30-C Double acting 10 133 13

Practical list of typical diesel hammers

**Maker of Model Rated energy Blows per minute Piston weight
**

hammer* no. (kN-m) (kN)

K K150 379.7 45-60 147

M MB70 191.2-86 38-60 71

K K-60 143.2 42-60 59

K K-45 123.5 39-60 44

M M-43 113.9-51.3 40-60 42

K K-35 96 39-60 34

MKT DE70B 85.4-57 40-50 31

K K-25 68.8 39-60 25

V N-46 44.1 50-60 18

L 520 35.7 80-84 23

M M-14S 35.3-16.1 42-60 13

V N-33 33.4 50-60 13

L 440 24.7 86-90 18

MKT DE20 24.4-16.3 40-50 9

MKT DE-10 11.9 40-50 5

L 180 11.0 90-95 8

47

Pile driven formulas

To develop the desired load-

load-carrying capacity,a point bearing

pile must penetrate the dense soil layer sufficiently or have

sufficient contact with a layer of rock.This requirement cannot

always be satisfied by driving a pile to a predetermined depth

because soil profile vary.For that reason, several equations

have been developed to calculate the ultimate capacity of a pile

during driving.These dynamic equations are widely used in the

field to determine whether the pile has reached a satisfactory

bearing value at the predetermined depth.One of the earliest of

these dynamic equations-

equations-commonly referred to as the

Engineering News Record (ENR) formula-

formula-is derived from the

work--energy theory;that is : Energy imparted by the hammer

work

per blow =(pile resistance)(penetration per hammer blow)

ENR equations

WRh

Qu =

S +C

Where WR-Weight of the ram

h-height of fall of ram(Cm)

S-penetration of the pile per

hammer blow(Cm)

C-a constant

C=2.54 Cm for drop hammer

C=0.254Cm for steam hammer

Factor of safety FS=6

48

ENR equations for single and double acting

hammer

E.H E

Qu =

S +C

Where E-

E-hammer efficiency

HE-rated energy of the hammer

S-penetration of the pile per hammer

blow(Cm)

C-a constant

C=0.254 Cm

Factor of safety FS=4 to 6

**Modified ENR equations
**

EW R h W R + n 2W P

Qu =

S + C WR + WP

Where E-

E-hammer efficiency

h-height of fall of the ram(Cm)

S-penetration of the pile per hammer

blow(Cm)

WP-weight of the pile

n-coefficient of restitution between

the ram and the pile cap

C=0.254 Cm

Factor of safety FS=4 to 6

49

Michigan state highway commission equations

1,25H E WR + n 2WP

After testing on 88 pile(1965) Qu =

S + C WR + WP

Where WR-weight of the ram

WP-weight of the pile

HE-rated energy of the hammer

S-penetration of the pile per hammer

blow(M)

C-a constant

C=2.54.10–3M

Factor of safety FS= 6

Danish equations

EH E

Qu =

EH E L

S+

2 AP EP

Where E-

E-hammer efficiency

EP-modulus of elasticity of the pile

HE-rated energy of the hammer

S-penetration of the pile per hammer

blow(M)

L-length of the pile

AP-area of the pile cross section

Factor of safety FS= 6

50

Pacific Coast Uniform Building Code equations

After International Conference of building

officials,1982 W + nW

( EH ) R P

E W +W

Qu = R P

QuL

S +

AP E P

Where E-

E-hammer efficiency

HE-rated energy of the hammer

S-penetration of the pile per hammer

blow(M)

L-length of the pile

EP-modulus of elasticity of pile

n=0.25 for steel piles and n=0.1 for another

piles

Factor of safety FS= 4 to 5

Value of E & n

Hammer type Efficiency,E

**Single and double acting hammers 0.7
**

0.7--0.85

Diesel hammers 0.8

0.8--0.9

Drop hammers 0.7

0.7--0.9

**Pile material Coefficient of restitution
**

n

Cast iron hammer and concrete pile 0.4

0.4--0.5

without cap

Wood cushion on steel pile 0.3

0.3--0.4

Wooden pile 0.25--0.3

0.25

51

Equation for estimation of pile

capacity

QU=QP+Qs

Where QU is ultimate load carrying capacity

of pile

QP is load carrying capacity of the pile

point

QS is frictional resistance

Pile foundation

Qu= Qp Qu= Qp+Qs Qu= Qs

Qs

Qs

Weak L Weak

L Weak L soil soil

soil

Lb

Qp

Qp Qp

**Strong soil layer Strong soil layer
**

Rock

52

Minimum pile embedment depth

into founding soil strata

From civil engineering association forum the

minimum pile embedment depth into bearing

stratum is 3 times diameter of pile.

Replace the pile with one having a different helix

configuration. The replacement pile must not

exceed any applicable maximum embedment

length and either (A) meet the minimum effective

torsion resistance criterion and all applicable

embedment criteria shown in Table for the

design load type (s), or (B) pass proof testing.

**Replacement pile embedment
**

criteria

Design Load type Replacement Pile Embedment Criterion

**Tension The last helix must be embedded at
**

least three times its own diameter

beyond the position of the first helix

of the replaced pile.

Compression The last helix must be embedded

beyond the position of the first helix

of the replaced pile.

Shear/Overturning Embedment must satisfy the specified

minimum.

53

Load--carrying Capacity of the pile point,QP

Load

from Terzaghi’s equation

QP=AP.qP=AP(CN *c+q’N *q)

Where AP-area of pile tip

C-cohesion of the soil supporting the pile tip

qP-unit point resistance

q’

q’--effective vertical stress at the level of the pile

tip

N*C,N*q-bearing capacity factor after Caquot &

Kerisel

N *q = e 7 tgφ N C* = ( N q* − 1) cot φ

**Load-carrying Capacity of the pile point,QP
**

Load-

from Eric Gervreau in Euro code 2000

QP=AP.qP=AP(1.3CN *c+50N *q)

Where AP-area of pile tip

C-cohesion of the soil supporting the pile

tip

qP-unit point resistance

N*C,N*q-bearing capacity factor after

Caquot & Kerisel

N *q = e 7 tgφ N C* = ( N q* − 1) cot φ

54

Critical depth

In the case of calculation of q’

q’,, the normal

practice is to assume that q’ increases

linearly with depth from zero at ground

level to a maximum value q’(max) at the tip

of pile.

However, extensive research carried out

by Vessic(1967) has indicated that q’

varies linearly from the ground surface up

to a limited depth only beyond which q’

q’,,

remains constant irrespective of the depth

of embedment of pile.

Critical depth

This phenomenon was attributed to arching of

SAND.

SAND.

This depth within which q’ varies linearly with

depth may be called as the critical depth Dc.

From the curves given by Poulos (1980), we

may write

For 28<φ<36.5 we have Dc/B=5+0.24(φ-28)

For 36.5<φ<42 we have Dc/B=7+2.35(φ-36.5)

55

Critical depth

From Caquot & Kerisel Dc=B/4.N*q(2/3)

In Bearing Capacity Technical Guidance by Career

Development and Resources for Geotechnical

Engineers

-Dc = 10B, for loose silts and sands

-Dc = 15B, for medium dense silts and sands

-Dc = 20B, for dense silts and sands

-loose when N<10 or φ<30

-medium dense when 10<N<30 or 30<φ<36

-dense when 30<N or 36<φ

Critical depth

This critical concept implies that fs for cohesionless

soil for a driven pile varies linearly with depth up to

depth Dc only and beyond this depth fs remains

constant.

Note that the application concept Dc in case the soil is

homogeneous for the whole depth of embedment D.

Since no information is available on the layered

system of soil, this approach has to be used with

caution. Tomlinson(1986) Bowles(1988) has not use

of this concept .This

.This indicates that this method has

not yet found favor with the designer.

56

Load-carrying Capacity of the pile point in sand

Load-

from ESA condition after Meyerhof (1976)

QP=AP.qP=APq’N *q

Where AP-area of pile tip

qP-unit point resistance

q’

q’--effective vertical stress at the level of

the pile tip

7 tgφ

N*q-bearing capacity factor N q = e

*

**QP=Apq’N*q<Apqi
**

tgφ(KN/M2)

qi=50N*qtgφ

As per Tomlinson, the maximum base resistance

qp is normally limited 11000KPa.

**Load-carrying Capacity of the pile point in
**

Load-

sand from ESA condition after Meyerhof

(1976)

** The angle φ to be use for determination
**

Nq* are

For driven pile φ = φ1

For bored pile φ = φ1-3

Where φ1 is angle of internal friction prior to

installation of pile.

57

Load-carrying Capacity of the pile point in

Load-

saturated clay from TSA condition

QP=AP.qP=ApCU N *c= 9CUAP

**Where AP-area of pile tip
**

qP-unit point resistance

N*c-bearing capacity factor for φ=0 N*C=9

**Carrying capacity of piles in layered soil
**

from meyerhof equation

58

Carrying capacity of piles in layered soil

If the pile toe terminates in a layer of dense sand or

stiff clay overlying a layer of soft clay or loose sand

there is a danger of it punching through to the weaker

layer.

To account for this, Meyerhof's equation is used.

The base resistance at the pile toe is

qp = q2 + (q1 -q2)H / 10B but < q1

where

-B is the diameter of the pile

-H is the thickness between the base of the pile and

the top of the weaker layer

-q2 is the ultimate base resistance in the weak layer

-q1 is the ultimate base resistance in the strong layer.

**Relation between ultimate point resistance of pile
**

and depth in sand stratum beneath weak soil layer

from Terzaghi 1982

59

Relation between ultimate point resistance of pile

and depth in sand stratum beneath weak soil layer

from Terzaghi 1982

Frictional Resistance QS

Qs = ∑ P.∆L. f

Where P-

P-perimeter of the pile section

∆L-incremental pile length over

which P and f are taken constant

f-unit friction resistance at any

depth Z

60

Skin friction from β Method

From Meyehof 1976

φ<28 we have β=0.44

28<φ<35 we have β=0.75

35<φ<37 we have β=1.20

f=βσ’0

**σ’0-effective vertical stress at center of layer
**

As Tomlinson, the maximum frictional resistance is

limited 110KPa

Skin friction from β Method

61

Skin friction from β Method

The angle φ to be use for determination β are

For driven pile φ = 0.75φ1+10

For bored pile φ = φ1-3

Where φ1 is angle of internal friction prior to

installation of pile.

**Skin friction from α Method
**

Skin friction for clayey soil for driven pile

f=αxCu α=1 for Cu=<25KPa

α=0.5 for Cu=>70KPa

α=1-(Cu-25)/90 for 25KPa<Cu<70KPa API(1984)

**α=1 for Cu<=35KPa
**

α=0.5 for Cu=>80KPa

α=1-(Cu-35)/90 for 35KPa<Cu<80KPa Semple and Rigden(1984)

**Skin friction for clayey soil for Bored pile or drilled shafts
**

f=αxCu α=0.45 for London clay Skempton(1959)

α=0.7 time value for driven diplacement pile Flaming et al(1985)

α=0 for Z<1.5 Reese and Oneill(1985)

62

Tomlinson α method

Case 1:pile driven through sands or sandy

gravels into stiff clay strata.

Case 2:pile driven through soft clay into

stiff clay strata.

Case 3:pile driven into a firm to stiff clay

without any overlying strata.

The value of α vary with Cu and L/B ratio

Tomlinson α method

63

Negative skin friction

Negative skin friction is a downward drag force exerted

on the pile by the soil surrounding it.This action can

occur under conditions such as the following:

1-if a fill of clay soil is placed over a granular soil layer

into witch a pile is driven, the fill will gradually

consolidate. This consolidation process will exert a

downward drag force on the pile during the period of

consolidation.

2-if a fill of granular soil is placed over a layer of soft

clay,it will induce the process of consolidation in the clay

layer and thus exert a downward drag on the pile

3-lowering of the water table will increase the vertical

effective stress on the soil at any depth,which will induce

consolidation settlement in clay.If a pile is located in the

clay layer,it will be subjected to a downward drag force.

Clay fill over granular soil Granular soil fill over clay

Clay Sand

Hf Hf

fill fill

L L

L1

Neutral

Sand

plane Clay

64

Clay fill over granular soil

Where: f n = K 'σ 0 ' tan δ

K’=earth pressure coefficient =Ko=1-

=Ko=1-sin φ

sinφ

σ’o=vertical effective stress at any depth Z

= γ’f.Z.

γ’f =effective unit weight of fill Clay

δ=soil 0.5φ to 0.7φ

=soil--pile friction angle = 0.5φ 0.7φ

H

PK ' γ ' f H 2 tan δ

Qn = ∫ ( PK ' γ ' f tan δ ) Zd z =

0

2

**Granular soil fill over clay
**

In this case, the evidence indicates that the

negative skin stress on the pile may exist from

Z=0 to Z=L1,which is referred to as the neutral

depth.The neutral depth may be given as

(Bowles 1982)

L − H f L − H f γ 'f H f 2γ ' f H f

L1 = + −

L1 2 γ' γ'

**Hence,the total drag force is
**

L PK ' γ ' tan δ

L1 2

Qn = ∫ PK ' (γ ' f H f + γ ' Z ) tan δd Z = PK ' L1γ ' f H f tan δ + 1

0

2

65

Determine End bearing capacity of

pile foundation from SPT test

Driven Method

C

Sand qp=CN(Mpa) 0.45 N=average SPT value in By Martin et al(1987)

qp=CN(Mpa) 0.4 local failure zone By Decourt(1982)

qp=CN(Mpa) 0.04 Ls/D Ls=Length of pile in sand Mayerhof(1976)

D=width of pile C<=0.4

Silt, sandy silts qp=CN(Mpa) 0.35 N=average SPT value in Matin et al.(1987)

Glacial Coarse to fine siltqp=CN(Mpa) 0.25 local failure zone Thorburn and Mac Vicar(1987)

Residual sandy silt qp=CN(Mpa) 0.25 Decourt(1982)

Residual Clayey silt qp=CN(Mpa) 0.2 Decourt(1982)

Clay qp=CN(Mpa) 0.2 Matin et al.(1987)

Clay qp=CN(Mpa) 0.12 Decourt(1982)

All soil qp=CN(Mpa) 0.3 ForL/D>=5 Shioi and Fukui(1982)

If L/D<5,C=0.1+0.04L/D

for closed end pile

and C=0.06L/D

for open end pile

**Determine End bearing capacity of
**

pile foundation from SPT test

Cast in place method

**Coarse grained soil qp=CN(Mpa) 0.15 qp<3.0MPa Shioi and Fukui(1982)
**

qp=CN(Mpa) 0.15 qp<7.5MPa Yamashita et al(1987)

**Fine grained soil qp=CN(Mpa) 0.15 qp=0.09(1+0.16Lt) Yamashita et al(1987)
**

Lt=pile length

Bored pile

Sand qp=CN(Mpa) 0.1 Shioi and Fukui(1982)

Clay qp=CN(Mpa) 0.15 Shioi and Fukui(1982)

66

Determine skin friction from SPT

test

Driven Methode A B

Coarse grained soil qf=A+BN(Kpa) 0 2 N=average SPT Mayerhof(1956)

along Shaft Shioi and Fukui(1982)

Coarse grained &fine soilqf=A+BN(Kpa) 10 3.3 3<N<50 Decourt(1982)

Fine grained soil qf=A+BN(Kpa) 0 10 Shioi and Fukui(1982)

Cast in place methode

Coarse grained soil qf=A+BN(Kpa) 30 2 qf<200Kpa Yamashita et al(1987)

qf=A+BN(Kpa) 0 5 Shioi and Fukui(1982)

Fine grained soil qf=A+BN(Kpa) 0 5 qf<150Kpa Yamashita et al(1987)

qf=A+BN(Kpa) 0 10 Shioi and Fukui(1982)

Bored pile

Coarse grained soil qf=A+BN(Kpa) 0 1 Findlay(1984)&Shioi & Fukui(1982)

qf=A+BN(Kpa) 0 3.3 Wright &Reese(1979)

Fine graned soil qf=A+BN(Kpa) 10 3.3 qf<170Kpa Decourt(1982)

**Load--Carrying capacity of pile point resting on
**

Load

rock

The ultimate unit point resistance in

rock(Goodman,1980) is approximately

qp=qu-R(Nφ+1)

Where Nφ=tg2(45+ φ/2)

(45+φ

qu-R=unconfined compression strength of rock

φ=drained angle of friction of rock

The allowable load-

load-carrying capacity of the pile

point.thus

Qp( all) =

[q u−R ( Nφ + 1) AP ] FS=3

FS

67

Typical unconfined compressive strength of rock

Rock type qu-R(Mpa)

Sandstone 70-

70-140

Limestone 105

105--210

Shale 35-

35-70

Granite 140-

140-210

Marble 60-

60-70

qu − R (lab )

qu − R ( design ) =

5

**Drilled Shafts Extending into
**

Rock

Based on the procedure developed by Reese and

O’Neill(1988-1989),we can estimate the bearing load

O’Neill(1988-

capacity of drilled shafts extending into Rock as

follows:

1-Calculate the ultimate unit side resistance as:

f=6.564qu0.5≤0.15qu

Where qu=unconfined compression strength or Rock

core

2-Calculate the ultimate capacity based on side

resistance only:

Qu=π

Qu= πDsLf

68

Calculate the settlement Se of the shaft at the top of the Rock

socked:

Se=Se(s)+Se(b)

Where Se(s)=elastic compression of the drilled shaft within the

socket, assuming on side resistance

Se(b)=settlement of the base

QU L

However Se(s)=

AC EC

QU I f

And Se(b)=

DS Emass

69

Where Qu=Ultimate friction load

Ac=Cross

=Cross--section area of the drilled shaft

in the socked

Ds=Diameter of the drilled shaft

Ec=Young’s modulus of the concrete

Emass=Young’s modulus of the rock mass

If=Elastic influence coefficient (read on

chart)

L=Depth of embedment in rock

If Se is less than 10mm, then the ultimate load-

load-

carrying capacity from this way is correct.

**If Se≥ 10mm, there way be rapid, progressive side
**

shear failure in the rock socket ,resulting in a

complete loss of side resistance. In that case the

ultimate capacity is equal to the point resistance :

CS

3+

DS

Qu = 3qU Ac 0.5

101 + 300 δ

CS

70

Where Cs=Spacing of discontinuities

δ=Thickness of individual discontinuity

qu=unconfined compression strength of

the rock beneath the base of the socket or

drilled shaft concrete, whichever is smaller.

Note that applies for horizontally stratified

discontinuities with Cs>305 mm and δ<5mm

Typical values of angle of friction of rocks

**Rock type Angle of friction
**

φ(deg)

Sandstone 27-

27-45

Limestone 30-

30-40

Shale 10-

10-20

Granite 40-

40-50

Marble 25-

25-30

71

Group pile

Pile cap

d d

d

L Bg

d

Lg

d d

**Group pile efficiency
**

Determination of the load bearing capacity of group

piles is extremely complicated and has not yet been

fully resolved.When the piles are placed close to each

other,a reasonable assumption is that the stress

transmitted by the piles to the soil will overlap,thus

reducing the load bearing capacity of the

pile.Ideally,the piles in a group should be spaced so

that the load bearing capacity of the group should be

no less than the sum of the bearing capacity of the

individual piles.In practice,the minimum center to

center pile spacing d is 2.5D and in ordinary situations

is actually about 3D to 3.5D

3.5D..

72

Efficiency factor

Many structural engineers used a simplified

analysis to obtained the group efficiency for

friction piles (ratio between Qs & Qu is over

80%),particularly

80% ),particularly in sand.The piles may act in one

of two way:

1-as a block with dimension Lg*Bg*L

2-as individual piles

If the piles act as the block, the frictional capacity is

Qg(u)=favPgL note Pg=2(n1+ n2-2)d+4D

For each pile acting individually

Q(u)=favLP

Efficiency factor

Qg ( u )

η=

∑ Q( u )

Where η=group efficiency

Qg(u)=ultimate load bearing capacity of

group pile

Q(u)=ultimate load bearing capacity of

each pile

2(n1 + n2 − 2)d + 4 D

η=

Pn1n2

73

Converse Labarre equation

(n1 − 1)n2 + (n2 − 1)n1

η = 1− θ

90 n n

1 2

θ (deg) = arctg ( D / d )

Pile in sand

Model test results on group piles in sand have shown

that group efficiency can be greater than 1 because

soil compaction zones are created around the piles

during driving.Based on the experimental observations

of the behavior of group piles in sand to date,two

general conclusions may be drawn:

1-for driven group piles in sand with d>3D, Qg(u)=ΣQ(u)

2-for bored group piles in sand at conventional

spacing

d=3D,Qg(u) may be taken 2/3 to 3/4 time ΣQ(u)

74

Pile in clay

The ultimate load bearing capacity of group piles in clay

may be estimated with the following procedure:

1-Determine ΣQu=n1n2(QP+Qs) ;

ΣQu=n1n2[9CuAp+ΣαPCuL]

2-determine the ultimate capacity by assuming that the

piles in the group act as a block with dimension

Lg*Bg*L.The skin resistance of the block is:

Qs(g)=Σ2αCu(Lg+Bg)L

Calculate the point bearing capacity from

QP(g)=N*cCuLgBg , N*C=5.14(1+0.2Bg/Lg)(1+0.2L/Bg)<9

ΣQ(u)=Qs(g)+QP(g)

3-Compare the 2 results,The lower of the two value is

Qg(u)

Piles in rock

For point bearing piles resting on

rock,most building codes specify that

Qg(u)=ΣQ(u),provided that the minimum

center to center spacing of pile is

D+300mm.For

D+300mm .For H-

H-piles and piles with

square cross sections,the magnitude of D

is equal to the diagonal dimension of the

pile cross section

75

Settlement of piles and groups in

sands and Gravels

The present Knowledge is not sufficient to

evaluate of pile and pile groups. For most

engineering structures, the loads to be applied

to a pile group will be governed by consideration

of consolidation settlement rather than by

bearing capacity of the groups divided by an

arbitrary factor of safety of 2 or 3. It has been

found from field observation that the settlement

of a pile groups is many times the settlement of

a single pile at the corresponding working load.

**Settlement of piles and groups in
**

sands and Gravels

The settlement of a group is affected by the

shape and size of group, length of pile, method

of installation of pile and possibly many other

factors.

There are no equations that would

satisfactorily predict the settlement of pile in

SAND. It is better to rely on load tests for

piles in SAND.

In this chapter we try to show some equations

for estimation the settlement of pile in SAND.

76

Settlement of pile shaft

(Q pall + ξQ all

f )L

Se1 =

Ap E p

Where : L-

L-pile length

EP-elastic modulus of pile

material,for concrete pile EP=21000MPa

ζ =0.5

AP-area of pile tip

**Settlement of pile cause by load at
**

the pile point

q all

p B

Se2 = 0.85 (1 − µ 2 )

E

Where : B-

B-Width of pile

E-elastic modulus of soil

µ-Poisson ratio

77

Settlement of pile cause by the load

transmitted along the pile shaft

Q all B L

Si3 = f (1 − µ 2 ) I f I f = 2 + 0.35

PL E B

Where : B-

B-Width of pile

E-elastic modulus of soil

µ-Poisson ratio

L-pile length

P-perimeter of the pile section

**Consolidation settlement of group piles
**

The settlement of pile group in clay can be estimated

by assuming that the total load is carried by an

equivalent raft located at depth of 2L/3 where L is the

length of the piles.It may be assumed,that the load is

spread from the perimeter of the group at a slope of 1

horizontal to 4 vertical to allow for that part of the

load transferred to the soil by skin friction.The vertical

stress increment at any depth below the equivalent

raft may be estimated by assuming in turn that the

total load is spread to the underlying soil at slope of 1

horizontal to 2 vertical.The

vertical.The consolidation settlement

is than calculated as the shallow foundation.

78

Equivalent raft concept

Q

Q

q=

B' L'

1:4 2L/3 d d

q L

d Bg

Lg

1:2

d d B’=D+d+L/3

B’&L’ L’=D+2d+L/3

Thank you for your attention

Mr. Sieng

PEOU

Master

science of

geotechnical

engineering

79

- Pile Foundation Design ExampleUploaded bythanzawtun1981
- Foundation DesignUploaded byconstruction managment
- Foundation DesignUploaded byprabhu81
- Tower foundation designUploaded byunikmyquestar
- Transmission Tower Foundation DesignUploaded bySara Nuon
- AFES English ManualUploaded byMai Kawayapanik
- Structural Steel Design PPTUploaded byMilomir Gavrilovic
- Design of Spread FootingUploaded byghulamqader
- Design of ReinConcrete FoundationUploaded byJan Gnat
- Design of Foundation 35 m TowerUploaded byEngr Ali Asghar
- Steel Beam designUploaded byNaveen Parthasarathy
- Helix Manual Sample Application WebUploaded byspaceskipper
- Foundation Engineering Q & A.docxUploaded byGowtham Raja
- ASTM D 1143 Test Method for Piles Under Static Axial Compressive LoadUploaded byAmanda Ariesta Aprilia
- CIV4112 - Assignment 2Uploaded byJonathan
- PileAXL 2014 - A Program for Single Piles Under Axial LoadingUploaded bymyplaxis
- EC7Uploaded bySewGuan
- Parking StandardsUploaded byIsbel
- As 1181-1982 Method of Measurement of Civil Engineering Works and Associated Building WorksUploaded bySAI Global - APAC
- Carrying Capacity of Single Vertical PileUploaded byNatesa Indrasenan
- Dpie.tpipmanual 3.28.15finalUploaded byaliengineer953
- International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences & Geomechanics Abstracts Volume 21 Issue 5 1984 [Doi 10.1016%2F0148-9062%2884%2992985-1] -- Reinforced Retaining Walls- The Use of Old Motor Tyres (in French) - Long, N T;Uploaded byDženana Smajić