Cite this article Research Article Keywords: field testing & monitoring/

Taylor L, Ganesharatnam L, O’Leary F et al. (2018) Paper 1700223 geology/site investigation

Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1, ground investigation. Received 11/12/2017;
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Geotechnical Engineering 171(6): 474–485, Accepted 26/07/2018;
https://doi.org/10.1680/jgeen.17.00223 Published online 07/09/2018

ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Geotechnical Engineering

Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,

ground investigation
Lee Taylor MESci (Hons), MSc, CGeol, FGS, EurGeol, Rogep Stephan Jefferis MA, MEng, MSc, PhD, CEng, CEnv, CGeol,
Senior Geologist, Ove Arup and Partners, London, UK FICE, FGS
Lohini Ganesharatnam BSc (Hons) Civil Eng Director, Environmental Geotechnics Ltd, Banbury, UK
Senior Engineer, Ove Arup and Partners, London, UK Paul Morrison BAI, PhD, CEng, MIEI
Frank O’Leary BEng (Hons), CEng, MIEI Director, Ove Arup and Partners, London, UK
Senior Engineer, Ove Arup and Partners, London, UK Vivien Kwan BEng (Hons), MSc, DIC
(corresponding author: frank.oleary@arup.com) Senior Engineer, Ove Arup and Partners, London, UK

Deep bored piled foundations were planned to support a new 279 m tall tower in east London. The piles were
founded in chalk, and therefore detailed stratigraphical logging of the chalk strata was carried out using known
marker bands such as flints bands and marl seams. This helped to develop a ground model, including the separation
of the various chalk formations into their respective beds. Other investigation methods were employed to assist
in developing the chalk stratigraphy, including downhole geophysical techniques, fluid temperature, fluid flow,
resistivity, density, caliper and natural gamma. Other downhole tools, such as downhole optical imaging, were also
used. Critical to the design of the pile was understanding the behaviour of the bentonite support fluid when used in
chalk. Owing to concerns regarding the possible interaction of the bentonite with the chalk, bespoke laboratory tests
were carried out on core samples using two commonly used bentonite types. The tests were carried out at two
bentonite concentrations with chalk samples from three depths. Control samples were also tested without chalk. This
paper presents the detailed investigation of the chalk and its interaction with the bentonite carried out prior to the
commencement of the pile design.

1. Introduction is underlain by Palaeogene strata comprising Thanet Sand

The development discussed in this paper is located in east
London. The proposed structure is 60 storeys tall with two
levels of basement, see Figure 1. The building spans over
London Underground tunnels, resulting in column loads of
between 33 MN and 87 MN and requiring a stiff raft and cast
in situ bearing piles founding in chalk. Piles with diameters up
to 2·4 m and 61 m long were to be used due to the high resist-
ance required. The basement stretches beyond the footprint of
the tower on the north side of the site.
The unusual use of piles founded in the chalk in this area
of London, along with the lack of published data relating
to the performance of chalk piles constructed under bentonite
with long construction times, posed a significant design and
construction risk. A comprehensive ground investigation was
undertaken to understand the stratigraphy and the engineering
characteristics at the site, and to inform the presence or
absence of geohazards such as faulting or buried hollows. This
paper describes the ground investigation techniques that were
used to inform the development of the ground model.
Specialised laboratory testing was carried out to investigate the
interaction of bentonites typically used in the UK with chalk
found on site. The results of this bespoke testing are presented
and commented upon herein.
2. Published geology
The site is located on the Isle of Dogs floodplain of the River
Thames within the London Basin. The published geology
(British Geological Survey (BGS, 2017)) indicates that the site
Formation and Lambeth Group Formation, overlain by
Quaternary and more recent River Terrace Deposits and
Alluvium. Chalk of the White Chalk sub-group is present
beneath the Sub-Palaeogene erosion surface delineated in east
London by the Bullhead Beds of the Thanet Sand formation.
A characteristic feature of the White Chalk sub-group is the
presence of bands of flint and marls, which can be used as
marker bands to interpret the presence of the various for-
mations and beds. The stratigraphy of the chalk in the region
of the site has been studied extensively through numerous
ground investigations for recent tunnelling and other engi-
neering projects (Mortimore et al., 2011). The stratigraphical
framework developed by Mortimore et al. (2011), which
describes the disposition and relative separation of various
marker horizons, was used to carry out detailed stratigraphical
logging of the chalk.
3. Ground investigation
The fieldwork for the ground investigation comprised a
mixture of boreholes advanced to depths of 81 m through
cable percussion and rotary coring techniques, see Figure 1,
which were instrumented to monitor the pore-water pressure in
the chalk. In situ tests included standard penetration tests
(SPTs), downhole wireline geophysical logging, downhole
optical and acoustic imagery and in situ permeability tests.
3.1 Rotary coring
Rotary coring was carried out using a 102 mm core
(Geobor-S) size wireline core barrel and rigid core liner with

474
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 171 Issue GE6
LU tunnels
Zone of tower
BH02A
BH01
Figure 1. Site plan including deep ground investigation layout
polycrystalline diamond bits and water/polymer flush. Cores
were photographed using artificial lighting and subsequently
logged in accordance with Eurocode 7 (BSI, 2004, 2007). The
Ciria grade of chalk was determined in accordance with the
guidance provided in Ciria C574 (Lord et al., 2002). Selected
core sub-samples were preserved in aluminium foil, cling film
and wax and sent to the laboratory for testing. These tests
included the following
& chalk classification tests
& point load index testing
& unconfined compressive strength (UCS) testing in
accordance with the International Society for Rock
Mechanics and Rock Engineering (ISRM) suggested
methods (Ulusay and Hudson, 2006)
& bespoke chalk testing.
3.2 Chalk logging
Detailed stratigraphical logging of the chalk was carried out
through identification of the key marker beds within boreholes
and cross-referencing them with the descriptions and relative
spacing of the features within published stratigraphic columns
by Ellison (2004) and Mortimore et al. (2011). The lithostrati-
graphical units used for logging the chalk in southern England
and the typical stratigraphical intervals at the subcrop in east
London are presented within Figure 2. The chalk of the
Seaford Chalk Formation and underlying Lewes Chalk
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.
N
BH03
13/BH01
13/BH02
Test pile
BH04
Exclusion zones
1m
0 m2 m 5 m 7·5 m10 m
Formation were encountered all within deep boreholes. The
chalk underlies the Palaeogene deposits of the Bullhead Beds
(at the base of the Thanet Sand) and is present from between
−30·7 mOD in the south of the site and −31·5 mOD in the
north of the site. The Seaford Chalk Formation comprises, in
stratigraphical order from youngest to oldest, the Haven Brown
Beds, Cuckmere Beds and the Belle Tout Beds. The disposition
of the stratigraphical boundaries between these beds is sum-
marised within Table 1. The variation in the top of the chalk
and the disposition of the relevant marker bands indicate that
the chalk has a dip of between 2 and 5° in the northerly direc-
tion. This is consistent with the dip and dip direction within
the region (Ellison, 2004). There is good correlation between
the key marker bands within boreholes on the site. However,
the correlation between the key marker bands within boreholes
carried out north of the site (13/BH01 and 13/BH02) is poor,
even though these boreholes were drilled approximately 20 m
away from the nearest borehole on site (BH04), see Figure 3.
It is noted that the core recovery within boreholes to the north
of the site (13/BH01 and 13/BH02), just outside the proposed
basement footprint (30 m from the tower), was poor (as low as
45%) compared to the excellent core recovery within boreholes
carried out on the site, despite the drilling being carried out
by the same contractor using the same drilling technique.
Therefore a geological reason was attributed to the poor
recovery in the boreholes north of the site, such as degraded
475
 Geotechnical Engineering Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
Volume 171 Issue GE6 ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.

Southern Province Chalk

Traditional Chalk
stratigraphy
stratigraphy
(Bristow et al., 1997; Mortimore, 1983, 1986)
Stage Zone Key marker beds Formations/members Key boundary markers
with bed divisions

Traditional units and new subgroups

Portsdown
Belemnitella
mucronata

Stratigraphical range of the Chalk at subcrop, London

Portsdown Chalk
Formation

for most engineering ptojects in east London

Portsdown Marl
Spetisbury
Gonioteuthis

Chalk Member
quadarata
Campanian

Culver

Stratigraphical interval at subcrop

Tarrant
Chalk Member

In North Downs
Castle Hill Marls
Newhaven Chalk Fm

Bastion Steps
Offaster
pilula

Meeching
Peacehaven
Old Nore Marl
Old Nore

Margate
Mt
Brighton Marl

Chalk
Upper Chalk (redefined) (White Chalk Subgroup)
Santonian

Us Splash Point
Barrois’ Buckle Marls
Sponge Bed Whitaker’s Three Inch Flint
Seaford Chalk Fm

Haven Brow
Bedwell’s
coranguinum

Columnar Bedwell’s Columnar Flint

Micraster

Flint
Cuckmere
Seven Sisters Seven Sisters Flint Band
Flint
Coniacian

Belle Tout
Shoreham Shoreham Marls
cortestudinarium

Beachy Head
Lewes Nodular Chalk Fm
Micraster

Light Point
Beeding
Hope Gap
Top Rock Cliffe Navigation Marls
Navigation
Sternotaxis
planus

South Street Lewes Marl

Chalk Rock Kingston
Ringmer Bridgewick Marl 1
Caburn Caburn Marl
Southerham Marl 1
Terebratulina

Glynde
Turonian

First nodular chalk

Glynde Marls
lata

(redefined) White

New Pit Chalk

Chalk Subgroup

Formation
Middle Chalk

Gun Gardens Main Marl

labiatus s.l.
Mytiloides

Holywell nodular
Chalk Formation
Melbourn Rock
Melbourn Rk Foyle Marl
Plenus Marls Plenus Marls
Grey Chalk Subgroup
Cenomanian

Grey Chalk Zig Zag Chalk

Formation
Lower Chalk

Tenuis Limestone
Chalk Marl
West Melbury
Marly Chalk
Formation
Glauconitic Marl Gl. Marl

Figure 2. Extract from Mortimore et al. (2011). Chalk lithostratigraphical units annotated with top of Chalk at the site

rock quality due to the presence of a local fault or fold (as the top of the Shoreham Beds over a 20 m distance, despite the
schematically represented within Figure 3). Evidence for the fact that the level was expected to fall as the borehole locations
presence of a fault also included an approximately 2 m offset of progressed northwards. It is also noted that, for the preliminary

476
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
Volume 171 Issue GE6 ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.

Table 1. Summary of the disposition of marker bands and stratigraphical boundaries within the White Chalk Subgroup at the site
Formation Beds Marker Level: mOD Notes

Seaford Chalk Haven Brow Beds Top of chalk −30·7 to −31·5 —

Bedwell’s Columnar Flint −37·7 to −40·3 About 8 m below top of chalk. First large flint band
Cuckmere Beds Michel Dean Flint −40·5 to −43·6 —
Belle Tout Beds Seven Sister’s Flint −58·6 to −59·5 About 2–3 m below the Cuckmere/Belle Tout boundary
Belle Tout Marl 3 −62·8 to −63·1 —
Lewes Chalk Shoreham Beds Shoreham Marl 2 −66·9 to −69·6 About 2 m above Shoreham Marl 1
Shoreham Marl 1 −69·3 to −71·0 —
Haven Brow–Cuckmere boundary −40·5 to −43·6 About 3–4 m below Bedwell’s Flint
Cuckmere–Belle Tout boundary −56·0 to −56·9 First wispy marl, about 2–3 m above Seven Sisters Flint
Belle Tout–Shoreham boundary −68·4 to −69·6 Shoreham Marl 2. Zoophycos traces

Distance along baseline: m

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
02

01
/BH

/BH

2A
South
4

1
North
BH

BH

BH

BH
13

13

Site boundary
–30 Bullhead Bed Flint
Haven Brow Beds

–35
Bedwell’s columnar Flint

–40
Michel’s Flint
Reduced level: moD

–45
Seaford Chalk Formation

Cuckmere Beds

Possible local fault -

orientation and fault
–50 type unknown

–55
Seven Sisters Flint
–60
Belle Tout Beds

Belle Tout Marl 3

–65
Shoreham Marl 2
chalk formation
Lewes nodular

Shoreham

–70 Shoreham Marl 1

beds

–75

Figure 3. Geological cross-section showing marker bands and possible fault location

test pile (see part 2 of this paper (Ganesharatnam et al., 2018)), In addition to the geophysical logging methods listed above,
bentonite losses in the northern area were much higher than downhole optical and acoustic images were obtained.
those in the southern area, which also adds weight to the
interpretation of the ground being affected by faulting. Selected results of the downhole geophysics are presented in
Figure 4 and annotated to present the correlation between the
3.3 Downhole geophysics and imagery downhole geophysics and the stratigraphical classification. The
Downhole geophysics was carried out within three boreholes top of the chalk is defined by a sharp decrease in natural
(BH04, BH02A and BH01). The suite of testing included gamma, which is observed within all boreholes, and the signal
is consistent over the full depth of chalk. The resistivity signal
(a) fluid temperature and conductivity (static and recharging) is relatively consistent throughout the Haven Brow Beds and
(b) fluid flow (static and recharging) Cuckmere Beds; and an increase in resistivity at −57 mOD
(c) focused resistivity marks the boundary between the Cuckmere Beds and the
(d) neutron porosity underlying Belle Tout Beds. Resistivity increases and sub-
(e) formation density sequently decreases towards the boundary between the Belle
(f ) caliper Tout Beds and the underlying Lewes Chalk. The variation in
(g) natural gamma. resistivity is consistent with the variation of intact dry density.

477
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
Volume 171 Issue GE6 ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.

FV (pumped) Resistivity (deep) FV (pumped) Resistivity (deep) FV (pumped) Resistivity (deep)

–150 150 0 125 –150 150 0 125 –150 150 0 125
mm/s Ωm mm/s Ωm mm/s Ωm
FV R (pumped) Natural gamma FV R (pumped) Natural gamma FV R (pumped) Natural gamma
10 –150 150 0 125 –150 150 0 125 –150 150 0 125

01
02
mm/s API mm/s API mm/s API
04

BH
BH
BH

(3·5) (–11·4)
(–3·2) Haven Brow Beds
Natural gamma: API
Cuckmere Beds
Natural gamma: API
0 Belle Tout Beds
Shoreham Beds
Natural gamma: API

–10

–20
Reduced level: moD

Natural
–30 gamma
decrease
= top of Resistivity Resistivity Ω m
Chalk Ωm
–40 Resistivity
Ωm

–50
Decrease in
resistivity
= decrease
in dry
–60
density Variation in
resistivity
Decrease in correlates
resistivity = with variation
–70 Shoreham in dry density
Marl 1 and 2

Figure 4. Borehole logs showing interpreted ground model with the results of the downhole geophysics. FV, fluid velocity (mm/s); FV R,
fluid velocity recharge (mm/s)

Optical imagery provided information on the presence of 4. Chalk classification

chalk marker bands including flint bands and marl seams. The chalk encountered on site was classified using the tests
It also provided information on the characteristics of dis- as set out in the following sections. This testing permitted com-
continuities, such as the dip and dip direction, spacing posite borehole logs to be produced to present the chalk prop-
between discontinuities and the aperture of discontinuities. erties and the variation in the engineering properties of the
The results of the optical imagery correlated with the chalk strata, see Figure 5.
recovered chalk cores and also confirmed the absence of
voids and any degraded rock. Acoustic imagery was not as
successful as optical imagery because the signal was affected 4.1 Chalk grade
by the presence of small flint fragments around the outside of In the UK, the chalk was historically graded for engineering
the bore. purpose on the basis of visual descriptions only – the
Mundford grading classification after Burland and Lord
In summary the results of downhole geophysics and (1970), Wakeling (1970) and Ward et al. (1968). Discrepancies
downhole optical image logs were used in combination with often arose with attempts to correlate SPT results with the
the stratigraphical borehole logs to confirm and update the chalk grades and a new system was introduced by Ciria in
ground model. 1994, which is referred to as the Ciria grading scheme. This

478
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
Volume 171 Issue GE6 ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.

Uniaxial compressive Size corrected point Coefficient of

Dry density: Mg/m3 Moisture content: % strength: MPa load index IS50: MPa SPT N Value: blow/300 mm permeability: m/s
1·4 1·6 1·8 0 10 20 30 0 2 4 6 0 0·2 0·4 0 200 400
–30 –30 –30 –30 –30

BH01
BH0SA
–35 –35 –35 –35 –35 3·6 × 10–7

6·3 × 10–7
–40 –40 –40 –40 –40

–45 –45 –45 –45 –45 1·4 × 10–6

3·5 × 10–8

–50 –50 –50 –50 –50

Level: mOD

–55 –55 –55 –55 –55 7·1 × 10–8

–60 –60 –60 –60 –60 1·3 × 10–8

–65 –65 –65 –65 –65

–70 –70 –70 –70 –70

–75 –75 –75 –75 –75

Seaford Formation – Haven Brow Beds Seaford Formation – Cuckmere Beds Seaford Formation – Belle Tout Marl Beds Lewes Formation – Shoreham Beds

Figure 5. Composite plots showing chalk properties for all boreholes

Table 2. Summary of dry densities and chalk grades for the Chalk
Dry density: Mg/m3 Ciria gradea

Formation Beds Min. to max. Typical range Ciria densitya Joint set 1

Seaford Chalk Formation Haven Brow Beds 1·45 to 1·65 1·50 to 1·60 Low to medium density A1 and B1 to A4
Cuckmere Beds 1·41 to 1·70 1·55 to 1·65 Low to medium density Typically A1 to A3
Belle Tout Beds 1·51 to 1·82 1·51 to 1·63 (above −60 mOD) Medium to high density Typically A1 to A3
1·60 to 1·75 (below −60 mOD)
Lewes Chalk Formation Shoreham Beds 1·54 to 1·70 1·54 to 1·70 Medium density Typically A1

a
Based on Table 3.2 (Ciria density), Table 3.3 and Table 3.4 (Ciria grade) within Ciria C574 (Lord et al., 2002)

requires knowledge of discontinuity aperture (Ciria C574, 4.2.2 Rock testing

Table 3.3) and spacing (Ciria C574, Table 3.4). For full classifi- The range of uniaxial compressive strength (UCS) test results
cation, intact dry density is required (low, medium, high and is between 0·2 and 5·9 MPa. Typical UCS values for each bed
very high – see Ciria C574, Table 3.2). Although absent at the are summarised within Table 3, which also presents the size-
site, for grade D chalk, matrix or clast domination is also corrected results of point load index tests (PLI Is50) and
required for classification (Table 2). derived UCS values based on the relationship of PLI
Is50  22 MPa (Ulusay and Hudson, 2006). Table 3 shows that
the agreement between measured and derived UCS is reason-
4.2 Strength
able for Haven Brow Beds, good for Cuckmere Beds and
4.2.1 Standard penetration testing Shoreham Beds, and very good for the Belle Tout Beds. On the
On the basis of SPTs within chalk a range of SPT N values basis of UCS test results the strength of chalk may be typically
has been recommended for design purposes as follows classified as a very weak rock, in accordance with BS 5930,
throughout the depth of all exploratory holes.
& lower bound: N = 52 + 3z
& upper bound: N = 208 + 9z 4.2.3 Permeability
Six falling head tests were carried using double packers with a
where z is the depth below the top of the chalk. static water head without elevated pressure. Tests were carried

479
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
Volume 171 Issue GE6 ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.

Table 3. Summary of UCS and size-corrected PLI test results

UCS: MPa PLI Is50: MPa

Min. to Typical Min. to Typical Typical derived UCS

Formation Beds max. range max. range (based on PLI Is50  22): MPa

Seaford Chalk Formation Haven Brow Beds 0·2 to 3·9 1·5 to 3·0 0·0 to 0·4 0·02 to 0·2 0·4 to 4·4
Cuckmere Beds 1·6 to 4·2 2·0 to 3·5 0·02 to 0·4 0·05 to 0·2 1·1 to 4·4
Belle Tout Beds 2·0 to 5·9 2·0 to 4·5 0·03 to 0·6 0·1 to 0·2 1·3 to 4·4
Lewes Chalk Formation Shoreham Beds 2·6 to 3·7 2·6 to 3·7 0·1 to 0·2 0·1 to 0·2 1·5 to 4·2

Table 4. Summary of permeability test results
Formation Beds Permeability, k: m/s
Seaford Chalk Haven Brown Beds 3·6  10−7 to 6·3  10−7
Formation Cuckmere Beds 1·4  10−6 to 7·1  10−8
Belle Tout Beds 1·3  10−8
Lewes Chalk Shoreham Beds Not tested
Formation
out within the chalk to target various levels around the pro-
posed pile toe levels. Permeability values ranged from
1·3  10−8 m/s to 1·4  10−6 m/s, see Table 4. It is noted that
the permeability of the chalk is governed by bulk loss through
discontinuities rather than by permeation through the chalk
mass. The variation in permeability is therefore primarily due
to the extent of fracturing within the chalk local to the in situ
test pocket.
5. Specialist chalk testing
Specialist testing was carried out by Environmental
Geotechnics Ltd on chalk from the site as there were concerns
about possible interactions between the bentonite to be used
during piling and the chalk due to the lack of published data
relating to bentonite performance in chalk. The concerns pri-
marily related to the time taken to construct the piles and the
thick filter cake that could form in this period, reducing shaft
capacity. This risk was further increased due to the possibility
of chalk particles becoming entrained in the bentonite that
could not be removed through desanding. Tests were carried
out on bentonite slurry samples with added chalk and control
samples without chalk. For the investigations, two types of
bentonite commonly used in the piling industry Berkbent 163
and Bentonil C2, were tested at concentrations of 4% and 5%
by weight. Chalk samples were selected for testing from
13/BH02. Chalk 1 was from a depth (below ground level) of
46·97 to 47·20 m (Haven Brows Bed); chalk 2 from 50·15 to
50·28 m (Cuckmere Beds) and chalk 3 from 58·55 to 58·80 m
(Cuckmere Beds).
Initial tests with the Marsh funnel showed that the chalk type
had minimal effect on the Marsh funnel times. Therefore only
one of the chalk types was investigated in detail and, as will be
shown in this paper, this chalk had no or minimal effects on
any of the slurry properties tested.
Groundwater samples from the chalk were tested to check if
the ions present in the groundwater might have an impact on
the bentonite slurry. The chemical analyses found that the
groundwater was not expected to have any impact on bentonite
slurries (Jefferis, 2014).
The following tests were carried out on each of the slurry/chalk
combinations and the results of this testing are presented and
discussed in the following sections
& slurry density using a digital density meter (Lam and
Jefferis, 2018)
& pH with an electronic pH meter
& Marsh funnel with flow times recorded for discharges of
946 ml (1 US quart) and 1000 ml; to assess the evolution
of slurry viscosity, tests were carried out at times up to
116 h from mixing
& Fann viscometer tests to determine apparent and plastic
viscosities, and 10 s and 10 min gel strengths
& tests with the Kugelharfe (Ball harp) to determine gel
strength also at 10 s and 10 min
& fluid loss tests in the American Petroleum Institute
standard low-pressure fluid loss cell.
5.1 Sample preparation
As potential chemical effects of the chalk on slurry properties
were being investigated it was necessary to limit physical
effects. To minimise physical effects, the chalk was added as a
relatively coarse material. Samples of each of the chalks were
broken up and only the fraction passing a 5 mm sieve but
retained on a 2·36 mm sieve was used. Ten (10) g/l of this size
fraction were added to each of the test slurries.
5.2 Slurry testing
The fluid flow properties of the bentonite slurries are sensitive
to the shear history of the slurry prior to testing. In particular,
bentonite slurries are thixotropic – that is the slurry viscosity
and gel strength both tend to increase on standing. As com-
parative data were required for slurries with and without
added chalk, the slurries were conditioned to a standard state
prior to testing. Each slurry sample was therefore re-mixed
for 50 s prior to the fluid testing; this time was chosen as a
compromise – ideally just sufficient to condition the slurry to

480
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
Volume 171 Issue GE6 ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.

Table 5. Slurry densities and pH

Bentonite type Moisture content of bentonite powder, as received: % Concentration: % Measured density: kg/m3 pH

Bentonil C2 11·6 4 1023·5 9·7

Bentonil C2 11·6 5 1029·0 9·7
Berkbent 163 13·3 4 1024·0 10·3
Berkbent 163 13·3 5 1030·0 10·3

a consistent state without excessive re-mixing, which would 60

Marsh funnel flow time for 946 ml

tend to further develop the slurry properties.
55

50
5.3 Timing of the tests
The slurry density tests were carried out at 12 h from mixing;

discharge: s
45
the density should be effectively independent of the time from
40
mixing. The Marsh funnel tests were undertaken over a range
of ages. The Fann viscometer, Kugelharfe and fluid loss tests 35
were undertaken at greater than 110 h from mixing to allow 30
Bentonil C2 at 4% – Control Berkbent 163 4% – Control
the slurry properties to stabilise prior to the testing. Bentonil C2 at 4% – Chalk 1 Berkbent 163 4% – Chalk 1
25 Bentonil C2 at 5% – Control Berkbent 163 5% – Control
Bentonil C2 at 5% – Chalk 1 Berkbent 163 5% – Chalk 1

5.4 Slurry density and pH 20

The densities of the four control slurries without chalk were
measured with a digital density meter with a best resolution of
0·5 kg/m3. The samples with chalk were not tested as the chalk
particles could have blocked the fine capillary sensing element
of the apparatus. The pH of the slurries was measured with an
electronic pH meter. The measured densities and pHs are
shown in Table 5 together with the moisture contents of the
bentonite powders as received.
The measured densities of the Berkbent 163 slurries were very
slightly greater than the Bentonil C2 slurries of the same con-
centration despite the lower moisture content of the Bentonil
C2 powder (slurries were mixed by as-received weight). The
density differences may be the result of slight differences
between the bentonites and/or other minerals present in the
powders.
5.5 Marsh funnel flow time
Marsh funnel flow times were determined after the 50 s re-
mixing and each test was repeated at least twice. Testing was
continued, if the results of the tests differed by more than
0·5 s, until consistent results were obtained and the average of
the final two test results was used. The Bentonil C2 slurries
typically required at least three tests, with the flow time redu-
cing with each test; it is likely that the 50 s of re-mixing may
not have been sufficient to condition these slurries.
The Marsh funnel tests were undertaken over a range of ages
and the flow times are plotted as a function of time from
mixing, see Figure 6. When the repeatability of the test is con-
sidered, it can be seen that the plots for the slurries with chalk
1 effectively overlie their partner control samples without
chalk, showing that these chalks had negligible impact on the
slurry behaviour. The other three chalk types were tested at
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Time from start of mixing: h
Figure 6. Marsh funnel flow times in seconds for 946 ml
14 h from mixing. The tests showed that chalk from different
depths did not have any significant or consistent effect on the
Marsh funnel flow time (results for all three chalk types were
typically within ± 0·5 s with a maximum variation from the
mean of 1·5 s). Therefore, for the later test times, 48 and
116 h, only chalk 1 was investigated.
Figure 6 shows that the Marsh funnel viscosity for Berkbent
163 slurries increased with time from mixing, although slightly
unexpectedly for the 5% slurry, the increase does not seem to
have begun to plateau by 116 h. Unexpectedly, the Marsh
funnel time for the Bentonil C2 slurries showed a slight
decrease with time. This decrease in flow time was quite dis-
tinct for all samples (with and without chalk) and at both con-
centrations, although the values at all test times were
acceptable for on-site use. The decrease will not have been due
to bleed or settlement of solids as the samples were re-mixed
for 50 s prior to testing. Furthermore, it is unlikely to have
been due to the biological degradation of any organic additives
in the bentonite powder as the times were too short for the
development of biological activity in a nominally sterile slurry.
Given that the construction of a given pile was not anticipated
to take more than 116 h, any further reduction in flow time
was not expected to be of significance.
5.6 Fann viscometer tests and Kugelharfe tests
The Fann viscometer and Kugelharfe tests were carried out
at a single age of about 100 h. The results are presented in
Table 6. The Kugelharfe apparatus has a series of calibrated

481
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
Volume 171 Issue GE6 ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.

Table 6. Test results from the Fann viscometer and Kugelharfe

Fann viscometer results Kugelharfe results

Viscosity: mPa s Gel strength: N/m2 Gel strength: N/m2

Bentonite type Type of sample Concentration: % Apparent Plastic 10 s 10 min 10 s 10 min

Bentonil C2 Control 4 14·5 12·0 1·4 4·3 >6·7 <8·4 >8·42 <12·4
Chalk 1 4 14·3 10·5 1·9 4·8 >6·7 <8·4 >8·42 <12·4
Control 5 22·5 15·5 2·4 7·2 >6·7 <8·4 >8·42 <12·4
Chalk 1 5 23·0 16·0 2·9 7·7 >6·7 <8·4 >8·42 <12·4
Berkbent 163 Control 4 13·0 6·0 6·7 12·0 >12·4 <17·2 >17·2 <23·0
Chalk 1 4 13·0 5·0 6·7 12·0 >12·4 <17·2 >17·2 <23·0
Control 5 21·0 7·5 13·4 19·6 >23·0 <32·0 >36·7 <47·3
Chalk 1 5 21·3 6·5 13·7 19·2 >23·0 <32·0 >36·7 <47·3

balls suspended from fine threads and the gel strength range is
18
determined from the largest ball that does not sink and the
smallest that does. 16

14
Volume of filtrate: ml

From the test results it can be seen that

12

(a) the added chalk had a negligible impact on the apparent 10

and plastic viscosities of the slurries or the gel strengths 8
(b) Bentonil C2 slurries have markedly higher plastic
6 Bentonil C2 at 4% control (no Chalk), 250 kPa cell pressure
viscosities, although both bentonite types give
Bentonil C2 at 4% control (no Chalk), 350 kPa cell pressure
comparable apparent viscosities 4 Bentonil C2 at 4% control (no Chalk), 689 kPa cell pressure
(c) Berkbent 163 slurries have markedly higher gel strengths
2
(d) Kugelharfe tests give higher gel strengths than the Fann 2·5 3·0 3·5 4·0 4·5 5·0 5·5 6·0
viscometer. Square root time: min1/2

The fluid properties of the two slurries are therefore quite dis-
tinct, Bentonil C2 providing a more viscous but lower gelling
slurry than the Berkbent 163.
During the tests it was observed that the 10 min gel strength
of the Berkbent 163 slurries was easily broken – a sharp gel.
This is a desirable feature as it helps separation of suspended
soil solids; higher gel strength allows coarser particles to be
held in suspension, but a sharp gel enables easier release when
the slurry is sheared – for example, on the vibrating screens
and in the hydrocyclones of a slurry treatment plant. In con-
trast the Bentonil C2 is a lower gelling slurry and therefore has
a lesser tendency to suspend solids.
Figure 7. Example plots of volume of filtrate–square root time
the slope of volume–square root time plots. (Figure 7 shows
three examples of these plots. The plots for the other slurries
showed equally good fits.) This enables more precise compari-
son of results than a single volume measurement at 30 min,
especially as the single result can be affected by the brief spurt
loss that can occur at the start of a test and the volume of fluid
necessary to fill the small void beneath the filter paper and its
supporting screen in the test cell. This volume, which must be
part filled before any filtrate discharges, varies slightly from
test to test (independent of the sample being tested).

5.7 Fluid loss tests
Tests were carried out in the American Petroleum Institute
low-pressure test cell (FPS, 2000) and were undertaken at an
age of 5 days after mixing, by which time the slurries should
have achieved reasonably stable properties. To better reflect
pressure differentials in the pile bore, tests were carried out at
pressures of 250 and 350 kPa (water level in chalk aquifer
lowered due to construction activity nearby), as well as the
standard pressure of 689 kPa. The tests were continued to at
least 30 min and flow volumes measured on at least six
occasions over this time. The fluid loss was determined from
Results of all the fluid loss tests are presented in Table 7. From
the test results the following can be seen.
(a) Added chalk had effectively no impact on the fluid loss
or filter cake thickness.
(b) Berkbent 163 slurries show higher fluid losses than
Bentonil and have slightly thicker cakes, although it must
be noted that all cakes were thin and measurement of
cake thickness was difficult and of limited precision.
(c) The variation of filtration pressure between 250 and
689 kPa had a minimal impact on the fluid loss and filter

482
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
Volume 171 Issue GE6 ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.

Table 7. Fluid loss test results Table 8. Permeability and permittivity of chalk disc to London tap
water
30 min fluid Filter cake
Bentonite type loss: ml thickness: mm Pressure: kPa Permeability: m/s Permittivity: s−1

Test pressure: kPa 250 350 698 250 350 698 25 3·0  10−8 3·0  10−6
50 3·2  10−8 3·2  10−6
Bentonil C2 4% control 14·5 15·1 15·2 0·9 0·8 0·5 100 4·2  10−8 4·2  10−6
Bentonil C2 4% chalk 1 — 15·4 — — 0·8 — 250 6·5  10−8 6·5  10−6
Bentonil C2 5% control — 13·0 — — 1·1 —
Bentonil C2 5% chalk 1 — 13·0 — — 1·1 —
Berkbent 163 4% control 23·9 24·6 25·0 1·4 1·4 1·4
Berkbent 163 4% chalk 1 — 24·8 — — 1·4 — 60
Berkbent 163 5% control — 22·4 — — 1·5 —
Berkbent 163 5% chalk 1 — 22·4 — — 1·6 — 50

Volume of filtrate, V : ml
V = 3·6242t 0·5 + 0·9592
R2 = 0·9993
40

cake thickness – a marginal increase in filtrate volume

30
and a slight reduction in cake thickness for the 4%
Bentonil C2 slurry. 20

5.8 Test with a chalk disc and estimation of effects of
chalk on filter cake development
A key parameter for a filter cake is its permittivity (k/d) where
k is the cake permeability and d is its thickness at any time.
The permittivity of a cake is a measure of its conductance of
water. The reciprocal of permittivity is the resistance to flow,
that is the resistance to flow presented by a thickness d of
material of permeability k.
For the investigations, the permeability and permittivity of a
chalk disc were first determined. The disc was cut to 73 mm
dia.; the average thickness of the disc was 9·9 mm. The disc
was sealed into the American Petroleum Institute filter loss
cell with a clear silicone sealant (clear, so that the filling of the
annular space between the chalk disc and the wall of the
pressure cell could be checked). The permeability of the disc to
London tap water was determined at pressures of 25, 50, 100
and 250 kPa, as shown in Table 8. The permittivity of the
chalk disc is also given in Table 8.
The increase in permeability between 50 and 250 kPa suggests
that some leakage started to develop or accelerate as the
pressure was increased. The pressure therefore was not
increased beyond 250 kPa. However, as the permeability was
still only of the order 10−7 m/s at this pressure, it was assumed
that any slight leakage pathways could be sealed by bentonite
and this proved to be the case.
After completion of the water permeability tests, the filter cell
was filled with 4% Berkbent control slurry. The cell was pres-
surised at 250 kPa and the pressure maintained for 13 h.
The resulting volume of filtrate is plotted as a function of the
square root of time, see Figure 8. It can be seen that the
volume data follow a linear trend with the square root of
time – the same relationship as is shown by bentonite filter
cakes formed on filter paper.
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Square root time, t1/2: min1/2
Figure 8. Filtrate volume–square root time plot for chalk disc
From the data given in Table 7 it can be calculated that the
control 4% Berkbent 163 slurry achieved a permittivity of
6·5  10−7 s−1 (test pressure of 250 kPa) 14 s from the start of
cake formation. This permittivity would have continued to
drop with time as the filter cake developed in thickness.
Therefore, within 14 s of pressure application, a 4% Berkbent
163 slurry will have achieved a permittivity ten times less than
that of the chalk disc and so a flow resistance ten times greater
than that of the chalk disc (see Table 8 for the permittivity of
the chalk disc at a pressure of 250 kPa). It follows that beyond
about 14 s the resistance of the chalk disc will have had
minimal effect on the fluid loss.
The effect of in situ flow path length can be investigated by
considering different chalk thicknesses. A 1 m thickness of
chalk, for example, with a permeability of 6·5  10−8 m/s, will
have a permittivity of 6·5  10−8 s−1. From the fluid loss test
results, after about 23 min under pressure the 4% Berkbent 163
slurry will have a permittivity of 6·5  10−8 s−1 and by 39 h
this will have reduced to 6·5  10−9 s−1. A metre thickness of
chalk therefore could influence fluid loss from the pile bore up
to perhaps 39 h – although to a progressively diminishing
degree. Beyond about 39 h it would have minimal impact. It
should be noted that this effect is purely due to the build-up of
bentonite cake on the chalk and the time (39 h) is controlled
by the permeability of the chalk and the assumed thickness
(flow path length) relative to the permeability and thickness of
the cake as it develops.

483
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 171 Issue GE6
Table 9. Summary of brush characteristics during brush trials
Brush type Bristle diameter
Green garden brush 1 mm
Black garden brush 1·5 mm
Wire brush Approx. 0·3 mm (in 4–5 mm dia. clusters of bristles)
a
Based on approximately similar applied pressures – test carried out by the same person each time
5.9 Conclusion
It was concluded that both bentonites would perform ade-
quately as support fluids, but Berkbent 163 was preferred
because of the higher and sharper gel strength. The Berkbent
163 at 5% bentonite showed slightly lower fluid loss than its
4% counterpart but a marginally thicker filter cake. The 4%
concentration was chosen as the drillers were more familiar
with slurries at this concentration.
6. Brush trials on chalk cores
The preliminary test pile was to be constructed over 2 days,
which was expected to result in filter cake developing on the
pile shaft. The use of brushes to remove the filter cake on the
chalk shaft was considered and as such brush trials were
carried out on chalk cores at various depths to select the type
of brush that could potentially remove any filter cake but avoid
damaging the chalk. Trials were carried out on cores taken at
various depths over three consecutive days, with the chalk
samples submerged within the bentonite between testing dates.
The bentonite mixture that was used was bentonite slurry 4·5%
bentonite – previously de-sanded. The indentations caused by
the brushes were observed and measured. The characteristics
of the brushes used for the trials and the indentations caused
are summarised within Table 9. Although the characteristics of
green and black garden brushes in terms of bristle deflection
were very similar, the bristles of the black garden brush were
made of a harder plastic, and hence appeared to be stiffer than
the green garden brush.
On the basis of the results of brush testing it was evident that
the green and black garden brushes, described in Table 9,
caused very little damage or degradation to the chalk surface.
In contrast, the effects of brush tests using the wire brush
resulted in significant damage and degradation to the chalk
surface in the form of grooves. These grooves were typically
2–4 mm deep, but a maximum of 7 mm deep and there was a
risk that this degradation would result in chalk putty forming
and a reduced shaft resistance as a result. On the basis of these
results, a garden brush variety similar to the black brush was
considered to be the most suitable for the required cleaning of
the chalk bore of the preliminary test pile.
7. Discussion
The ground investigation information was used to develop
a detailed understanding of the chalk stratigraphy and its
engineering characteristics to inform the design of bored piles
484
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.
Bristle length: mm Typical bristle deflectiona: mm
90 10–20
110 10–20
22·5 3
founded in chalk. The development of the ground model
was aided by stratigraphical logging, which was carried out
by identifying pertinent marker bands within the chalk
stratum in accordance with the descriptions and relative
spacing of the features within published stratigraphic
columns by Ellison (2004) and Mortimore et al. (2011). The
interpretation of the marker beds was carried out through
collaborative logging between the ground investigation con-
tractor and the designer, which is considered to have
enhanced the results of the interpretation. The correlation of
marker beds and strata boundaries between boreholes ident-
ified a possible fault offset north of the proposed tower
structure.
The features of these marker beds and strata boundaries were
confirmed through examination of the results of downhole
optical and acoustic imagery and downhole geophysics. The
resistivity measured by the downhole geophysics recorded the
relative increase and decrease in intact dry density throughout
the member beds and divisions. A rapid decrease in resistivity
also indicated the presence of the relatively thick Shoreham
Marls at the boundary between the Seaford Chalk and the
underlying Lewes Nodular Chalk. The results of downhole
geophysics and stratigraphical logs compared well with the
results of classification tests and proved to be a valuable
resource in developing the ground model for the site.
Understanding the behaviour of the bentonite support fluid
and possible interaction with chalk was critical to the design
of the piles. Specialised laboratory tests were carried out on
high-quality core samples with two bentonite types commonly
used in the UK piling industry. The tests showed that overall
the coarse crushed chalk would not have any impact on the
bentonite slurry properties, although a build-up of finely dis-
persed chalk in a slurry can have physical effects leading to
more viscous fluids and thicker filter cakes. The Berkbent 163
slurries had markedly higher gel strengths which allow coarser
particles to be held in suspension and also increase in viscosity
with time. The Berkbent 163 slurries show higher fluid losses
than Bentonil C2 and have slightly thicker filter cakes,
although all the cakes were thin and measurement of cake
thickness was difficult and of limited precision. It was con-
cluded that both bentonites would perform adequately as
support fluids, but Berkbent 163 was preferred because of the
higher gel strength and its ability to release the solids easily
when sheared.
 Geotechnical Engineering
Volume 171 Issue GE6
A preliminary test pile was to be constructed over 2 days
which could result in thick filter cake development; therefore,
brush trials were carried out to select the suitable brush
required for cleaning the chalk bore (in effect zeroing the time
for further filter cake formation). The results of the prelimi-
nary pile test are discussed with part 2 of this paper
(Ganesharatnam et al., 2018).
Acknowledgements
The success of the ground investigation and testing was
achieved through collaboration between the contractor and
the engineer. Accordingly the authors wish to acknowledge
Fugro Engineering Services for the ground investigation and
Environmental Geotechnics for assisting with the specialist lab-
oratory testing and interpretation. The authors would also like
to thank the authors of Mortimore et al. (2011) for permission
to reproduce Figure 2.
REFERENCES
BGS (British Geological Survey) (2017) Web Map Services (WMS).
BGS Geology 50k. BGS, Nottingham, UK. See http://www.bgs.ac.
uk/data/services/dogmap50wms.html (accessed 02/11/2017).
Bristow CR, Mortimore RN and Wood CJ (1997) Lithostratigraphy for
mapping the Chalk of southern England. Proceedings of the
Geologists’ Association 109(4): 293–315.
BSI (2004) BS EN 1997-1:2004 and National Annex to
BS EN 1997-1:2004: Eurocode 7 – Geotechnical design –
part 1 general rules. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2007) BS EN 1997-2:2007 and National Annex to
BS EN 1997-2:2007: Eurocode 7 – Geotechnical design –
part 2 ground Investigation and testing. BSI, London, UK.
Burland JB and Lord JA (1970) The load–deformation behaviour of
Middle Chalk at Mundford, Norfolk: a comparison between
full-scale performance and in-situ and laboratory measurements.
In Proceedings of Conference on In-situ Investigations in Soils and
Rocks. British Geotechnical Society, London, UK, pp. 3–15.
Ellison RA (2004) Geology of London. Special Memoir for
Geological Sheets 256 (North London), 257 (Romford), 270
Downloaded by [ Jun Wang] on [03/12/18]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 1,
ground investigation
Taylor, Ganesharatnam, O’Leary et al.
(South London) and 271 (Dartford) (England and Wales).
BGS, Nottingham, UK.
FPS (Federation of Piling Specialists) (2000) Bentonite Support Fluids in
Civil Engineering. FPS, Bromley, UK.
Ganesharatnam L, O’Leary F, Morrison P, Kwan V and Thorp A (2018)
Large-diameter piles in chalk – part 2, design and construction.
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Geotechnical
Engineering 171(6): 486–501, https://doi.org/10.1680/
jgeen.17.00207.
Jefferis SA (2014) Grouts and Slurries in Doran, D. and Cather B.
Construction Materials Reference Book, 2nd edn. Routledge,
London, UK and New York, NY, USA.
Lam C and Jefferis SA (2018) Polymer Support Fluids in Civil
Engineering. ICE Publishing, London, UK.
Lord JA, Clayton CR and Mortimore RN (2002) CIRIA C574 Engineering
in Chalk. Ciria, London, UK.
Mortimore RN (1983) The stratigraphy and sedimentation of the
Turonian-Campanian in the Southern Province of England.
Zitteliana: Bayerische Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und
Historische Geologie München 10: 27–41.
Mortimore RN (1986) Stratigraphy of the Upper Cretaceous White
Chalk of Sussex. Proceedings Geologists’ Association 97(2):
97–139.
Mortimore R, Newman TG, Royce K, Scholes H and Lawrence U
(2011) Chalk: it’s stratigraphy, structure and engineering
geology in east London and the Thames Gateway.
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrology
44(4): 419–444.
Ulusay R and Hudson JA (2006) The Complete ISRM Suggested
Methods for Rock Characterization, Testing and Monitoring:
1974–2006. International Society for Rock Mechanics and Rock
Engineering (ISRM), Ankara, Turkey.
Wakeling TR (1970) A comparison of the results of standard site
investigations method against the results of a detailed
geotechnical investigation in middle chalk at Munford,
Norfolk. In Proceedings of Conference on In-situ Investigation
in Soils and Rocks. British Geotechnical Society, London, UK,
pp. 17–21.
Ward WH, Burland JB and Gallois RW (1968) Geotechnical assessment
of a site at Mundford Norfolk for a large proton accelerator.
Géotechnique 18(4): 399–431, https://doi.org/10.1680/
geot.1968.18.4.399.
How can you contribute?
To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the
editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be
forwarded to the author(s) for a reply and, if considered
appropriate by the editorial board, it will be published as
discussion in a future issue of the journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions from the
civil engineering profession (and allied disciplines).
Information about how to submit your paper online
is available at www.icevirtuallibrary.com/page/authors,
where you will also find detailed author guidelines.
485