"'

..v«1 Pressure Injected Footings

Standard Specification
1. Definition TABLE I Pressure Injected Footing Types, Capacities and Dimensions
A Pressure Injected Footing (PIF)
shall consist of an expanded base Type Recommended Drive Standard Drop- Energyper Nominaldiameter Nominal
formed by ramming zero-slump maximum tube batch hammer blow in base compacted diameter
concrete into the soil with impact workingload O.D. volume weight I injection zero-slump cased
concreteshaft* shaW*
pressure of up to (see Table 1) foot- Tons Inehes Cu.ft. Tons Ft.lbs. Inehes Inehes
pounds of energy per blow, and a
concrete or steel-and-concrete shaft Mini 50 12-3/4 2 1.5 60,000 NIA 10-5/8,11-1/8
designed to transmit the superstruc- Medium 100 16 5 2.5 100,000 17 12-1/4 to 14
ture load to the expanded base. Standard 200 21 5 3.5 140.000 22 16,17-5/8
2. Qualifications 250 22 5 3.5 23 19
Large 140,000
Installation of PIF shall be performed
Maxi 300 24 5 5.0 200,000 25 22
by a specialty contractor, hereinafter
called the Subcontractor, whose
qualifications as regards experience
. Uncased zero-slump concrete shafts, in which concrete is rammed out against the
soil, are conservatively assigned nominal diameter 1" greater than drive-tube. Uncased
in work of this type and scope,
suitability of equipment, competent
personnel and reputation shall be
.. high-slump concrete shafts are normally taken as equal in diameter to drive-tube.
Casing referred to here is corrugated steel shell, 01 no structural value. When steel
pipe is used, structural value is allowed i1 wall thickness exce~ds,Q..1'.',..resultingin
subject to the approval of the diameters somewhat less than those listed. . ,~.. :" .',
Architect. As a minimum, the Sub-
contractor shall submit sq~j.sf~qtory.. ".".,:.~._ _ ..!.i ,,',:' . _>-' . v.'.. f-I; ::..': .í: ~v' ..:,., >'.r<~ .~ ..,
evidence of succ~ssfulc~ÍTiple;~i9,n"ot ,;';;¡;A..~n{lanls:.:,: ,~,.-""';;'.:., ';;:":" ~. :: ,; _'[~::~~.2:Base:::At th:is.:depth, the
at least t.hree PIF mst~lIatlo~s com- AII work performed under this closure shall .1:>J3,-expe~I~~.and
an
para~le m scope to thls pr?ject. The Seetion shall conform to generally expanded base shall 5e formed by
grantmg of approval sh.al.I.lmp.ly no _" .'. acp,e,pteQ,engin.e.eriJ.l,9 and~q':lstn~c-;._,. ..., r~l"Qi.rg ~fJ.r9 ~lumPij:;oncrete into
acceptance of respons.!:>III.ty,.!::?y,the.
. . " :. ;tic;>n¡pr~¿tice.
Ar~~ltect for the Subcon~ractor ~i ..: . ,', J' ,. '.0;.-';. .:,
:<-."', .¡-,
L..', ."
,
.' ..;. .". ...,..,..thesdil~~th tfrdP-h~~~er blows
:'défivering {see Tabfe'I)'foot-pounds
ablllty to perform the wo~k. i .~> .,-, 0., " 5~.Basis of.:Contract "', ; ~i;' .":. of.energy. Retor.~ishatl{\¡)e kept both
3. Guarantee .' ,,. ,': '99.ntr~~t Sra,IJ~Cj!,bas~d.on.tlT~ I')ym~.. i. ~qq~e: vpluf!1~pf.c!ln<;~ete inject~d
The Subcontractor shall accept ber of PIF shown on the drawmgs, and of the number of blows reqUlred
entire responsibility for the perfo~- satisfactorilY.i~~1alledt9.. co~f.()rlT1.. '. "toiN~9t ;~c~ (~e~,_T~l?le1)cubic-foot
mance of the PIF under the workm~ tothedirffe.nsións'~hd'load'cap~cities";"battn ofconéret~.~TIie! process shall
loads. He shall guarantee that he wllI shown on the drawings or specified continue until the number of blows
repair or replace at his expen~e al.l. herein. Payment for satisfactory PIF required to inject the last batch of
structural damage caused by I.nablhty will be oo;.a.fixed 1t!tT)p swn,tlasis, concrete satisfies the formula here-
of the PIF to support the 'l:fpr,ktnq., .'',' w,ith no ~d¡us.ttí;lenff<?j;,[i(ly."ariation under. During injection of the Iast
loads satisfactorily. Confor~ance of.:, in aepth;-6r ih vc51Url"feiof ~p~nded batch, the height of concrete in the
the Subcontractor's work wlth the bases that may be reqOired'through- drive-tube shall not exceed 6 inches.
requirements of the Specification will out the site'inQrdertb aCt\(eve the BWH
not release him from liability for specified'rbad'caRf:iéity"at'all PIF L =~ X V2/3

unsatisfactory perf~rmance of the locations. ,', .:~,:<~ .;~.':. where L = working load in tons
PIF under the workmg loa?s. How- When a 10ad-testJ.s,r~qu.í{E:)d, B = average number of
ever, the Subcontractor wllI not be responsibility for thErprovisióh of a blows required to
liable for long-ter~ s~ttlement. successful test rests sol ely with the injec\1 cubic foot of
caused by consolldatlon of coheslve Subcontractor. No payment will be corícrete during in-
soil if such soil underlies the agre~d made for any load-test that fails to jection o; last batch
bearing stratum for t~e PIF; nor wllI satisfy the requirements of the load W = weight of drop-
the guarantee apply In the event of test specification. hammer in tons
(i) loading in excess of or of a type. H = height of drop in feet
differing from that shown in contract 6.Installatl.o~ , V = total volume 01con-
plans
ference andwhether
specifications
J.
or (ii)
of natural inter-
or human 6.1 Dnvmg: A heavy steel
. of at least (see Table
tube, .
dnve-
. 1)outside cre t e I.n the .
d t h I1b d d th expan d ed b ase, m
origin, with the vertical or lateral lame er, s a e provl e .WI a cubic feet
support provided to the PIF by the concrete, gravel or other sUltable end K t t (N t A)
subsoil. closure to seal off water and soil and =. ~ cons an o ~
The Subcontractor's guarantee shall be driven int~ the gro~nd to If.the speclfled energy reqUlre-
shall be covered by Product Liability reach proper beanng matenal. At the ment IS not met at the depth selec~ed,
Insurance with limits of not less than Subcontractor's discretion, the t~e Subcontractor shall, at ~o addl-
$20,000,000, placed with an insurance driving proce~s ~ay be as.si~ted by tlonal cost to the Owner, dnve
company satisfactory to the Archi- pre-bonng or jettlng. The dnve-~u~e through th~ ~xp~nded ba~e and
tect. Certificates attesting to such shall penetrate to such depth wlt~m repeat the mject~on proced~re at
coverage shall be submitted to the the bearing stratum as will be SUlt- su~h depth as ":'111 enable hlm to
Architect on request. able for forming the expanded base. satlsfy the reqUlrements.

2

6.3 Shaft: (Separateparagraphs
6.3a ,6.3b and 6.3c are provided,
coveringthe shaft proceduresin most
commonuse.Deletethose which do
not apply.)
6.3a Uncased zero-slump con-
crete shaft: Upon completion of the
expanded base, the concrete shaft
shall be made by compacting charges
of zero-slump concrete, not exceed-
ing 5 cubic feet each, with drop-
hammer blows of at least 20,000
foot-pounds, as the drive-tube is
withdrawn in short steps. During
shaft construction the tip of the
drive-tube shall at all times be below
the level of concrete within the tu be.
Concreting shaU.terminate at or
above the cut-off elevation shown on
the plans. The shaft head shall be
trimmed, after e~cavation, to remove
excess concrete and indentation
caused by the drop-hammer, provid-
ing a level surface at correct cut-off
elevation.
6.3b Uncflsed high-slump con-
crete shaft: Pnor to completion of the
expanded base, a full-Iength reinforc-
ing steel cage'incorporating as a . 8. Tolerances
minimum four #5 longitudinal bars
(Note B) shall b~ inserted in the
drive-tube and anchored in the base.
The drive-tube shall then be filled to
ground surface with concrete of 8 to
10-inch slump and the tu be with-
drawn, concrete being recharged as
needed to ensure that its final level
shall be at or above cut-off elevation.
Alternatively, the concrete may be
placed at 4 to 6-inch slump and shall
be liquefied by application of external
power vibration to the drive-tube as
it is withdrawn. No PIF shall be
installed less than 9 feet center-to-
center from a completed high-slump
shaft until 24 hours have elapsed.
6.3c Cased shaft: Upon com-
pletion of the expanded base, a steel
shell or pipe of (see Table 1)diameter
shall be inserted in the drive-tube,
shall besecurely connected to the
expanded base and shall be sealed
with a concrete plug so as to exclude
water and soil. The drive-tube shall
then be withdrawn. Any annular
space remaining around the shell or
pipe shall be filled with sand to
assure lateral support. The shell or
pipe shall be filled, to the cut-off
elevation shown on the plans, with
concrete 01 4 to 6-inch slump. Prior
to filling with concrete all shafts shall
:l
be inspected for cleanliness and
shape, and water or other foreign
material removed to the approval of
the Architect. Shell or pipe that is
excessively distorted shall be
replaced at noadditional cost to the
Owner. No PIFs shall be installed less
than 9 feet center-to-center from a
freshly-filled cased shaft until 24
hours have elapsed.
7. Materials
Concrete for PIF shall be propor-
tioned to aUain p.s.i
strength at 28 days, or times
the maximum working stress, which-
ever is less.
Steel shell or pipe for cased shafts
shall be of sufficient thickness and
strength to resist all soil or hydro-
static pressures to which it may be
exposed prior to filling with concrete.
Pipe material, if considered as con-
tributing structural value to the shaft,
shall conform to ASTM Sp~cification
A-252.
Reinforcing steel shall conform to
ASTM Specification A-615
grade_.
Pressure Injected Footings in clusters
shall be installed within 3 inches of
plan position. Single PIF shall be
installed with 1-1/2 inches of plan
positiol). Variation from the plumb or
specified baUer shall not exceed
5 per cent.
9. Records
A complete and accurate record of
all Pressure Injected Footings shall
be maintained by the Subcontractor.
The record shall show reference
number, type, diameter and length of
shaft, depth at which expanded base
was formed, volume per batch and
total volume of concrete in base, and
number and magnitude of blows
required to inject the last batch of
base concrete.
Note A: K is normally assigned a value
developed from experience in similar
soils (see Table 11,page 7). Alternatively,
K may be evaluated by load test on any
particular site (see Dynamic Formula
discussion, page 7).
Note B: This Standard Specification
addresses PIF designed for compression
load only. Nominal reinforcing is an
integral part of the uncased high-slump
shaft installation procedure. rt is assigned
no structural value in a corTipression PIF
and is thus not subject to minimum-area
Code requirements.
2.1/Fr-1
&RAN<I
Structural Design
The shaft of a PIF can be constructed
in a variety of ways. It can be
made with uncased zero-slump
concrete compacted by drop-ham-
mer, with uncased high-slump
concrete, with a concrete-filled steel
shell, with a concrete-filled steel
pipe, with a precast concrete mem-
ber, or with a steel H-section. Space
limitations restrict this discussion
to only the most frequently used
types which are: thecompacted
zero-slump, plain or reinforced,
uncased concrete shaft and the steel
shell filled with plain or reinforced
concrete, referred to hereafter as
the cased shaft.
Choice 01 Type 01 Shalt
Which type of shaft should be used?
This question is not easy to answer
since so many variables are in-
volved. First, however, the type of
loading must be considered. PIFs
can be designed to carry compres-
sion load, tension load, shear load,
or some combination of all three.
For compression loading, any of
t~e types of shafts mentioned can
be used. If the loads are such that
one PIF can be used to support a
column, then compacted zero-slump
concrete shafts should normally be
selected because the concrete is
rammed out of the drive-tube against
the surrounding soil, providing
significant lateral support to the
shaft. Because of this unique feature,
many codes and engineering practice
in general recognize that a single
PIF with a shaft made in this manner
can be used to support a column
without any lateral bracing.
Another factor in the selection of
PIF type is length. As a rule, when
PIFs are longer than 30 feet, cased
shafts are more economical than
compacted concrete shafts. Finally,
the decision may be dictated by the
soil environment. A deep.deposit of
soft organic material, for example,
would rule out the compacted-
concrete method which requires
beUer lateral resistance to the com-
pacting blows than suchsoil offers;
here the cased shaft would be
chosen, presenting the further ad-
vantage that its method of installa-
tion minimizesnegative friction.
.wAN<1Pressure Injected Footings
Structural Design
If tension loading is present,
the most frequently used shaft is the
uncased compacted zero-slump
concrete type, with a steel reinforc-
ing cage extending into the base of
the PIF. The uncased high-slump
concrete procedure may be used
where depth and poor soil con di-
tions so indicate. In special situa-
tions, tension PIF can be provided
with cased shafts.
When shear loading is present,
the most effective shaft to use is
again the compacted zero-slump
concrete type because the proce-
dure employed to make these shafts
ensures the development of maxi-
mum lateral soil pressures. For
significant shear, the upper part of
the shaft is reinforced. Shafts made
in this fashion have safely been
designed for shear loads of 40 kips.
Alternatively, of course, PIFs can be
installed on a batter to resist the
shear loads. However, a design
emp!oying battered PIFs is usually
more costly than a solution using
PIFs with plumb reinforced shafts.
4
then DESIGN FOR COMPRESSION LOAD
AII codes permit piles to bedesigned as short columns
except for situations where the piles extend above
ground surface or where the surrounding upper soils
are so fluid as to offer no lateral support to the piles.
Pressure Injected Footings (PIFs) are rarely used in such
situations and therefore this discussion will be concerned
with the design of PIFs as short columns only.
For the case of compression loading, structural con-
siderations do not mandate steel reinforcement. It is
recommended that ACI Standard 322-72, "Building Code
Requirements for Structural Plain Concrete" be followed.
The strength design (ultimate strength) method is pre-
ferred, in keeping with ACI Standard 318-77. An example
follows:
a) Standard uncased compacted concrete shaft:
given: Required service or working load of
PIF = 400 kips
Average load factor = 1.55
Shaft diameter = 22 inches
Ac = 380 sq. ins.
From code, permissible factored
stress = 0.60 fe'
Therefore: 1.55 X 400,000 = 0.60fe'
380
fe'= 1.55X 400,000 = 2720psi
380 X 0.60
Many Codes still mandate worki.ng stress design for
piles loaded in compression, the maximum permissible
working stress (fe) being some percentage of the ultimate
strength (fe') of the concrete at 28 days.
BOCA and the Southern Building Code, for example,
permit fe in the range of 0.33 fe' to 0.40 fe', depending on
thickness of casing, etc.
A working stress approach to the above example results in:
400,000 = 0.33 fe' X 380
fe' = 3,160 p.s.i.
b) Standard cased shaft:
Strength design
Required working load of PIF = 400 kips
Average load factor = 1.55
O.D. of corrugated steel shaft casing* = 175/0inches
Ae = 243 sq. ins-.
From code, permissible factored stress = 0.60 fe'
Therefore, 1.55 X 400,000 - O60 f '
243 . e
f'e = 4252 psi
Alternatively, using Working stress design
400,000 = 0.33 fe' X 243
fe' = 4,988 psi
* No structural value assigned-to steel shell.
 2.1/Fr-1

DESIGN FOR TENSION LOAD

The PIF is a highly efficient tension unit because of its
geometry. But to capitalize on the obviously high
pull-out resistance of the expanded base, the PIF shaft
must be sufficiently strong structurally to transfer the
pull-out load to the base. In designing the shaft for a
tension load, the concrete is ignored and the area of
steel reinforcing bars required is computed.

For example:
'Required tension load = 120 kips per PIF
Use grade60 steel, f1 = 60,000 p.s.i.
Average load factor = 1.55
Strength reduction factor = 0.90 (ACI 318-77)
1.55 x 120,000 = 0.90 x 60,000 x A.
A. = 3.44.sq. ins.
Use 6 #7 bars = 3.60 sq. ins.

DESIGN FOR SHEAR LOAD

Although battered PIFs can be inst~lIed to carry shear Given: minimum compression load while maximum
load axially, the preferred (because less costly) method shear load acts = 200 kips
is to design the PIF shaft to carry the shear load in V = 20 kips
bending. Both the structural and the geotechnical engi-
neering disciplines are needed to do so. Numerous PIF diameter = 22 inches, fixed head condition
studies have been made regarding the interaction of soil fe' = 4000 psi
and lateral deflection of a pile. Lyman C. Reese and
Hudson Matlock have published design criteria for this f1 = 60,000 psi
problem in a paper entitled "Non-Dimensional Solutions V
E = 57,000 X 4000 = 3,605,000 psi
for Laterally Loaded Piles with Soil Modulus Assumed soil is a medium dense sand below water
Proportional to Depth". Experience with this analysis is table, n = 30
excellent and its use is recommended. The .following
design procedure is a simplification of the solution pre-
sented by Reese and Matlock: MM = AxVx (~) l/S

Mm = maximum bending-moment
= 1.00 x 20 x (3,605X ~;85 x 114) l/S
V = shear applied to PIF at ground surface = 1346 in-kips
E = modulus of elasticity of concrete in psi load factor on shear force = 1.7
I = moment of inertia of PIF cross-section in and on compression force = 1.4
inches4 eccentricity = e = 1.7 x 1346 = 8.2 inches
n = modulus of subgrade reaction of soil in pci 1.4 x 200
A = dimensionless constant From CRSI Handbook (1978), 1% steel would be suffi-
cienl. Thus a cage of 6-#7 bars would be adequate. For
A shear loads, unless a separate computation is made, the
Top '01 PIF Condition
cage should have a length of 60% of the PIF length but
Fixed Head 1]50 not less than 10 feet nor more than 25 feel. Below the
Free Head 0.78 bottom of the cage, the shaft must be checked to see
that the maximum comp.ression load can be carried by
Soil Condition the plain concrete.
'Typical n Values
medium dense sand. above water table 50
dense sand above water table 100
medium dense sand below water table 30
dense sand below water table 60
soft clay 4
mediumclay 13
hard clay 25
This table does not inelude loose sand, beeause sueh material
wlll be densified by the PIF installation proeess.
5
r

..v«1 Pressure Injected Footings

Bearing Capacity
Under this heading the transfer of end-bearing, the normal interpreta- are proportional to each other. The
load from the expanded PIF base to tion applied to the PIF. If it is desired capacity of the foundation unit is
the soil is examined. The problem to consider shaft friction it must be also, of course, a function of the size
can be approached from the dynamic computed statically. of the bearing area. These variables
or the static viewpoint and preferably Dynamic Formula: In the manufac- are brought together in the simple,
from both. In practice, substantially ture of the expanded base of a PIF, rational and workable formula .
all PIF installations are controlled in the bearing capacity of the soil must
the field by a dynamic formula, the be overcome by the dynamic energy ~
L = S H X Y2/3
key clause in the Specification; a used to ram zero-slump concrete -in which the constant K provides
static analysis is employed to ensure into the soil. The energy required is empirically for such other variables
that the overall concept is geo- thus a measure of the ultimate ca- as type of soil, energy losses, etc.
technically sound. Note that the pacity of the soil; in fact both logic Derivation of the formula is presented
dynamic approach assumes pure and experience indicate that they below.

Proof
GAOI,IHD
SOR'ACE\
--.
I Lu

energy = force x distance

from Figure 1: dE = F x dr

" E r2 r2

f dE = f
rl
F x dr = f rl
Pll X 4 'Ir r2 x dr

Pu E=pu (: 'lrr23-; 'lrr13)

= Pu (V'2 - V'l)
but E = e x W x H x n

(1) niEORETICAL DYNAMIC (2)ACTUAL OYNAMIC CO~ITION (3) ACTUAL STATIC CONDITION
then p¡. (V'2 - V'l) = e x W x H x n
CONDI1lON n
FIGURE1 and Pu= e x W x H x \1,2- V' 1
. n
Smce ' s,
Symbols
V 2 - v ,1 =
lu = ultimate bearing capacity of PIF base
then Pu= e x W x H x S'
Lu = PII X 'Ir r2
Lw = working load allowed (service load) on base
= e x W x H x S' X 'Ir r2
Pu = ultimate unit bearing capacity of soil surrounding
the base 3fE
W = weight of drop-hammer but'lr r2 = .v 16 x (V')2/3
H = height through which drop-hammer falls
y = bulk volume of concrete in base 3rfi.
S = number of blows of weight W falling distance H that
then lu = e x W x H x s' X.v 16 x (V')2/3
is needed to ram a unit volume ot bulk concrete
into the base since Y'':::..0.9Y
4 and B' :::::.B ...;.-
0.9
y' = sameas Y but for compacted concrete ="3 'Ir r
and Lw = LlI ...;.-
S
S' = same as Sbut for compacted concrete
e = fraction of the energy of the blow, W x H, available
to ram the concrete into the soil then Lw = e x (0.9)2/3 xo:gx
1 ~ 169; x W x H x Sx V2/3
S
r = radius of the base
W x H x S X Y2f3
A, = surface area of the base = 4 'Ir r2 or Lw= --

S = factor of safety = lu ...;.--lw

K = a dimensionless constant K in the formula can be assigned a value selected from
F = a force Table 1I._Thevalues in the table have been determined
from a study of numerous load-tests. On average, the
n = number of blows of W x H energy
use of these values wiU yield a factor of safety of about
E = energy 3 againstshear failure of the soil supporting the PIF base.
6
 2.1/Fr-1

~I
The values of K are different for a compacted concrete On major projects, a load-test is a common require-
shaft than for a cased shaft. When a compacted concrete ment. The value of K should lhen, of course, be deter-
shaft is made, the concrete in the shaft is rammed mined for each site from its own load-test. For example,
against the surrounding soil creating major lateral pres- suppose the test proves a service load of 400 kips for
sures. When a cased shaft is made, these lateral pressures the PIF. Suppose also that the test data shows that the
are virtually absent. The incipient failure zone in the soil total volume of bulk concrete in the base of the test PIF
surrounding the base arches back to the shaft of the PIF is 20 cf and that 45 blows of a 7000 lb. drop hammer
and the presence or absence of the lateral pressures falling 20 feet were required to ram the last 5 cf of bulk
from the shaft on this failure zone significantly affects concrete into the base.
the resisting shear stress es and strains developed on the From the above data:
failure plane. The greater the lateral pressure, the greater
is the resisting shear and the lesser the resulting strain. Lw = 400 kips
Lower values of K for PIFs with compacted concrete W = 7 kips
shafts reflect this phenomenon. H = 20 feet
T ABLE 11
45
B = 5" = 9 blows average per cu. ft. for
RecommendedK last 5 cu. ft.
SoilDescription withCompactedRecommended K and V = 20 cf
ConcreteShaft withCasedShaft
gravel 9 12 Substituting the above data into the formula, K can be
computed:
medium to coarsesand 11 14
B x W x H X V2/3
fineto mediumsand 14 18 K
Lw
coarsesand 18 23 9 x 7 x 20 X 202/3
medium sand 22 28 =
400
finesand 27 35 =23.3
veryfinesand 32 40
Therefore, the general formula for all PIFs on this job is:
siltymedium to coarsesand 14 .18
B x W x H X V2/3
siltyfineto medium sand 17 22 23.3
siltyfinesand 24 30
If, as is usually the case, all PIFs are to be installed to the
residualso!!common U.S. 600but1:
to Southeast 18. 1800 same service load of 400 kips and the same W and H
N N but<j:50.
are to be used throughout the job,
finesandwith"limerock"fragments 18 25
and/orshells B x 7 x 20 X V2/3
then 400
glacialtill, granularmatrix 20 27 23.3
glacialtill, claymatrix 30 40 and B x V2/3 = 66.6
bedrock 10 10 Using this relationship, a table of minimum B values can
.N = number of blows from Standard Penetration Test be determined for the job:
Vin cf Min.Brequiredpercf Min.Brequiredfor last5cf
5(PIug) Notapplicable Notapplicable
10 15 75
15 11 55
20 9 45
25 8 40
cte.
During the course of the work the job inspector must
satisfy himself that W and H remain the same, that the
size of the bucket is not changed, and that for the vari-
ous sizes of bases installed, the corresponding minimum
required blows are achieved. For example, if after ram-
ming 15 cf into the base, the blow count on the last 5 cf
is less than 55, then another 5 cf must be added. If that
blow count does not exceed 45, then still another 5 cf
must be added, and so on.
Tbe nomograph following (Figure 2) is a general
solution of the formula. It can be easily used to determine
K from the load-test and to determine the required B
values for given V values.
7

I\¡¡¡_
 LEGEND B = NUMBER OF BLOWS TO INJECT LAST UNIT OF VOLUME B W H . V 2/3
o o

Lw =
V = TOTAL BULK VOLUME OF BASE CONCRETE K
W.H = WEIGHT OF DROP HAMMER X HEIGHT OF FALLo
Lw = WORKING LOAD ALLOWED (SERVICE LOAD) ON BASE NOTE: ONLY USE COMBINATIONS OF GRAPHS
K= DIMENSIONLESS CONSTANT. WITHTHESAMESYMBOLS
(. . .)

B V 2/3
o .w..:J:L K. Lw Lw JL
400 -:1 5-, r- 2,000 C-5O
50
300 -1 . b-40
10
3,000
250

fn 2 200 20 4,000 , r30 25

C) ['00200
e 30
;: 5,000 1-20
o 150 40 300
o 3
u.. 50 6,000
125 400

-
"C
el)
() 4
-V 100
70
8,000
500
600
15

-!
'-eel) 5 70
50
90
80
100

150
110,000 l:- 1,000 IO

0 'O
Q)
6
7
30
70
60 .
t=.... 1,500 8

.
0 :::1
20
el) c:
8 200j
300 ",000
... c: 50
Q. o 9 6
I 10
10
40 -j 20,000 1-5
-
>-
5
'u
ea 4
D.
ea 15 301 30,000
O
QC'\I
2J
. 25

.
'--3

.. ..
e w
.C a:
ea :) 20.
20J [ 40,000
Q) CJ
m ¡¡: IX)
 -
2.1/Fr-1

~I
Static Analysis (Method 1) Static Analysis (Method 2)
This method utilizes standard bearing capacity theory This much simpler method is used in cases where
adapted to deep circular footings. Bearing capacity "presumptive bearing capacities" are mandated by
factors have been developed by several authorities to applicable building codeso It follows procedures pre-
simplify the complex equations. Application to PIF, how- sented in the Massachusetts Code, New York Code and
ever, is complicated by the necessity of allowing for the National Building Code. It can be helpful in analyzing
effects of compaction on the soil, especially the situations where weaker soil such as soft clay underlies
increase in friction angle rf> to which all bearing capacity the PIF bearing stratum.
equations are extremely sensitive. A simple example This approach ignores the volume of concrete in-
follows: jected in the expanded base. It considers that after the
GROUND SURFACE base has been "forged" to the specified number of high-
energy blows per unit of voJume, the material within the
frustrum of a cone, extending from bottom of shaft to 6
feet below, has been so compacted as to be incompres-
sibJe. In effect, a composite footing 6 feet deep has
been created.
It is assumed that the soil at the 6 ft. level is un-
...
...J
Q. changed, a very conservative assumption since it is
'"
.. known that in granular soil compaction extends 3 to 6
x
.... base diameters below the base. 10 feet is a more realistic
;!;
o
...
and adequately conservative depth. The Massachusetts
'"
::> Code indeed recognizes this fact by stating in its seismic
'"
'"
.. ---' LTO= BEARING STRATUM section that "For Pressure Injected Footings, the 10 foot
o!!! thickness of soil immediately below the bottom of the
drive shaft shall not be considered subject to
liquefaction. "
Nevertheless, having referred to the above Codes,
it is proper that the example hereunder follow their
6-foot ruJe:

GROUND SURFACE

Assume VoJume of expanded base = 10 ft.3

Conservatively, assume true sphere .'.

Dlameter
. = ~ -:;--
6 x 10 = 2.67'
Effective bearing area = 7r x 4.222/4 = 14 ft.2
Assume depth to bearing plane = 15'
Conservatively, assume water at surface :. consider only
submerged weight of soil
Effective overburden pressure
p = 15 x (110-62.4) = 713 psf
Friction angle of soil after forming base = 40., due to
compactive effect of base
.9
-..
Bearing capacity factor Nq = 140 (reference below)
Ultimate bearing capacity = Nq x A x p
= 140 x 14 x 713 lbs.
= 1396 kips
Proposed maximum working (oad = 400 kips

Factor of safety against shear failure = ~30906

= 3.5
Note: A factor of safety of 3 is recommendedwith this analysis.
Reference:"Load bearing Capacity and Deformationof Piled Given: Bearing area = 'TTx 92/4.= 63.5 ft.2
Foundations," by V. Berezantzev,V. Kristoforov, and V. Golubkov, "Presumptive bearing capacity" for medium sand
Proceedings5th International Conferenceon S.M. and F.E., at this depth = 8 KSF by Code :. Allowable
Paris, 1961. (oad on single PIF = 63.5 x 8
For an adaptation of general bearing capacity theory specifically = 508 kips
to PIF,the reader is referred to "Compaction of Sandsand
Bearing Capacity of Piles" by G. G. Meyerhof,Proceedings Note: Factors of safety against shear failure are already
ASCE,1959, Vol. 85, No. SM6. provided for in code-ordained "presumptive bearing capacities".
9

)
~I Pressure Injected Footings

BearingCapacity-continued
Pressure Injected Footings in Tension
The geometry of the PIF makes it obviously advantageous
as an uplift or tension unit. Determination of ultimate uplift
resistance is a complex problem in soil mechanics: one
simplified approach, iIIustrated below, equates ultimate
capacity to the weight of the cone of soil above the base,
the sides of the cone assumed to be at 30° to the
vertical in granular material.

FINISHED FLOOR

AREA AT TH IS LEVEL = A2
TOP OF CAP

MISCELLANEOU8 FILL
BOTTOM OF CAP
~ DESIGN G.W.L.

80FT CLAY
REINFORCING CAGE

SAND

"SUBI HI

RE1NFORCING CAGE
ANCHORED IN BASE

Groups ofPIF's are similarly analyzed but due to over-
lapping of "cones" the efficiency is reduced. Normally
it is assumed that the PIFs mobilize the entire mass of
soil within the group, plus that within the pyramidal
configuration outside the group.
The above method, while simplistic, is consorvative,
especially at relatively shallow depths. A factor of safety
of 1.5 is usually applied to establish working tension load.
10
At greater depths, it is advisableto examine shear
failure around the perimeter of the PIF or group of PIFs.
Shear strength values are established for the various
strata and applied to the corresponding surface of the
vertical cylinder or prism mobilized by the base or bases.
A suitable factor of safety is then taken to arrive at
design capacity.
 2.1/Fr-1

..vK1
Normal
Clearance Requirements of
Franki Driving Rig

A
A

A=3'-0"
8=6'-0"
C=30'-0"

~~
.wAN<1 Pressure Injected Footings

Reinforcing
Pressure Injected Footings are never REINFORCING BAR
1/4" ~ SPIRAL TIE
reinforced where compression loads
only are to be resisted, which is the
normal case. Reinforcing can,
however, be provided where moment,
shear or tension conditions so
dictate.
In cased-shaft PIFs the shaft
concrete is placed at 4 to 6~inch
slump after the driving machine has PLAN
left. Thus, if it is desired to reinforce
the shaft, the steel cage can be
designed and detailed in the
standard manner. Bends or hooks at
the top must be avoided where cut- WRAP TlE 2 TO 3 TI MES
off elevation is well below working
grade. TOP OF P.I.F.
Cased shafts are usually reinforced
for shear only. Their use for tension
resistance is confined to special
situations, beyond the scope of this
note.
Significant moment, shear or ORIVE 1/4" ~ SPIRAL TIE
tension usually demand the uncased TUBE y
compacted zero-slump concrete 0.0.
shaft PIF. For this type of shaft, the 1--
16" 13.5" :5
cage design must satisfy certain en
requi rements. 20.5" "'7.5" o
For tension PIFs, the reinforcing 1--,
:J:
cage is placed inside the drive-tube 21" 18.5" 1--
<!)
before the base is completed so that Z
LLI
the cage will be anchored in the 22" 19.5" -1 6"-8" PITCH
base. For PIFs required to resíst
shear loads but not tension loads, 24" 20.5"
the cage is placed inside the drive- REINFORCING BAR
tube at the appropriate depth below
the top of the PIF as the shaft is
being made. In both cases, the zero-
slump concrete is rammed out of the WRAP TIE 2 TO 3 TIMES
end of the drive-tube through the
cage and against the surrounding
soil. In order for the concrete to be
rammed out through the cage
effectively, the space between the
individuallongitudinal reinforcing
bars and the encircling 114inch
diameter spiral binding must not be SECTION
so small as to impede the ejection
of the concrete. From experience DETAlL OF REINFORCING CAGE
over many years, it has been learned
what this limit is. The outside of the
spiral (marked y on Figure 1) should should be consulted in the design Extreme cases, where the number
be about 112inch less than the inside stage as to proper combination of of longitudinal bars needed exceeds
diameter of the drive-tube; pitch of cage size and drive-tube. 8, require the uncased high-slump
the spiral binding should be 6 to 8 The bars at the top of the cage concrete shaft procedure, in which
inches. The number and size of the must be straight; they cannot be the fluidity of the concrete allows
bars have limits which are dictated hooked or bent out or in because bars to be spaced as in normal
by the size of the drive-tube.as well the cage must be inserted in the reinforced concrete. This shaft
as by stress considerations. In drive tube and the drop-hammer procedure is usually more expensive,
general, however, the number of must be inserted in the cage. Finally, unless it is also indicated by other
longitudinal bars should not be less the bars at the bottom of thecage considerations, such as depth or
than 5 nor more than 8 and the size should be bent only if it is intended soil conditions.
of the bars should not be smaller to anchor the cage in the base of
than #5 nor greater than #9. Franki the PIF.
12
 2.1/Fr-1

..v«1
Typical Details at Head of
Single Pressure Injected Footing

I~ --:~\
~/t¡
" ,~
I

~(¡\tH
'-
~/
. J
::

~
I
~

PLAN PLAN

ANCHOR BOLTS

¡ANCHOR BOLTS
DOWELS

GRADE BEAM
POURED MONO'-
LlTHIC WITH
PILASTER

DOWELS DOWELS

. 'GRADE' BEAM

EXT E RIO R COLU MN ~NTERIOR COL.UMN

;TI:;:"!:...o
..1 :1]:1

DOWELS

GRADE BEAM
WITH COLUMN OVER
13