10.

9  Drilled Shafts in Clay: Load-Bearing Capacity  529

Hence,
Qultsnetd 5 qpr Ap 1 ofi p DLi 5 2582 1 1449.4 5 4031.4 kN

Part b
We have
Allowable settlement 12
5 5 0.12 5 1.2%
Ds s1.0ds1000d

The trend line in Figure 10.13a shows that, for a normalized settlement of 1.2%, the
normalized load is about 0.8. Thus, the side-load transfer is s0.8ds1449.4d < 1160 kN.
Similarly,

Allowable settlement 12
5 5 0.008 5 0.8%
Db s1.5ds1000d

The trend line shown in Figure 10.11 indicates that, for a normalized settlement
of 0.8%, the normalized base load is 0.235. So the base load is s0.235ds2582d 5
606.77 kN. Hence, the total load is
Q 5 1160 1 606.77 < 1767 kN  ■

10.9 Drilled Shafts in Clay: Load-Bearing Capacity

For saturated clays with f 5 0, the bearing capacity factor Nq in Eq. (10.4) is equal to
unity. Thus, for this case,

Qpsnetd < Apcu Nc Fcs Fcd Fcc (10.32)

where cu 5 undrained cohesion.

Assuming that L ù 3Db , we can rewrite Eq. (10.32) as

Qpsnetd 5 Apcu N *c (10.33)

1 2
L
where N *c 5 Nc Fcs Fcd Fcc 5 1.33[ sln Ird 1 1] in which for . 3 Ir 5 soil rigidity
Db
index. (10.34)
The soil rigidity index was defined in Eq. (10.11). For f 5 0,

Es
Ir 5 (10.35)
3cu

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 530  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Table 10.4  Approximate Variation of Esy3cu

with N *c and cuypa (Based on data from Reese
and O’Neill, 1999)

cuypa Esy3cu Nc*

0.25 50 6.5
0.5 150 8.0
$1.0 250–300 9.0

O’Neill and Reese (1999) provided an approximate relationship between cu and

Es y3cu . This is summarized in Table 10.4. For all practical purposes, if cuypa is equal
to or greater than unity spa 5 atmospheric pressure < 100 kN/m2 or 2000 lb/ft2d, then the
magnitude of N *c can be taken to be 9.
For LyDb , 3 (O’Neill and Reese, 1999),

Qpsnetd 5 Ap 523 31 1 16 1DL 246c N *(10.36)

b
u c

Experiments by Whitaker and Cooke (1966) showed that, for belled shafts, the full
value of N *c 5 9 is realized with a base movement of about 10 to 15% of Db . Similarly,
for straight shafts sDb 5 Dsd, the full value of N *c 5 9 is obtained with a base movement
of about 20% of Db .
The expression for the skin resistance of drilled shafts in clay is similar to
Eq. (9.59), or

L5L1
Qs 5 o a*c p DL
L50
u (10.37)

Kulhawy and Jackson (1989) reported the field-test result of 106 straight drilled
shafts—65 in uplift and 41 in compression. The best correlation obtained from the
results is

1 c 2 < 1
pa
a* 5 0.21 1 0.25 (10.38)
u

where pa 5 atmospheric pressure < 100 kN/m2 s<2000 lb/ft2d.

So, conservatively, we may assume that

a* 5 0.4 (10.39)

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.10  Load-Bearing Capacity Based on Settlement  531

10.10 Load-Bearing Capacity Based on Settlement

Reese and O’Neill (1989) suggested a procedure for estimating the ultimate and allow-
able (based on settlement) bearing capacities for drilled shafts in clay. According to this
procedure, we can use Eq. (10.25) for the net ultimate load, or
n
Qultsnetd 5 o f p DL 1 q A
i51
i i p p

The unit skin friction resistance can be given as

fi 5 a*i cusid (10.40)

The following values are recommended for a i*:

a i* 5 0 for the top 1.5 m (5 ft) and bottom 1 diameter, Ds, of the drilled shaft. (Note: If
Db . Ds , then a* 5 0 for 1 diameter above the top of the bell and for the periph-
eral area of the bell itself.)
a*i 5 0.55 elsewhere.
The expression for qp (point load per unit area) can be given as

1 2 # 9c
L
qp 5 6cub 1 1 0.2 ub # 40pa (10.41)
Db

where
cub 5 average undrained cohesion within a vertical distance of 2Db below the base
pa 5 atmospheric pressure
If Db is large, excessive settlement will occur at the ultimate load per unit area, qp,
as given by Eq. (10.41). Thus, for Db . 1.91 m (75 in.), qp may be replaced by

qpr 5 Fr qp (10.42)

where
2.5
Fr 5 # 1 (10.43)
c1Db 1 c2
The relations for c1 and c2 along with the unit of Db in the SI and English systems
are given in Table 10.5.
Figures 10.16 and 10.17 may now be used to evaluate the allowable ­load-bearing
capacity, based on settlement. (Note that the ultimate bearing capacity in Figure 10.16 is
qp , not qpr .) To do so,

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 532  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Table 10.5  Relationships for c1 and c2

Item SI English

c1 c1 5 2.78 3 1024 1 8.26 3 1025 1 DL 2 # 5.9 3 10

b
24
c1 5 0.0071 1 0.0021 1 DL 2 # 0.015
b
c2 c2 5 0.065[cubskN/m2d]0.5 c2 5 0.45[cubskip/ft2d]0.5
     s0.5 # c2 # 1.5d      0.5 # c2 # 1.5
Db mm in.

Step 1. Select a value of settlement, s.

N
Step 2. Calculate o f p DL and q A .
i51
i i p p

Step 3. Using Figures 10.16 and 10.17 and the calculated values in Step 2, determine
the side load and the end bearing load.
Step 4. The sum of the side load and the end bearing load gives the total allowable
load.

1.2

1.0
Ultimate side-load transfer, S fi p DLi

0.8
Side-load transfer

0.6 Trend
line

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0
Settlement
(%)
Diameter of shaft, Ds

Figure 10.16  Normalized side-load transfer versus settlement in cohesive soil

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.10  Load-Bearing Capacity Based on Settlement  533

1.0

0.8

Ultimate end bearing, qp Ap 0.6

End bearing

Trend
line

0.4

0.2

0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Settlement of base
(%)
Diameter of base, Db

Figure 10.17  Normalized base-load transfer versus settlement in cohesive soil

Example 10.4
Figure 10.18 shows a drilled shaft without a bell. Here, L1 5 27 ft, L2 5 8.5 ft,
Ds 5 3.3 ft, cus1d 5 1000 lb/ft2, and cus2d 5 2175 lb/ft2. Determine
a. The net ultimate point bearing capacity
b. The ultimate skin resistance
c. The working load, Qw (FS 5 3)
Use Eqs. (10.33), (10.37), and (10.39).

Solution
Part a
From Eq. (10.33),

Qpsnetd 5 ApcuN *c 5 Apcus2dN *c 5 31p4 2s3.3d 4 s2175ds9d 5 167,425 lb

2

< 167. 4 kip

(Note: Since cus2dypa . 1, N *c < 9.)

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 534  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Clay
L1 cu (1)
Ds

L2 Clay
cu (2)
Figure 10.18  A drill shaft without a bell

Part b
From Eq. (10.37),

Qs 5 oa*cu pDL

From Eq. (10.39),

a* 5 0.4
p 5 pDs 5 s3.14ds3.3d 5 10.37 ft

and

Qs 5 s0.4ds10.37d[s1000 3 27d 1 s2175 3 8.5d] 5 188,682 lb

< 188.7 kip
Part c

Qpsnetd 1 Qs 167.4 1 188.7

Qw 5 5 5 118.7 kip  ■
FS 3

Example 10.5
A drilled shaft in a cohesive soil is shown in Figure 10.19. Use Reese and O’Neill’s
method to determine the following.
a. The ultimate load-carrying capacity.
b. The load-carrying capacity for an allowable settlement of 12 mm.

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.10  Load-Bearing Capacity Based on Settlement  535

Clay
0.76 m cu(1) 5 40 kN/m2
3m

Clay
6m cu(2) 5 60 kN/m2
3m

1.5 m
Clay
1.2 m cu 5 145 kN/m2

Figure 10.19  A drilled shaft in layered clay

Solution
Part a
From Eq. (10.40),
fi 5 a*i cusid
From Figure 10.19,
DL1 5 3 2 1.5 5 1.5 m
DL2 5 s6 2 3d 2 Ds 5 s6 2 3d 2 0.76 5 2.24 m
cus1d 5 40 kN/m2
and
cus2d 5 60 kN/m2
Hence,

o fi pDLi 5 oa*i cusidpDLi

5 s0.55d s40d sp 3 0.76d s1.5d 1 s0.55d s60d sp 3 0.76d s2.24d
5 255.28 kN

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 536  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Again, from Eq. (10.41),

1 2 3 1 24 5 1957.5 kN/m
L 6 1 1.5 2
qp 5 6cub 1 1 0.2 5 s6ds145d 1 1 0.2
Db 1.2

A check reveals that

qp 5 9cub 5 s9ds145d 5 1305 kN/m2 , 1957.5 kN/m2

So we use qp 5 1305 kN/m2

qp Ap 5 qp 1p4 D 2 5 s1305d 31p4 2 s1.2d 4 5 1475.9 kN

2
b
2

Hence,
Qult 5 oa*i cusidpDLi 1 qpAp 5 255.28 1 1475.9 < 1731 kN

Part b
We have
Allowable settlement 12
5 5 0.0158 5 1.58%
Ds s0.76ds1000d

The trend line shown in Figure 10.16 indicates that, for a normalized settlement of
1.58%, the normalized side load is about 0.9. Thus, the side load is
s0.9d so fi pDLid 5 s0.9d s255.28d 5 229.8 kN
Again,
Allowable settlement 12
5 5 0.01 5 1.0%
Db s1.2ds1000d

The trend line shown in Figure 10.17 indicates that, for a normalized settlement of
1.0%, the normalized end bearing is about 0.63, so

Base load 5 s0.63dsqp Apd 5 s0.63ds1475.9d 5 929.8 kN

Thus, the total load is

Q 5 229.8 1 929.8 5 1159.6 kN  ■

10.11 Settlement of Drilled Shafts at Working Load

The settlement of drilled shafts at working load is calculated in a manner similar to that
outlined in Section 9.17. In many cases, the load carried by shaft resistance is small com-
pared with the load carried at the base. In such cases, the contribution of s3 may be ignored.
(Note that in Eqs. (9.82) and (9.83) the term D should be replaced by Db for drilled shafts.)

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.11  Settlement of Drilled Shafts at Working Load  537

Example 10.6
Refer to Figure 10.18. Given: L1 5 8 m, L2 5 3 m, Ds 5 1.5 m, cu(1) 5 50 kN/m2,
cu(2) 5 150 kN/m2, and working load Qw 5 1005 kN. Estimate the elastic
settlement at the working load. Use Eqs. (9.81), (9.83), and (9.84). Take j 5 0.65,
Ep 5 21 3 106 kN/m2, Es 5 14,000 kN/m2, ms 5 0.3, and Qwp 5 205 kN.
Solution
From Eq. (9.81),
sQwp 1 jQwsdL
ses1d 5
ApEp

Now,
Qws 5 1005 2 250 5 755 kN
so
[250 1 s0.65ds755d]s11d
ses1d 5 5 0.00022 m 5 0.22 mm
1 2
p
3 1.52 s21 3 106d
4

From Eq. (9.83),

QwpCp
ses2d 5
Dbqp

From Table 9.14, for stiff clay, Cp < 0.04; also,

qp 5 cusbdN *c 5 s105ds9d 5 945 kN/m2

Hence,
s250ds0.04d
ses2d 5 5 0.0071 m 5 7.1 mm
s1.5ds945d

Again, from Eqs. (9.84) and (9.85),

1 pL 21 E 2s1 2 m dI
Qws Ds 2
ses3d 5 s ws
s

where

Iws 5 2 1 0.35 Î L
Ds
5 2 1 0.35 Î 11
1.5
5 2.95

3sp 3755
1.5ds11d 41 14,000 2
1.5 2
ses3d 5 s1 2 0.3 ds2.95d 5 0.0042 m 5 4.2 mm

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 538  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

The total settlement is

se 5 ses1d 1 ses2d 1 ses3d 5 0.22 1 7.1 1 4.2 < 11.52 mm  ■

10.12 Lateral Load-Carrying Capacity­—Characteristic

Load and Moment Method
Several methods for analyzing the lateral load-carrying capacity of piles, as well as the
load-carrying capacity of drilled shafts, were presented in Section 9.18; therefore, they
will not be repeated here. In 1994, Duncan et al. developed a characteristic load method
for estimating the lateral load capacity for drilled shafts that is fairly simple to use. We
describe this method next.
According to the characteristic load method, the characteristic load Qc and moment
Mc form the basis for the dimensionless relationship that can be given by the following
correlations:

Characteristic Load

1 2
0.68
cu
Qc 5 7.34D2s sEpRId (for clay) (10.44)
EpRI

1 2
g9Dsf9Kp 0.57
Qc 5 1.57D2s sEpRId (for sand) (10.45)
EpRI

Characteristic Moment

1E R 2
0.46
cu
Mc 5 3.86D3s sEpRId (for clay) (10.46)
p I

M 5 1.33D sE R d1
ER 2
g9D f9K 0.40
3 s p
c s p I (for sand) (10.47)
p I
In these equations,
Ds 5 diameter of drilled shafts
Ep 5 modulus of elasticity of drilled shafts
RI 5 ratio of moment of inertia of drilled shaft section to moment of inertia of a solid
section (Note: RI 5 1 for uncracked shaft without central void)
g9 5 effective unit weight of sand
f9 5 effective soil friction angle (degrees)
Kp 5 Rankine passive pressure coefficient 5 tan2s45 1 f9y2d

Deflection Due to Load Qg Applied at the Ground Line

Figures 10.20 and 10.21 give the plot of QgyQc versus xoyDs for drilled shafts in sand
and clay due to the load Qg applied at the ground surface. Note that xo is the ground line

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.12  Lateral Load-Carrying Capacity­—Characteristic Load and Moment Method  539

0.050 0.050

0.045 0.045

Qg
} Fixed head
Qc

0.030 Qg 0.030
} Free head
Qc
Qg Mg
Qc Mc

Mg
Mc
0.015 0.015

xo Qg Qg Mg
} Free } Fixed
Ds Qc Qc Mc
0.005 0.0065 0.0133 0.0024
0.010 0.0091 0.0197 0.0048
0.020 0.0135 0.0289 0.0074

0 0
0 0.05 0.10 0.15
xo
Ds

Qg Mg xo
Figure 10.20  Plot of and versus in clay
Qc Mc Ds

deflection. If the magnitudes of Qg and Qc are known, the ratio QgyQc can be calculated.
The figure can then be used to estimate the corresponding value of xoyDs and, hence, xo .

Deflection Due to Moment Applied at the Ground Line

Figures 10.20 and 10.21 give the variation plot of MgyMc with xoyDs for drilled shafts in
sand and clay due to an applied moment Mg at the ground line. Again, xo is the ground line
deflection. If the magnitudes of Mg , Mc , and Ds are known, the value of xo can be calculated
with the use of the figure.

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 540  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

0.015 0.015

Mg
Mc
Qg
} Fixed head
Qc
0.010 0.010

Qg
} Free head
Qg Qc Mg
Qc Mc

0.005 0.005
xo Qg Qg Mg
} Free } Fixed
Ds Qc Qc Mc
0.005 0.0013 0.0028 0.0009
0.010 0.0021 0.0049 0.0019
0.020 0.0033 0.0079 0.0032

0 0
0 0.05 0.10 0.15
xo
Ds

Qg Mg xo
Figure 10.21  Plot of and versus in sand
Qc Mc Ds

Deflection Due to Load Applied above the Ground Line

When a load Q is applied above the ground line, it induces both a load Qg 5 Q and a
moment Mg 5 Qe at the ground line, as shown in Figure 10.22a. A superposition solution
can now be used to obtain the ground line deflection. The step-by-step procedure is as
follows (refer to Figure 10.22b):
Step 1. Calculate Qg and Mg .
Step 2. Calculate the deflection xoQ that would be caused by the load Qg acting
alone.
Step 3. Calculate the deflection xoM that would be caused by the moment acting
alone.
Step 4. Determine the value of a load QgM that would cause the same deflection as
the moment (i.e., xoM).
Step 5. Determine the value of a moment MgQ that would cause the same deflection
as the load (i.e., xoQ).
Step 6. Calculate sQg 1 QgMdyQc . and determine xoQMyDs .
Step 7. Calculate sMg 1 MgQdyMc and determine xoMQyDs .

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.12  Lateral Load-Carrying Capacity­—Characteristic Load and Moment Method  541

Q
Mg 5 Qe
e
Qg 5 Q

5
Q xo
Ds
5 0.5
Ds
1
Ds(
xoQM xoMQ
)
(a)

Qg Mg
Qc Mc

Qg
Qc
Qg 1 QgM Step 6
Mg
Qc
Mc
QgM Step 4
Qc Step 7 Mg 1 MgQ
Step 4 Mc
Step 7
Qg Step 2
Qc
Step 3 Mg
Mc
Step 3
Step 5 MgQ
Mc
Step 2

xoQ xoM xoQM xoMQ

Ds Ds Ds Ds
xo
Ds
(b)

Figure 10.22  Superposition of deflection due to load and moment

Step 8.  Calculate the combined deflection:

xoscombinedd 5 0.5sxoQM 1 xoMQd (10.48)

Maximum Moment in Drilled Shaft Due to Ground Line Load Only

Figure 10.23 shows the plot of QgyQc with MmaxyMc for fixed- and free-headed
drilled shafts due only to the application of a ground line load Qg . For fixed-headed

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 542  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

0.045 0.020

Fixed

Free
0.015
Fixed
Free
0.030

Qg Qg
Qc 0.010 Qc
(Clay) (Sand)

0.015

Clay 0.005

Sand

0 0
0 0.005 0.010 0.015
Mmax
Mc
Qg Mmax
Figure 10.23  Variation of with
Qc Mc

shafts, the maximum moment in the shaft, Mmax , occurs at the ground line. For this
condition, if Qc , Mc , and Qg are known, the magnitude of Mmax can be easily calculated.

Maximum Moment Due to Load and Moment at Ground Line

If a load Qg and a moment Mg are applied at the ground line, the maximum moment in the
drilled shaft can be determined in the following manner:
Step 1. Using the procedure described before, calculate xoscombinedd from
Eq. (10.48).
Step 2. To solve for the characteristic length T, use the following equation:
2.43Qg 1.62Mg
xoscombinedd 5 T3 1 T 2 (10.49)
Ep Ip Ep Ip

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.12  Lateral Load-Carrying Capacity­—Characteristic Load and Moment Method  543

Step 3. The moment in the shaft at a depth z below the ground surface can be
calculated as
Mz 5 AmQgT 1 Bm Mg (10.50)

where Am , Bm 5 dimensionless moment coefficients (Matlock and Reese,

1961); see Figure 10.24.
The value of the maximum moment Mmax can be obtained by calcu-
lating Mz at various depths in the upper part of the drilled shaft.
The characteristic load method just described is valid only if LyDs has a certain
minimum value. If the actual LyDs is less than sLyDsd min , then the ground line deflections
will be underestimated and the moments will be overestimated. The values of sLyDsd min
for drilled shafts in sand and clay are given in the following table:

Clay Sand
EpRI EpRI
cu (LyDs)min g9Ds f9Kp (LyDs)min
1 3 105 6 1 3 104 8
3 3 105 10 4 3 104 11
1 3 106 14 2 3 105 14
3 3 106 18

Am , Bm
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0

Am

0.5

Bm

z
1.0
T

1.5

2.0

Figure 10.24  Variation of Am and Bm with zyT

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 544  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Example 10.7
A free-headed drilled shaft in clay is shown in Figure 10.25. Let Ep 5 22 3 106 kN/m2.
Determine
a. The ground line deflection, xoscombinedd
b. The maximum bending moment in the drilled shaft
c. The maximum tensile stress in the shaft
d. The minimum penetration of the shaft needed for this analysis
Solution
We are given
Ds 5 1 m
cu 5 100 kN/m2
RI 5 1
Ep 5 22 3 106 kN/m2
and

pD4s spds1d4
Ip 5 5 5 0.049 m4
64 64

Part a
From Eq. (10.44),

1 2
0.68
cu
Qc 5 7.34Ds2 sEp RId
Ep RI

3 4
0.68
100
5 s7.34d s1d2 [s22 3 106 d s1d]
s22 3 106ds1d
5 37,607 kN

Mg 5 200 kN-m
Qg 5 150 kN

Clay
cu 5 100 kN/m2

Ds 5
1m

Figure 10.25  Free-headed drilled shaft

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.12  Lateral Load-Carrying Capacity­—Characteristic Load and Moment Method  545

From Eq. (10.46),

1E R 2
0.46
cu
Mc 5 3.86Ds3 sEp RId
p I

3 4
0.46
100
5 s3.86d s1d3 [s22 3 106d s1d]
s22 3 106d s1d
5 296,139 kN { m
Thus,
Qg 150
5 5 0.004
Qc 37,607
From Figure 10.20, xoQ < s0.0025d Ds 5 0.0025 m 5 2.5 mm. Also,

Mg 200
5 5 0.000675
Mc 296,139

From Figure 10.20, xoM < s0.0014d Ds 5 0.0014 m 5 1.4 mm, so

xo M 0.0014
5 5 0.0014
Ds 1

From Figure 10.20, for xoMyDs 5 0.0014, the value of QgMyQc < 0.002. Hence,

xoQ 0.0025
5 5 0.0025
Ds 1

From Figure 10.20, for xoQyDs 5 0.0025, the value of MgQyMc < 0.0013, so

Qg QgM
1 5 0.004 1 0.002 5 0.006
Qc Qc

From Figure 10.20, for sQg 1 QgMdyQc 5 0.006, the value of xoQMyDs < 0.0046.
Hence,

xoQM 5 s0.0046d s1d 5 0.0046 m 5 4.6 mm

Thus, we have
Mg MgQ
1 5 0.000675 1 0.0013 < 0.00198
Mc Mc

From Figure 10.20 for sMg 1 MgQ dyMc 5 0.00198, the value of xoMQyDs < 0.0041.
Hence,
xoMQ 5 s0.0041d s1d 5 0.0041 m 5 4.1 mm

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 546  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Consequently,

xo scombinedd 5 0.5 sxoQM 1 xoMQ d 5 s0.5d s4.6 1 4.1d 5 4.35 mm

Part b
From Eq. (10.49),
2.43Qg 1.62Mg
xo scombinedd 5 T3 1 T2
Ep Ip Ep Ip
so
s2.43d s150d s1.62d s200d
0.00435 m 5 6
T3 1 T2
s22 3 10 d s0.049d s22 3 106d s0.049d

or
0.00435 m 5 338 3 1026 T 3 1 300.6 3 1026 T 2
and it follows that
T < 2.05 m
From Eq. (10.50),

Mz 5 Am Qg T 1 Bm Mg 5 Am s150d s2.05d 1 Bm s200d 5 307.5Am 1 200 Bm

Now the following table can be prepared:

z Am Bm
T (Figure 10.24) (Figure 10.24) Mz (kN-m)
0 0 1.0 200
0.4 0.36 0.98 306.7
0.6 0.52 0.95 349.9
0.8 0.63 0.9 373.7
1.0 0.75 0.845 399.6
1.1 0.765 0.8 395.2
1.25 0.75 0.73 376.6

So the maximum moment is 399.4 kN { m < 400 kN { m and occurs at zyT < 1. Hence,

z 5 s1d sTd 5 s1d s2.05 md 5 2.05 m

Part c
The maximum tensile stress is

122 1122
Ds
Mmax s400d
s tensile 5 5 5 4081.6 kN/m2
Ip 0.049

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.13  Drilled Shafts Extending into Rock  547

Part d
We have
Ep RI s22 3 106ds1d
5 5 2.2 3 10 5
cu 100

By interpolation, for sEp RIdycu 5 2.2 3 105, the value of sLyDsd min < 8.5. So

L < s8.5d s1d 5 8.5 m  ■

10.13 Drilled Shafts Extending into Rock

In Section 10.1, we noted that drilled shafts can be extended into rock. Figure 10.26
shows a drilled shaft whose depth of embedment in rock is equal to L. When considering
drilled shafts in rock, we can find several correlations between the end bearing capacity
and the unconfined compression strength of intact rocks, qu. It is important to recognize
that, in the field, there are cracks, joints, and discontinuities in the rock, and the influ-
ence of those factors should be considered. Following are two procedures for determination
of the ultimate bearing capacity of drilled shafts extending into rock. The procedures were
developed by Reese and O’Neill (1988, 1989) and Zhang and Einstein (1998).

Qu

Soil

f 5 unit side
Rock
resistance

L f
z qp 5 unit point
bearing
Ds 5 Db

Figure 10.26  Drilled shaft

qp socketed into rock

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 548  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Procedure of Reese and O’Neill (1988, 1989)

Following is a step-by-step outline to estimate the ultimate bearing capacity. In this design
procedure, it is assumed that there is either side resistance between the shaft and the rock
or point resistance at the bottom.
Step 1. Calculate the ultimate unit side resistance as
f slb/in2d 5 2.5q0.5
u < 0.15qu (10.51a)

where qu 5 unconfined compression strength of rock core of NW size of

larger or of the drilled shaft concrete, whichever is smaller in (lb/in2).
In SI units, Eq. (10.51a) can be expressed as

f skN/m2d 5 6.564q u0.5 skN/m2d < 0.15qu skN/m2d (10.51b)

Step 2. Calculate the ultimate capacity based on side resistance only, or

Qu 5 pDs L f (10.52)
Step 3. Calculate the settlement se of the shaft at the top of the rock socket, or
se 5 sessd 1 sesbd (10.53)
where
sessd 5 elastic compression of the drilled shaft within the socket, assuming
no side resistance
sesbd 5 settlement of the base

However,
Qu L
se ssd 5 (10.54)
Ac Ec
and
Qu If
se sbd 5 (10.55)
Ds Emass
where
Qu 5 ultimate load obtained from Eq. (10.52) (this assumes that the
contribution of the overburden to the side shear is negligible)
Ac 5 cross-sectional area of the drilled shaft in the socket
p
5 Ds2
4
Ec 5 Young’s modulus of the concrete and reinforcing steel in the shaft
Emass 5 Young’s modulus of the rock mass into which the socket is drilled
If 5 elastic influence coefficient (see Table 10.6)

The magnitude of Emass can be taken as

Emass
< 0.0266 sRDQd 2 1.66 (10.56)
Ecore

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.13  Drilled Shafts Extending into Rock  549

Table 10.6  Settlement Influence Factor, If (interpolated

values from O’Neill and Reese, 1989)
If
EcyEmass

LyDs 10 50 100 5000

0 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10

1 0.51 0.47 0.47 0.47
2 0.47 0.37 0.35 0.32
4 0.43 0.31 0.28 0.23
6 0.41 0.27 0.24 0.18
8 0.40 0.25 0.21 0.14
10 0.39 0.24 0.18 0.12
12 0.38 0.22 0.16 0.10
20 0.37 0.20 0.15 0.08

where
RDQ 5 rock quality designation in %
Ecore 5 Young’s modulus of intact specimens of rock cores of NW size
or larger
However, unless the socket is very long
Qu If
se < se sbd 5 (10.57)
Ds Emass

Step 4. If se is less than 10 mm (ø0.4 in.), the ultimate load-carrying capacity is

that calculated by Eq. (10.52). If se > 10 mm. (0.4 in.), then go to Step 5.
Step 5. If se > 10 mm (0.4 in.), there may 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, or (for hard rocks such
as limestone, schist, etc.). Thus,

31 24
cs
31
Ds
Qu 5 3Ap 0.5
qu (10.58)
d
10 1 1 300
cs
where
cs 5 spacing of discontinuities (same unit as Ds)
d 5 thickness of individual discontinuity (same unit as Ds)
qu 5 unconfined compression strength of the rock beneath the base of the
socket or the drilled shaft concrete, whichever is smaller
Note that Eq. (10.58) applies for horizontally stratified discontinui-
ties with cs . 305 mm (12 in.) and d , 5 mm (0.2 in.).

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 550  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Procedure of Zhang and Einstein (1998)

Zhang and Einstein (1988) analyzed a database of 39 full-scale drilled shaft tests in which
shaft bases were cast on or in generally soft rock with some degree of jointing. Based on
these results, they proposed

Qusnetd 5 Qp 1 Qs 5 qp Ap 1 f pL (10.59)

where end bearing capacity Qp can be expressed as

Qp sMNd 5 qp Ap 5 [4.83squ MN/m2d0.51] [Apsm2d] (10.60)

Also, the side resistance Qs is

QssMNd 5 f pL 5 [0.4 squ MN/m2d0.5] [pDssmd] [Lsmd]

(10.61)
sfor smooth socketd

and

QssMNd 5 f pL 5 [0.8squ MN/m2d0.5][pDssmd][Lsmd]

(10.62)
sfor rough socketd

Example 10.8
Consider the case of drilled shaft extending into rock, as shown in Figure 10.27. Let
L 5 4.5 m, Ds 5 0.9 m, qu (rock) 5 72,450 kN/m2, qu (concrete) 5 20,700 kN/m2, Ec 5
20.7 3 106 kN/m2, RQD (rock) 5 80%, Ecore (rock) 5 2.48 3 106 kN/m2, cs 5 457 mm,
and d 5 3.81 mm. Estimate the allowable load-bearing capacity of the drilled shaft. Use
a factor of safety (FS) 5 3. Use the Reese and O’Neill method.
Solution
Step 1. From Eq. (10.51b),
f skN/m2d 5 6.564 q0.5
u < 0.15qu

Since qu (concrete) , qu (rock), use qu (concrete) in Eq. (10.51b). Hence,

f 5 6.564 s20,700d0.5 5 944.4 kN/m2
As a check, we have

f 5 0.15qu 5 (0.15) (20,700) 5 3105 kN/m2 . 944.4 kN/m2

So use f 5 944.4 kN/m2

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 10.13  Drilled Shafts Extending into Rock  551

Soft clay
3m
Ds 5 0.9 m

Rock

L 5 4.5 m
Drilled shaft

Figure 10.27  Drilled shaft extending into rock

Step 2. From Eq. (10.52),

Qu 5 pDs L f 5 spds0.9ds4.5ds944.4d 5 12,016 kN
Step 3. From Eqs. (10.53), (10.54), and (10.55),
Qu L Qu If
Se 5 1
Ac Ec Ds E mass

From Eq. (10.56), For RDQ 5 80%

Emass
5 s0.0266ds80d 2 1.66 5 0.468
Ecore
Emass 5 0.468 Ecore 5 s0.468ds2.48 3 106d 5 1.16 3 106 kN/m2
so
Ec 20.7 3 106
5 < 17.84
Emass 1.16 3 106
and
L 4.5
5 55
Ds 0.9

From Table 10.6, for EcyEmass 5 17.84 and LyDs 5 5, the magnitude of If
is about 0.35. Hence,

s12,016ds4.5d s12,016ds0.35d
se 5 1
p s0.9ds1.16 3 106d
s0.9d2s20.7 3 106d
4
5 0.008128 m ø 8.13 mm , 10 mm
Therefore,
Qu 5 12,016 kN
and
Qu 12,016
Qall 5 5 5 4005 kN < 4 MN ■
FS 3

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 552  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Example 10.9
Figure 10.28 shows a drilled shaft extending into a shale formation. For the intact
rock cores, given qu 5 4.2 MN/m2. Estimate the allowable load-bearing capacity of
the drilled shaft. Use a factor of safety sFSd 5 3. Assume a smooth socket for side
resistance. Use the Zhang and Einstein method.
Solution
From Eq. (10.60),
p 2
Qp 5 Apf4.83squd0.51g 5 s1d fs4.83ds4.2d0.51g 5 7.89 MN
4
Again, from Eq. (10.61),
Qs 5 0.4squd0.5spDsLd 5 0.4s4.2d0.5[spds1ds4d] 5 10.3 MN
Hence,
Qu Qp 1 Qs 7.89 1 10.3
Qall 5 5 5 5 6.06 MN
FS FS 3

Soft clay
3m
Ds 5 1 m

Shale
Smooth socket
4m
Drilled shaft

Figure 10.28  Drilled shaft extending into rock

  ■

Problems
10.1 A drilled shaft is shown in Figure P10.1. Determine the net allowable point bearing
capacity. Given
Db 5 2 m gc 5 15.6 kN/m3
Ds 5 1.2 m gs 5 17.6 kN/m3
L1 5 6 m f9 5 358
L2 5 3 m cu 5 35 kN/m2
Factor of safety 5 3
Use Eq. (10.18).
10.2 Redo Problem 10.1, this time using Eq. (10.5). Let Es 5 600pa .
10.3 For the drilled shaft described in Problem 10.1, what skin resistance would develop
in the top 6 m, which are in clay? Use Eqs. (10.37) and (10.39).

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 Problems  553

Silty clay
L1
Ds c
cu

Sand
L2 s
9
c9 5 0

Db Figure P10.1 

10.4 Redo Problem 10.1 with the following:

Db 5 1.75 m gc 5 17.8 kN/m3
Ds 5 1 m gs 5 18.2 kN/m3
L1 5 6.25 m f95 328
L2 5 2.5 m cu 5 32 kN/m2
Factor of safety 5 4
10.5 Redo Problem 10.4 using Eq. (10.5). Let Es 5 400pa .
10.6 For the drilled shaft described in Problem 10.4, what skin friction would develop
in the top 6.25 m?
a. Use Eqs. (10.37) and (10.39).
b. Use Eq. (10.40).
10.7 Figure P10.7 shows a drilled shaft without a bell. Assume the following values:
L1 5 6 m cus1d 5 50 kN/m2
L2 5 7 m cus2d 5 75 kN/m2
Ds 5 1.5 m
Determine:
a. The net ultimate point bearing capacity [use Eqs. (10.33) and (10.34)]
b. The ultimate skin friction [use Eqs. (10.37) and (10.39)]
c. The working load Qw (factor of safety 5 3)
10.8 Repeat Problem 10.7 with the following data:
L1 5 20 ft cus1d 5 1400 lb/ft2
L2 5 10 ft cus2d 5 2400 lb/ft2
Ds 5 3 ft
Use Eqs. (10.40) and (10.41).

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 554  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

Clay
L1
Ds cu(1)

Clay
L2 cu(2)

Figure P10.7 

10.9 A drilled shaft in a medium sand is shown in Figure P10.9. Using the method
proposed by Reese and O’Neill, determine the following:
a. The net allowable point resistance for a base movement of 25 mm
b. The shaft frictional resistance for a base movement of 25 mm
c. The total load that can be carried by the drilled shaft for a total base movement
of 25 mm
Assume the following values:
L 5 12 m g 5 18 kN/m3
L1 5 11 m f9 5 388
Ds 5 1 m Dr 5 65%smedium sandd
Db 5 2 m

Ds Medium sand
L1 
L 9
Average standard
penetration number (N60)
within 2Db below the
drilled shaft 5 19

Db Figure P10.9

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 Problems  555

10.10 In Figure P10.9, let L 5 7 m, L1 5 6 m, Ds 5 0.75 m, Db 5 1.25 m, g 5 18 kN/m3,

and f9 5 378. The average uncorrected standard penetration number sN60d within
2Db below the drilled shaft is 29. Determine
a. The ultimate load-carrying capacity
b. The load-carrying capacity for a settlement of 12 mm.
The sand has 35% gravel. Use Eq. (10.30) and Figures 10.11 and 10.13.
10.11 For the drilled shaft described in Problem 10.7, determine
a. The ultimate load-carrying capacity
b. The load carrying capacity for a settlement of 25 mm
Use the procedure outlined by Reese and O’Neill. (See Figures 10.16 and 10.17.)
10.12 For the drilled shaft described in Problem 10.7, estimate the total elastic settle-
ment at working load. Use Eqs. (9.81), (9.83), and (9.84). Assume that Ep 5 20 3
106 kN/m2, Cp 5 0.03, j 5 0.65, ms 5 0.3, Es 5 12,000 kN/m2, and Q ws 5 0.8Qw .
Use the value of Qw from Part (c) of Problem 10.7.
10.13 For the drilled shaft described in Problem 10.8, estimate the total elastic settlement at
working load. Use Eqs. (9.81), (9.83), and (9.84). Assume that Ep 5 3 3 106 lb/in2,
Cp 5 0.03, j 5 0.65, ms 5 0.3, Es 5 2000 lb/in2, and Q ws 5 0.83Qw . Use the value
of Qw from Part (c) of Problem 10.8.
10.14 Figure P10.14 shows a drilled shaft extending into clay shale. Given: qu (clay shale) 5
1.81 MN/m2. Considering the socket to be rough, estimate the allowable load-carrying
capacity of the drilled shaft. Use FS 5 4. Use the Zhang and Einstein procedure.
10.15 A free-headed drilled shaft is shown in Figure P10.15. Let Qg 5 260 kN, Mg 5 0,
g 5 17.5 kN/m3, f9 5 358, c9 5 0, and Ep 5 22 3 106 kN/m2. ­Determine
a. The ground line deflection, xo
b. The maximum bending moment in the drilled shaft
c. The maximum tensile stress in the shaft
d. The minimum penetration of the shaft needed for this analysis
10.16 Refer to Figure P10.14. Assume the botton 8 m to be hard rock and the following
values.
qu(concrete) 5 28,000 kN/m2 E(concrete) 5 22 3 106 kN/m2
2
qu(rock) 5 46,000 kN/m Ecore(rock) 5 12.1 3 106 kN/m2
RDQ(rock) 5 75%
Spacing of discontinuity in rock 5 500 mm
Thickness of individual discontinuity in rock 5 3 mm
Estimate the allowable load-bearing capacity of the drilled shaft using the proce-
dure of Reese and O’Neill. Use FS 5 3.
Mg

Loose sand Qg
2m  5 15 kN/m3
1.5 m 95 30˚
g
Clay shale c9, cu
Concrete 9, 
8m Ds 5
drilled shaft 1.25 m

Figure P10.14  Figure P10.15 

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.
 556  Chapter 10: Drilled-Shaft Foundations

References
Berezantzev, V. G., Khristoforov, V. S., and Golubkov, V. N. (1961). “Load Bearing Capacity
and Deformation of Piled Foundations,” Proceedings, Fifth International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Paris, Vol. 2, pp. 11–15.
Chen, Y.-J. and Kulhawy, F. H. (1994). “Case History Evaluation of the Behavior of Drilled
Shafts under Axial and Lateral Loading,” Final Report, Project 1493-04, EPRI TR-104601,
Geotechnical Group, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, December.
Duncan, J. M., Evans, L. T., Jr., and Ooi, P. S. K. (1994). “Lateral Load Analysis of Single Piles and
Drilled Shafts,” Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 120, No. 6, pp. 1018–1033.
Kulhawy, F. H. and Jackson, C. S. (1989). “Some Observations on Undrained Side Resistance
of Drilled Shafts,” Proceedings, Foundation Engineering: Current Principles and Practices,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 2, pp. 1011–1025.
Matlock, H. and Reese, L.C. (1961). “Foundation Analysis of Offshore Pile-Supported
Structures,” in Proceedings, Fifth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Founda-
tion Engineering, Vol. 2, Paris, pp. 91–97.
O’Neill, M. W. (1997). Personal communication.
O’Neill, M.W. and Reese, L.C. (1999). Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedure and Design
Methods, FHWA Report No. IF-99-025.
Reese, L. C. and O’Neill, M. W. (1988). Drilled Shafts: Construction and Design, FHWA, Publi-
cation No. HI-88-042.
Reese, L. C. and O’Neill, M. W. (1989). “New Design Method for Drilled Shafts from Common
Soil and Rock Tests,” Proceedings, Foundation Engineering: Current Principles and
Practices, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 2, pp. 1026–1039.
Reese, L. C., Touma, F. T., and O’Neill, M. W. (1976). “Behavior of Drilled Piers under
Axial Loading,” Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, American Society of Civil
Engineers, Vol. 102, No. GT5, pp. 493–510.
Rollins, K. M., Clayton, R. J., Mikesell, R. C., and Blaise, B. C. (2005). “Drilled Shaft Side
Friction in Gravelly Soils,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 131, No. 8, pp. 987–1003.
Whitaker, T. and Cooke, R. W. (1966). “An Investigation of the Shaft and Base Resistance of
Large Bored Piles in London Clay,” Proceedings, Conference on Large Bored Piles, Institute
of Civil Engineers, London, pp. 7–49.
Zhang, L. and Einstein, H. H. (1998). “End Bearing Capacity of Drilled Shafts in Rock,” Journal
of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers,
Vol. 124, No. 7, pp. 574–584.

Copyright 2016 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s).
Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.