ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guideline: July 2013

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/256196466
ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guideline
Book · July 2013
CITATIONS READS
43 7,244
2 authors:
Rolf Katzenbach Deepankar Choudhury

IK • KATZENBACH ENGINEERS & Technische Universit… Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
154 PUBLICATIONS 1,093 CITATIONS 284 PUBLICATIONS 4,579 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Expert advise on Review and validation of combined pile-raft foundation (CPRF) analysis and design for storage
shed for bulk materials in Taiwan View project
Stiffness and Strength of Dubai Sedimentary Rock View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Deepankar Choudhury on 31 May 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

TECHNISCHE
UNIVERSITAT
DARMSTADT

Eds.: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rolf Katzenbach
Prof. Dr. Deepankar Choudhury
Technische Universität Darmstadt

Institute and Laboratory of Geotechnics
Darmstadt · Germany · July 2013
Editor
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rolf Katzenbach

Petersenstrasse 13
D-64287 Darmstadt / Germany
Telefon: +49 (0) 6151 / 16-2149
Telefax: +49 (0) 6151 / 16-6683
E-Mail: katzenbach@geotechnik.tu-darmstadt.de
Web: http://www.geotechnik.tu-darmstadt.de
ISBN: 978-3-942068-06-2
ISSN: 1436-6517
The realisation of this publication was made possible by the financial support
of the “Förderverein der Freunde des Institutes für Geotechnik an der
Technischen Universität Darmstadt e.V”.
TECHNISCHE
UNIVERSITAT
DARMSTADT

Eds.: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rolf Katzenbach
Prof. Dr. Deepankar Choudhury

Darmstadt · Germany · July 2013
International Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering
Société internationale de mécanique des sols et de la géotechnique
From the Desk of Editors
Greetings from the ISSMGE Technical Committee TC 212 – Deep Foundations.
In the present term 2009 – 2013 of TC 212, we are very happy to bring out this
‘ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guidelines’ as a technical guideline
for the design, construction and monitoring of Combined Pile-Raft Foundation
(CPRF), which can be followed all over the world.
A need to bring out such guideline was felt by several members of ISSMGE and
more so for relatively new type of deep foundation like CPRF. Hence the
committee members started discussing on this issue over several meetings,
conferences, emails, get-togethers and technical deliberations all over the world
to formulate general guidelines for CPRF design, construction, monitoring.
Simultaneously it was also discussed that the technical document must be lucid,
clear, simple and short to understand and accept by the community for practice. It
needs not to be like a design code with exact mention of values or quantification,
but it will give an overall guideline which will be enough to follow the uniform
standard/guideline for CPRF across the world.
Editors are extremely thankful to all the members of TC 212 who are also authors
of this document for their valuable contributions and suggestions to bring out the
present shape of the guideline which was accepted by majority voting in the
meeting of TC 212 at Kanazawa, Japan. Also editors acknowledge the
suggestions provided by many other friends of TC 212 who are not members but
attended meetings of TC 212 at Kanazawa, Japan and at Bandung, Indonesia to
provide their valuable inputs for this guideline and via email correspondences.
Help received from Hendrik Ramm and Frithjof Clauss of Germany for
compilation of this document is highly acknowledged.
Editors hope that the CPRF guideline will be useful to the entire geotechnical
community of the world who practices Combined Pile-Raft Foundation.
Best Regards,
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rolf Katzenbach Prof. Dr. Deepankar Choudhury

Chairman of TC 212 Secretary of TC 212
TU Darmstadt, Germany. IIT Bombay, Mumbai, India.
-1-
Prof. Jean-Louis Briaud, USA
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rolf Katzenbach, Germany

Prof. Sang Seom Jeong, Korea
Prof. Deepankar Choudhury, India
Michele B. Jamiolkowski, Italy

Tim Chapman, UK
Fiona Chow, Australia
V. Paramonov, Russia
Rodrigo Salgado, USA
Gary Axelsson, Sweden

Willem Bierman, Netherlands
Maurice Bottiau, Belgium
Dan Brown, USA
Michael Brown, UK
Nicol Chang, South Africa
Der-Wen Chang, Taiwan
Emilios Comodromos, Greece
Luca de Sanctis, Italy
M. de Vos, Belgium
Luis del Canizo, Spain
Arpad Deli, Hungary
Kazem Fakharian, Iran
V.T. Ganpule, India
Kenneth Gavin, Ireland
Juan Jose Goldemberg, Argentina
A.L. Gotman, Russia
K. Gwizdała, Poland
James Higgins, USA
K. Horikoshi, Japan
-2-
Maosong Huang, China

Roland Jörger, Germany
Amir M. Kaynia, Norway
Makoto Kimura, Japan
J. Kos, Czech & Slovak Republics
Daman Lee, Hong Kong
Jouko Lehtonen, Finland
Scott Mackiewicz, USA
Andras Mahler, Hungary
Vittorio Manassero, Italy
Alessandro Mandolini, Italy
Gerardo Marrote, Spain
Jarbas Milititsky, Brazil
Christian Moormann, Germany
Tony O'Brien, UK
Victor CW Ong, Singapore
A.B. Ponomaryov, Russia
Alain Puech, France
Nicoleta Radulescu, Romania
Jaime Santos, Portugal
Alfredo Silva, Ecuador
Teresa Simões, Portugal
Tim Sinclair, New Zealand
Byung Woong Song, Korea
A.F. van Tol, Netherlands
Weidong Wang, China
Limin Zhang, Hong Kong
A.A. Zhussupbekov, Kazakhstan
1 Terms and Definitions
The Combined Pile-Raft Foundation (CPRF) is a geotechnical composite

construction that combines the bearing effect of both foundation elements raft and
piles by taking into account interactions between the foundation elements and the
subsoil shown in figure 1.1.
-3-
The characteristic value of the total resistance Rtot,k (s) of the CPRF depends on
the settlement s of the foundation and consists of the sum of the characteristic pile
m
resistances R
j1
pile,k,j (s) and the characteristic base resistance Rraft,k (s). The
characteristic base resistance results from the integration of the settlement

dependent contact pressure  (s, x, y) in the ground plan area of the raft.
Fig. 1.1 Combined Pile-Raft Foundation (CPRF)

as a geotechnical composite construction and the
interactions coining the bearing behaviour
-4-
Rraft ,k ( s )    ( s , x, y ) dx dy (1.1)
m
Rtot ,k ( s)   R pile ,k , j ( s)  Rraft ,k ( s ) (1.2)
j 1
R pile , k , j ( s )  Rb , k , j ( s )  Rs , k , j ( s ) (1.3)
The bearing behaviour of the CPRF is described by the pile-raft coefficient pr
which is defined by the ratio between the sum of the characteristic pile resistances
m
R
j1
pile,k,j (s) and the characteristic value of the total resistance Rtot,k (s):
R
j 1
pile , k , j (s)
 pr  (1.4)
Rtot ,k ( s)
The pile-raft coefficient varies between pr = 0 (spread foundation) and pr = 1
(pure pile foundation). Figure 1.2 shows a qualitative example of the dependence
between the pile-raft coefficient pr and the settlement of a CPRF spr related to
the settlement of a spread foundation ssf with equal ground plan and equal
loading.
The pile-raft coefficient pr depends on the stress level and on the settlement of
the CPRF.
-5-
Fig. 1.2 Qualitative example of a possible settlement reduction of

a CPRF in function of the pile-raft coefficient pr
2 Scope
The CPRF guideline applies to the design, dimensioning, inspection and

construction of preponderant vertically loaded Combined Pile-Raft Foundations.
Note: The CPRF guideline can also be applied to other deep foundation elements
than piles such as diaphragm walling elements (barrettes), diaphragm walls,
sheet pile walls etc.
The CPRF guideline shall not be used in cases where layers of relatively small
stiffness (e.g. soft cohesive and organic soils) are situated closely beneath the raft.
3 Geotechnical Category
According to Eurocode EC 7, the Geotechnical Category 3 may be assigned for

the design of Combined Pile-Raft Foundation.
-6-
4 Symbols
Number Symbol Explanation Unit Section

1 Cd limiting design value of the relevant 8
serviceability criterion
2 D pile diameter m 1
3 d index for design value - 7
4 E effect of actions 8
5 E2 effect of actions for SLS 8

6 e distance between pile axes m 1
7 Fk,i characteristic value of an action i MN 8
8 j index for a pile - 1

9 k index for characteristic value - 1
10 m number of piles of a CPRF - 1
11 qb unit base resistance MN/m² 1
12 qs unit shaft resistance MN/m² 1
13 R resistance MN 1
14 Rb,k(s) characteristic value of the base resistance MN 1
of a pile as a function of settlement
15 Rpile,k,j(s) characteristic value of the resistance of MN 1
the pile j of a pile group as a function of
settlement
16 Rraft,k(s) characteristic value of the base resistance MN 1
of a CPRF as a function of settlement
-7-
17 Rs,k(s) characteristic value of the shaft resistance MN 1

of a pile as a function of settlement
18 Rtot,k(s) characteristic value of the total resistance MN 1
of a CPRF as a function of settlement
19 R1,tot total resistance of a CPRF for ULS MN 7

20 s settlement m 1
21 spr settlement of a CPRF m 1
22 ssf settlement of a spread foundation m 1

23 s2 allowable settlement for SLS m 8
24 Δs2 allowable differential settlement for SLS m 8
25 x,y,z cartesian coordinates m 1

26 αpr pile-raft coefficient - 1
27  partial safety factor - 7
28 G partial safety factor for a permanent - 7

action
29 Q partial safety factor for a variable action - 7
30 R partial safety factor for a resistance - 7
31 σ(s,x,y) contact pressure as a function of MN/m² 1

settlement
Tab. 1 Symbols
5 Soil investigation and evaluation
Soil investigation on site and in laboratory is necessarily required for the design
and the dimensioning of a CPRF and the basis for all analysis. The quality and
-8-
quantity of the geotechnical investigations and the performance of the field and
laboratory tests have to be designed and controlled by geotechnical experts and
also have to be evaluated under the consideration of the Soil-Structure-
Interaction.
The results of field and laboratory investigation have to be compared with values
experienced for the local soil conditions.
5.1 Field investigation
Direct soil investigations are necessarily required for the design of a CPRF even
if local experiences are given. Depending on project related circumstances and
the local soil conditions the investigation program has to be reviewed concerning
the necessity of further investigations.
5.2 Laboratory investigation
The design of a CPRF requires a sufficient knowledge of the deformation and the
strength properties of the subsoil. Additional to classification tests, a sufficient
number of laboratory tests on soil samples are to be performed in order to
determine the stiffness and shear strength of the soil. Quality and quantity of the
laboratory tests have to be defined with regard to the constitutive laws used
within the analysis of the CPRF.
5.3 Tasks within the construction process
Exposures during the constructing process of a CPRF have to be examined and

evaluated by a geotechnical expert and have to be compared to the results of the
actual soil investigation. The data achieved during the construction of the bored
piles have to be recorded in a protocol and displayed graphically by diagrams.
The usage of driven piles or other deep foundation elements requires a
corresponding procedure.
-9-
If the soil and groundwater conditions encountered during the construction

process deviate relevantly from the expected soil and groundwater conditions
additional investigations of subsoil and groundwater have to be carried out. The
updated geotechnical data is the basis for a reviewed design and construction
process of the CPRF.
6 Requirements to the computational methods for the design of a CPRF
6.1 Prefaces
The bearing effect of a CPRF is influenced by the interactions of the particular

bearing elements (Figure 1.1).
Beside the pile group effect, i.e. the mutual interactions of the piles within the
pile group, the contact pressure considerably influences the bearing behaviour of
the foundation piles of the CPRF.
Therefore, the prerequisite for a safe design of a CPRF is the realistic modelling
of the interactions between the superstructure, the foundation elements and the
subsoil. This requires the use of a computational model which is able to simulate
the interactions determining the bearing behaviour of the CPRF in a reliable and
realistic way.
The computational model used for the design of a CPRF shall contain a realistic
geometric modelling of the foundation elements and the soil continuum as well as
a realistic description of the material behaviour of both structure and subsoil and
of the contact behaviour between the soil and the foundation elements. The
choice of the constitutive laws and the applied material parameters used within
the analysis has to be justified.
- 10 -
6.2 Bearing behaviour of a single pile
For the design of a CPRF the knowledge of the bearing behaviour of a stand-
alone single pile under comparable soil conditions is required (section 6.3,
paragraph 1).
As far as no experiences are given for the bearing behaviour of a single pile by
test loadings a static pile test under axial loading has to be performed for a
corresponding pile type under comparable soil conditions.
As far as no static load pile tests are performed, the bearing behaviour of a single
pile can be defined by using the empirical values indicated in the concerned
standards. The transferability of the standardised empirical values on the soil
conditions explored on site and on the planned CPRF has to be proven.
6.3 Requirements for a computational model
The used computational model shall be able to simulate the bearing behaviour of
an appropriate single pile according to section 6.2. The shearing at the pile shaft
and the compression process at the pile base has to be modelled correctly.
The computational model used for the design of the CPRF shall also be able to
transfer the bearing behaviour of a single pile to the bearing behaviour of the
CPRF including the pile-pile-interaction and the pile-raft-interaction. Furthermore
the computational model has to be able to simulate all relevant interactions
including their effects on the bearing behaviour of the CPRF (Figure 1.1).
For the design of a CPRF different computation methods are available which are
based on different computation and modelling approaches. The computation
method used for the design of a CPRF has to be documented within the design
process.
- 11 -
7 ULS – Ultimate Limit State
The proof of the external and internal bearing capacity has to be carried out for a
CPRF. The external bearing capacity describes the bearing capacity of the soil
interacting with the foundation elements. The internal bearing capacity describes
the bearing capacity of the single components like the piles and the foundation
raft.
The bearing behaviour of the CPRF is computed based on characteristic soil and
material parameters. Time-dependent properties of the soil and the structure have
to be considered if necessary.
The stiffness of the superstructure and its influence on the bearing behaviour of
the CPRF has to be considered within the computational investigation and the
proofs of limit states.
Figure 7.1 shows the concept for the proof of ultimate limit state schematically.
Fig. 7.1 Proof and safety concept in the ultimate limit state
- 12 -
7.1 Proof of the external bearing capacity (ULS)
A sufficient safety against failure of the overall system is achieved by fulfilling

the following equation:
R1,tot , k
Ed  EG ,k   G  EQ ,k   Q   R1,tot ,d (7.1)
R
The characteristic value of the total resistance of the CPRF in the ultimate limit
state R1,tot,k has to be determined by an analysis of the CPRF as an overall system
based on a computational model including all relevant interactions according to
section 6.2. The characteristic values of the soil and the structure properties shall
be used within the analysis. The characteristic value of the total resistance R1,tot,k
has to be derived from the load-settlement relation for the overall system. The
characteristic value of the total resistance R1,tot,k is equal to the load at which the
settlements of the CPRF visibly increase. In the load-settlement curve the
characteristic value of the total resistance R1,tot,k represents that point at which the
flat section, after a transition region with increasing settlement, passes into the
steeply falling section.
If the proof is not performed by a realistic computational model according to

section 6.3 in simple cases it is permissible to calculate the characteristic value of
the total resistance R1,tot,k alternatively by means of the characteristic value of the
base resistance of the foundation raft of the CPRF.
"Simple cases" are given if the following conditions are fulfilled:
 A geometrically uniform configuration of the CPRF:

- identical pile length and pile diameter
- constant distance between the pile axes e
- rectangular or round raft foundation
- projection of the raft foundation beyond the outer pile row  3 · D
(D = pile diameter)
- 13 -
 Homogeneous subsoil (no layering):

- no distinct difference in stiffness between the individual layers (see
section 2)
 Actions
- centrically loaded raft foundation i.e. the resulting action is
concentrated in the centre of gravity of the raft
- no predominantly dynamic effects
The bottom line of the raft defines the foundation level for the calculation of the
base resistance.
The vertical bearing effect of the piles has to be neglected within the base
resistance calculation of the raft.
The horizontal bearing effect of the piles may be applied as dowel resistance
within the base resistance calculation of the raft. The calculation of the base
resistance has to be carried out according to the relevant national standards.
The proof of the external bearing capacity of a CPRF saves the proof of all single
piles.
7.2 Proof of the internal bearing capacity (ULS)
A sufficient safety against material failure has to be proven for all foundation
elements according to the specific standards. The proof of the internal bearing
capacity shall be carried out for all relevant combinations of actions. The
following stress states have to be proven:
 Piles: Tension (construction stages), compression combined with

bending and shearing.
 Raft: Bending, shearing, punching at the areas of punctual loading of
the superstructure elements (columns) as well as of the foundation
piles.
- 14 -
The calculation of the internal forces shall be performed for two cases because of
the non-linear relation between the settlement and the partial resistances of raft
and piles. The pile-raft coefficient pr shall be calculated for both limit states, the
ultimate limit state (section 7.1) and the serviceability limit state (section 8.1).
The internal forces of the raft and the piles have to be computed due to the
distribution of the characteristic actions on raft and piles determined by the pile-
raft coefficient. The more unfavourable results have to be used for the design of
the foundation elements.
The proof of the internal bearing capacity of the foundation elements has to be
carried out according to the relevant standards.
If no detailed proof is performed, the piles have to be reinforced to the minimum

amount or the amount calculated within the design process on their total length.
8 SLS – Serviceability Limit State
The proof of the serviceability limit state comprises of two different examinations
analogously to the proof of the ultimate limit state (figure 8.1).
Fig. 8.1 Proof and safety concept in the serviceability limit state
- 15 -
8.1 Proof of the external serviceability
A sufficient safety of the serviceability is achieved by fulfilling the following

equation:
E2,d  E2,k  Cd (8.1)
The effects E dependent on the actions Fk,i have to be computed by a

computational model according to section 6.2 based on characteristic values for
the material properties. The effects E are computed on the overall system
subjected to onefold actions.
During the service of the building the effects E expressed by the relevant
settlements s2, differential settlements s2, etc. have to be smaller than the
limiting design value of the relevant serviceability criterion.
The value of the limiting design value of the relevant serviceability criterion Cd is
defined by the requirements deriving from the characteristics of the planned
CPRF and the adjacent buildings possibly affected by the construction of the
CPRF. For the allowable settlements s2 or the allowable differential settlements
s2, the limiting values need to be defined by taking into account the sensitivity
of the structure for deformations and especially for differential settlements. It also
should be checked for the sensitivity of the adjacent underground or overground
structures and infrastructural installations.
8.2 Proof of the internal serviceability
For the foundation elements a sufficient safety for the serviceability limit state
has to be proven according to the material specific standards. The following stress
states have to be proven:
 Piles: Restriction of the crack width

- 16 -
 Raft: Restriction of the crack width, allowable deflections and/or

differential settlements with respect to the requirements the
superstructure is subjected to
The internal forces have to be determined for the serviceability limit state.
9 Proof of design and construction of a CPRF
The examination of the design and the construction of a CPRF should be

controlled by an geotechnical expert particularly qualified on this subject with
respect to the subsequent aspects:
 Examination of the extent, the results and the evaluations of the soil
investigation (field and laboratory tests).
 Evaluation of the plausibility and suitability of the characteristic values
of the soil properties used in the computational models for the CPRF.
 Examination of the computational model used for the design of the
CPRF and the computation results by using independent comparative
calculations.
 Examination of the evaluation of the effects on the adjacent buildings.
 Examination of the measuring program and of the soil exposures
attained within the construction process of the CPRF.
 Examination of the protocol of the acceptance procedure and the
measured values.
10 Construction of a CPRF
The construction of a CPRF has to be supervised by a geotechnical expert

particularly qualified on this subject assigned by the owner or the supervising
authority with respect to the ground engineering aspects. This applies to the
construction both of the piles and the foundation level. The protocols of the
acceptance procedure and the measured values have to be included into the
examination.
- 17 -
11 Monitoring of a CPRF
The bearing behaviour and the force transfer within a CPRF may be monitored by
a geotechnical expert particularly qualified on this subject due to the requirements
deriving from the soil, the superstructure and the foundation according to the
concept of the observational method on the basis of the measuring program set up
in the design phase. The monitoring comprises geotechnical and geodetic
measurements at the new building and also at the adjacent buildings. The
monitoring of a CPRF is an elementary and indispensable component of the
safety concept and is used for the following purposes:
 the verification of the computational model and the computational

approaches,
 the in-time detection of possible critical states,
 an examination of the calculated settlements during the whole
construction process,
 quality assurance and the
 conservation of evidence
both during the construction process and during the service of the building.
The monitoring program has to be designed by a geotechnical expert in the design

phase. The measurements shall give information about the load distribution
between the raft and the piles.
In simple cases the arrangement and regular levelling of settlement measuring

points can be sufficient.
- 18 -
Acknowledgement
The entire team members of ISSMGE Technical Committee TC 212 – Deep

Foundations want to acknowledge the suggestions and help provided by many
friends of TC 212 who had participated in the detailed discussions to bring out
this guideline during the meetings of TC 212 at Kanazawa, Japan during IS-
Kanazawa 2012 on 19th September, 2012 and at Bandung, Indonesia during
PILE-2013 on 2nd June, 2013 and also via email communications. Names of
these friends are, Kaustav Chatterjee, India; Chris Danilewicz, UK; Silvia F.
Herina, Indonesia; Wang Yao Hui, China; Rinda Karlinasari, Indonesia; Aksan
Kawanda, Indonesia; Martin Larisch, Australia; Kwang Woo Lee, Korea; Steffen
Leppla, Germany; Garland Likins, USA; Aswin Lim, Indonesia; San-Shyan Lin,
Taiwan; Tatsunori Matsumoto, Japan; Ernst Niederleithinger, Germany; Harry
Poulos, Australia; V. Dilli Rao, India; Paulus P. Rahardjo, Indonesia;
Nurindahsih Setionegoro, Indonesia; Dennie Supriatna, Indonesia; Wanchai
Teparaska, Thailand; Shuntaro Teramoto, Japan; Christos Vrettos, Germany;
Maria Wahyuni, Indonesia; Askar Zhussupbekov, Kazakhstan.
- 19 -
Bibliography
Bourgeois, E., Buhan, P. and Hassen, G. (2012), Settlement analysis of piled-raft

foundations by means of a multiphase model accounting for soil-pile interactions.
Computers and Geotechnics, 46, 26-38.
Butterfield, R. and Banerjee, P.K. (1971), The problem of pile group-pile cap
interaction. Géotechnique, 21(2), 135-142.
CEN European Committee of Standardization (2008), Eurocode 7: Geotechical

design – Part 1: General Rules.
Chaudhary, K.B., Phoon, K.K. and Toh, K.C. (2013), Effective block diagonal
preconditioners for Biot's consolidation equations in piled-raft foundations.
International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics,
37(8), 871-892.
Clancy, P. and Randolph, M.F. (1993), An approximate analysis procedure for

piled raft foundations. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical
Methods in Geomechanics, 17(12), 849-869.
Cooke, R.W. (1986), Piled raft foundations on stiff clays—a contribution to

design philosophy. Géotechnique, 36 (2), 169-203.
Cunha, R., Poulos, H., and Small, J. (2001), Investigation of design alternatives
for a piled raft case history. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, 127(8), 635–641.
DIN 1054:2005 (2005), Subsoil – Verification of the safety of soil engineering

and foundations. German National Standard, Beuth Verlag, Berlin.
DIN EN 1997-1:2004 (2004), Eurocode 7 Geotechnical design – Part 1: General

Rules. German National Standard, Beuth Verlag, Berlin.
- 20 -
Eslami, M.M., Aminikhah. A. and Ahmadi. M.M. (2011), A comparative study

on pile group and piled raft foundations (PRF) behavior under seismic loading.
Comp. Meth. Civil Eng., 2(2), 185-199.
Frank, R. (2010), Some aspects of research and practice for foundations design in
France, Aspects of research and practice for foundation design in France. 11th
Šuklje day, 17 September 2010.
Hooper, J.A. (1973), Observations on the behaviour of a piled-raft foundation on

London Clay. Proceedings Institution of Civil Engineers, 55(2), 855-877.
Horikoshi, K., Matsumoto, T., Hashizume, Y., Watanabe, T. and Fukuyama, H.

(2003), Performance of piled raft foundations subjected to static horizontal loads.
International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotechnics, 2, 37-50.
Horikoshi, K. and Randolph, M.F. (1998), A contribution to optimal design of

piled rafts. Géotechnique, 48(3), 301-317.
Katzenbach, R. and Reul, O. (1997), Design and performance of piled rafts.

Proceedings of 14th ICSMGE, Hamburg, 4, 2253-2256.
Katzenbach, R. (2005), Optimised design of high-rise building foundations in

settlement-sensitive soils. Proc. of International Geotechnical Conference of Soil-
Structure Interaction, 26-28 May 2005, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Katzenbach, R., Bachmann, G., Boled- Mekasha, G., and Ramm, H. (2005),
Combained Pile Raft Foundations (CPRF) - an appropriate solution for the
foundations of high rise buildings. Slovak Journal of Civil Engineering, 3, 19-29.
Katzenbach, R., Clauss, F., Ramm, H., Waberseck, T. and Choudhury, D. (2009),
Combined pile-raft foundations and energy piles – Recent trends in research and
practice. Proceedings of International Conference on Deep Foundations – CPRF
and Energy Piles, May 15, 2009, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, Darmstadt
Geotechnics No. 18, Ed. R. Katzenbach, 3-20.
Katzenbach, R., Ramm, H. and Choudhury, D. (2012), Combined pile-raft

foundations – a sustainable foundation concept. Proc. of 9th International
- 21 -
Conference on Testing and Design Methods for Deep Foundations, 18-20

September, Kanazawa, Japan, p. 10.
Katzenbach, R., Leppla, S., Ramm, H., Seip, M. and Kuttig, H. (2013), Design
and construction of deep foundation systems and retaining structures in urban
areas in difficult soil and groundwater conditions. Procedia Engineering, 57, 540-
548.
Kitiyodom, P., Matsumoto, T. and Kawaguchi, K. (2005), A simplified analysis

method for piled raft foundations subjected to ground movements induced by
tunnelling. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in
Geomechanics, 29(15), 1485-1507.
Kitiyodom, P. and Matsumoto, T. (2003), A simplified analysis method for piled

raft foundations in non-homogeneous soils. International Journal for Numerical
and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, 27(2), 85-109.
Leung, C.F. and Radhakrishnan, R. (1985), The behaviour of pile-raft foundation

in weak rock. Proceedings of 11th ICSMFE, San Francisco, 3, 1429-1432.
Maharaj, D.K. and Gandhi, S.R. (2004), Non-linear finite element analysis of
piled-raft foundations. Proceedings of the ICE - Geotechnical Engineering,
157(3), 107 –113.
Mandolini, A., Laora, R.D. and Mascarucci, Y. (2013), Rational design of piled
raft. Procedia Engineering, 57, 45-52.
Narasimhan, S.L. and Kameswara Rao, N.S.V. (1982), Finite element analysis of
piled circular footings. Proceedings of 4th ICNMG, Edmonton, 2, 843-852.
O’Brien, A.S., Burland, J.B. and Chapman, T. (2012), Rafts and piled rafts,
Chapter 56. ICE Manual of Geotechnical Engineering, 853-886.
O’Neill, M.W. (1996), Case histories of pile-supported rafts. Report by ISSMFE

Technical Committee No. 18.
Peck, R. B. (1969), Advantages and limitations of the observational method in

applied soil mechanics. Géotechnique, 19(2), 171-187.
- 22 -
Poulos, H.G. (2001), Piled raft foundations: design and applications.

Géotechnique, 51(2), 95-113.
Poulos, H.G. (1994), An approximate numerical analysis of pile–raft interaction.

International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics,
18(2), 73-92.
Poulos, H.G., Small, J.C., Ta, L.D., Sinha, J. and Chen, L. (1997), Comparison of
some methods for analysis of piled rafts. Proceedings of 14th ICSMGE, Hamburg,
2, 1119-1124.
Prakoso, W. and Kulhawy, F. (2001), Contribution to piled raft foundation

design.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(1),
17–24.
Randolph, M.F. (1983), Design of piled raft foundations. CUED/D – Soils TR

143, Cambridge University.
Randolph, M.F. (1994), Design methods for pile groups and piled rafts.
Proceedings of 13th ICSMGE, New Delhi, 5, 61-82.
Randolph, M.F. and Clancy, P. (1993), Efficient design of piled rafts.

Proceedings of Deep Foundations on Bored and Auger Piles, Ghent, 119-130.
Ranganatham, B.V. and Kaniraj, S.R. (1978), Settlement of model pile

foundations in sand. Indian Geotechnical Journal, 8(1), 1-26.
Reul, O. (2000), In-situ-Messungen und numerische Studien zum Tragverhalten

der Kombinierten Pfahl-Plattengründung. Mitteilungen des Institutes und der
Versuchsanstalt für Geotechnik der Technischen Universität Darmstadt, Heft 53
(in German).
Reul, O. and Randolph, M.F. (2004), Design strategies for piled rafts subjected to
nonuniform vertical loading. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering,130(1),1-13.
Reul, O. and Randolph, M.F. (2009), Optimised design of combined pile-raft

foundations. Darmstadt Geotechnics 18, 149-169.
- 23 -
Sales, M.M., Small, J.C. and Poulos, H.G. (2010), Compensated piled rafts in
clayey soils: behavior, measurements and predictions. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, 47, 327-345.
Small, J.C. and Liu, H.L.S. (2008), Time-settlement behaviour of piled raft
foundations using infinite elements. Computers and Geotechnics, 35(2), 187-195.
Yamashita, K., Kakurai, M. and Yamada, T. (1994), Investigation of a pile raft

foundation on stiff clay. Proceedings of 13th ICSMGE, New Delhi, 2, 543-546.
Yamashita, K., Hamada, J., Onimaru, S. and Higashino, M. (2012), Seismic

behavior of piled raft with ground improvement supporting a base-isolated
building on soft ground in Tokyo. Soils and Foundations, 52, 1000-1015.
ISBN 978-3-942068-06-2
ISSN 1436-6517
View publication stats

ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guideline: July 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guideline: July 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guideline

Book · July 2013

Rolf Katzenbach Deepankar Choudhury

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Stiffness and Strength of Dubai Sedimentary Rock View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guideline

Technische Universität Darmstadt

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rolf Katzenbach

ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guideline

Technische Universität Darmstadt

From the Desk of Editors

Greetings from the ISSMGE Technical Committee TC 212 – Deep Foundations.

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rolf Katzenbach Prof. Dr. Deepankar Choudhury

ISSMGE Combined Pile-Raft Foundation Guideline

Prof. Jean-Louis Briaud, USA

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rolf Katzenbach, Germany

Michele B. Jamiolkowski, Italy

Gary Axelsson, Sweden

Maosong Huang, China

1 Terms and Definitions

The Combined Pile-Raft Foundation (CPRF) is a geotechnical composite

characteristic base resistance results from the integration of the settlement

Fig. 1.1 Combined Pile-Raft Foundation (CPRF)

Fig. 1.2 Qualitative example of a possible settlement reduction of

The CPRF guideline applies to the design, dimensioning, inspection and

According to Eurocode EC 7, the Geotechnical Category 3 may be assigned for

Number Symbol Explanation Unit Section

5 E2 effect of actions for SLS 8

8 j index for a pile - 1

17 Rs,k(s) characteristic value of the shaft resistance MN 1

19 R1,tot total resistance of a CPRF for ULS MN 7

22 ssf settlement of a spread foundation m 1

25 x,y,z cartesian coordinates m 1

28 G partial safety factor for a permanent - 7

30 R partial safety factor for a resistance - 7

31 σ(s,x,y) contact pressure as a function of MN/m² 1

5 Soil investigation and evaluation

5.1 Field investigation

5.2 Laboratory investigation

5.3 Tasks within the construction process

Exposures during the constructing process of a CPRF have to be examined and

If the soil and groundwater conditions encountered during the construction

6 Requirements to the computational methods for the design of a CPRF

The bearing effect of a CPRF is influenced by the interactions of the particular

6.2 Bearing behaviour of a single pile

6.3 Requirements for a computational model

7 ULS – Ultimate Limit State

7.1 Proof of the external bearing capacity (ULS)

A sufficient safety against failure of the overall system is achieved by fulfilling

If the proof is not performed by a realistic computational model according to

"Simple cases" are given if the following conditions are fulfilled:

 A geometrically uniform configuration of the CPRF:

 Homogeneous subsoil (no layering):

7.2 Proof of the internal bearing capacity (ULS)

 Piles: Tension (construction stages), compression combined with

If no detailed proof is performed, the piles have to be reinforced to the minimum

8 SLS – Serviceability Limit State

8.1 Proof of the external serviceability

A sufficient safety of the serviceability is achieved by fulfilling the following

E2,d  E2,k  Cd (8.1)

The effects E dependent on the actions Fk,i have to be computed by a