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

net/publication/272182158

Field measurements on piled raft foundations in Japan

Conference Paper · September 2012

CITATIONS READS

14 962

1 author:

Kiyoshi Yamashita
Takenaka Research & Development Institute
45 PUBLICATIONS   401 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Settlement and load sharing of piled raft foundations View project

Seismic performance of piled raft foundations View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kiyoshi Yamashita on 10 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Field measurements on piled raft foundations in Japan
Yamashita, K.
R & D Institute, Takenaka Corporation, Japan

Keywords: piled raft, settlement, load sharing, measurement, case history, seismic loading

ABSTRACT: This paper offers field measurements on the settlement and the load sharing of piled rafts in
Japan. In the first part of this paper, the measurement results obtained from the selected structures on piled
rafts, completed in 1984 to 2009, are overviewed and general aspects of the foundation settlements and the
load sharing between raft and piles are discussed. In the second part of this paper, the two buildings on piled
rafts subjected to the seismic loading during the 2011 Tohoku Pacific Earthquake are presented and the
effects of the strong seismic motion on the behavior of the piled rafts are discussed.

1 INTRODUCTION and the piles have been carefully carried out

In designing raft foundations, engineers frequently
encounter situations in which the bearing capacity of
the raft is quite adequate, but the settlements are
estimated to be excessive. In such cases, it is
proposed that the combined use of a raft, along with
a limited number of piles, could be an economical
countermeasure (Burland et al., 1977; Randolph,
1994). In recent years, there has been increasing
recognition that the use of piles to reduce raft
settlements can lead to considerable economic
savings without compromising the safety and the
performance of the foundations (Poulos, 2001).
For designing piled rafts, the interaction of the
raft-soil-pile system must be carefully considered in
order to predict the settlement and the load sharing
between the raft and the piles. Detailed
investigations of several high-rise buildings in
Germany, mainly in Frankfurt, have been carried out
(Katzenbach et al., 2000). However, not so many
case histories exist on the monitoring the load
sharing between the raft and the piles as well as the
settlements. Thus, the accumulation of field
evidence is required to develop more reliable design
methods for piled rafts (Mandolini et al., 2005).
Piled raft foundations have been used in Japan for
many buildings, including tall buildings in excess of
150 m, since a piled raft was first used in the
four-story building in 1987. Field measurements on
the settlements and the load sharing between the raft
(Yamashita et al., 2011a; Yamashita et al., 2011b).
In the first part of this paper, the field
measurement results obtained from the selected
structures on piled rafts in Japan, completed in 1984
to 2009, are overviewed. Among these, piled rafts
with ground improvement, which were employed to
cope with liquefaction beneath the raft, are included.
Based on the measurement results, general aspects
of the foundation settlement and the load sharing
between the raft and the piles are discussed.
At present, it is required to develop more reliable
seismic design methods for piled rafts in Japan and
other countries where major earthquakes occur
frequently. However, only a few case histories on
monitoring seismic soil-pile-structure interaction
behavior exist (Mendoza et al., 2000). In the second
part of this paper, the two case histories of the piled
rafts subjected to the seismic loading during the
2011 Tohoku Pacific Earthquake are presented. The
effects of the strong seismic motion on the behavior
of the piled rafts are discussed.
2 CASE HISTORIES IN 1980S AND 1990S
2.1 Introduction
Early in the 1980s in Japan, there existed no case
histories on monitoring the settlement and the load
sharing behavior of piled rafts. Therefore, to
investigate the effectiveness of settlement reducing
79
Figure 1. Schematic view of the concrete silo with soil profile.

piles and the load sharing between the raft and the
piles, field measurements on the foundation
settlement and the axial loads of the piles, the
contact pressures beneath the raft were carried out.
In the 1980s and 1990s, piled rafts were applied to
several structures, mainly small-scale structures
(Kakurai, 2002). These foundations may be called
‘piled rafts of the first generation in Japan’.

2.2 Piled rafts applied to small-scale structures

A piled raft was first applied to the small silo on a
trial basis before applying to an actual building
(Kakurai et al., 1987). Figure 1 shows a schematic
view of the concrete silo and foundation with a soil
profile. The subsoil consists of a soft alluvial stratum
from the ground surface to a depth of 44 m. The silty
soil layer between depths of 9 to 15 m is normally
consolidated. The average contact pressure over the
raft was 74 kPa. Consequently, a raft foundation
with five friction piles was used aiming at reducing
the excess consolidation settlement in the normally
consolidated silty soil. Figure 2 shows the increase
in the total load, the total pile load and the
foundation settlements with time. The sum of the
measured total pile-head load was 43% of the total
structure load; the rest of the total structure load
57% was supported by the raft. The average
settlement reached 31 mm at the end of observation.
Based on the favorable results, a piled raft was
first used in the construction of a four-story office
building in Saitama City (former Urawa City) in
1987 (Yamashita et al., 1991). Figure 3 shows a
schematic view of the building and foundation with
a soil profile. The soil profile to a depth of 5 m is
made of diluvial clay called Kanto Loam. The
average contact pressure of the building was 61 kPa.
A raft with friction piles was employed primarily to
80
Figure 2. Increase in total load, total pile load and foundation
settlements with time.
reduce the differential settlements. The friction pile
was located just below the column where the
superstructure load was presumed to be concentrated.
Figure 4 shows a layout of the piles. The piles were
constructed by inserting a steel-H member into a
pre-augered borehole filled with mix-in-place soil
cement. The measured foundation settlements were
3.0 to 10.5 mm and the maximum angular rotation of
the raft was 1/1760 radian at the end of construction.
The relationship between the sum of the pile-head
load and the total load in the tributary area is shown
in Fig. 5. The ratio of the sum of the measured
pile-head loads to the building load estimated in the
tributary area of the three piles was 0.51 at the end
of construction and slightly increased to 0.56 three
to twelve months after the end of construction.
The results of the field measurements on the piled
rafts supporting the three structures, i.e. the concrete
silo, the four-story building and the five-story

Consolidation yield
N-value stress (kPa)
0 50 0 500 100
0
Figure 3. Schematic view of the four-story building with soil
profile.
building (Yamashita et al., 1994), were summarized
as follows:
・The measured maximum settlements were 11 to
35 mm at the end of observation.
・The ratios of the load carried by the piles to the
total load were estimated to be 0.43 to 0.56 at the
end of observation. The ratios of the load carried
by the piles to the total load were approximately
equal to those to the effective load because the
buoyancy forces were negligible.
Based on the field measurements, it was found
that piles were effective in reducing overall and
differential settlements of the foundation and a raft
could share about half of the structure load.
3 CASE HISTORIES IN 2000S
3.1 Introduction
In the early 2000s, a basic framework of design
method, including seismic design method, for piled
rafts has been established in Japan (AIJ, 2001). To
confirm the validity of the design method, field
measurements on the settlements and the load
sharing between the raft and the piles have been
carried out for the selected structures. Table 1 shows
the case histories of the piled rafts completed in the
2000s (Yamashita et al., 2011a; Yamashita et al.,
2011b).
3.2 Design method
The design method for the piled rafts listed in Table
1 was based on the following common design
criteria. The design criteria under working load
conditions are as follows:
Unconfined
compressive
strength (kPa)
0 500
Figure 4. Foundation plan with locations of monitoring
devices.
Figure 5. Increase in total load, total pile load and
foundation settlements with time.
・It has to be proved that the factor of safety
against the ultimate bearing capacity of a piled
raft foundation is larger than 3.0. The ultimate
bearing capacity of the piled raft foundation can
be replaced with the ultimate bearing capacity of
the raft foundation alone (ignoring the effect of
the piles).
・It has to be proved that the maximum settlement
and the maximum differential settlement are less
than the allowable values. The maximum
differential settlement can be replaced with the
maximum angular rotation.
Typical values for the limited allowable angular
rotation are 1/1000 to 1/500 radian in Japan. The
settlements of the foundations, as well as the load
sharing between raft and piles, were computed by
the simplified method of analysis developed by
Yamashita et al. (1998). The deformation parameters
of the soil were determined based on the shear
81
 Table 1. Case histories of piled rafts in 2000s.

㻹㼍㼤㼕㼙㼡㼙 㻾㼍㼒㼠㻌㼏㼛㼚㼠㼍㼏㼠 㻰㼑㼜㼠㼔㻌㼛㼒 㻰㼑㼜㼠㼔㻌㼛㼒 㻼㼕㼘㼑㼟

㻿㼠㼞㼡㼏㼠㼡㼞㼑 㻯㼛㼚㼟㼠㼞㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚
㻿㼕㼠㼑 㼔㼑㼕㼓㼔㼠 㼜㼞㼑㼟㼟㼡㼞㼑 㼒㼛㼡㼚㼐㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚 㼓㼞㼛㼡㼚㼐㼣㼍㼠㼑㼞 㻸㼑㼚㼓㼠㼔 㻰㼕㼍㼙㼑㼠㼑㼞
㼜㼑㼞㼕㼛㼐
㻔㼙㻕 （㼗㻼㼍） 㻔㼙㻕 㼠㼍㼎㼘㼑 㻔㼙㻕 㻺㼡㼙㼎㼑㼞 㻼㼕㼘㼑㻌㼠㼥㼜㼑
㻔㼙㻕 㻔㼙㻕

㻯㼍㼟㼠㻙㼕㼚㻙㼜㼘㼍㼏㼑
㻝㻝㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼛㼒㼒㼕㼏㼑㻌㼎㼡㼕㼘㼐㼕㼚㼓 㻭㼕㼏㼔㼕 㻞㻜㻜㻠㻙㻜㻡 㻢㻜㻚㻤 㻝㻤㻝 㻟㻚㻜，㻟㻚㻢 㻝㻣㻚㻜 㻠㻜 㻞㻣㻚㻡，㻞㻢㻚㻥 㻝㻚㻝㻛㻝㻚㻠 ＊㻙㻝㻚㻡㻛㻝㻚㻤 ＊
㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑

㻮㼛㼞㼑㼐㻌㻌㼜㼞㼑㼏㼍㼟㼠
㻝㻟㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼔㼛㼟㼜㼕㼠㼍㼘 㻻㼟㼍㼗㼍 㻞㻜㻜㻠㻙㻜㻡 㻡㻝㻚㻟 㻝㻢㻥 㻢㻚㻠 㻞㻚㻡 㻝㻣 㻝㻥㻚㻜 㻜㻚㻤㻙㻝㻚㻜
㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑

㻮㼛㼞㼑㼐㻌㻌㼜㼞㼑㼏㼍㼟㼠
㻴㼍㼐㼞㼛㼚㻌㼑㼤㼜㼑㼞㼕㼙㼑㼚㼠㼍㼘㻌㼔㼍㼘㼘 㻵㼎㼍㼞㼍㼗㼕 㻞㻜㻜㻡㻙㻜㻣 㻝㻥㻚㻜 㻞㻡㻥－㻠㻠㻞 㻤㻚㻜－㻝㻟㻚㻠 㻠㻚㻜 㻟㻣㻝 㻞㻞㻚㻜－㻞㻡㻚㻣 㻜㻚㻢㻙㻜㻚㻤
㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑

㻯㼍㼟㼠㻙㼕㼚㻙㼜㼘㼍㼏㼑
㻠㻣㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌ｒ㼑㼟㼕㼐㼑㼚㼠㼕㼍㼘㻌㼠㼛㼣㼑㼞 㻭㼕㼏㼔㼕 㻞㻜㻜㻢㻙㻜㻥 㻝㻢㻝㻚㻥 㻢㻜㻜 㻠㻚㻟 㻞㻚㻡 㻟㻢 㻡㻜㻚㻞 㻝㻚㻡㻙㻝㻚㻥㻛㻞㻚㻥＊
㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑

㻮㼛㼞㼑㼐㻌㻌㼜㼞㼑㼏㼍㼟㼠
㻣㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼛㼒㼒㼕㼏㼑㻌㼎㼡㼕㼘㼐㼕㼚㼓 㼀㼛㼗㼥㼛 㻞㻜㻜㻟㻙㻜㻠 㻞㻥㻚㻠 㻝㻜㻜 㻝㻚㻢，㻞㻚㻞 㻝㻚㻡 㻣㻜 㻞㻥㻚㻤，㻟㻜㻚㻠 㻜㻚㻢㻙㻜㻚㻥
㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑

㻯㼍㼟㼠㻙㼕㼚㻙㼜㼘㼍㼏㼑
㻝㻥㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼞㼑㼟㼕㼐㼑㼚㼠㼕㼍㼘㻌㼎㼡㼕㼘㼐㼕㼚㼓 㻷㼍㼓㼛㼟㼔㼕㼙㼍 㻞㻜㻜㻡㻙㻜㻢 㻣㻡㻚㻤 㻞㻡㻣 㻟㻚㻞 㻟㻚㻜 㻞㻤 㻢㻞㻚㻤 㻝㻚㻞㻛㻝㻚㻤 ＊，㻝㻚㻟㻛㻞㻚㻞 ＊
㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑

㻮㼛㼞㼑㼐㻌㻌㼜㼞㼑㼏㼍㼟㼠
㻝㻞㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼞㼑㼟㼕㼐㼑㼚㼠㼕㼍㼘㻌㼎㼡㼕㼘㼐㼕㼚㼓 㼀㼛㼗㼥㼛 㻞㻜㻜㻣㻙㻜㻤 㻟㻤㻚㻣 㻝㻥㻥 㻠㻚㻤 㻝㻚㻤 㻝㻢 㻠㻡㻚㻜 㻜㻚㻥㻙㻝㻚㻞
㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑

㻼㼕㼘㼑㼐㻌㼞㼍㼒㼠 㼣㼕㼠㼔㻌㼓㼞㼛㼡㼚㼐㻌㼕㼙㼜㼞㼛㼢㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠
＊ 㻰㼕㼍㼙㼑㼠㼑㼞㻌㼛㼒㻌㼑㼚㼘㼍㼞㼓㼑㼐㻌㼎㼍㼟㼑

modulus at very small strains. The secant shear
modulus was set to 0.30 times the shear modulus at
very small strains in the analysis.
The design criteria under seismic loading
conditions are as follows:
・It has to be proved that the factor of safety against
the ultimate bearing capacity of the piled raft is
larger than 1.5 under vertical loading together
with lateral loading.
・It generally has to be proved that the factor of
safety against the ultimate bearing capacity of the
piles is larger than 1.5 against the maximum axial
load assumed in the design load sharing.
The influence of the lateral loading on the piled
raft has to be considered, i.e., the maximum bending
moment and the shear force on the cross-sections of
the pile evaluated by the analytical method
developed by Hamada et al. (2009) should be less
than the design structural strength of the piles.
3.3 Thirteen-story hospital on soft clay
The hospital building is located in Osaka (Yamashita
et al., 2011a). Figure 6 shows a schematic view of
the building and the foundation with a soil profile.
The building consists of a thirteen-story high-rise
section and a four-story low-rise section. The
high-rise part is a steel-framed structure, while the
low-rise section and the basement are a reinforced
concrete construction. The soil profile down to a
depth of 8 m is made of loose sand and silty sand.
From the depth of 8 to 21 m, there lie soft sandy silt
and silty clay layers.
The average contact pressure over the raft was
169 kPa in the high-rise section and 114 kPa in the
low-rise section. In the low-rise section, a raft
foundation was proposed because the consolidation
yield stresses of the soft sandy silt and the silty clay
below the raft were slightly larger than the average
contact pressure. In the high-rise section, to reduce
consolidation and differential settlement, a piled raft
foundation consisting of seventeen 19-m long PHC
(pretensioned spun high-strength concrete) piles in
the inside and 198 steel-H piles built in the
soil-cement diaphragm walls in the perimeter was
proposed. The piles were constructed by inserting
the PHC piles into a pre-augered borehole filled with
mixed-in-place soil cement.
Figure 7 shows the foundation plan with a layout
of the piles and the locations of the monitoring
devices. The two piles at locations of 3C and 4C
were installed with a couple of LVDT-type strain
gauges at the pile head. Four earth pressure cells and
one piezometer were installed beneath the raft. The
vertical ground displacement below the raft was
measured near the center of the high-rise section by
differential settlement gauges. The settlements of the
foundation were measured at the monitoring points
of the selected columns by an optical level.
Figure 8 shows the vertical ground displacement
measured at the depth of 7.5 m, which is
approximately equal to the foundation settlement,
with the settlement of the raft measured at column
3C by an optical level. The ground displacement
reached 20.6 mm at the end of observation, 52
months after the end of construction. The maximum
angular rotation was 1/1440 radian at the edge of the
high-rise section.

82
 㻿㼠㼑㼑㼘㻙㻴㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑㼟㻌㼕㼚㻌
㼟㼛㼕㼘㻙㼏㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌
㼐㼕㼍㼜㼔㼞㼍㼓㼙㻌㼣㼍㼘㼘㼟㻌

Figure 6. Schematic view of the building and foundation Figure 7. Layout of piles with locations of monitoring devices.
with soil profile.

Figure 8. Measured settlement of ground and raft. Figure 9. Measured axial loads of piles 3C and 4C.
Load 　(kN)

㻟㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻜
㼀㼛㼠㼍㼘㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐
㻜㻞㻜
㻾㼍㼒㼠㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐
㻠㻜㻢㻜㻤㻜
㻝㻜㻝㻞
㻝㻠㻝㻢㻝㻤
㻞㻜㻞㻞
Time （day)
㻮㼡㼛㼥㼍㼚㼏㼥
㻜㻜 㻜 㻜㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻜㻜㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻜㻜㻜㻜

系列1
系列5
系列6
㻼㼕㼘㼑㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌

㻝㻜㻜
㻡㻜
㻜
㻜 㻞㻜㻜 㻠㻜㻜 㻢㻜㻜 㻤㻜㻜 㻝㻜㻜㻜 㻝㻞㻜㻜 㻝㻠㻜㻜 㻝㻢㻜㻜 㻝㻤㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻱㼒㼒㼑㼏㼠㼕㼢㼑㻌
㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌

㻱㻝 㻱㻞 㻱㻟 㻱㻠 㼃 系列5

Figure 10. Measured contact pressures and pore-water pressure. Figure 11. Load sharing between raft and piles in
tributary area.

Figure 9 shows the measured axial loads of the load, is 23.8 MN. The sum of the measured
two piles. Figure 10 shows the development of the pile-head loads and the raft load in the tributary area
measured contact pressures of the raft and the is generally consistent with the sum of the design
pore-water pressure beneath the raft. Figure 11 load of the two columns. The ratios of the load
shows the time-dependent load sharing among the carried by the piles to the effective load were
piles, the soil and the buoyancy in the tributary area estimated to be 0.60 to 0.62 and those to the total
of two columns, 3C and 4C. The sum of the load were estimated to be 0.45 to 0.46, respectively,
measured pile-head loads and the raft load in the 25 to 52 months after the end of construction.
tributary area varied from 28 to 29 MN 25 to 52
months after the end of construction. The sum of the 3.4 Forty-seven-story residential tower on medium
design vertical load of the two columns, which sand
corresponds to the sum of the dead load and the live
83
 㻡㻰㻌 㻣㻰㻌
㻡㻰㻌 㻣㻰㻌

㼀㼞㼕㼎㼡㼠㼍㼞㼥㻌 㼍㼞㼑㼍㻌
㻝㻢㻝㻚㻥㼙㻌

㼀㼞㼕㼎㼡㼠㼍㼞㼥㻌 㼍㼞㼑㼍㻌

㻿㻼㼀㻌 㻿㻙㼣㼍㼢㼑㻌
㻺㻙㼂㼍㼘㼡㼑㻌 㼂㼟㻔㼙㻛㼟㻕㻌
㻳㻸±㻌㻜
㻜 㻢㻜 㻜
㻜㻌 㻌 㻌 㻡㻜㻌 㻜㻌 㻌 㻌 㻌㻡㻜㻜
㻡㻜㻜㻌 㻸㼍㼙㼕㼚㼍㼠㼑㼐㻌㼞㼡㼎㼎㼑㼞㻌㼎㼑㼍㼞㼕㼚㼓㼟㻌 Figure 13. Layout of piles with locations of monitoring devices.
㻿㼕㼘㼠
㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㼓㼞㼍㼢㼑㼘 㻡㻚㻟㼙㻌 㻡㻚㻤㼙㻌 㻠㻚㻟㼙㻌
㻝㻜
㻿㼍㼚㼐
㻝㻤㼙㻌
㻞㻜
㻿㼕㼘㼠
㻰㼑㼜㼠㼔㻌㻔㼙㻕

㻟㻜 㻿㼍㼚㼐
㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㼓㼞㼍㼢㼑㼘
㻟㻞㼙㻌

㻠㻜 㻿㼍㼚㼐
㻠㻝㼙㻌
㻿㼕㼘㼠
㻡㻜 㻡㻞㻚㻠㼙㻌
㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㼓㼞㼍㼢㼑㼘 㻡㻠㻚㻡㼙㻌
㻢㻜

㻣㻜㼙㻌 㻿㼑㼠㼠㼘㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌㼓㼍㼡㼓㼑㼟㻌

Figure 12. Schematic view of the building and foundation with

soil profile. Figure 14. Measured vertical ground displacements.

The forty-seven-story residential tower is located in gauges.

Nagoya (Yamashita et al., 2011a). Figure 12 shows a Figure 14 shows the measured vertical ground
schematic view of the building and the foundation displacements where the initial values of the
with a soil profile. The building is a reinforced displacements were taken right before the casting the
concrete structure with a base isolation system. The foundation slab. The ground displacement measured
soil profile below a depth of 4 m from the ground at a depth of 5.3 m is approximately equal to the
surface consists of diluvial medium to dense foundation settlement. The measured ground
sand-and-gravel and sand to a depth of 17 m, displacement reached 23.4 mm at the end of the
underlain by medium silt to a depth of 27 m. construction. Thereafter, the displacement increased
Between depths of 43 and 53m, there lies medium very slightly to 24.2 mm at the end of observation,
silt. 17 months after the end of construction. Based on
The average contact pressure over the raft was the measured settlements by an optical level 17
600 kPa. The reinforced concrete raft is founded on months after the end of construction, the measured
the medium-to-dense sand and gravel. To reduce the settlements were 12 to 29 mm and the maximum
excessive settlement due to the medium silt layers, a angular rotation of the raft was 1/1000 radian. Figure
piled raft foundation consisting of thirty-six 50-m 15 shows the development of the measured axial
long cast-in-place concrete piles was proposed. loads on pile 7D. The load transferred to the pile
Figure 13 shows the foundation plan with a layout of toes was relatively small and the instrumented piles
the piles the locations of the monitoring devices. show the behavior of friction piles. Figure 16 shows
Two piles, 5D and 7D, were provided with a couple the development of the measured contact pressures
of LVDT-type strain gauges at the pile head and at of the raft and the pore-water pressure beneath the
the pile toe. Eight earth pressure cells and one raft after the end of construction.
piezometer were installed beneath the raft Figure 17 shows the time-dependent load sharing
surrounding the two piles. The vertical ground among the piles, the soil and the groundwater
displacements below the raft relative to the reference buoyancy in the tributary area of column 7D and the
point at a depth of 70 m using differential settlement ratio of the load carried by the pile to the effective

84
 ■

Figure 15. Measured axial loads of the piles 7D. Figure 16. Measured contact pressures and pore-water pressure.

㻠㻜
㻟㻜
㻞㻜
㻝㻜
㼀㼛㼠㼍㼘㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐
㻜
㻾㼍㼒㼠㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐
㻜 㻞㻜 㻠㻜 㻢㻜 㻤㻜 㻝㻜 㻝㻞
㻮㼡㼛㼥㼍㼚㼏㼥
㻜 㻜 㻜 㻜 㻜㻜 㻜㻜
系列3
㻰㼑㼟㼕㼓㼚㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌㻞㻢㻚㻟㻹㻺
㻼㼕㼘㼑㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌

㻱㼒㼒㼑㼏㼠㼕㼢㼑㻌
㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌

（a）Load sharing between raft and pile （b）Ratio of load carried by pile

Figure 17. Load sharing between raft and piles in tributary area of column 7D.

load versus time together with that to the total load
versus time. The sum of the measured pile-head load
and raft load on the tributary area was 29.6 MN on
columns 7D at the end of observation. The design
vertical load of columns 7D, which correspond to
the sum of the dead load and the live load, was 35.6
MN. Therefore, the sum of the measured pile-head
load and the raft load on the tributary area was
consistent with the design load. The ratios of the
load carried by the piles to the effective load on the
tributary area of columns 5D and 7D were estimated
to be 0.93 and 0.87, respectively, both at the end of
construction and at the end of observation.
3.5 Piled raft with ground improvement
The seven-story office building is located in
Tokyo (Yamashita et al., 2011b). Figure 18 shows a
schematic view of the building and the foundation
with a soil profile. The building is a steel-framed
structure. The soil profile down to a depth of 11 m
from the ground surface is made of soft silt and
loose sand. Between depths of 11 m to 42 m, there
lies a thick soft to medium silt stratum, underlain by
a diluvial very dense sandy layer.

Figure 18. Schematic view of the building and foundation with soil profile.

85
 An assessment of a potential of liquefaction displacements below the raft were measured by
during earthquakes was carried out using the differential settlement gauges. The settlements of the
simplified method (Tokimatsu and Yoshimi, 1983). foundation were measured by an optical level.
It indicated that the loose sand had a potential of Figure 21 shows the measured vertical ground
liquefaction during earthquakes with the peak displacements below the raft at three depths relative
horizontal ground acceleration of 2.0 m/s2. to a reference point at a depth of 46 m. The ground
Therefore, to cope with the liquefiable sand and displacement at a depth of 3.0 m reached 21.9 mm at
ensure bearing capacity of a raft, grid-form deep the end of observation, 72 months after the end of
cement mixing walls (TOFT method) shown in Fig. construction. The settlements of the foundation
19 were employed below the raft. As to the TOFT measured by the optical level were 17 to 31 mm and
method, typical compressive strength of the soil the maximum angular rotation of the raft was 1/1200
cement is 2 N/mm2 and the high-modulus radian four years after the end of construction.
soil-cement walls confine loose sand so as not to Figure 22 shows the time-dependent load sharing
cause excessive shear deformation to the loose sand among the piles, the soil, the soil-cement walls and
during earthquakes. The effectiveness of the TOFT the buoyancy in the tributary area, where the total
method was confirmed during the 1995
Hyogoken-Nambu earthquake (Tokimatsu et al.,
1996).
The average contact pressure over the raft was
100 kPa. In order to reduce overall and differential
settlement due to consolidation of the soft cohesive
soil, a piled raft consisting of seventy 30-m long
PHC piles with grid-form deep cement mixing walls
was employed. Figure 20 shows a layout of the piles
and the grid-form soil-cement wall with the
locations of the monitoring devices. Two piles were
installed with a couple of LVDT-type strain gauges.
Two earth pressure cells and a piezometer were
installed beneath the raft. The vertical ground Figure 19. Grid-form deep cement mixing walls (TOFT
method).
■

Grid-form soil-cement walls Office building Dining hall

㻰 ● ◎◎ ● ● ○ ○ ● ● ○ ○ ● ● ○ ○ ● ● ◎ ◎
Pile diameter
㻝㻜㻚㻌㼙

○ ◎ d=0.9m ○ d=0.8m
○○

㻯 ○ ● ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ● ● ○
○
Tributary area d=0.7m d=0.6m
㻟㻞㻚㻠㼙
㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙

○ ●

☆
○
○○

㻮 ○ ○ ○
● ● ○ ○ ○ ○
E1
○ ○ ● ●
E2
○ Monitoring devices
㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙

W ● ○
○ ○ Instrumented pile
○
○ ● ● ○ ○ ● ● ○ ○ ● ● ○ ○ ◎ ◎
㻭
● ● ●
□ Earth pressure cell
△ Piezometer ■
㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻝㻜㻚㻤㼙
☆ Settlement gauges
㻺

㻝㻝㻤㻚㻤㼙

① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧ ⑨ ⑩ ⑪ ⑫
Figure 20. Layout of piles and grid-form deep cement mixing walls with locations of monitoring devices.

Figure 21. Measured vertical ground displacement. Figure 22. Time-dependent load sharing between raft and
piles in tributary area.

86
 ■
load is assumed to be equal to the sum of the design 㻜㻌
㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌（㼐㼍㼥㼟）
㻞㻜㻜㻌 㻠㻜㻜㻌 㻢㻜㻜㻌 㻤㻜㻜㻌 㻝㻜㻜㻜㻌㻝㻞㻜㻜㻌㻝㻠㻜㻜㻌㻝㻢㻜㻜㻌㻝㻤㻜㻜㻌㻞㻜㻜㻜㻌㻞㻞㻜㻜㻌㻞㻠㻜㻜㻌㻞㻢㻜㻜㻌
column load. The ratio of the load carried by the 㻜㻌

piles to the effective load was estimated to be 0.54 at

the end of construction and increased to 0.72 at the 㻝㻜㻌

㻿㼑㼠㼠㼘㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌㻔㼙㼙㻕
end of observation. This was supposed to be caused
by a decrease in raft resistance due to the 㻞㻜㻌

consolidation settlement of the soft silt layers below

the raft. Meanwhile, the ratio of the load carried by 㻟㻜㻌

the piles to the total load was estimated to be 0.50 at

the end of construction and 0.66 at the end of 㻠㻜㻌

observation. Figure 23. Measured foundation settlements.

㻝㻚㻟㻜㻌

4 DISCUSSIONS ON MEASUREMENTS
㻝㻚㻞㻜㻌

㻿㼠㻛㻿㼑㼛㼏㻌
4.1 Settlement
The vertical ground displacements just below the 㻝㻚㻝㻜㻌

rafts were successively measured by the settlement

gauges from the beginning of construction to 17 to 㻝㻚㻜㻜㻌
72 months after the end of construction as for six of 㻌 㻜㻌 㻞㻜㻜㻌 㻠㻜㻜㻌 㻢㻜㻜㻌 㻤㻜㻜㻌 㻝㻜㻜㻜㻌 㻝㻞㻜㻜㻌 㻝㻠㻜㻜㻌 㻝㻢㻜㻜㻌 㻝㻤㻜㻜㻌 㻞㻜㻜㻜㻌 㻞㻞㻜㻜㻌 㻞㻠㻜㻜㻌
㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌㼍㼒㼠㼑㼞㻌㻱㻚㻻㻚㻯㻌㻔㼐㼍㼥㼟㻕㻌
the structures in Table 1. The measured settlements
at the end of construction, seoc, were 12 to 23 mm, Figure 24. Ratio of measured settlement after the end of
construction to that at the end of construction.
while those at the end of observation, seobs, reached
17 to 24 mm. Figure 23 shows the relationship
between the foundation settlement and the elapsed 㻱㼚㼐㻙㼎㼑㼍㼞㼕㼚㼓㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑㼟㻌 㻌
time for the six structures. The measured settlements ○
● 㻌 㻝㻝㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼎㼡㼕㼘㼐㼕㼚㼓㻘㻌㻝㻟㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼎㼡㼕㼘㼐㼕㼚㼓㻘㻌㻠㻣㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼎㼡㼕㼘㼐㼕㼚㼓㻌
□
■ 㻌 㻝㻥㻙㼟㼠㼛㼞㼥㻌㼎㼡㼕㼘㼐㼕㼚㼓㻌㻔㼣㼕㼠㼔㻌㼓㼞㼛㼡㼚㼐㻌㼕㼙㼜㼞㼛㼢㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻕㻌
□㻌
■㻌 㼅㼍㼙㼍㼟㼔㼕㼠㼍㻌㻒㻌㻴㼍㼙㼍㼐㼍㻘㻌㻞㻜㻝㻝㻌㻔㼣㼕㼠㼔㻌㼓㼞㼛㼡㼚㼐㻌㼕㼙㼜㼞㼛㼢㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻕㻌
were relatively small, less than 30 mm, and within a 㻲㼞㼕㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑㼟㻌
○㻌 㻴㼍㼐㼞㼛㼚㻌㼑㼤㼜㼑㼞㼕㼙㼑㼚㼠㼍㼘㻌㼔㼍㼘㼘㻌
limited range. ◇㻌 㻷㼍㼗㼡㼞㼍㼕㻌㼑㼠㻌㼍㼘㻚㻘㻌㻝㻥㻤㻣㻧㻌㼅㼍㼙㼍㼟㼔㼕㼠㼍㻌㻒㻌㻷㼍㼗㼡㼞㼍㼕㻘㻌㻝㻥㻥㻝㻧㻌㼅㼍㼙㼍㼟㼔㼕㼠㼍㻌㼑㼠㻌㼍㼘㻚㻘㻌㻝㻥㻥㻠㻌
＋
□㻌 㼅㼍㼙㼍㼟㼔㼕㼠㼍㻌㻒㻌㼅㼍㼙㼍㼐㼍㻘㻌㻞㻜㻜㻥㻌㻔㼣㼕㼠㼔㻌㼓㼞㼛㼡㼚㼐㻌㼕㼙㼜㼞㼛㼢㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻕㻌
Figure 24 shows the ratio of the measured
settlement from the beginning of construction to that
at the end of construction, st/seoc, versus the elapsed
time from the end of construction for the five
structures. The value of st/seoc ranged from 1.03 to
1.20. The increase in the settlements after the end of
construction is supposed to be due to live load and
primary creep of soil in which no consolidation
settlement would occur except for the seven-story
building.

4.2 Load sharing

Mandolini et al. (2005) pointed out that the pile
spacing ratio, which is the ratio of the pile spacing to
the pile diameter, plays a major role in load sharing
between the raft and the piles based on a review of
the available experimental evidence by the
monitoring of full-scale structures. Figure 25 shows
the ratios of the load carried by the piles to the
effective load in the tributary area αp’ at the end of
observation versus the pile spacing ratio s/d as for
the ten case histories, where s is average
center-to-center spacing between the instrumented
pile and the adjacent piles and d is the shaft diameter
of the pile.
Although the value of αp’ varied from 0.43 to 0.93,
it was found that the value of αp’ generally decreased
Figure 25. Ratio of load carried by piles to effective load
versus pile spacing ratio.
as the pile spacing ratio was increased. The value of
αp’ seems to have significantly decreased as the pile
spacing ratio was increased from about four to six.
At the pile spacing ratio of larger than about six, the
value of αp’ seems to decrease gradually.
Furthermore it appears that the value of αp’ depended
on the type of piled rafts, i.e. the value of αp’ for the
raft with end-bearing piles is approximately 0.6 to
87
 ■
0.7 and that for the raft with friction piles is 0.4 to 㻢㻜㼙㻌

0.6. However, it should be noted that the value of αp’

for the seven-story building is somewhat larger than

㻝㻥㼙㻌
the others, possibly, because a decrease in raft 㻿㻼㼀㻌 㻿㻙㼣㼍㼢㼑㻌
㻺㻙㼂㼍㼘㼡㼑㻌 㼂㼟㻔㼙㻛㼟㻕㻌

resistance was caused by the consolidation 㻳㻸±㻜㻌

㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌
㻜㻌 㻌 㻌 㻡㻜㻌 㻜㻌 㻌 㻌 㻡㻜㻜㻌

settlement of the soft silt below the raft. 㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌

㼓㼞㼍㼢㼑㼘㻌 ▽㻤㻚㻜㼙㻌

Based on the measurement results, it is suggested 㻝㻜㻌

㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌
▽㻝㻝㻚㻠㼙㻌
▽㻝㻟㻚㻠㼙㻌
㻝㻞㻚㻡㼙㻌

that piled rafts work more effectively with a pile

㻰㼑㼜㼠㼔㻌 㻔㼙㻕㻌
㻿㼍㼚㼐㼥㻌㼟㼕㼘㼠㻌

spacing ratio of larger than about six on the 㻞㻜㻌 㻿㼕㼘㼠㼥㻌㼟㼍㼚㼐㻌

㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌
㻞㻝㻚㻡㼙㻌

assumption that no consolidation settlement occurs 㻿㼍㼚㼐㼥㻌㼟㼕㼘㼠㻌

in the soil below the raft, where at least 30% of the

㻟㻜㻌 㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌 㻟㻜㻚㻡㼙㻌
㻟㻞㻚㻜㼙㻌
㻿㼍㼚㼐㼥㻌㼟㼕㼘㼠㻌

effective load could be carried by the raft. 㻠㻜㻌

㻿㼕㼘㼠㻌
㻟㻣㻚㻜㼙㻌

㻹㼡㼐㼟㼠㼛㼚㼑㻌 㻠㻝㼙㻌

㻿㼑㼠㼠㼘㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌㼓㼍㼡㼓㼑㼟㻌 㻤㻜㼙㻌

5 SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF PILED RAFTS Figure 26. Schematic view of the building and foundation with
soil profile.
5.1 The 2011 Tohoku Pacific Earthquake N
Ｋ
㻱㼤㼜㼑㼞㼕㼙㼑㼚㼠㼍㼘㻌㼘㼕㼚㼑

The 2011 Tohoku Pacific Earthquake, with an

estimated magnitude of Mw=9.0 Moment Magnitude 㻹㼛㼚㼕㼠㼛㼞㼕㼚㼓㻌㼐㼑㼢㼕㼏㼑㼟

scale, struck the East Japan at 14:46 on Mar. 11, 㻵㼚㼟㼠㼞㼡㼙㼑㼚㼠㼑㼐㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑

㻱㼍㼞㼠㼔㻌㼜㼞㼑㼟㼟㼡㼞㼑㻌㼏㼑㼘㼘
2011. According to the JMA, an earthquake 㻼㻟 㻼㼕㼑㼦㼛㼙㼑㼠㼑㼞
★ 㻿㼑㼠㼠㼘㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌㼓㼍㼡㼓㼑
epicenter was located about 130 km east-southeast
off the Oshika Peninsura at a depth of 23.7 km.
㻢㻜㼙

★㻼㻝 㻼㻞
The earthquake struck the sites of the two
buildings, e.g. the hadron experimental hall and the
twelve-story building listed in Table 1. The 㻮㼑㼍㼙㻌㼐㼡㼙㼜
following shows the field measurement results on 㻮㼑㼍㼙㻌㼘㼕㼚㼑
the piled rafts before and after the earthquake as well
as discussions on the effects of the seismic motion
on the foundation behaviour. 㻡㻢㼙 㻞㻜㼙

Figure 27. Layout of piles with locations of monitoring

5.2 Hadron experimental hall in Ibaraki devices. Ｅ
The hadron experimental hall is located at JPARC
㻱㼤㼜㼑㼞㼕㼙㼑㼚㼠㼍㼘㻌㻴㼍㼘㼘㻌
(Japan Proton Accelerator Research Complex) in
Ibaraki Prefecture (Yamashita et al., 2011a). Figure
26 shows a schematic view of the building and the
foundation with a soil profile. The building is a steel
reinforced concrete structure. The subsoil below a
depth of 6 m consists of diluvial dense
sand-and-gravel and medium to dense sand to a
depth of 16m. Between the depths of 23 and about
40 m, lie cohesive layers with unconfined
compressive strengths of 180 to 480 kPa, underlain
by a weathered sandy mudstone.
Figure 27 shows the foundation plan with a layout
of the piles and the locations of the monitoring
devices. The average contact pressures over the raft Photo 1. Ground subsidence along the building.
were 259 kPa in the experimental line, 350 kPa in Ｋ
the beam line and 442 kPa in the beam dump. The 371 PHC piles with diameters varying from 0.60 to
foundation levels are between depths of 8.0 to 13.4 0.80 m.
m. A reinforced concrete mat was founded on the Forty-four months after the end of construction,
dense sand-and-gravel and medium to dense sand. the 2011 Tohoku Pacific Earthquake struck the site
To reduce the settlement due to the compression of of the building (Yamashita et al., 2012a). The
the cohesive layers below the depth of 23 m to an distance from the epicenter to the building was about
acceptable level, a piled raft foundation consisting of 270 km. At the site 0.9 km south from the building,
88

㻜㻌
Figure 28. Measured vertical ground displacements.
the peak ground acc elerations at a depth of 6 m
below the ground surface were recorded to be 3.24
m/s2 for the horizontal direction and 2.77 m/s2 for
the vertical direction (Hashimura et al., 2011). Photo
1 shows the ground subsidence along the northeast
side of the experimental hall, which reached a
maximum of 1.2 m after the earthquake.
Figure 28 shows the measured vertical ground
displacements relative to the reference point. The
ground displacement at the depth of 12.5 m was
approximately equal to “foundation settlement” in
case that it was initialized just before the casting of
the foundation mats. The foundation settlement
reached 20.7 mm just before the earthquake. Figure
29 shows the profiles of the measured vertical
ground displacements before and after the
earthquake. The foundation settlement increased 4.1
mm to 24.8 mm 28 days after the earthquake when
the monitoring system was restored. It can be seen
that the increments in the ground displacements
（a）Pile P1 in beam line
（b）Pile P2 in beam dump
Figure 30. Measured axial loads of piles.
㻮㼑㼍㼙㻌㼘㼕㼚㼑㻌 㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌
㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㼓㼞㼍㼢㼑㼘㻌
㻝㻞㻚㻡㼙㻌
㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌
㻞㻝㻚㻡㼙㻌 㻿㼍㼚㼐㼥㻌㼟㼕㼘㼠㻌
㻿㼕㼘㼠㼥㻌㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌
㻿㼍㼚㼐㻌
㻟㻜㻚㻡㼙㻌 㻿㼍㼚㼐㼥㻌㼟㼕㼘㼠㻌
㻠㻝㻚㻜㼙㻌 㻿㼕㼘㼠㻌
㼃㼑㼍㼠㼔㼑㼞㼑㼐㻌
㼙㼡㼐㼟㼠㼛㼚㼑㻌
Figure 29. Profiles of vertical ground displacements.
occurred mostly by the compression of the silty soil
between depths o f 23 and 41 m. The compression of
the silty soil seemed to be caused by the vertical
cyclic loading due to the inertial force acting on the
building.
Figure 30 shows the measured axial loads of the
piles. Figure 31 shows the measured contact
pressures and pore-water pressure beneath the raft.
After the earthquake, the axial loads of pile P1
decreased only slightly and the contact pressures
near pile P1 increased slightly. On the other hand,
the axial load of pile P2 at pile head increased 30%
and the contact pressures near pile P2 increased 39%,
possibly, because the frictional resistance at the
interface of the outside wall of the structure and the
back-filled sand was considerably reduced by the
subsidence of the back-filled sand due to the strong
seismic motion. The pore-water pressures were not
affected by the seismic motion.
（a）Near pile P1（beam line）
（b）Near pile P2（beam dump）
Figure 31. Measured contact pressures and pore-water pressure.
89
 （a）Load sharing between raft and pile
（b）Ratio of load carried by pile
Figure 32. Load sharing between raft and piles in tributary
area of pile P1.
Figure 32 shows the time-dependent load sharing
among the piles, the soil and the buoyancy on the
tributary area of pile P1. Figure 33 shows those on
the tributary area of pile P2. The ratio of the load
carried by the piles to the effective load on the
tributary area of pile P1 was estimated to be 0.85
and that of pile P2 was 0.67 just before the
earthquake. The former decreased only slightly to
0.82 and the latter decreased slightly to 0.57 28 days
after the earthquake. In one year after the earthquake,
Figure 34. Schematic view of the building and foundation with soil profile.
90
（a）Load sharing between raft and pile
（b）Ratio of load carried by pile
Figure 33. Load sharing between raft and piles in tributary
area of pile P2.
the ratios of the pile load to the effective load were
quite stable.
5.3 Twelve-story base-isolated building in Tokyo
The twelve-story residential building is located in
Tokyo (Yamashita et al., 2011b). The building is a
reinforced concrete structure with a base isolation
system of laminated rubber bearings. Figure 34
shows a schematic view of the building and the
 㻼㼕㼘㼑㻌㼐㼕㼍㼙㼑㼠㼑㼞 㻹㼛㼚㼕㼠㼛㼞㼕㼚㼓㻌㼐㼑㼢㼕㼏㼑㼟 ◆ 㻭㻞（㻳㻸㻙㻝㻡㼙）

㻞㻚㻡㼙 㻞㻚㻡㼙
㻝㻚㻞㼙 㻵㼚㼟㼠㼞㼡㼙㼑㼚㼠㼑㼐㻌㼜㼕㼘㼑 ◆ 㻭㻝（㻳㻸㻙㻝㻚㻡㼙）
㻝㻚㻜㼙 㻱㼍㼞㼠㼔㻌㼜㼞㼑㼟㼟㼡㼞㼑㻌㼏㼑㼘㼘 ◆ 㻭㻟（㻳㻸㻙㻡㻜㼙）
㻜㻚㻤㼙 㻼㼕㼑㼦㼛㼙㼑㼠㼑㼞

㻤㻚㻜㼙
㻿㼑㼠㼠㼘㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌㼓㼍㼡㼓㼑㼟
◆ 㻭㼏㼏㼑㼘㼑㼞㼛㼙㼑㼠㼑㼞
㻜㻚㻤㼙
㻲

㻭㼏㼏㼑㼘㼑㼞㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㻔㼙㻛㼟㻞㻕㻌
㻤㻚㻤㼙

㻰
㻟㻟㻚㻞㻡㼙
㻝㻜㻚㻟㼙

㻱㻝 㻱㻟 㻱㻡 㼃

㻡㻮 㻣㻮
㻮 㻰㻝 㻰㻞
㻱㻞 㻱㻠 㻱㻢
㻝㻜㻚㻡㻡㼙

㼀㼞㼕㼎㼡㼠㼍㼞㼥㻌㼍㼞㼑㼍

① ③ ⑤ ⑦ 㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌㻔㼟㻕㻌
㻥㻚㻜㻞㻡㼙 㻤㻚㻠㼙 㻥㻚㻜㻞㻡㼙
㻟㻜㻚㻜㻡㼙 Figure 36. Time histories of EW accelerations of ground and
structure.
Figure 35. Layout of piles and grid-form deep cement mixing
walls with locations of monitoring devices.
㻹㼍㼞㻚㻌㻝㻝㻘㻌㻞㻜㻝㻝㻌

foundation with a typical soil profile. The soil

profile down to a depth of 7 m is made of fill, soft
silt and loose silty sand. Between depths of 7 m to
44 m, there lie very-soft to medium silty clay strata
underlain by a diluvial very dense sand-and-gravel
layer. The average contact pressure over the raft was
199 kPa. To improve the bearing capacity of the
subsoil beneath the raft, as well as to cope with the
liquefiable silty sand, the grid-form deep cement
mixing walls were embedded in the Figure 37. Vertical ground displacements at a depth of 5.8 m.
overconsolidated silty clay below a depth of 16 m.
Consequently, a piled raft consisting of sixteen 45-m
long PHC piles (SC piles in top portion) were
employed. histories of the EW acceleration of the ground and
The locations of the monitoring devices are the structure. The peak accelerations of the first and
shown in Figs. 34 and 35. As for the seismic the twelfth floors were 0.527 and 0.619 m/s2,
observation, the NS, EW and UD accelerations of respectively, whereas the peak horizontal ground
the free-field ground were recorded by the vertical acceleration of 1.748 m/s2 was observed near the
array consisted of borehole-type triaxial servo ground surface. The peak acceleration of the first
accelerometers and those of the building on the raft, floor was reduced to 30% from that near the ground
the first and the twelfth floors were recorded by surface by the base-isolation system and the
triaxial servo accelerometers. The axial loads of the kinematic soil-foundation interaction. Figure 37
piles and the contact pressures between the raft and shows the measured vertical ground displacements
the soil as well as the pore-water pressure beneath just below the raft, which were approximately equal
the raft were also recorded during the earthquake in to the foundation settlements. The foundation
common starting time with the accelerometers. settlement, initialized just after the casting of the
Thirty months after the end of construction, the slab, reached 17.3 mm on Mar. 10, just before the
2011 Tohoku Pacific Earthquake struck the building earthquake. The settlement increased very slightly to
site. The distance from the epicenter to the building 17.6 mm on Mar. 15, 4 days after the earthquake.
site was about 380 km. The seismic responses of the Thereafter, the settlements were stable.
soil-structure system were successfully recorded Figure 38 shows the development of the measured
(Yamashita et al., 2012b). Figure 36 shows the time axial loads of piles 5B and 7B. The axial loads at the

91
 㻹㼍㼞㻚㻌㻝㻝㻘㻌㻞㻜㻝㻝㻌 㻹㼍㼞㻚㻌㻝㻝㻘㻌㻞㻜㻝㻝㻌

㻢㻚㻜㼙㻌
㻝㻢㻚㻜㼙㻌

(a) Pile 5B
㻹㼍㼞㻚㻌㻝㻝㻘㻌㻞㻜㻝㻝㻌
Figure 40. Contact pressures between raft and deep mixing
walls and those between raft and soil.
㻢㻚㻜㼙㻌
㻝㻢㻚㻜㼙㻌
㻠㻢㻚㻡㼙㻌

㻯㼛㼚㼠㼍㼏㼠㻌㼜㼞㼑㼟㼟㼡㼞㼑㻌 （㼗㻼㼍）㻌

㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌㻔㼟㻕㻌
㻯㼛㼚㼠㼍㼏㼠㻌㼜㼞㼑㼟㼟㼡㼞㼑㻌 （㼗㻼㼍）㻌

(b) Pile 7B
㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌㻔㼟㻕㻌
Figure 38. Measured axial loads of piles 5B and 7B.
㻼㼞㼑㼟㼟㼡㼞㼑㻌 （㼗㻼㼍）㻌
㻭㼤㼕㼍㼘㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌㻔㻹㻺㻕㻌

㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌㻔㼟㻕㻌

㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌㻔㼟㻕㻌

(a) Pile 5B Figure 41. Fluctuations of contact pressures and pore-water

pressure.
㻭㼤㼕㼍㼘㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌㻔㻹㻺㻕㻌

㻹㼍㼞㻚㻌㻝㻝㻘㻌㻞㻜㻝㻝㻌
㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌㻔㼟㻕㻌

(b) Pile 7B
㻰㼑㼟㼕㼓㼚㻌㼏㼛㼘㼡㼙㼚㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐㼟㻌㻟㻢㻚㻜㻹㻺
Figure 39. Fluctuations of axial loads of at pile head.

㻼㼕㼘㼑㼟㻌
pile head were 14.7 MN and 8.3 MN on Mar. 10 and
became 14.8 MN and 8.2 MN on Mar. 15 on piles
5B and 7B, respectively, so that there was little 㻰㼑㼑㼜㻌㼙㼕㼤㼕㼚㼓㻌㻌
change in the pile-head load before and after the 㼣㼍㼘㼘㼟㻌㻌 㻾㼍㼒㼠㻌

earthquake. Figure 39 shows the fluctuations of the 㻿㼛㼕㼘㻌

㻮㼡㼛㼥㼍㼚㼏㼥㻌
axial loads at the pile head during the earthquake.
The ratios of the maximum amplitude of the
pile-head load to that measured just before the
earthquake were 5.8 and 12.4 % on piles 5B and 7B, Figure 42. Time-dependent load sharing among piles,
respectively. deep mixing walls and soil in tributary area.
Figure 40 shows the development of the measured

92
contact pressures between the raft and the deep 㻹㼍㼞㻚㻌㻝㻝㻘㻌㻞㻜㻝㻝㻌

mixing walls and those between the raft and the soil
together with the pore-water pressure beneath the 㻱㼒㼒㼑㼏㼠㼕㼢㼑㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌
raft. The contact pressures between the raft and the
deep mixing walls were 296 to 316 kPa and those
between the raft and the soil were 39 to 63 kPa on
Mar. 10. The contact pressures, except for the value 㼀㼛㼠㼍㼘㻌㼘㼛㼍㼐㻌
from D1, increased very slightly on Mar. 15. Figure
41 shows the fluctuations of the contact pressure
between the raft and the deep mixing walls and that
between the raft and the soil together with the
pore-water pressure. The amplitude of the contact
pressure between the raft and the deep mixing walls Figure 43. Ratios of load carried by piles to effective load and
was significantly larger than that between the raft total load in tributary area.
and the soil as in the case of the static measurements.
The excess pore-water pressure was considerably
smaller than the contact pressures between the raft
and the soil.
Figure 42 shows the time-dependent load sharing
among the piles, the deep mixing walls, the soil and
the buoyancy in the tributary area of columns 5B
and 7B. Figure 43 shows the ratio of the load carried
㻸㼛㼍㼐㻌㻔㻹㻺㻕㻌
㻼㼕㼘㼑㼟㻌
by the piles to the effective load and that to the total
load in the tributary area versus time. The ratio of
the load carried by the piles to the effective load was
0.67 on Mar. 10 and little change in the ratio could
be observed just after and 13 months after the 㻰㼑㼑㼜㻌㼙㼕㼤㼕㼚㼓㻌㼣㼍㼘㼘㼟㻌
earthquake. Figure 44 shows the time histories of the
load sharing among the piles, the deep mixing walls, 㻿㼛㼕㼘㻌

the soil and the buoyancy during the earthquake. 㻮㼡㼛㼥㼍㼚㼏㼥㻌

Each load was initialized to the measured value on
Mar. 10. The fluctuation of the total load was
relatively small and carried mainly by the piles.
Figure 45 shows the interaction curve of axial
load and bending moment of the SC pile
corresponding to the allowable and the ultimate
bending moment for an axial force in design,
together with the relationship between the axial load
and the bending moment at pile head observed
during the earthquake. The bending moments were
obtained by combining the components in NS and
㼀㼕㼙㼑㻌㻔㼟㻕㻌
Figure 44. Load sharing among piles, deep mixing walls and
soil during earthquake.
EW directions. It is found that the change in the
axial force is small and the observed bending
moments for both piles are significantly smaller than
the allowable bending moment of the pile.

㼁㼘㼠㼕㼙㼍㼠㼑㻌
㼁㼘㼠㼕㼙㼍㼠㼑㻌
㼁㼘㼠㼕㼙㼍㼠㼑㻦㻌 㼡㼚㼕㼠㻌 㼟㼠㼞㼑㼟㼟㻌 㼍㼠㻌 㼠㼔㼑㻌 㼑㼐㼓㼑㻌 㼛㼒㻌
㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌 㼞㼑㼍㼏㼔㼑㼟㻌 㼠㼔㼑㻌
㻭㼘㼘㼛㼣㼍㼎㼘㼑㻌 㼏㼛㼙㼜㼞㼑㼟㼟㼕㼢㼑㻌㼟㼠㼞㼑㼚㼓㼠㼔㻌㻔㻝㻜㻡㻌
㻭㼘㼘㼛㼣㼍㼎㼘㼑㻌 㻺㻛㼙㼙㻞㻕㻌 㻌
㻭㼘㼘㼛㼣㼍㼎㼘㼑㻦㻌 㼡㼚㼕㼠㻌 㼟㼠㼞㼑㼟㼟㻌 㼍㼠㻌 㼠㼔㼑㻌 㼑㼐㼓㼑㻌 㼛㼒㻌
㼟㼠㼑㼑㼘㻌㼜㼕㼜㼑㻌㼞㼑㼍㼏㼔㼑㼟㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㼥㼕㼑㼘㼐㻌
㼟㼠㼞㼑㼟㼟㻌 㼕㼚㻌 㼠㼑㼚㼟㼕㼛㼚㻌 㼍㼚㼐㻛㼛㼞㻌
㼠㼔㼍㼠㻌 㼛㼒㻌 㼏㼛㼚㼏㼞㼑㼠㼑㻌 㼞㼑㼍㼏㼔㼑㼟㻌
㻹㼑㼍㼟㼡㼞㼑㼐㻌 㻹㼑㼍㼟㼡㼞㼑㼐㻌 㻞㻛㻟㻚㻡㻌㼠㼕㼙㼑㼟㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㼏㼛㼙㼜㼞㼑㼟㼟㼕㼢㼑㻌
㼟㼠㼞㼑㼚㼓㼠㼔㻌

(a) Pile 5B (1.2m in diameter) (b) Pile 7B (1.0m in diameter)

Figure 45. Interaction curves of axial load and bending moment of SC pile.
93
6 CONCLUSIONS
The settlement and the load sharing behaviour of
piled rafts were investigated by monitoring full-scale
structures for a long term. Through the investigation,
the following conclusions can be drawn:
・The measured settlements of the large-scale piled
rafts were 14 to 24 mm 17 to 72 months after the
end of construction on the seven structures
completed in 2005 to 2009. The measured
settlements were relatively small, less than 30
mm, and within a limited range.
・The ratios of the load carried by the piles to the
effective load on the tributary area, αp’, were
estimated to be 0.43 to 0.93 at the end of
observation. It was found that the value of αp’
generally decreased as the pile spacing ratio was
increased. At the pile spacing ratio of larger than
about six, the value of αp’ seems to decrease
gradually. The ratios of the load carried by the
piles were found to be quite stable for a long
period after the end of construction.
・During the monitoring period, the 2011 Tohoku
Pacific Earthquake struck the sites of the
buildings. As for the two buildings in Ibaraki and
Tokyo, no significant change in the foundation
settlements and the load sharing between the raft
and the piles was observed after the earthquake.
Further research is required to develop more
reliable seismic design methods for piled rafts
particularly in highly seismic areas such as Japan.
7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Dr. J. Hamada of Takenaka R&D Institute and Mr. T.
Yamada of former Takenaka R&D Institute were
involved in various aspects of design and field
measurements. Messrs. N. Nakayama, H. Ito, H.
Abe, Y. Soga and H. Yamamoto of building design
departments of Takenaka Corporation were involved
in the foundation design for the projects. The author
would like to thank them all for their contribution to
this work. The author also would like to thank Dr. M.
Kakurai from Pile Forum Co., Ltd for his valuable
assistance and useful discussions.
REFERENCES
Architectural Institute of Japan (2001). “Recommendations for
Design of Building Foundations”, 7.2 Piled raft foundation,
pp. 339-348 (in Japanese).
Burland, J.B., Broms, B.B. and de Mello, V.F.B. (1977).
“Behaviour of foundations and structures”, Proc. 9th
ICSMFE, Vol.2, pp. 495-546.
94
View publication stats
Hamada, J., Tsuchiya, T. and Yamashita, K. (2009).
“Theoretical equations to evaluate the stress of piles on
piled raft foundation during earthquake”, J. Structural Const.
Eng. (AIJ), Vol. 74, No. 644, pp. 1759-1767 (in Japanese).
Hashimura, H., Uryu, M., Yamazaki, T., Nakanishi, R., Kirita,
F. and Kojima, K. (2011). “A study on the response
characteristics of base-isolated structures for earthquake
motion (Part 1 & Part 2) ”, Proc. Annual Meeting of AIJ, pp.
621-624 (in Japanese).
Kakurai, M., Yamashita, K. and Tomono, M. (1987).
“Settlement behavior of piled raft foundation on soft
ground”, Proc. 8th ARCSMFE, pp. 373-376.
Kakurai, M. (2002). “Study on load-transfer mechanism of
vertically loaded piles”, Thesis, Tokyo Institute of
Technology (in Japanese).
Katzenbach, R., Arslan, U. and Moormann, C. (2000). “Piled
raft foundation projects in Germany”, Design applications
of raft foundations, Hemsley J.A. Editor, Thomas Telford,
pp. 323-392.
Mandolini, A., Russo, G. and Viggiani, C. (2005). “Pile
foundations: Experimental investigations, analysis and
design”, Proc. 16th ICSMGE, Vol.1, pp. 177-213.
Mendoza, M. J., Romo, M.P., Orozco, M. and Dominguez, L.
(2000). “Static and seismic behavior of a friction pile-box
foundation in Mexico City clay”, Soils & Foundations,
Vol.40, No.4, pp. 143-154.
Poulos, H.G. (2001). “Piled raft foundations: design and
applications”, Geotechnique 51, No.2, pp. 95-113.
Randolph, M. F. (1994): Design methods for pile groups and
piled rafts, Proc. 13th ICSMFE, pp. 61-82.
Tokimatsu, K. and Yoshimi, Y. (1983). “Empirical correlation
of soil liquefaction based on SPT N-value and fines content”,
Soils & Foundations, Vol.23, No.4, pp. 56-74.
Tokimatsu, K., Mizuno, H. and Kakurai, M. (1996). “Building
damage associated with geotechnical problems”, Special
Issue of Soils & Foundations, pp. 219-234.
Yamashita, K. and Kakurai, M. (1991). “Settlement behavior
of the raft foundation with friction piles”, Proc. 4th Int. Conf.
on Piling and Deep Foundations, pp. 461-466.
Yamashita, K., Kakurai, M. and Yamada, T. (1994).
“Investigation of a piled raft foundation on stiff clay”, Proc.
13th ICSMFE, Vol.2, pp. 543-546.
Yamashita, K., Yamada, T. and Kakurai, M. (1998).
“Simplified method for analyzing piled raft foundations”,
Proc. the 3rd International Geotechnical Seminar on Deep
Foundations on Bored and Auger Piles BAPⅢ, pp. 457-464.
Yamashita, K., Yamada, T. and Hamada, J. (2011a).
“Investigation of settlement and load sharing on piled rafts
by monitoring full-scale structures”, Soils & Foundations,
Vol.51, No.3, pp. 513-532.
Yamashita, K., Hamada, J. and Yamada, T. (2011b). “Field
measurements on piled rafts with grid-form deep mixing
walls on soft ground”, Geotechnical Engineering Journal of
the SEAGS & AGSSEA, Vol.42, No.2, pp. 1-10.
Yamashita, K., Hashiba, T. and Ito, H. (2012a). “Settlement
and load sharing behavior of a piled raft subjected to strong
seismic motion”, Proc. 11th Australia - New Zealand
Conference on Geomechanics.
Yamashita, K., Hamada, J., Onimaru, S. and Higashino, M.
(2012b). “Seismic behavior of piled raft with ground
improvement supporting a base-isolated building on soft
ground in Tokyo”, Soils & Foundations (Acceptance).