Hindawi

Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

Volume 2022, Article ID 8434788, 12 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8434788

Research Article
su-Based Shaft Friction Design Method and Evaluation for
Pipe Pile

Bin Huang,1 Yuting Zhang ,2 Xudong Fu,3 and Ruiyu Ye1

1
School of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Huizhou University, Huizhou, China
2
Discipline of Civil, Surveying and Environmental Engineering, The University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia
3
School of Civil Engineering, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Yuting Zhang; yuting.zhang11@uon.edu.au

Received 19 January 2022; Accepted 9 May 2022; Published 18 July 2022

Academic Editor: Luigi Di Sarno

Copyright © 2022 Bin Huang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The shaft friction in clay is essential to bearing capacity of pipe piles. Reasonable selection of design methods and parameters is
very important for offshore piles. This paper focuses on the current popular vertical load design methods based on undrained
strength for pipe piles, especially for offshore piles. Based on the database, the accuracy and reliability of various pile design
methods based on undrained strength su in clay were reviewed. The small-scale model tests were conducted to evaluate su-based
methods. For the shortcomings of small-diameter piles in the database, a field test of full-scale offshore pile was carried out and
analysed. By comparing the calculated and the measured capacity for each method, the reliability of various design methods is
evaluated for large-diameter piles. For the design methods based on undrained strength, it demonstrates the importance and
reliability of the determination of undrained strength parameters. In view of the vertical loading conditions of offshore large-
diameter steel pipe piles, reasonable suggestions for design methods and parameters determination are given.

1. Introduction
At present, the popular methods for the vertical bearing
capacity of pile foundations in offshore engineering are either
based on the empirical formula of CPT tip resistance or di-
rectly related to soil parameters, such as undrained strength,
yield stress, sensitivity, internal friction angle, etc. Among the
API-00 [1], Fugro-05 [2], ICP-05 [3], and UWA-05 [4]
methods which are applicable to sand, all but API-00 are
based on CPT. Based on the four CPT-based methods, a
unified CPT-based method has been developed by the JIP
group of UWA, NGI, Imperial College, Fugro, BP, Delft
university of Technology, University of Texas, DNV·GL, and
Lloyd’s Register EMEA [5]. The methods applicable to clay
include API-00, Fugro-96 [6], NGI-05 [7], ICP-05, UWA-13
[8], and Fugro-10 [9] methods, of which API-00, Fugro-96,
and NGI-05 are all based on the undrained strength of clay.
The unified CPT-based method of driven pile in sand has
replaced the API-00 method as the preferred recommended
method in the new version of the API specification. It is
noted that the API recommendations for clay, which have
not changed since 1987, are still based on undrained strength
and have a lot of experience in practice. On average, base
resistance amounted to approximately 20% of the total
bearing capacity in clay, especially for open-ended piles,
which have a very small proportion of base resistance [10].
Therefore, this paper focuses on the analysis and evaluation
of shaft friction design method of pile in clay and compares
the undrained strength-based API method with its improved
method Fugro-96 and NGI-05 method, especially in the
determination of undrained strength parameters.
2. Design Methods for Shaft Friction of Piles
2.1. API-00 Method. The unit shaft friction is calculated from
τ f  α · su ,
α  0.5 · ψ − 0.5 for ψ ≤ 1.0, (1)
− 0.25
α  0.5 · ψ for ψ > 1.0,
2 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

where su � undrained share strength at depth z,ψ � su / σ v0′ � decreases with the increase of the penetration depth. Gavin
strength ratio at depth z, and σ v0′ � et al. [12] suggested that the degree of fatigue degradation in
effective verticle stress at depth z. clay is smaller than that in sand. The API-00 method has not
considered friction fatigue due to installation. The NGI-05
method is still improved in accordance with the API-00
2.2. Fugro-96 Method. The unit shaft friction is calculated
method, while the Fugro-96 method considers the fatigue
from
degradation of the shaft friction.
τ f � α · su , Through a large number of database examination for
different design methods, the reliability statistics analysis
− 0.2
− 0.3 (2) results are shown in Table 1. There are 47 piles, with a
⎡0.9 · 􏼒L − z􏼓
α � min⎢
⎢
⎣ ⎝ su ⎞
·⎛ ⎠ , 1.0⎥⎥⎦⎤, diameter ranging from 0.2 to 0.8 m. Overall, compared with
D σ ′v0 the pile design method in sand, the calculation result of pile
capacity in clay has a larger variation coefficient. This is
where su � undrained share strength at depth z, L� because the design parameters of piles in clay are more than
pile length, z�depth below ground surface, D � that in sand and more complicated, and the design pa-
pile outer diameter, and σ v0′ � effective verticle stress at depth z. rameters of different methods are diverse. Among the design
methods based on undrained strength, the Fugro-96 method
2.3. NGI-05 Method. The unit shaft friction is calculated has obvious advantages over API-00 method, while NGI-05
from method has larger sample space and smaller variation
coefficient.
τ f � max􏽨α · su · Ftip , βmin · σ′v0􏽩, It is believed that the soil inside large-diameter steel pipe
0.33
(3) pile is in soil coring mode, and there is no soil plug occurring.
βmin � 0.06 · 􏼐Ip − 12􏼑 ; 0.05 < βmin < 0.20, For offshore piles, API-00, Fugro-96, and NGI-05 methods all
consider that the total bearing capacity is equal to the sum of
where su � undrained share strength at depth z, βmin �
the outer shaft friction, the inner shaft friction, and the base
minimum β − value observed from previous pile tests, σ v0′ �
resistance of the annulus area, and use the same unit shaft
effective verticle stress at depth z, Ip � clay plasticity index
friction to calculate the inner and outer shaft friction.
(in%), and ψ � su /σ v0′ � strength ratio at deapth z.
When the pile is subjected to a tension load, all methods
Forψ < 0.25, do not consider the reduction of the shaft friction; the
0.3 Fugro-96 and NGI-05 methods both propose the unit end
α � 0.32 · 􏼐Ip − 10􏼑 ; 0.2 < α < 1.0, (4a) bearing when the pile is in tension; the API-00 method does
Ftip � 1.0, not explicitly propose the calculation of the base resistance
in tension.
For ψ > 1.0
4. Field Tests of Small-Scale Pile
α � 0.5 · ψ − 0.3 ,
Ftip � 1.0, for open − ended, 4.1. Soil Conditions. Field tests of small-scale pile and CPTu
were carried out on the Bayswater clay test site which is
Ftip � min􏽨0.8 + 0.2 · ψ 0.5 , 1.25􏽩, for closed − ended, located roughly 10 km from Perth CBD and next to the Swan
(4b) River in West Australia (Figure 1). The geological conditions
and CPT profile of this site are shown in Figure 2. The soil
For 0.25 < ψ < 1.0, α is stratigraphy at the site comprises a relatively thin layer of
sand, overlying a deep layer of very soft clay. This clay is
determined by linear interpolation associated with a paleochannel and has similar character-
(4c)
(in a semi − logarithmic scale) istics to offshore clay, making it suitable for both onshore
between ψ � 0.25 and ψ � 1.0. and offshore research.
The CPT piezocone is a cylindrical penetrometer with a
60° conical tip which has a base area of 1000 mm2 (35.7 mm
3. Review of Design Methods for Shaft diameter) and a friction sleeve with area of 15000 mm2. The
Friction of Piles average rate of penetration is 23 mm/s. The CPT closest to
the test area are CPT-5, CPT-6, and CPT-7. The corrected
Lehane et al. [11] analysed the radial stress of the jacked pile cone resistance (qt ), sleeve friction (fs ), and pore pressure
in clay. The radial stress decreases with the increase of the (u2 ) are plotted in Figure 2(b) and show the uniformity of
penetration depth during pile installation. After the in- the soil conditions. The CPT tip resistance of the clay in-
stallation, the radial stress of the pile shows a power function creases linearly with depth, which also shows that the
degradation with the distance from pile tip, and the effective uniformity of the clay in the test site is very good. The pile
radial stress of the pile after the pore pressure dissipates diameter is 16.5 cm and the embedded length of pile is 5 m
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 3

Table 1: Method uncertainties for piles in clay [13].

No. of Qc/Qm (arithmetic functions) Qc/Qm (geometric functions)

Methods
samples μw σw CoVw μgw σgw CoVgw
API-00 23 0.73 0.29 0.40 0.68 1.47 0.47
Fugro-96 23 0.86 0.24 0.28 0.83 1.32 0.32
NGI-05 47 0.97 0.36 0.37 0.91 1.43 0.43

Figure 1: Pile test site location.

which ranges from 1.5 m to 6.5 m deep in clay. The plasticity
index of clay is 38%.
The average effective vertical stress of the soil layer
within the embedded length of the model pile is 48.5 kPa,
and the undrained strength is 19 kPa. This paper uses an
empirical method based on CPT to determine the undrained
strength of clay, as shown in the following equation:
qt − σ v0 􏼁
su � . (5)
Nk
Nk is generally determined by in situ vane shear test or
laboratory undrained strength test with high-quality sam-
ples. Using Nk � 10, the calculated averaged undrained
strength at 1.5∼6.5 m depth is 19 kPa, as shown in Figure 3.
4.2. Field Test of Pipe Piles. After removing the surface
∼0.5 m depth soil, an excavator was used to push the piles
into the clay to the embedded length as shown in Figure 4(a).
In order to avoid any influence of the upper 1 m crust on the
pile capacities, a 1 m deep bore was augered and supported
by a 190 mm inner diameter casing (see Figure 4(b)). After
installation, the buried depth of the pile is 1.5∼6.5 m in soft
clay, and the embedded length of the pile is 5 m. The soil plug
length ratios are 74%∼95%. The arrangement employed for
all tests is shown in Figure 4(c).
The results of model pile pull-out test are shown in
Figure 5. A total of 3 sets of tests were carried out, two piles
were tested 3 days after pile driving, and the other was
tested 28 days after pile driving. The test results were
basically the same. The tension bearing capacity of the pile
is equal to the sum of the total shaft resistance and the
effective weight of the pile and the soil plug in the pile, so
the measured total shaft resistance after deducting the
weight should be 40 kN.
4.3. Comparison between Design Methods. The load transfer
behavior and the distribution of shaft resistance with depth
calculated by different design methods are shown in Fig-
ure 6. There is a casing in the depth range of 0∼1.5 m to
isolate the pile from the sand on the side of the pile, so there
is no shaft resistance in this range, and the load transfer does
not change. It can be seen that the friction gradually in-
creases with the depth, which obtained by each design
method is almost the same.
The comparison between the calculated results of dif-
ferent design methods and the measured results is shown in
Table 2. It can be seen that the total shaft resistance
4 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

qt (MPa)
F
0 0.5 1
0

Sand
1
1.5 m
1.65m
2

4 Clay

6.5 m

7
(a)
qt: MPa fs: kPa u2: kPa
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 3 6 9 12 15 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0 0 0

1 1 1

2 2 2

3 3 3
Depth: m

4 4 4

5 5 5

6 6 6 u0

7 7 7

8 8 8
CPT-5 CPT-5 CPT-5
CPT-6 CPT-6 CPT-6
CPT-7 CPT-7 CPT-7
(b)

Figure 2: Geological conditions and CPT profile.

calculated by each design method is very close to the
measured result.
5. Case Analysis of Full-Scale Offshore Pile
5.1. Soil Conditions. A field test of large-diameter steel pipe
piles was carried out in an offshore wind farm project in
Pinghu waters of Hangzhou Bay (Figure 7). The site is about
20 km offshore, the seabed topography of the total site area
changes little, and the water depth is 8∼12 m. As for regional
geological information, the local quaternary sediments within
the exploration depth, the upper part is the silty clay and clay
deposited in the Holocene littoral facies, and the lower part is
the silty clay and silty sand deposited in the upper Pleistocene
estuary-littoral facies. The pile end is buried 69 m deep and is
located in the supporting layer of silty sand.
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 5

qt (MPa) su (kPa) In Situ Stress (kPa)

0 0.5 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 50 100 150
0 0 0

Sand

2 2 2

Clay
Depth (m)

4 4 4

6 6 6

8 8 8
Measured qt qt-derived su u0
σ'v0
σv0
Figure 3: Profiles of cone tip resistance, undrained strength, and in situ stress.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 4: Photos of pile installation and load test: (a) pile installation, (b) installed pile, and (c) pile field test.

The stratum distribution and profile of cone tip resis-
tance, sleeve friction, and pore pressure are seen in Figure 8.
The base area of CPT piezocone is 1000 mm2 (35.7 mm
diameter), and the area of friction sleeve is 15000 mm2. The
rate of penetration is 20 ± 5 mm/s. Two CPT results at test
site are almost the same, which shows uniformity of soil
conditions. The clays at the depth of 0∼45 m are nearly
uniform with the tip resistance gradually increasing with
depth. The plasticity indices of clays are shown in Figure 8.
5.2. Undrained Strength of Offshore Clay. There is a big
difference between marine soil and land soil in sampling,
sample transportation, and sample storage conditions. On-
6 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

50
45
40
35

Load (kN)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 4 8 12 16 20
Displacement (mm)
P4 - Day 3 - MS
P6 - Day 3 - GS
P5 - Day 28 - MS
Figure 5: The test results of field model piles in tension.

Load (MN) τf (kPa)

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045 0 10 20 30
0 0

1 1

2 2
Measured
averaged
friction
3 3
Depth (m)

Embedded pile

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7
Measured Fugro-96 API-00
API-00 NGI-05 Fugro-96
NGI-05
Figure 6: Load transfer behavior and shaft resistance distribution with depth during ultimate tension bearing calculated by different design
methods.

Table 2: Comparison of measured and calculated results of tension capacity with different design methods.
Methods Shaft resistance Qs (kN) Base resistance Qb (kN) Total resistance Qt (kN) Ratio of calculated and measured capacity (%)
Measured 40.2 0 40.2 NA
API-00 38.2 0 38.2 95
Fugro-96 36.4 0 36.4 90
NGI-05 36.2 0 36.2 90
Note. The tension capacity measured deducts the weight of pile and soil plug (2.8 kN); the base resistance in tension is not considered.

site test conditions for marine soil are limited and are affected disturbances such as sampling and transportation. Ladd and
by waves, tides, ocean currents, test platforms, instruments, Lambe [14] concluded that the soil sampling disturbance
and equipment. Cohesionless soils are generally difficult to makes the undrained strength of the soil sample not equal to
obtain core samples, while cohesive soils are easily affected by the undrained strength under in situ stress. The former is only
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 7

Figure 7: Pile test site location.

qt (MPa) fs (MPa) u2 (MPa)

0 10 20 30 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
0 0 0
Sensitive clay Ip = 14% Sensitive clay Sensitive clay

10 10 10
Clay
Clay Clay
Ip = 14%
20 20 20

30 30 30
Sensitive clay Sensitive clay
Sensitive clay
Depth (m)

Depth (m)
Depth (m)

Ip = 20%
40 40 40
Ip = 25%
Silty clay Silty clay Silty clay
Ip = 17%
50 50 50

60 60 60
Silty sand Silty sand
Silty sand

70 70 70

80 80 80
JT66 JT66 JT66
JT40 JT40 JT40
Figure 8: Cone penetration test results.
8 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

40%∼79% of the latter. If the undrained shear test is directly 600 c = 19.3 kPa
carried out on the marine clay samples transported to the φ = 12.4°
450
laboratory, the undrained strength would be very low, which

τ (kPa)
300
leads to excessive conservative design of the offshore engi-
neering and serious waste of cost. 150
For the test of marine soil samples, the conditions and 0
influence factors of field test and lab test should be fully 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000
considered. The test method is more complicated and requires σ (kPa)
more scientific and rigorous research. Recompression of the Figure 9: The total stress strength of the disturbed sample in high-
sample can reduce the disturbance of the sample caused by stress triaxial test.
sampling and sample processing [15]. The selected isotropic
consolidation effective stress for recompression type tests
800
should not equal the in situ vertical effective stress, especially
Disturbed, CU, σ3 =1200 kPa
for soft clays which have K0 values well below 1. This would
cause too much volumetric change during consolidation and,
600 Disturbed, CU, σ3 =900 kPa
hence, can result in a measured undrained shear strength that
is too high [16]. According to BS EN ISO 19901–8:2015 [17], if

the recompression method is used, the specimen should be
preloaded to approximately 75%∼80% of the estimated
preconsolidation stress of the sample, and then unloaded back
to the estimated in situ vertical effective stress.
In order to eliminate the influence of sample distur-
bance, besides the recompression method, there is also a
SHANSEP (stress history and normalized soil engineering
parameters) method [18]. The SHANSEP method requires
preparation of multiple specimens for normal consolidation
and overconsolidation triaxial compression test, which is
suitable for low sensitivity, unnatural cementation, and
cohesive soils with less structured properties.
First of all, a sample disturbance simulation study is
carried out for a certain clay sample. The plasticity index of
the clay is 21.1%, the dry density of the sample is 1.68 g/cm3,
and the water content is 21%. Regarding the prepared
remoulded sample as an intact sample, the sample was
shaken with a vibrating machine to simulate the influence of
disturbance, and the number of shakes was 500 times.
Comparing the mechanical properties of the intact sample
and the disturbed sample, the shaking disturbance simulated
caused more than 8.6% strength loss of the sample.
Take the shallow marine silty clay samples for the study
of disturbance treatment. Cut a Φ101 mm × H200 mm
sample from a core sample at a depth of 10 m. The effective
weight c′ of the soil sample is 8 kN/m3, and the internal
friction angle φ is 12.4° as shown in Figure 9. The static lateral
stress coefficient is K0 � 1 − sin φ � 1 − sin 12.4∘ � 0.785,
and then the average consolidation stress of in situ sample is
σ 1c + 2K0 σ 1c
σc �
3 The results of intact UU and disturbed CU triaxial test are
c′ h
� 1 + 2K0 􏼁
3 Mohr–Coulomb theory in Figure 9, the strength of 40.9 kPa
(6)
8 × 10
� (1 + 2 × 0.785)
3
� 68.5(kPa).
According to the SHANSEP method proposed by Ladd
and Foott [18], it is believed that the consolidated undrained
σ1-σ3 (kPa)
400 Disturbed, CU, σ3 =600 kPa
200
Intact, UU, σ3 =100 kPa
0
0 3 6 9 12 15
ε1 (%)
Figure 10: UU triaxial test with intact sample and CU triaxial test
with disturbed samples.
shear strength of the soil sample under 1.5∼2.5 times the
preconsolidation stress can more truly reflect the intact
strength characteristics of the site soil. Therefore, a confining
pressure of 100 kPa is applied isotropically which is about 1.5
times the in situ consolidation stress of 68.5 kPa. After
consolidation, Φ39.1 mm × H80 mm samples are cut from
the Φ101 mm × H200 mm sample. Regarding the cut sample
as the intact sample, the corresponding preconsolidation
stress is 100 kPa.
A vibrating machine is used to shake the Φ39.1 mm
× H80 mm samples to simulate the influence of disturbance,
and the number of shakes is 500 times. The CU triaxial tests
were performed on the disturbance samples, and the con-
fining pressure was 600, 900, and 1200 kPa. Figure 9 shows
the total stress strength results of CU triaxial test under high
stress relative to the consolidation pressure of 100 kPa.
The UU triaxial test was performed on the intact sample.
summarized, as shown in Figure 10. The undrained strength
in the intact UU triaxial test is 40.9 kPa. According to the
corresponds to the consolidation stress of 62.0 kPa.
In this test, the vibration of the vibrating machine is used to
simulate the influence of the disturbance on the sample. Re-
garding the cut sample without vibration as the intact sample,
the preconsolidation stress of the intact sample is 100 kPa, and
the recompression stress of the disturbance sample is 62.0 kPa,
which means that after the disturbed sample is recompressed at
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 9

Pile
qt (MPa) su (kPa) In situ stress (kPa)
0 10 20 30 0 30 60 90 120 150 0 500 1000 1500
0 0 0
Sensitive clay

10 10 10

Clay
20 20 20

30 30 30

Sensitive clay
Depth (m)

40 40 40

Silty clay
50 50 50

60 60 60
Silty sand

70 70 70

80 80 80
Measured qt qt-derived su u0
σ'v0
σv0
Figure 11: Profiles of cone tip resistance, undrained strength, and in situ stress.

62% of the preconsolidation stress, the same undrained strength
can be obtained. This is different from 75% to 80% of the
preconsolidation stress of the sample recommended by BS EN
ISO 19901–8:2015. It can be seen that the selection of
recompression stress is related to the disturbance pattern and
degree of the soil disturbance. However, there are certain dif-
ferences in marine soil sedimentation environments and in-
vestigation techniques in different countries, and it is
unscientific to blindly apply experiences or standards. Due to
the harsh marine environment, borehole sampling is inevitably
affected by disturbances, and there are also disturbances in
marine transportation and road transportation. In view of the
existing geotechnical investigation technology, how to rea-
sonably select the recompression stress to determine the un-
drained strength of soil requires continuous accumulation of
engineering experience, which can be further promoted and
applied after engineering verification.
Therefore, the SHANSEP method is more recommended
to determine the undrained strength of marine clay. The
SHANSEP method requires preparation of multiple speci-
mens for normal consolidation and overconsolidation tri-
axial compression test, which is suitable for low sensitivity,
unnatural cementation, and cohesive soils with less struc-
tured properties. The undrained shear strength of normally
consolidated or slightly overconsolidated clay is propor-
tional to the consolidation stress, and the undrained shear
strength corresponding to the preconsolidation pressure
should be adopted. The undrained strength of the intact
sample with a depth of 10 m obtained by the SHANSEP
method is 40.9 × 68.5/100 � 28.0kPa.
Jamiolkowski et al. [19] suggested that for clays of low to
moderate plasticity index the undrained strength ratio can
be estimated by the following equation:
su 0.8
􏼠 􏼡 � (0.23 ± 0.04)OCR . (7)
′ OC
σ v0
The OCR at 10 m depth is 1.8; according to equation (7),
the undrained strength of the intact sample at 10 m depth is
22.8∼32.4 kPa. It can be seen that the undrained strength
obtained by the SHANSEP method is reliable.
This paper uses an empirical method based on CPT to
determine the undrained strength of clay, as shown in
equation (5). Using Nk � 20, the calculated undrained
strength at 9.5∼10.5 m depth is 28.0 kPa, as shown in Fig-
ure 11. It can be seen that the cone tip resistance of the clay
with a depth of 4∼50 m increases linearly with depth, which
is a relatively uniform soil layer.
5.3. Field Test of Offshore Piles. The pile outer diameter is
1.8 m, the total pile length is 93 m, and the wall thickness is
20∼40 mm. The IHC S800 hydraulic hammer is used for pile
10 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

25

20
Tension

Load (MN)
15

10

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Pile head displacement (mm)
Figure 12: Axial tension load-displacement curves.

Table 3: Comparison of measured and calculated results of tension capacity with different design methods.
Methods Shaft resistance Qs (MN) Base resistance Qb (MN) Total resistance Qt (MN) Ratio of calculated and measured capacity (%)
Measured 14.150 0 14.150 NA
API-00 18.075 0 18.075 127.7
Fugro-96 15.672 0 15.672 110.8
NGI-05 13.410 0 13.410 94.8
Note. The tension capacity measured deducts the weight of pile and soil plug (4.550 MN); the shaft resistance in sand all uses the Unified CPT-based method
[5]; the base resistance in tension is not considered.

Load (MN) τf (kPa)

0 5 10 15 20 0 50 100 150 200
0 0

10 10

20 20

Clay Clay
30 30
Depth (m)

40 40

50 50

Sand Sand
60 60

70 70
Measured Fugro-96 API-00
API-00 NGI-05 Fugro-96
NGI-05
Figure 13: Load transfer behavior and shaft resistance distribution with depth during ultimate tension bearing calculated by different design
methods.
Advances in Materials Science and Engineering
driving. There is no slipping phenomenon during the pile
driving process, and the pile embedded depth is 69 m. After the
pile driving, the soil plug/core is 1.45 m slightly above the
mudline, and the soil plug ratio of the steel pipe pile with an
inner diameter of about 1.7 m is 1.0, which is a soil coring mode.
The vertical static tension test was carried out 44 days
after the pile was driven using the slow maintained loading
method. Figure 12 shows the axial tension test results of the
pile. The axial tension test of the single pile achieves failure,
and the ultimate axial tension capacity of the single pile is
18.7 MN.
5.4. Comparison between Design Methods. Comparisons of
measured and calculated results of capacity with different
design methods for tension are shown in Table 3. It can be
seen that in tension, the methods based on undrained
strength, except for the NGI-05 method, are 11%∼28%
higher than the measured value.
Mostly with the methods based on the undrained
strength, the tension capacity is higher than the actual
measured value. This is because the undrained strength in
this project is estimated through CPT data, and the pa-
rameter Nk is only determined by the SHANSEP method of
the disturbed sample at a depth of 10 m. In fact, Nk is
related to soil properties and depth. The NGI-05 method
based on undrained strength is 94.8% of the measured
capacity, which is safer than the API-00 method and Fugro-
96 method.
Figure 13 is the friction distribution with depth during
ultimate bearing calculated by different methods. Obviously,
the shaft friction of clay calculated by the NGI-05 method is
the smallest, then Fugro-96 and API-00. But the trends of
shaft friction changing with depth are almost the same.
6. Conclusions
This paper introduces and evaluates the su-based design
methods for friction of pipe pile under vertical load which
are currently popular in the industry. The main conclusions
are as follows:
(a) According to the statistical analysis of the database,
the Fugro-96 and NGI-05 method based on the
undrained strength are improved compared with
API-00 method. NGI-05 method is safer for full scale
piles in offshore engineering.
(b) It is difficult for offshore engineering to determine
the undrained strength of the intact clay sample. The
strength parameters in different soil layers and
different depths can be determined by the relatively
mature SHANSEP method, but this method is only
suitable for low sensitivity, unnaturally cemented,
and low structured cohesive soil.
Data Availability
The data used to support the findings of this study are in-
cluded within the article.
11
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgments
The first author gratefully acknowledges the financial sup-
ported by Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.
51978540), China Scholarship Council (201906275010) and
Guangdong University Students' Science and Technology
Innovation Cultivation Special Fund. The authors also
gratefully acknowledge Eduardo Bittar and Wenbo Du for
the contributions of the site work.
References
[1] API, API RP 2A-WSD: Recommended Practice for Planning,
Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platform-Working
Stress Design, API, Washington, DC, 2000.
[2] H. J. Kolk, A. E. Baaijens, and M. Senders, “Design criteria for
pipe piles in silica sands,” CRC Press/Balkema, Boca Raton, FL,
USA, 2005.
[3] R. Jardine, F. Chow, R. Overy, and J. Standing, “ICP Design
Methods for Driven Piles in Sands and Clays,” Thomas Telford
London, vol. 112, London, UK, 2005.
[4] B. M. Lehane, J. A. Schneider, and X. Xu, “The UWA-05
method for prediction of axial capacity of driven piles in
sand,” in Frontiers in Offshore Geotechnics: ISFOG,
pp. 683–689, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2005.
[5] B. Lehane, Z. Liu, E. Bittar et al., “A new CPT-based axial
pile capacity design method for driven piles in sand,” in
Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Fron-
tiers in Offshore Geotechnics, American Society of Civil
Engineers, Austin, Texas, AU, USA, May 2020.
[6] H. J. Kolk and E. Der Velde, “A reliable method to determine
friction capacity of piles driven into clays,” in Proceedings of
the Offshore Technology Conference, pp. 337–346, Houston,
Texas, May 1996.
[7] K. Karlsrud, C. J. F. Clausen, and P. M. Aas, “Bearing capacity
of driven piles in clay, the NGI approach,” in Proceedings of
the 1st Int. Symp. on frontiers in offshore geotechnics, vol. 1,
pp. 775–782, Taylor & Francis, Perth, WA, Australia, June
2005.
[8] B. M. Lehane, Y. Li, and R. Williams, “Shaft capacity of
displacement piles in clay using the cone penetration test,”
Journal of Ge-otechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
vol. 139, no. 2, pp. 253–266, 2013.
[9] B. F. J. Van Dijk and H. J. Kolk, “CPT-Based Design Method
for Axial Capacity of Offshore Piles in Clays,” in Frontiers in
Offshore Ge-otechnics II, pp. 573–578, CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL, USA, 2010.
[10] R. Jardine, F. Chow, R. Overy, and J. Standing, ICP Design
Methods for Driven Piles in Sands and Clays, Thomas Telford,
London, UK, 2005.
[11] B. M. Lehane, Y. Li, and R. Williams, “Shaft capacity of
displacement piles in clay using the cone penetration test,”
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
vol. 139, no. 2, pp. 253–266, 2013.
[12] K. Gavin, D. Gallagher, P. Doherty, and B. McCabe, “Field
investigation of the effect of installation method on the shaft
resistance of piles in clay,” Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 730–741, 2010.
12 Advances in Materials Science and Engineering

[13] B. M. Lehane, J. K. Lim, P. Carotenuto et al., “Charac-

teristics of unified databases for driven piles,” in Pro-
ceedings of the 8th International Conference of Offshore Site
Investigation and Geotechnics OSIG, vol. 1, pp. 162–191,
Society for Underwater Technology, London, UK, 2017.
[14] C. C. Ladd and T. W. Lambe, “The strength of “undis-
turbed” clay determined from undrained tests,” Labora-
tory shear testing of soils, vol. 361, pp. 342–371, 1963.
[15] L. Bjerrum, “Problems of soil mechanics and construction on
soft clays,” in Proceedings of the 8th Int. Conference on Soil
Mech. and Found. Engrg, vol. 3, pp. 111–159, U.S.S.R, Mos-
cow, 1973.
[16] C. C. Ladd, R. Foott, K. Ishihara, F. Schlosser, and
H. G. Poulos, “Stress-deformation and strength characteris-
tics,” in Proceedings of the 9th Int. Conferance. on Soil Me-
chanics and Foundation Eng, vol. 2, pp. 421–494, Tokyo, July
1977.
[17] BSI, BS EN ISO 19901-8, Petroleum and Natural Gas Indus-
tries-specific Requirements for Offshore Structures-Part 8:
Marine Soil Investigations, BSI, London, UK, 2015.
[18] C. C. Ladd and R. Foott, “New design procedure for
stability of soft clays,” Journal of the Geotechnical Engi-
neering Division, vol. 100, no. 7, pp. 763–786, 1974.
[19] M. Jamiolkowski, C. C. Ladd, J. T. Germaine, and
R. Lancellotta, “New developments in field and laboratory
testing of soils,” in Proceedings of the 11th international
conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering,
vol. 1, pp. 57–154, San Francisco, December 1985.