AASHTO LRFD

Section 10.7 and 10.8

Deep Foundations

“BY FAR THIS SECTION HAS BEEN

IDENTIFIED AS THE MOST PROBLEMATIC
SECTION OF THE AASHTO LRFD SPECS.
BY THE STATE DOTS”
 10.7 DRIVEN PILES
10.7.1 General
10.7.1.1 MINIMUM PILE SPACING, CLEARANCE AND EMBEDMENT INTO CAP
10.7.1.2 PILES THROUGH EMBANKMENT FILL
10.7.1.3 BATTER PILES
10.7.1.4 PILE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
10.7.1.5 Determination of Pile Loads
10.7.1.5.1 Downdrag
10.7.1.5.2 Uplift Due to Expansive Soils
10.7.1.5.3 Nearby Structures
10.7.2 Service Limit State Design
10.7.2.1 GENERAL
10.7.2.2 TOLERABLE MOVEMENTS
10.7.2.3 settlement
10.7.2.3.1 Pile Groups in Cohesive Soil
10.7.2.3.2 Pile Groups in Cohesionless Soil
10.7.2.4 HORIZONTAL PILE FOUNDATION MOVEMENT
10.7.2.5 SETTLEMENT DUE TO DOWNDRAG
10.7.2.6 lateral squeeze
10.7.3 Strength Limit State Design
10.7.3.1 POINT BEARING PILES ON ROCK
10.7.3.1.1 Piles Driven to Soft Rock
10.7.3.1.2 Piles Driven to Hard Rock
10.7.3.2 pile length estimates for contract documents
10.7.3.3 nominal axial RESISTANCE CHANGE AFTER PILE DRIVING
10.7.3.3.1 Relaxation
10.7.3.3.2 Setup
10.7.3.4 groundwater effects and BUOYANCY
 Deep Foundations Overview
 10.7 Driven Piles
 Total re-write

 10.8 Drilled Shafts

 Re-organized + new & updated content
 Service Limit State (10.7.2)
 Vertical Displacement
 Additional equivalent footing diagrams
added
 Horizontal Displacement
 P-y method for analysis of horizontal
displacement now specifically called out
 P multipliers for group effects updated
and specified
 Overall stability
Vertical Displacement
 Horizontal Displacement
(P-y method)
Qt
Ht Mt P
y

Properties y
A, E, I y
 S P P

Pm * P
y
D
P-multiplier (Pm)
Spacing (S) Row 1 Row 2 Row 3
3D 0.7 0.5 0.35
5D 1.0 0.85 0.7
From Table 10.7.2.4-1
Overall Stability
Strength Limit State (10.7.3)
 Geotechnical Resistance
 Emphasis of pile resistance verification
during construction
 De-emphasis on use of static analysis
methods except for estimation of pile
length for contract drawings
 Structural Resistance
 Axial
 Combined bending and axial
 Shear
 Driven Resistance (10.7.7)
Axial Geotechnical Resistance
Static Load Test
Settlement Load

Pile top settlement

Davidson Method Specified

Dynamic Load Test (PDA)

Method & equations are

now prescribed
Driving Formulas
 Driving Formulas
 FHWA Gates Method
 Method & Equation Prescribed

 Engineering News Method

 Equation Modified to Produce
Ultimate Resistance by Removing the
Built-in Factor of Safety = 6
 Driving Formula Limitations

 Design “stresses” must be limited if a

driveability analysis is not performed
 limiting stresses prescribed

 Limited to nominal resistances below 300

tons
Geotechnical Safety Factors for Piles
Design Basis & Increasing Design/Const.
Const. Control Control
Subsurface Expl. X X X X X
Static Calculation X X X X X
Dynamic Formula X
Wave Equation X X X X
CAPWAP X X
Static Load Test X X
FS 3.50 2.75 2.25 2.00 1.90
 Static Analysis Methods
 Existing Methods Retained
 FHWA Nordland/Thurman Method Added

Applicability limited to:

- Prediction of pile penetration (used
without resistance factors)
- Rare case of driving to prescribed
penetration or depth (no field
determination of pile axial resistance)
 Geotechnical Resistance Factors
Pile Static Analysis Methods
Method Comp Ten
 - Method 0.4 0.3
 - Method 0.35 0.25
 - Method 0.4 0.3
Nordlund-Thurman 0.45
SPT 0.3 0.25
CPT 0.45 0.35
Group 0.6 0.5
From Table 10.5.5.2.2-1
 Table 10.5.5.2.2-1 Resistance Factors for Driven Piles

CONDITION/RESISTANCE DETERMINATION METHOD RESISTANCE FACTOR

Driving criteria established by static load test(s);
quality control by dynamic testing and/or calibrated
wave equation, or minimum driving resistance
combined with minimum delivered hammer energy
from the load test(s). For the last case, the hammer Values in Table 2
used for the test pile(s) shall be used for the
production piles.

Driving criteria established by dynamic test with

Nominal Resistance of signal matching at beginning of redrive conditions
Single Pile in Axial only of at least one production pile per pier, but no
less than the number of tests per site provided in 0.65
Compression – Dynamic
Analysis and Static Load Table 3. Quality control of remaining piles by
Test Methods, dyn calibrated wave equation and/or dynamic testing.

Wave equation analysis, without pile dynamic

measurements or load test, at end of drive conditions 0.40
only
FHWA-modified Gates dynamic pile formula (End Of
Drive condition only) 0.40

Engineering News Record (as defined in Article

10.7.3.7.4) dynamic pile formula (End Of Drive 0.10
condition only)
 Table 10.5.5.2.2-2 Relationship between Number of Static Load Tests
Conducted per Site and  (after Paikowsky, et al., 2004)

Resistance Factor, 
Number of Site Variability*
Static Load
Tests per Site Low* Medium* High*

1 0.80 0.70 0.55

2 0.90 0.75 0.65
3 0.90 0.85 0.75
>4 0.90 0.90 0.80
Table 10.5.5.2.2-3 Number of Dynamic Tests with Signal Matching Analysis per Site to Be Conducted
During Production Pile Driving (after Paikowsky, et al., 2004)

Low* Medium* High*

Site
Variability*
Number of Number of Piles with Dynamic Tests and Signal
Piles Matching Analysis Required (BOR)
Located
within Site
< 15 3 4 6

16-25 3 5 8

26-50 4 6 9

51-100 4 7 10

101-500 4 7 12

> 500 4 7 12
Structural Axial Failure Mode
Structural Flexure Failure
Mode
Structural Shear Failure
Mode
 Methods for determining
structural resistance
 Axial compression
 Combined axial and flexure
 Shear
Concrete – Section 5
LRFD Steel – Section 6
Specifications
Wood – Section 8
Driven Performance Limit
 Drivability Analysis (10.7.7)
 Specifically required
 Purpose is to verify that the specified pile
can be driven:
 To the required minimum penetration
 To the required ultimate resistance
 Using a commonly available hammer
 Without exceeding the permissible
driving stress
 At a reasonable penetration rate
 Comp Str Tens Str
37.5 ksi ksi ksi

30

20

10

Ult Cap Stroke

kips ft
800 16.0

600 12.0
550 kip
400 8.0

200 4.0

0 160 320 480 Blows/ft

120 bpf
Driven Performance Limit
 Extreme Event Limit State (10.7.4 )

 New section
with limited
guidance
regarding
extreme events
(no guidance
previously
provided)
 Piles - Other Considerations
 10.7.5 Corrosion and Deterioration
 Moved from section 10.7.1 with no
major changes
 10.7.6 Determination of Minimum Pile
Penetration
 New section combining some of the
existing material from section 10.7.1
with additional guidance.
 Downdrag provisions extensively
modified
 Downdrag
 New provisions in article 3.11.8 regarding
determination of downdrag as a load
 Revisions to load factors pending
additional analysis/research

Prediction Method Maximum Minimum

Piles, -Tomlinson 1.4 -

Piles, -Method 1.05 -

Drilled shafts, O’Neill 1.25 -

and Reese (1999)
 10.8 DRILLED SHAFTS
 Article re-organized to follow section 10.7
 Most provisions refer back to section 10.7
 Service limit state provisions removed
from strength limit state resistance
determination
 Provisions for resistance determination
updated
 Detailed procedures for evaluation of
combined side friction and end bearing in
rock added to commentary
 10.8 DRILLED SHAFTS
10.8.1 General
10.8.1.1 scope
10.8.1.2 shaft spacing, clearance and embedment into cap
10.8.1.3 shaft diameter and enlarged bases
10.8.1.4 batterED shafts
10.8.1.5 drilled SHAFT resistance
10.8.1.6 DETERMINATION OF Shaft Loads
10.8.1.6.1 General
10.8.1.6.2 Downdrag
10.8.1.6.3 Uplift
10.8.2 Service Limit State Design
10.8.2.1 tolerable movements
10.8.2.2 settlement
10.8.2.2.1 General
10.8.2.2.2 Settlement of Single-Drilled Shaft
10.8.2.2.3 Intermediate Geo Materials (IGM’s)
10.8.2.2.4 Group Settlement
10.8.2.3 HORIZONTAL MOVEMENT OF SHAFTS AND SHAFT GROUPS
10.8.2.4 settlement due to downdrag
10.8.2.5 lateral squeeze
10.8.3 Strength Limit State Design
10.8.3.1 general
10.8.3.2 ground water table and bouyancy
10.8.3.3 Scour
10.8.3.4 downdrag

10.8.3.5 NOMINAL axial COMPRESSION resistance of single drilled shafts

10.8.3.5.1 Estimation of Drilled Shaft Resistance in Cohesive Soils
10.8.3.5.1a Side Resistance
10.8.3.5.1b Tip Resistance
10.8.3.5.2 Estimation of Drilled Shaft Resistance in Cohesionless Soils
Drilled Shaft Resistance in Rock
Total Resistance
A

Resistance
Side Resistance
B
D C

Tip Resistance
QS
Displacement
QP QR = fQn = fqpQp + fqsQs
Geotechnical Resistance Factors
Drilled Shafts
Method Comp Ten
 - Method (side) 0.55 0.45
 - Method (side) 0.55 0.45
Clay or Sand (tip) 0.5
Rock (side) 0.55 0.45
Rock (tip) 0.55
Group (sand or clay) 0.55 0.45
Load Test 0.7
AASHTO Table 10.5.5.2.3-1