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

net/publication/269196621

The Effect of Gravel Layer on the Behavior of Piled Raft Foundations

Conference Paper in Geotechnical Special Publication · May 2014

DOI: 10.1061/9780784413425.038

CITATIONS READS
13 517

2 authors:

Abbasali Taghavi Ghalesari Habib Rasouli

University of Texas at El Paso University of Technology Sydney
27 PUBLICATIONS 203 CITATIONS 16 PUBLICATIONS 83 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Geotechnical mitigation strategies for structures impacted by earthquake induced fault ruptures View project

Laboratory and Numerical Analysis of Piled Rafts and Offshore Foundations Considering Interaction and Bearing Mechanism View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abbasali Taghavi Ghalesari on 24 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 373
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The Effect of Gravel Layer on the Behavior of Piled Raft Foundations

Abbasali Taghavi Ghalesari1 and Habib Rasouli2

1
Graduate Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Babol University of Technology,
Babol, Iran; Abbasali.Taghavi@gmail.com
2

l
Graduate Student, Department of Civil Engineering, Iran University of Science and
y
Technology, Tehran, Iran; Rasouli.Habib@gmail.com

on
ABSTRACT: Piled raft foundations are often used when a raft foundation alone does

se
not satisfy the design requirements or the raft settlements exceed allowable values.
The addition of piles may improve both the ultimate load capacity and the settlement

u
performance of the raft. In this paper, the behavior of piled raft foundation is
investigated using three-dimensional finite element analysis and 100g centrifuge tests.

a l
The effect of a gravel layer on the maximum and differential settlement behavior of
piled raft is considered. Based on the results, the behavior of piled raft foundation is

INTRODUCTION
on
dependent on the thickness of the gravel layer and the particle size.

r s
Pile enhanced raft has been experienced as one of the most effective ways for

p e
increasing the bearing capacity of a foundation system. The system is known as a
hybrid foundation or a piled raft foundation (PRF). The piled raft foundation is a

o r
recent design concept as one of the effective methods to reduce the settlements of
superstructures. In soft soils where a raft alone may not provide the bearing
capacity, connected piles to enhance the performance of the raft or non-connected

F
piles to reinforce the supporting soil are usually added. Traditionally, one common
perception of engineers is that more piles can lead to a greater reduction in raft
settlements. However, as pointed out by Poulos and Davis (1980), the number of piles
required to reduce settlements under the working load to a tolerable limit is usually
small, and any further addition of piles may result in only marginal further reductions
in settlements. Conventionally, there are two main design methodologies for piled raft
foundation. The first design method is based on reducing raft foundation settlement by
adding a certain number of piles. Another design method assumes that all structure
loads to be transferred to piles without considering contribution of load taken by the
raft.
Piled raft foundations has received much attention recently. In order to address the
design of piled rafts, many numerical and experimental methods has been developed.

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 374

Prakoso and kulhawy (2001) proposed a simplified linear elastic and nonlinear plane
strain finite element model to evaluate the effects of raft and pile group system
geometries on the average and differential displacements of the piled rafts. Reul and
Randolph (2003) presented a three-dimensional finite element method to investigate
the behavior of piled rafts with associated and non-associated flow rules for modeling
the plastic behavior of soil. Zheng et al. (2008) performed finite element analyses to
investigate the behavior of composite CFG (Cement-Flyash-Gravel)–lime pile
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

foundations under various load distributions considering geometrical parameters.

Nguyen et al. (2013) presented a design method based on finite element analyses to
consider the interaction effect of piled raft under vertical load. Moreover, Horikoshi
and Randolph (1996) have performed a series of centrifuge tests of model piled raft
foundations to study the effects of centered pile group on raft performance with
particular attention to the differential settlement across the raft and the load transfer
mechanism. Cao et al. (2004) considered experimentally the effect of different
l y
geometrical parameters on the piled raft performance through load tests of model rafts

on
resting on pile-reinforced sand. El Sawwaf (2010) studied the effectiveness of using
short piles in connected or non-connected piled rafts under eccentrically load instead
of long piles.

se
Some studies have been devoted to the effect of sand or gravel cushion on the non-
connected piled raft performance (Liang et al. 2003), while no studies were aimed to

l u
the connected ones. To consider the effects of a surface gravel layer on the settlement
and bearing behavior of unpiled and piled raft foundation, 100g centrifuge tests and

a
three-dimensional finite element analyses have performed in this study.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

on
Model Box and Materials

r s
Full-scale field tests to consider the behavior of piled raft foundation is costly and

p e
time consuming. Furthermore, it is difficult to control the permanent changes in
groundwater level. Therefore, simulation of in-situ condition using model tests such as

r
centrifuge tests can be useful. In centrifuge modelling, a model geometrically scaled
down N times and prepared from the prototype material is accelerated at N times

F o
Earth’s gravity: the centrifuge acceleration reproduces the same stress and strain in the
model as in the prototype. The centrifuge used for the present study is installed at Iran
University of Science and Technology. A model scale of 1/100 was used with a
nominal centrifugal acceleration of 100g. The observations from the model can be
converted to the prototype scale using the scaling factors reported in Table 1.
The laboratory model tests were conducted in a test box, having inside dimensions
of 0.62 m  0.20 m in plan and 0.18 m in depth. The box was made from Plexiglas with
steel frame. The dimensions of square raft (steel plate) was 55  55 mm (5.5 m at
prototype scale) with the thickness of 10 mm (1 m). Model piles with 5.0 and 5.6 mm
diameters made of aluminum bars (E=7  104 MPa) were used. The length of the piles
was 84 mm (8.4 m).

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 375

Table 1. Similarity Relationships for 1/N Centrifuge Model

Property Prototype Model Property Prototype Model

Acceleration 1 N Force N2 1
Length N 1 Energy N3 1
Area N2 1 Stress 1 1
Volume N3 1 Strain 1 1
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Velocity Time
1 N N 1
(undrained conditions) (dynamic)
Mass N3 1 Frequency 1 N

Experiments were performed using dry Firouzkouh (No. 161) siliceous sand. This
kind of sand has uniform aggregation and in the present study, it has relative density
of about 55%. For modeling gravel layer, Firouzkouh D11 sand was used which
l y
n
models granular layer by scaling. Some specification of used soil is presented in Table
2. The specific gravity of the soil particles (Gs) was determined by the gas jar method.
The particle size distribution was determined using the dry sieving method and the
o
e
results are shown in Fig. (1).

Table 2. Specification of Firouzkouh Sand

u s
Property Gs emax emin
a l D50
(mm)
o Cc Cu
F.C.*

n
%
Firouzkouh sand (161) 2.658 0.97 0.55 0.30 32 0.97 2.58 0.20
Firouzkouh sand (D11)
*fine content
2.650

s o
0.89 0.63 1.15 - 0.96 1.43 0.15

e r
r p
F o

FIG. 1. Grain-size distribution of the test soils

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 376

The effect of particle-size dimension on the shallow foundations in centrifuge tests

was considered by Corte´ et al. (1991) and the ratio of Br/D50  50 (raft width to
average particle-size) was suggested. This ratio for Firouzkouh 161 sand and
Firouzkouh D11 sand was 183.3 and 74.8, respectively. The diameter of the model
piles, normalized with respect to particle-size dimension, was D/D50 = 18.7 and 16.7
for two kind of sands. This ratio is close to the limit suggested by Bolton et al. (1999;
D/D50> 20).
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Experimental Setup and Test Program

By taking into account density and water content, the required soil was determined.
In order to achieve reasonably homogeneous sand in the model box, pouring and
tamping technique was used. The outer faces of model box were marked at 10 mm
intervals (Fig. 2a). In this method, the quantity of sand for each layer, which was

l
required to produce a specific relative density, was first weighed and placed in the
y
on
tank and tamped by a steel plate until achieving the required layer height. The relative
density of sample was 55%. After sampling, the piles were installed singly one-by-one
using a special guide system which held the piles vertical during the installation. No

se
visible movement in the sand surface was observed during the installation process.
Then the sand surface was leveled again and finally the model raft was placed (Fig.
2b). Some points on the piles and raft or in the soil were instrumented by LVDTs

l u
(linear variable displacement transducers). A data logger instrument are applied to
gathering required data related with piles, pile cap and soil parameters.

n a
s o
e r
r p
F o (a) (b)
FIG. 2. (a) Soil layers (b) Structural components setup

The experimental program consisted of three groups in 8 series carried out on

model raft and piled raft with 4 and 9 piles with or without surface gravel layer. Fig.
(3) shows the model schemes of the test program.

FINITE ELEMENT MODELING

Finite Element Mesh and Boundary Conditions

The behavior of the piled raft was also investigated by carrying out 3D finite
element analysis. Six-node triangular elements were used to represent piled raft

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 377

elements. Fig. (4) shows a typical finite element mesh used in the numerical study.
Material properties of soil and piled raft are tabulated in Table 3.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

l y
on
se
l u
n a
s o
FIG. 3. Model schemes

e r
r p
F o

(a) (b)
FIG. 4. (a) Typical finite element mesh (b) Pile-soil interface modeling

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 378

Table 3. Material Properties Used for Numerical Analysis

Internal Dilation
Young’s Unit
Poisson’s Cohesion, friction angle,
Material modulus, weight,
ratio,  c (kPa) angle,  (deg)
E (MPa)  (kN/m3)
 (deg)
Sand 20 0.20 18 0.3 32 2
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Gravel 35 0.15 18 - 30 -
Pile 25000 0.15 24 - - -
Raft 20000 0.15 24 - - -

y
The pile head was connected to the raft rigidly. A relatively fine mesh was used
near the structural components while a coarser mesh was used further from the pile
and raft. Lateral boundaries are restrained by horizontal translations to allow
n l
o
downward movement of the soil layers and the beneath of the model is fixed in three
orthogonal directions. For the far-field boundaries, the distance of the boundary from

e
the edge of the raft was greater than the pile length. This limit prevents the effects of

s
boundaries. After initial equilibrium, the vertical loading was applied on the top of the
raft surface. Since modeling of the entire pile installation process is rather

start of the analysis (Jeong et al. 2004).

l u
complicated, the pile was assumed to be in a stress-free state (wished in place) at the

Constitutive Modeling

n a
s o
The material behavior of the soil was modeled with a Mohr–Coulomb model, and
to simplify the analysis process, average values of material parameters (as mentioned

e r
in Table 3) were adopted for the soil layer. Since the raft and piles have great Young’s
modulus in comparison with the soil, they remain in elastic range. Due to the

p
aforementioned reason, they were modeled with a non-porous linear elastic model.
Interface elements were used at the soil-pile interface. The modeling techniques

o r
used for the pile-soil interface were generally divided into two types: thin layer
element and slip element. The former was used by Jeong et al. (2004), in which the

F
slip behavior between the adjacent surfaces could be considered. The latter was used
by Reul and Randolph (2003) and a middle layer is used to model the interface using
the behavior of the soil. In this study, slip interface elements was used at the pile-soil
interface. When no slip occurs between the soil and pile elements; the nodes at the
interface have identical coordinates and the distance between the two surfaces is zero.
When contact occurs, the relationship between shear force and normal pressure ( P  ) is
governed by a modified Coulomb’s friction theory. The slip interface elements are
completely defined by their geometry, a friction coefficient (  ), where   tan  .
Interface friction angle, (  ) can be estimated by the following equation (Jeong et al.
2004) using soil internal friction angle (  ):
sin  cos 
 (1)
1  sin 2 

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 379

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Type of the Foundation

As shown in Fig. (3), three types of foundation were considered in the analyses. It
aims to examine the superstructure load transfer system to the medium dense sand.
Moreover, the bearing capacity of these foundations can be estimated. In this case, the
soil was used and modeled without any improvement. Fig. (5) shows the load-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

settlement relationship for different types of foundation. In this figure, Smax is the
calculated and measured settlement at the raft center, Br is raft width and q is the total
applied load. Piled raft with 4 piles has pile spacing to diameter (S/Dp) of 4.9 and this
ratio for piled raft with 9 piles is 3.7.

l y
on
se
l u
n a
(a)
s o (b)

e r
FIG. 5. Load-settlement curve from the (a) test results (b) numerical analyses for
different foundation type

r p
As expected, in a certain value of normalized settlement, bearing capacity of raft is

o
lower than that of piled raft with different number of piles from both numerical and

F
experimental results. This is more obvious for higher levels of the applied load and
this shows that the ultimate bearing capacity of the raft is reached. Comparing Fig.
(5a) and (5b), the effect of adding piles to a raft foundation is more significant from
the test results in comparison with numerical analysis. Numerical analyses
underestimates the bearing capacity of the foundation except for raft foundation.

Gravel Layer Thickness

Based on the reports, using a gravel layer beneath the raft can adjust the load
distribution between piles and subsoil, mitigate the stress concentration around them
and enhance the strength of the subsoil between the piles. Some studies have been
devoted to the effect of sand or gravel cushion on the non-connected piled raft
performance (Liang et al. 2003), while no studies were aimed to connected piled raft

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 380

with cushion. In this study, the gravel layer was modeled with Firouzkouh D11 sand
and it was simulated according to Table 3 in the numerical analysis. Fig. (6) shows the
effect of the gravel layer thickness on the settlement and bearing behavior of the raft
and piled raft with 9 piles.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

l y
o n
(a)
se (b)

different gravel layer thicknesses

l u
FIG. 6. Load-settlement curve from the (a) test results (b) numerical analyses for

n a
s o
At a given applied load, the settlement of piled raft initially decreased with gravel
layer thickness and then increased for piled raft with 1.5 m gravel layer (tg=1.5 m). It

e r
is due to increasing the elastic settlements of the gravel layer caused by self-weight
and decreasing the piles performance caused by load distribution over a larger area.
Thus, the required gravel layer thickness to minimize the piled raft settlements is
tg=0.5 m or less.

r p
A comparison between the results for raft (solid line) and piled raft (dotted line)

F o
with Fig. (5) shows that adding gravel layer leads to reduction in the effect of piles on
the foundation performance. It is probably due to the fact that 1.5 m gravel layer cause
a reduction in the perimeter length of piles. Another point that realized from the figure
is that numerical analyses, however, underestimate the bearing capacity of the
foundations.

Particle Size
From the test results, the effect of the soil particle-size on the settlements and
bearing capacity of the foundation was considered. Fig. (7) shows the load-settlement
relationship for piled raft (4 piles) with mean particle-size of D50=0.30 and 1.15. As
shown, particle size has a negligible effect on the foundation performance until a
certain applied load (of about 600 kPa) and after that, soil with D50=1.15 is more
efficient.

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 381
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

l y
FIG. 7. Load-settlement curve for different particle-size from test results

on
Center to Corner Differential Settlement

se
In general, the effect of differential settlement on the bending moment and

l u
optimum design of piled raft foundations is not negligible. For this reason, it is
considered as an important factor in this study. Fig. (8) shows the variation of unpiled

numerical analysis.

n a
and piled raft differential settlement (Sd) with or without gravel layer from the

s o
e r
r p
F o
FIG. 8. Load-settlement curve for different particle-size from test results

As shown, the gravel layer can reduce the differential settlement of unpiled and
piled raft foundation. Clearly, piled raft with larger gravel layer thickness has lower
differential settlement. Considering the differential settlement reduction, adding piles
or gravel layer have little differences.

Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering

 Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering GSP 240 © ASCE 2014 382

CONCLUSIONS

A series of experiments and numerical analyses were conducted to investigate the

behavior of unpiled of piled rafts with or without gravelly cushion. In this study,
centrifuge tests and 3D elasto-plastic finite element analyses with slip interface model
were carried out in sandy soil. From the results, gravel layer thickness has a significant
effect on the maximum and differential settlements of the foundation. After a certain
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi on 05/23/14. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

applied load, grain-size also affected on the bearing and settlement behavior of the
foundation.

REFERENCES

Bolton, M.D., Gui, M.W., Garnier, J., Corte’, J.F., Bagge, G., Laue, J., and Renzi, R.
(1999). “Centrifuge Cone Penetration Tests in Sand.” Géotechnique, 49(4), 543–
552.
l y
Cao, X.D. Wong, I.H. and Chang, M.F. (2004). “Behavior of model rafts resting on

on
pile-reinforced sand.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
130(2), 129–138.

se
Corte’, J. F., Garnier, J., Cottineau, L. M. & Rault, G. (1991). “Determination of
model soil properties in the centrifuge.” Proceedings of the international

u
conference on the centrifuge, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 607–614.
El Sawwaf, M. (2010). “Experimental study of eccentrically loaded raft with

Geoenvironmental Engineering, 136(10), 1394–1402.

a l
connected and unconnected short piles.” Journal of Geotechnical and

on
Horikoshi, K. and Randolph, M.F. (1996). “Centrifuge modelling of piled raft
foundations on clay.” Géotechnique, 46(4), 741–752.
Jeong, S., Lee, J. and Lee, C. (2004). “Slip effect at the pile–soil interface on

r s
dragload.” Computers and Geotechnics, 31, 115–126.
Liang, F.Y., Chen, L.Z. and Shi, X.G. (2003). “Numerical analysis of composite piled

443–453.
p e
raft with cushion subjected to vertical load.” Computers and Geotechnics 30(6),

o r
Nguyen, D.D., Jo, S.B. and Kim, D.S. (2013). “Design method of piled-raft
foundations under vertical load considering interaction effects.” Computers and
Geotechnics, 47, 16–27.

F
Poulos, H.G. and Davis, E.H. (1980). “Pile foundation analysis and design.” New
York. Wiley.
Prakoso, W.A. and Kulhawy, F.H. (2001). “Contribution to piled raft foundation
design.” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(1), 17–
24.
Reul, O. and Randolph, M.F. (2003). “Piled rafts in overconsolidated clay: comparison
of in situ measurements and numerical analyses.” Géotechnique, 53(3), 301–315.
Zheng, J.J., Abusharar, S.W. and Wang, X.Z. (2008). “Three–dimensional nonlinear
finite element modeling of composite foundation formed by CFG–lime piles”
Computers and Geotechnics. 35, 637–643.

View publication stats Advances in Soil Dynamics and Foundation Engineering