Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MultiPier Soil Table 2
MultiPier Soil Table 2
May 2011
The Bridge software Institute disclaims any warranty, expressed or implied, including but not
limited to, any implied warranty of accuracy for a particular purpose or accuracy of the Florida
Pier software. The BSI shall not be liable for any damages incurred through the use of the
provided information. Thus, All parameters for soil models available in the FB-MultiPier
program must be used for preliminary design purpose only.
College of Engineering
University of Florida
Cohesionless Soil
Soil properties for preliminary design only.
Cohesionless Soil Properties Symbol Units Loose Medium Dense References :
Total Unit Weight γ pcf 90 115 110 130 110 140 Ref.[1]
Corrected SPT Blow Count 60 4 10 10 30 30 50 Ref.[2]
Relative Density Dr % 15 35 35 65 65 85 Ref.[3]
Angle of Internal Friction φ deg 29 30 30 36 36 41 Ref.[4]
Coefficient of Lateral Earth Pressure
K0 0.51 0.5 0.5 0.41 0.41 0.34 K 0 = 1 − sin (φ ) (1) Ref.[5]
(From Eqn. (1) using φ )
Subgrade Modulus (Below Water Table) kbw pci 20 30 30 100 100 160 Ref.[6]
Subgrade Modulus (Above Water Table) kaw pci 20 50 50 165 165 275 Ref.[6]
Poisson's Ratio υ 0.20 - 0.40 0.25 - 0.40 0.30 - 0.45 Ref.[7]
Young's Modulus
(From Eqn. (2) using α =5, pa =2000psf Eem psf 40000 100000 100000 300000 300000 500000 Eem = pa * α * 60 (2) Ref.[8]
and 60 )
Young's Modulus
(From Eqn. (2) using α =10, pa =2000psf Eem psf 80000 200000 200000 600000 600000 1000000
and 60 )
Young's Modulus
( From Eqn. (3) using B = 24in, E psf 66360 99530 97200 324000 314500 503190 E = k * B *(1 − υ 2 ) (3) Ref.[9]
υ =the minimum of the range, and kbw )
Young's Modulus
( From Eqn. (3) using B = 24in, E psf 66360 165890 162000 534600 518920 864860
υ =the minimum of the range, and kaw )
Notation:
Eem = Elastic Modulus based on empirical equation.
3
Cohesive Soil
Soil properties for preliminary design only.
Cohesive Soil Properties Symbol Units Soft Medium Stiff References :
Total Unit Weight γ pcf 100 120 110 130 120 140 Ref.[12]
Corrected SPT Blow Count 60 2 4 4 8 8 15 Ref. [13]
Unconfined Compressive Strength qu tsf 0.25 0.5 0.5 1 1 2 Ref. [13]
Undrained Shear Strength Cu psf 250 500 500 1000 1000 2000 Ref. [14]
Average Undrained Shear Strength psf 375 750 1500
Major Principal Strain @ 50% ε 50 0.02 0.01 0.005 Ref. [15]
Major Principal Strain @ 100% ε 100 0.06 0.03 0.015 Ref. [16]
Subgrade Modulus (Fine-Grained) k pci NA NA NA NA 29 115 Ref. [17]
Subgrade Modulus (Coarse-Grained) k pci NA NA NA NA 52 150 Ref. [17]
Poisson's Ratio υ 0.4 0.45 0.5 Ref. [18]
Elastic Modulus E psi 415 1735 1735 4860 4860 >13890 Ref. [19]
Shear Modulus
G ksi 0.15 0.62 0.60 1.68 1.62 4.63 G = E ( 2 (1 + υ ) ) (4) Ref.[10]
(From Eqn. (4) using E , and υ )
Ultimate Unit End Bearing ksi See Fig.2 (For Driven Piles) on pp. 8
Axial Bearing Failure kips Ultimate Unit End Bearing x Tip Area
Ultimate Unit Skin Friction psf See Fig. 3 (For Driven Piles) on pp. 9
Note: For the input values of vertical failure shear stress and torsional shear stress, the ultimate unit skin friction for a pile or drilled shaft can be
used.
General Rock Properties 5
Ultimate Unit Skin Friction (Driven Piles) fs psf f s = 20.877* ( 2.8* + 10 ) Ref. [25]
Ultimate Unit End Bearing (Driven Piles) qb ksf qb = 0.0209*180* Ref. [25]
Axial Bearing Failure kips Unit End Bearing x Tip Area
Florida Limestone 7
Ultimate Unit Skin Friction fs psf See Fig. 3(Driven Piles) on pp.9
Ultimate Unit End Bearing qb psf See Fig. 2(Driven Piles) on pp.8
For Driven Piles - The Ultimate End bearing of any pile can be calculated from
the below graph if the SPT blow count are available
n := 60 i := 1 .. n + 1 N := ( i − 1)
i
2
Sand(Conc/Steel/HPile) := 3.2⋅ N ⋅ Ultimate End Bearing for Concrete, Steel and H piles in Sand
i i 144
2
Clay(Conc/Steel/HPile) := 0.7⋅ N ⋅ Ultimate End Bearing for Concrete, Steel and H piles in Clay
i i 144
2
Limestone(Conc/HPile) := 3.6⋅ N ⋅ Ultimate End Bearing for Concrete and H piles in Florida Limestone
i i 144
Limestone(Steel) := 2
3.6⋅ Ni⋅ 144 if Ni ≤ 30 Ultimate End Bearing for Steel piles in Florida
i
Limestone
36 + 7 ⋅
(Ni − 30) ⋅ 2⋅ 3 otherwise
30 144
2.5
Ultimate End Bearing (ksi)
2
Sand(Conc/Steel/HPile)
Clay(Conc/Steel/HPile)
Limestone(Conc/HPile) 1.5
Limestone(Steel)
0.5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
N
For Driven Piles - The Ultimate Skin Friction of any pile can be calculated
from the below graph if the SPT blow count are available
n := 60 i := 1 .. n + 1 N := ( i − 1)
i
Ultimate Skin Friction for Concrete Piles in Sand...
Ultimate Skin Friction for Concrete and Steel Piles in Florida Limestone...
3000
Ultimate Skin Friction (psf)
2500
Sand(Conc)
Sand(Steel)
2000
Clay(Conc)
Clay(Steel)
1500
Limestone(Conc/Steel)
1000
500
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
N
For Drilled shafts - The Ultimate Unit Skin Friction for Sand with respect to
the depth can be found out from the graph below
start := 0 end := 180 h := 5
( end − start )
n := i := 1 .. ( n ) Depth := start + ( i − 1 ) ⋅ h Depth from 0 to 175 ft
h i
β := 1.2 if Depth ≤ 5
i i
0.25 if Depth > 86
i
20
40
60
Depth (ft)
120
140
160
References:
1. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 3-4, pp 163.
2. "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd Editon, Karl Terzaghi , Ralph Peck and Gholamreza Mesri (1996),
Table 12.1, pp. 60.
3. FB MultiPier Help Manual -> 11.4.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure 11.4.b (Source: "Research on Determining the
Density of Sands by Spoon Penetration Testing", H.J.Gibbs and W.G.Holtz(1957), Proc. 4th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, pp. 35-39).
4. FB MultiPier Help Manual -> 11.4.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure 11.4.b (Source: American Petroleum Institute
(API), 1987, “Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing fixed offshore platforms”, API
Recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th Ed, Figure 6.8.7-1, pp.70).
5. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Equation 2-18a, pp.41.
6. FB MultiPier Help Manual ->11.4.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure 11.4.c (Source: American Petroleum Institute
(API), 1987, “Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing fixed offshore platforms”, API
Recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th Ed, Figure 6.8.7-1, pp.70).
7. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Table 5.8, pp. 240.
8. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Equation 5.43, pp. 240.
9. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Equation 6.5, pp. 294.
10. "Foundation Analysis and Design”, 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Equation (a), pp. 121.
11. “Seismic Response Analysis of a Highway Overcrossing Equipped with Elastomeric Bearings and Fluid
Dampers”, Nicos Makris & Jian Zhang, Equation (1), Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 6, June 2004,
pp. 830-845 (Source: ‘‘Correlations among seismic motion, ground conditions, and damage: Data on the
Miyagiken-oki earthquake of 1978”, Imai T. and Tonouchi K., 1982, Proc. 3rd Int. Earthquake Miscorzonation Conf.,
Univ. of Washington, Seattle, Vol. 2, pp. 649–660.).
12. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 2nd Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 3-4, pp 86.
13. "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd Editon, Karl Terzaghi , Ralph Peck and Gholamreza Mesri (1996),
Table 12.2, pp. 63.
14. “Soil Mechanics”, 1st Edition, T. W. Lambe and R. V. Whitman (1969), Section 29.8, pp.451.
15. “Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft clay”, Matlock, H. (1970), Proceedings, Offshore
Technology Conference, Vol. I, Paper No. 1204, Houston, Texas, pp. 577-594.
16. “Single Piles and Pile Groups under Lateral Loading”, Lymon C. Reese & William F. Van Impe, Figure 3.11, pp.
71.
17. “Soil Mechanics: Design Manual 7.01”, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Figure 6, pp. 7.1-219.
18. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 2-7, pp 123.
19. “Engineering and Design – Settlement Analysis”, EM1110-1-1904, Appendix D, Table D-3, pp. D-5.
12
20. “A Treatise on the Principles and Practice of Harbour Engineering”, Brysson Cunningham, pp. 86.
22. “AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification”, 5th Edition, Section 10(Foundations), pp. (10-25) – (10-27).
23. “AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges”, 16th Edition, 1996, Table 4.4.1.2B, pp.64.
24. “Handbook of Geotechnical Investigation and Design Tables”, Burt Look, pp.65.
25. “Geophysical testing for rock assessment and pile design”, Lani Cheenikal, Harry Poulos and Robert Whiteley,
Coffey Geotechnics, Australia. (Internet link:
“http://www.coffey.com/Uploads/Documents/Geophysical%20testing%20for%20rock%20assessment%20and%20
pile%20design_20100625141417.pdf”)
26. “Static and Dynamic Field Testing of Drilled Shafts: Suggested Guidelines on their use for FDOT Structures”,
Final Report, FDOT No. 99052794, Dr. Michael. McVay & Ralph D. Ellis Jr.
1
May 2011
The Bridge software Institute disclaims any warranty, expressed or implied, including but not
limited to, any implied warranty of accuracy for a particular purpose or accuracy of the Florida
Pier software. The BSI shall not be liable for any damages incurred through the use of the
provided information. Thus, All parameters for soil models available in the FB-MultiPier
program must be used for preliminary design purpose only.
College of Engineering
University of Florida
Cohesionless Soil
Soil properties for preliminary design only.
Cohesionless Soil Properties Symbol Units Loose Medium Dense References :
Total Unit Weight γ k m 3
14 18 17 20 17 22 Ref.[1]
Corrected SPT Blow Count 60 4 10 10 30 30 50 Ref.[2]
Relative Density Dr % 15 35 35 65 65 85 Ref.[3]
Angle of Internal Friction φ deg 29 30 30 36 36 41 Ref.[4]
Coefficient of Lateral Earth Pressure
K0 0.51 0.5 0.5 0.41 0.41 0.34 K 0 = 1 − sin (φ ) (1) Ref.[5]
(From Eqn. (1) using φ )
Subgrade Modulus (Below Water Table) kbw k m3 5430 8140 8140 27145 27145 43430 Ref.[6]
Subgrade Modulus (Above Water Table) kaw k m3 5430 13570 13570 44790 44790 74650 Ref.[6]
Poisson's Ratio υ 0.20 - 0.40 0.25 - 0.40 0.30 - 0.45 Ref.[7]
Young's Modulus
(From Eqn. (2) using α =5, pa =100kPa, Eem kPa 2000 5000 5000 15000 15000 25000 Eem = pa * α * 60 (2) Ref.[8]
and 60 )
Young's Modulus
(From Eqn. (2) using α =10, pa =100kPa, Eem kPa 4000 10000 10000 30000 30000 50000
and 60 )
Young's Modulus
( From Eqn. (3) using B = 0.61m, E kPa 3180 4765 4655 15525 15070 24110 E = k * B *(1 − υ 2 ) (3) Ref.[9]
υ =the minimum of the range, and kbw )
Young's Modulus
( From Eqn. (3) using B = 0.61m, E kPa 3180 7945 7760 25615 24865 41440
υ =the minimum of the range, and kaw )
Notation:
Eem = Elastic Modulus based on empirical equation.
3
Cohesive Soil
Soil properties for preliminary design only.
Cohesive Soil Properties Symbol Units Soft Medium Stiff References
Total Unit Weight γ k m 3
16 19 17 20 19 22 Ref.[12]
Corrected SPT Blow Count 60 2 4 4 8 8 15 Ref. [13]
Unconfined Compressive Strength qu kPa 23.95 47.9 47.9 95.8 95.8 191.6 Ref. [13]
Undrained Shear Strength Cu kPa 11.97 23.95 23.95 47.9 47.9 95.8 Ref. [14]
Avg.Undrained Shear Strength kPa 17.96 35.92 71.85
Major Principal Strain @ 50% ε 50 0.02 0.01 0.005 Ref. [15]
Major Principal Strain @ 100% ε 100 0.06 0.03 0.015 Ref. [16]
Subgrade Modulus (Fine-Grained) k k m3 NA NA NA NA 7870 31220 Ref. [17]
Subgrade Modulus (Coarse-Grained) k k m3 NA NA NA NA 14115 40720 Ref. [17]
Poisson's Ratio υ 0.4 0.45 0.5 Ref. [18]
Elastic Modulus E kPa 2860 11960 11960 33510 33510 >95770 Ref. [19]
Shear Modulus
G kPa 1021 4271 4124 11555 11170 31923 G = E ( 2 (1 + υ ) ) (4) Ref.[10]
(From Eqn. (4) using E , and υ )
Ultimate Unit End Bearing kPa See Fig.2 (For Driven Piles) on pp. 8
Axial Bearing Failure kN Ultimate Unit End Bearing x Tip Area
Ultimate Unit Skin Friction kPa See Fig. 3 (For Driven Piles) on pp. 9
Note: For the input values of vertical failure shear stress and torsional shear stress, the ultimate unit skin friction for a pile or drilled shaft can be
used.
General Rock Properties 5
Ultimate Unit Skin Friction fs kPa See Fig. 3(Driven Piles) on pp.9
Ultimate Unit End Bearing qb kPa See Fig. 2(Driven Piles) on pp.8
For Driven Piles - The Ultimate End bearing of any pile can be calculated from
the below graph if the SPT blow count are available
n := 60 i := 1 .. n + 1 N := ( i − 1)
i
Sand(Conc/Steel/HPile) := 3.2⋅ N ⋅ 95.76 Ultimate End Bearing for Concrete, Steel and H piles in Sand
i i
Clay(Conc/Steel/HPile) := 0.7⋅ N ⋅ 95.76 Ultimate End Bearing for Concrete, Steel and H piles in Clay
i i
Limestone(Conc/HPile) := 3.6⋅ N ⋅ 95.76 Ultimate End Bearing for Concrete and H piles in Florida Limestone
i i
Limestone(Steel) :=
i (3.6⋅ Ni⋅95.76) if Ni ≤ 30 Ultimate End Bearing for Steel piles in Florida
36 + 7 ⋅
(Ni − 30) ⋅287.28 otherwise
Limestone
30
4
2× 10
Ultimate End Bearing (kPa)
Sand(Conc/Steel/HPile)
4
1.5× 10
Clay(Conc/Steel/HPile)
Limestone(Conc/HPile)
Limestone(Steel) 4
1× 10
3
5× 10
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
N
Figure 2
9
For Driven Piles - The Ultimate Skin Friction of any pile can be calculated
from the below graph if the SPT blow count are available
n := 60 i := 1 .. n + 1 N := ( i − 1)
i
Ultimate Skin Friction for Concrete Piles in Sand...
Ultimate Skin Friction for Concrete and Steel Piles in Florida Limestone...
125
Ultimate Skin Friction (kPa)
Sand(Conc)
100
Sand(Steel)
Clay(Conc)
75
Clay(Steel)
Limestone(Conc/Steel)
50
25
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
N
For Drilled shafts - The Ultimate Unit Skin Friction for Sand with respect to
the depth can be found out from the graph below
start := 0 end := 50 h := 0.5
( end − start )
n := i := 1 .. ( n ) Depth := start + ( i − 1 ) ⋅ h Depth from 0 to 50m
h i
10
20
Depth (m)
30
40
References:
1. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 3-4, pp 163.
2. "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd Editon, Karl Terzaghi , Ralph Peck and Gholamreza Mesri (1996),
Table 12.1, pp. 60.
3. FB MultiPier Help Manual -> 11.4.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure 11.4.b (Source: "Research on Determining the
Density of Sands by Spoon Penetration Testing", H.J.Gibbs and W.G.Holtz(1957), Proc. 4th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, pp. 35-39).
4. FB MultiPier Help Manual -> 11.4.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure 11.4.b (Source: American Petroleum Institute
(API), 1987, “Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing fixed offshore platforms”, API
Recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th Ed, Figure 6.8.7-1, pp.70).
5. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Equation 2-18a, pp.41.
6. FB MultiPier Help Manual ->11.4.8 Subgrade Modulus -> Figure 11.4.c (Source: American Petroleum Institute
(API), 1987, “Recommended practice for planning, designing and constructing fixed offshore platforms”, API
Recommended practice 2A (RP 2A), 17th Ed, Figure 6.8.7-1, pp.70).
7. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Table 5.8, pp. 240.
8. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Equation 5.43, pp. 240.
9. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", 6th Edition, Braja Das, Equation 6.5, pp. 294.
10. "Foundation Analysis and Design”, 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Equation (a), pp. 121.
11. “Seismic Response Analysis of a Highway Overcrossing Equipped with Elastomeric Bearings and Fluid
Dampers”, Nicos Makris & Jian Zhang, Equation (1), Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 130, No. 6, June 2004,
pp. 830-845 (Source: ‘‘Correlations among seismic motion, ground conditions, and damage: Data on the
Miyagiken-oki earthquake of 1978”, Imai T. and Tonouchi K., 1982, Proc. 3rd Int. Earthquake Miscorzonation Conf.,
Univ. of Washington, Seattle, Vol. 2, pp. 649–660.).
12. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 2nd Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 3-4, pp 86.
13. "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", 3rd Editon, Karl Terzaghi , Ralph Peck and Gholamreza Mesri (1996),
Table 12.2, pp. 63.
14. “Soil Mechanics”, 1st Edition, T. W. Lambe and R. V. Whitman (1969), Section 29.8, pp.451.
15. “Correlations for design of laterally loaded piles in soft clay”, Matlock, H. (1970), Proceedings, Offshore
Technology Conference, Vol. I, Paper No. 1204, Houston, Texas, pp. 577-594.
16. “Single Piles and Pile Groups under Lateral Loading”, Lymon C. Reese & William F. Van Impe, Figure 3.11, pp.
71.
17. “Soil Mechanics: Design Manual 7.01”, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Figure 6, pp. 7.1-219.
18. "Foundation Analysis and Design", 5th Edition, Joseph E. Bowles, Table 2-7, pp 123.
19. “Engineering and Design – Settlement Analysis”, EM1110-1-1904, Appendix D, Table D-3, pp. D-5.
12
20. “A Treatise on the Principles and Practice of Harbour Engineering”, Brysson Cunningham, pp. 86.
22. “AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification”, 5th Edition, Section 10(Foundations), pp. (10-25) – (10-27).
23. “AASHTO Standard Specification for Highway Bridges”, 16th Edition, 1996, Table 4.4.1.2B, pp.64.
24. “Handbook of Geotechnical Investigation and Design Tables”, Burt Look, pp.65.
25. “Geophysical testing for rock assessment and pile design”, Lani Cheenikal, Harry Poulos and Robert Whiteley,
Coffey Geotechnics, Australia. (Internet link:
“http://www.coffey.com/Uploads/Documents/Geophysical%20testing%20for%20rock%20assessment%20and%20
pile%20design_20100625141417.pdf”)
26. “Static and Dynamic Field Testing of Drilled Shafts: Suggested Guidelines on their use for FDOT Structures”,
Final Report, FDOT No. 99052794, Dr. Michael. McVay & Ralph D. Ellis Jr.