7 Saturday course on

Geotechnical Engineering Design

Special Committee on IEM Structured Training

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DESIGN COURSE

UNIT B1.2.4
FOUNDATION DESIGN

by : Ir EP Lim Date: 15 Feb 2025

1
Content

2
CONTENTS
1. What is Foundation?
2. Types of Foundation
3. Shallow Foundation
3.1 Types of Shallow Foundation
3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Bearing capacity
3.2.2. Settlement
4. Deep (pile) foundation
4.1 Situations that require use of deep foundation
4.2 Classifications of piles
4.3 Pile Selection
4.4 Pile Design
4.4.1 Allowable structural capacity
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
4.4.3 Pile settlement
4.5 Pile Installation Method
4.6 Load Test on Pile
5. Foundation codes BSCP 2004, BS 8004 and Eurocode EC7
6. Examples & Case Studies
 1. What is Foundation?

• A foundation is a lower portion of

building structure that transmits its
superimposed loads to the earth.
 1. What is Foundation?

• Foundation engineering is the application of soil mechanics and rock

mechanics (Geotechnical engineering) in the design of foundation
elements of structures
 1. What is Foundation?

A foundation also serves as:

• Prevent settlements including differential settlement);

• Resist uplift or overturning (due to water/wind);

• Resist lateral forces due to soil/water pressure;

• Underpin (support) existing structures (or unstable structures)

2. Types of Foundations.
2. Types of Foundations.
3. Shallow Foundation.
 3. Shallow Foundation.

Advantages Disadvantages
Cost-Effective – Requires less excavation and Limited Load-Bearing Capacity – Not suitable
material, making it cheaper than deep for heavy structures or high-rise buildings
foundations.
Easy Construction – Simple design and faster Affected by Soil Conditions – Unsuitable for
execution with minimal technical weak, loose, or waterlogged soils, which can
requirements. cause settlement.
Suitable for Small to Medium Structures – Vulnerable to Water Table Changes – High
Ideal for residential buildings, low-rise offices, groundwater levels can weaken the
and light industrial structures. foundation.
Less Labor and Equipment – No need for heavy Prone to Differential Settlement – Uneven soil
machinery, reducing construction complexity. conditions may cause structural instability.
Better Load Distribution – Spreads the load Not Suitable for Deep Excavations – Cannot be
effectively over a wide area, reducing used where a strong bearing stratum is deep
settlement risks. below the surface.
 3.1 Types of Shallow Foundation.

•V
3.1 Types of Shallow Foundation.
3.1 Types of Shallow Foundation.
3.1 Types of Shallow Foundation.
4.1 Types of Shallow Foundation.
3.1 Types of Shallow Foundation.
3.1 Types of Shallow Foundation.

Raft
Advantages Disadvantages
3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
Introduction
3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
Design considerations
3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Bearing capacity
3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Bearing capacity
3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Bearing capacity
3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Bearing capacity
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)

Assumptions for Terzaghi’s method

• Depth of foundation is less than or equal its width
• No sliding occurs between foundation & soil
• Soil beneath foundation is homogeneous semi-
infinite mass
• Mohr-Coulomb model for soil
• General shear failure is the governing mode
• No soil consolidation occurs
• Foundation is very rigid relative to the soil
• Soil above bottom of foundation has no shear
strength; is only a surcharge load against the
overturning load Source: Foundation Analysis & design: Dr Amit Prashant
• Applied load is compressive and applied vertically
to the centroid of the foundation
• No applied moments present
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)

Meyerhoff (1963)

Ref: Craig’s Soil Mechanics)

 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)

Ref: Craig’s Soil Mechanics)

 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)

Ref: Craig’s Soil Mechanics)

 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)

Ref: Geotechnical Engineering principles and practices in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by V.N.S Murthy
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)

Ref: Geotechnical Engineering principles and practices in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by V.N.S Murthy
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.1 Determination Bearing Capacity of Soil (qa)
Further references on the Terzaghi, Meyerhof , Hansen Bearing Capacity Equations,
Meyerhof’s shape & depth correction factor, Hansen’s inclination, shape & depth correction
factors, bearing capacity of footing on slopes, eccentrically loaded foundation etc. can be
obtained from Foundation Analysis & design by Dr Amit Prashant via the following link

[Link]

&
3.2.2 Foundation Settlement.
 3.2.2 Foundation Settlement.

Settlement (& differential settlement)

Damages to appearance
• Cracking in non-load bearing walls
• Tilting
Loss of serviceability
• Distortion of structures
• Floor cracks
• Machines foundation
• Excessive tiling of building
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential
Methods of computing settlements
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential
Immediate/elastic settlement (theory of elasticity)

Immediate settlements of cohesive soils and total settlement of cohesionless soils may be estimated from the elastic theory.
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential
Immediate/elastic settlement
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential
Immediate/elastic settlement (Janbu method of determining Elastic settlement under undrained conditions)
Ref: Geotechnical Engineering principles and practices in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by V.N.S Murthy
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential
Immediate/elastic settlement (Janbu method of determining Elastic settlement under undrained conditions)
Ref: Geotechnical Engineering principles and practices in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by V.N.S Murthy
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential

Consolidation settlement (please refer to B.1.2.5 settlement analysis )

 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential

Consolidation settlement
Ref: Geotechnical Engineering principles and practices in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by V.N.S Murthy
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential

Consolidation settlement
Ref: Geotechnical Engineering principles and practices in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by V.N.S Murthy
 3.2 Shallow Foundation Design
3.2.2 Settlement: Total & differential

Consolidation settlement
Ref: Geotechnical Engineering principles and practices in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by V.N.S Murthy
 3.2.2 Foundation Settlement.

Settlement & differential – limit state?

 3.2.2. Foundation Settlement.

Settlement & differential – limit state?

 3.2.2 Foundation Settlement.

Settlement & differential – limit state?

 3.2.2 Foundation Settlement.

Settlement & differential – limit state?

 3.2.2 Foundation Settlement.

Maximum allowable settlement of some structures

4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.1 Situations that require the use of deep foundations
a) Upper soil strata too weak to support heavy vertical loads.
Deep foundation transfer loads to deeper dense stratum & act
as toe bearing foundation
b) Load transferred through soil resistance along shaft
c) Resists uplift loads by shaft resistance
d) Lateral loads resisted by vertical deep foundations in bending
e) Lateral loads resisted by groups of vertical and battered
foundations
f) Lateral loads from overhead highway signs & noise walls
resisted by groups of deep foundations
g) Scour around footings could cause loss of bearing capacity at
shallow depths
h) Soils subject to liquefaction in a seismic event
i) As fender system to protect bridge piers from vessel impact
j) To support structures adjacent to locations where future
excavations are planned or could occur
k) Used in expansive or collapsible soils to resist undesirable
seasonal movements of foundations
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.1 Situations that require the use of deep foundations
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.1 Situations that require the use of deep foundations
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by materials
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by materials

R.C Precast square piles

Size : 150 mm to 400mm

Length : 3m, 6m, 9m & 12m
Structural capacity : 25 ton to 185
ton
Material : Grade 40MPa concrete
Joints: Welded
Installation method:
• Drop Hammer
• Jack-in
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by materials
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by materials

Pre-stressed Concrete Spun Piles

Size : 250 mm to 1000mm

Length : 6m, 9m & 12m
Structural capacity : 45 ton to 520 ton
Material : Grade 60MPa & 80MPa
concrete
Joints: Welded
Installation method:
• Drop Hammer
• Jack-in
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by materials
Pre-stressed Concrete Spun Piles

Higher prestress classes, such as Class C, are typically chosen for projects demanding greater load-bearing capacities and durability.
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by materials

Steel H-Piles

Size : 200 mm to 400mm

Length : 6m & 12m
Structural capacity : 40 ton to 1000 ton
Material : 250 N/mm2 to 410 N/mm2 Steel
Joints: Welded
Installation method:
• Hydraulic Hammer
• Jack-in
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by materials

Bored Piles

Size : 450 mm to 2000mm

Length : varies
Structural capacity : 80 ton to 2300 ton
Material : Concrete Grade 30-35MPa
(tremie)
Joints: None
Installation method: Drill then cast-in-situ
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by materials

Types of Pile Shoes

Source :Pile Design and Construction Practice – MJ Tomlinson 4th Edition

 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by construction method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by installation method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.2 Classification of piles – by load transfer

End Bearing Friction Combine end bearing

& Friction
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.3 Pile Selection
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.3 Pile Selection
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.3 Pile Selection
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.3 Pile Selection
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.3 Pile Selection
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4 Pile Design
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.1 Allowable structural capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.1 Allowable structural capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.1 Allowable structural capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
Partial factor of safety for shaft and base capacities respectively.
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity

93
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
Partial factor of safety for shaft and base capacities respectively.
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
Criteria Hiley Formula Simplified Engineering
News Formula
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
Estimation of axial pile capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity

Kb varies depend on workmanship

 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity

(Shearing Dilation)
(quc )
(Rock mass fractures &
pile diameter)
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity

RQD = Rock Quality Designation

quc = Unconfined compressive strength of rock
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity

Check maximum axial load < structural pile capacity

 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.2 Pile Design Geotechnical Capacity
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.3 Pile Settlement

Pile group settlement Design in Cohesive Soil

• Design for total settlement & differential settlement for design

tolerance

• Differential settlement can cause damage to structures

+
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.3 Pile Settlement
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.3 Pile Settlement

Pile group settlement Design in Cohesive Soil

Consolidation settlement (please refer to B.1.2.5 settlement analysis )

 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.3 Pile Settlement

Settlement of pile group - example

(ref: Pile Design and Construction Practice – MJ Tomlinson 4th Edition)
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.3 Pile Settlement

Settlement of pile group - example

(ref: Pile Design and Construction Practice – MJ Tomlinson 4th Edition)
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.3 Pile Settlement

Settlement of pile group - example

(ref: Pile Design and Construction Practice – MJ Tomlinson 4th Edition)
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.4.3 Pile Settlement

Settlement of pile group - example

(ref: Pile Design and Construction Practice – MJ Tomlinson 4th Edition)
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method

Further reference:
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
Further references:

Item Advantages Disadvantages

1 Silent Require flat & solid ground

2 Vibration free Multi-tier platform requires double handling in

earthwork.
3 Speedy : 5-6 workers per rig Costly machine mobilisation & demolization, high
overhead
4 Productivity: 20 hrs – 2 shifts Duration for machine assembly & disassembly (2-5
days); slow movement
5 Multifunction –act as kentledge Trim pile to ground level for machine movement,
pile head damage
6 Need to prepare pile head for PDA test
7 No raked injection pile yet
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
Bored pile installation
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
Bored pile installation
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
Bored pile installation
Further references on bored pile :
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
Example of bored pile record
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.5 Pile Installation Method
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles

Pressure gauge & Dial gauge

Calibration

Hydraulic jack cylinder model Pressure Gauge Dial Gauge

Certificate Calibration of
Certificate Calibration of Pressure Gauge Dial Gauge
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Pile Dynamic Test (PDA)
A pile test method method to obtain capacity and integrity of piles through wave mechanics
Aspect Advantages Disadvantages
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Pile Dynamic Test (PDA)
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Pile Dynamic Test (PDA) & CAPWAP
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles

Pile Damage.
Output quantity BTA (beta) is an estimate of the severity of the damage. A scale of
damage severity suggested by PDI is shown in Table 4.
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Low Strain Pile Integrity Test (PIT)
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Low Strain Pile Integrity Test (PIT)
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Sonic Logging for Bored pile
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Sonic Logging for Bored pile
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Sonic Logging for Bored pile
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles

In pile testing, "DVL" stands for "Design Verification Load," which refers to the maximum load applied to a test pile during a static load test,
representing the working load of the pile with additional factors considered like soil conditions and potential variations in construction,
ensuring the pile can safely handle the intended design load in real-world situations.
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles

ref
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
Reference:
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.6 Load Test on Piles
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.7 JKR TOR on foundation
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.7 JKR TOR on foundation
 4 Deep (pile) Foundation
4.7 JKR TOR on foundation
5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7

UBBL, implementation of Eurocdes

UBBL amendments – incorporation of MS EN

UBBL UBBL Amendment (2021)

5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7

UBBL UBBL Amendment (2021)

5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7
5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7

BSCP 2004 BS 8004 Eurocode 1997 EC 7

 5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7

BSCP 2004 BS 8004 EC 7

BS 8004: A Practical Update Eurocode 7 (EC7): The Modern Standard
1. BSCP 2004: Conservative and Simplified Beginnings •Time Period: Published in 1986, with significant updates in 2015. •Time Period: Published in 2004, widely adopted across Europe in the 2010s,
•Time Period: Published in the mid-20th century (as part •Philosophy: Allowable Stress Design (ASD), continuing the approach replacing BS 8004 and BSCP 2004 in the UK.
of older British Standards). of BSCP 2004 with incremental improvements. •Philosophy: Limit State Design (LSD), emphasizing performance-based design
•Philosophy: Allowable Stress Design (ASD), using a •Key Features: with partial safety factors for actions, resistances, and material properties.
• Expanded and modernized empirical methods for •Key Features:
global factor of safety applied to ultimate bearing • Introduced two limit states:
foundation design.
capacities. • Ultimate Limit State (ULS): Safety against failure (e.g.,
• Practical guidance for shallow and deep foundations,
•Key Features: retaining walls, and settlement estimation.
bearing capacity, sliding, overturning).
• Serviceability Limit State (SLS): Acceptable levels of
• Relied on empirical methods and classical • Incorporated more detailed site investigation and settlement, deformation, or vibration.
theories (e.g., Terzaghi, Meyerhof). testing practices (aligned with BS 5930). • Explicitly considered soil variability and uncertainty through
• Focused on practical, simplified calculations • Retained the use of global safety factors for simplicity characteristic values and partial factors.
suitable for general-purpose designs. and conservatism. • Offered three design approaches (DA1, DA2, DA3) for flexibility in
• Conservative design with limited • Continued focus on ease of use and widespread handling partial factors.
applicability. • Integrated with Eurocode 2 (concrete design) and Eurocode 3
optimization potential. (steel design) for structural elements.
• SLS (serviceability) was not explicitly •Advancements Over BSCP 2004:
• Harmonized design practices across Europe, allowing for
• Broader range of foundation types and conditions
addressed; safety was ensured indirectly international consistency.
considered. •Advancements Over BS 8004:
through conservative assumptions. • Improved guidance for construction tolerances and • Greater emphasis on site-specific conditions and rigorous ground
•Limitations: practical design issues. investigation.
• Lacked flexibility for complex or high-risk • Greater emphasis on addressing differential settlements • Factored loads and resistances, enabling more economic and
projects. and long-term behavior. efficient designs.
• Did not explicitly account for variability in •Limitations: • Explicit treatment of SLS, which was previously neglected.
soil properties, actions, or resistances. • Still relied on global safety factors, lacking the • Adaptable for complex, critical, or high-risk projects.
•Limitations:
• Often overly conservative, leading to sophistication of limit state approaches.
• More complex and computationally intensive compared to BSCP
potentially uneconomical designs. • Did not explicitly consider multiple load combinations or
2004 and BS 8004.
partial factors. • Requires a deeper understanding of soil behavior, partial factors,
• Less adaptable for large-scale or international projects and design approaches.
compared to modern standards. • May be overcomplicated for smaller or simpler projects.
5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7 and
Malaysia’s Conventional Geotechnical Practice

Similarities
Aspect BSCP 2004/BS 8004 Eurocode 7 (EC7) Malaysia’s conventional
Practice
5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7 and
Malaysia’s Conventional Geotechnical Practice

Similarities
Aspect BSCP 2004/BS 8004 Eurocode 7 (EC7) Malaysia’s conventional
Practice
5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7 and
Malaysia’s Conventional Geotechnical Practice

Differences
Aspect BSCP 2004/BS 8004 Eurocode 7 (EC7) Malaysia’s conventional
Practice
5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7 and
Malaysia’s Conventional Geotechnical Practice

Differences
Aspect BSCP 2004/BS 8004 Eurocode 7 (EC7) Malaysia’s conventional
Practice
5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7 and
Malaysia’s Conventional Geotechnical Practice

Differences
Aspect BSCP 2004/BS 8004 Eurocode 7 (EC7) Malaysia’s conventional
Practice
5 Foundation Codes BSCP 2004, BS8004 and Eurocode 1997 EC7 and
Malaysia’s Conventional Geotechnical Practice
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7

(EC0)
(EC1)
(EC2)
(EC3)
(EC4)
(EC5)
(EC6)
(EC7)
(EC8)
(EC9)
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7

DA1-1
DA1-2

DA1-1
DA1-2
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7

Source:
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7
 5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7

Further references:
 5.1 Foundation Codes Eurocode 1997 EC7

Further references:

Participant is
encouraged to attend
the upcoming online
webinar on
MS EN 1997-1 (EC 7)
organised by the
Malaysian Geotechnical
Society MGS to learn
more on the Principles
& Design – Basis of Pile
Foundations on EC7.
 6 Foundation Examples
Example 1: Geotechnical design assessment for bored pile
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 1: Geotechnical design assessment for bored pile

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 1: Geotechnical design assessment for bored pile

 6 Foundation Examples
Example 2 Pile cap design to BS8110
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 3 spun pile

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 4 Pile cap design

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 5 Micropile design

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 5 Micropile design

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 5 Micropile design

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 5 Micropile design

Other design considerations

• Grout/API bond
• Buckling/pile slenderness & buckling capacity analysis
• Settlement estimation
• Elastic shortening
• Ultimate Load capacity Limitation due to Elasticity
• Pile head capping detail
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 6 Remedial proposal for piles deviation exceed allowable tolerances

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 6 Remedial proposal for piles deviation exceed allowable tolerances – eccentricity check
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 6 Remedial proposal for piles deviation exceed allowable tolerances

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 6 Remedial proposal for piles deviation exceed allowable tolerances

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 7 Interpretation of Maintained load test MLT

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 7 Interpretation of Maintained load test MLT

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 7 Interpretation of Maintained load test MLT

 6 Foundation Examples

Example 8 Remedial for unset piles - Compensation piles & modification of pile caps
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 8 Remedial for unset piles - Compensation piles & modification of pile caps
: eccentricity check
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 8 Remedial for unset piles - Compensation piles & modification of pile caps
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 8 Remedial for unset piles - Compensation piles & modification of pile caps
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 9
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 9
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 9
 6 Foundation Examples

Example 9
 References & acknowledgement

1. Acknowledgment to Ir Kong for some of his earlier presentation notes.

2. A Aysen “Problem Solution in Soil Mechanics”

3. Neoh CA (2005) Pile foundation design and construction scope
4. Neoh CA 2005 What can go wrong for driven piles at site
5. Neoh CA “Site Supervision of Installation of Bored piles”
6. Tan YC “Pile Foundation Design and Construction practice: A Malaysian Consultant’s Perspective”
[Link] Domanski “The Design and Construction of bored piles socketed in Karstic Marble/Limestone”
8. Toh CT “Design parameters for bored piles in a weathered sedimentary formation”
9. Serge Borel “An appraisal of the Chin method based on 50 instrumented pile tests”.
10. V.N.S Murthy “Geotechnical Engineering Principles and Practices of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering”
11. Ahmad Safuan b A Rashid ‘ Introduction to Foundation Design using EC7 Part 1”

12. Dr SH Chew “ Worked example of footing design using EC7” (2-Days Workshop on EC7 for Foundation Engineering 2024)

13. Tan Teng Hau “Webinar on Lessons Learnt from Injection Pile Foundation”