Deep Foundations-Axial Load

Capacity
• Full Scale Load Tests
• Analytical Methods - Based on
Laboratory of In-Situ Test Data
• Dynamic Methods – Based on the
dynamics of Pile Driving or Wave
Propagation
 Load Transfer
Two Mechanisms
Side Friction, Qs
(skin friction)

Toe-bearing Resistance, Qp
(point-bearing resistance, end
bearing resistance, tip bearing
resistance)
How are Q1 and Q2
related to the total
load?
• The ultimate load-carrying capacity Qu of a
pile is given by the equation
– Qu = Qp + Qs
• Numerous published studies cover the
determination of the values of Qp and Qs:
– Vesic (1977),
– Meyerhof (1976), and
– Coyle and Castello (1981)
– Janbu’s method
Downward Load Capacity

Qu Q p  Qs  W f
Qa  
F F
´
Qu Q p  Qs
Qa  
F F
qp At   f s As
Qa 
F
Upward Load Capacity

W f   f s As
(Qupward ) a 
F
 Computing
Ae and As

• Soil plugging!
• When L/B is:
> 10-20 (clays)
> 25-35 (sands)
Factor of Safety (Piles)
Table 1
Factor of Safety (Drilled Shafts)

Table 2
Full Scale Static Load Tests
Full Scale Static Load Tests
Full Scale Static Load Tests
Full Scale Static Load Tests
Full Scale Static Load Tests
Full Scale Static Load Tests
Full Scale Static Load Tests
 Full Scale Load Tests
• Controlled Stress Tests
– Maintained Load Tests (ML Tests)
• Slow ML Tests (hold load for 1-2 hours)
• Quick ML Tests (hold load for 2.5-15 minutes)
• Controlled Strain Tests
– Constant Rate of Penetration Test
– Constant Settlement Increment Test
Interpretation of Test Results
Davisson’s Method
 Estimating Toe Bearing
• Unit toe bearing
resistance, q´p
• q´p in Sands
• Piles
• Drilled Shafts
• Auger Cast Piles
• Q´p in Clays
• q´p in Intermediate
Geomaterials and Rock
 Estimating Toe Bearing, Qp
• The ultimate resistance per unit area
developed at the pile tip, qp, may be
expressed by an equation similar in form to:
– qu = c'Nc* + qNq* + γBNγ*
although the values of Nc*, Nq*and Nγ* will
change.
Hence,
Qp = Apqp = Ap(c'Nc* + qNq*)
 Frictional Resistance, Qs
• The frictional, or skin, resistance of a pile
may be written as
– Qs = pLf
• where p = perimeter of the pile section
• L = incremental pile length over which p
and f are taken to be constant
• f = unit friction resistance at any depth z
 Meyerhof's Method for Estimating Qp

• Sand
• The point bearing capacity, qp, of a pile in sand
generally increases with the depth of
embedment in the bearing stratum and reaches
a maximum value at an embedment ratio of Lb/D
= (Lb/D)cr.
• Note that in a homogeneous soil Lb is equal to
the actual embedment length of the pile, L.
• Beyond the critical embedment ratio,
(Lb/D)cr, the value of qp remains constant
(qp = ql).
• Qp should not exceed the
limiting value Apql :
Qp = Ap qNq*  Apql
• The limiting point resistance
is:
ql = paNq*tan‘
• where pa = atmospheric pressure (=100
kN/m2 )
• Meyerhof (1976) also suggested that
the ultimate point resistance qp in a
homogeneous granular soil (L = Lb)
may be obtained from standard
penetration numbers as
ql = 0.4pa(N1)60L/D  4 pa(N1)60
 Clay ( = 0)
• For piles in saturated clays under
undrained conditions ( = 0),
Qp = ApCuN*c = 9CuAp

• where Cu = undrained cohesion of the soil

below the tip of the pile.
Vesic’s method for estimating Qp

• A method for estimating the pile point

bearing capacity based on the theory of
expansion of cavities proposed as
'
Q p  A p q p  A p  c ' N c*   0 N* 
   
 1  2K o  '
  q
 3 
• where o = mean effective normal ground stress at the
level of the pile point.
• Ko = earth pressure coefficient at rest = 1 - sin'
• Nc* , N* = bearing capacity factors.
• According to Vesic’s theory,
N* = f(Irr)
where Irr = reduced rigidity index for the soil
Ir
I rr 
1 Ir
Es Gs
I r  rigidity index  

21   s  c '  q ' tan  '  c'  q ' tan  '
• Es = modulus of elasticity of soil
• µs= Poisson's ratio of soil
• Gs = shear modulus of soil
 = average volumatic strain in the plastic zone below the pile point
• When the volume does not change (e.g., for dense sand or saturated
clay), = 0, so
Ir = Irr
Vesic’s N*
Vesic’s , Nq*
Table 2.1 Bearing Capacity Factors Nc* and N* Based on
the Theory of Expansion of Cavities
 Unit toe bearing resistance, q´p
in Sands
• Drilled Shafts

qp  57.5 N 60  2900 kPa

If base diameter of shaft >1200mm (50in):

1200mm
qpr  qp
Bb
 Unit toe bearing resistance, q´t
in Sands

• Auger-cast Piles

qp  190 N 60  7500 kPa

 Unit toe bearing resistance, q´p
in Clays

*
qp  N c su
N*c = 6.5 at Su = 25 kPa
= 8.0 at Su = 50 kPa
= 9.0 at Su  100 kPa

Use reduction factor, Fr if Bb >1900mm

 Unit Toe Bearing Resistance, q´p
in Intermediate Geomaterials & Rock

• Intermediate Geomaterials
Cohesive materials with
250 kPa (5000psf) < Su <2500kPa (50,000psf)
Or
Non-cohesive materials with
N60 > 50
 Unit Toe Bearing Resistance, q´t
in Intermediate Geomaterials & Rock

• Cohesive Intermediate Geomaterials & Rock

If RQD is 100% qp  2.5 qu
If 70%<RQD<100% and qu>500 kPa


q p  7970 (qu ) 0.51

For jointed material

 
qp  t 0.5  (mt 0.5  t )0.5 qu
 Unit Toe Bearing Resistance, q´t
in Intermediate Geomaterials & Rock
 Unit Toe Bearing Resistance, q´t
in Intermediate Geomaterials & Rock
 Estimating Unit-Side Friction Resistance, fs

• Effective Stress Analysis (-Method)

– Sands f s    z
– Gravels
– Silts and Clays
• Total Stress Analysis (-Method)

f s   su
 -Method (Sands)

For large displacement piles, Bhushan(1982)

  0.18  0.65Dr
 -Method (Sands)

For drilled shafts with N6015, O’Neill & Reese

(1999)

  1.5  0.135 z 0.25    1.20 (English)

  1.5  0.245 z 0.25    1.20 ( SI )

Subject to maximum value of fs of 4000 psf (190

kPa)
If N60<15 then multiply above  by N60/15
 -Method (Sands)

For Auger-Cast Piles,

Neely (1991)

Do not divide into

layers

f s      140 kPa (2800 psf )

 -Method (Gravels)

Rollins, Clayton, and Mitchell (1997)

For 50% or more gravel size particles
  3.4 e 0.026 z 0.25    3.00 (English)

  3.4 e 0.085 z 0.25    3.00 (SI )

For 25-50% gravel size particles

  2.0  0.061z 0.75 0.25    1.80 (English)

  2.0  0.15 z 0.75 0.25    1.80 (SI )

 -Method (Silts and Clays)

Fellenius, (1999)
For normally consolidated silts and clays
  0.27 - 0.50 ( Silts )
  0.25 - 0.35 (clays)

For heavily over consolidated clays

 could be much higher (See Figure next)
-Method (Clays)
-Method (fs=  su); Piles
 -Method (fs=  su)
• For su < 25 kPa (500 psf)
  1.0
For 25 kPa (500 psf) < su <75kPa
(1500psf)

 su  500 psf 
  1.0  0.5 
 1000 psf 

  0.5
For su > 75 kPa (1500 psf)
-Method (fs=  su); Drilled Shafts
-Method (fs=  su); Drilled Shafts
Example 2.1
Example 2.2