Basarkar

WorkshopProgramDFI2013Conference,IITBombay
WELCOMEALL
WorkshopProgramDFI2013Conference,IITBombay
Rock Socketing using Reverse

Circulation Rig under operation at
Karwar, India
Piling with 180kN.m Torque Hydraulic

rigs
Piling with Tripod rigs at Gangtok,,

Sikkim, India
ROCKSOCKETEDPILES CURRENTINDIANPRACTICE
Dr.SunilS.Basarkar
ITDCementationIndialimited
PRESENTATIONOUTLINE
Conceptofrockanddefiningthem
Relevantquestionsonrocksocketing
Behaviour ofrocksocketedpiles
Designapproachesforrocksocketedpiles
Fieldterminationcriteriaforsocketedpiles
Rocksocketingtechniques Indiacontext
ConcludingRemarks
References
DFI2013India,IITBombay
CONCEPTOFROCK&DEFININGTHEM
SOCKETEDPILES
SocketedPiles:
Aportionofpileshaftthatpenetratesintoarock
formationunderneaththeoverburden(IS:14593)
Thesepilesderiveresistancefromsideshearand
endbearingatthesocketportion
Thesepileshavelessdisplacementcomparedto
pilesinsandandclays
Advantages:
Usedwhennostrongbearingmaterialisavailableatshallow
depths&structuralloadisheavy
Haveveryhighcapacity especiallywhenSideshear&End
Bearingareaccountedpragmatically
Withsuitabledesign&constructionmethods,theygivevery
highUpliftcapacity
CONCEPTOFROCKANDDEFININGROCK
RockDefinition
ToanEngineer,Rocksignifiesfirm,coherentorconsolidatedsubstances
thatcannotbenormallyexcavatedbymanualmeansalone(Jumikis,
1979)
Indesigningofsocketedpiles,engineersassumerockashomogeneous
andisotropicmedium
However,mostrocksarenotsound.Hencetheyareneither
homogeneousnorisotropic
Insitufeaturesofrockslikejointingpattern,fracturesstronglygovern
thebehaviour ofsocketedpiles,particularlyoflargediameter
Tables2.ISCodeClassificationofRock
Table: Strength of Intact Rock Material (MPa) (IS: 13365 (Part 1) 1998.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Description
Compressive Strength
Point Load Strength
Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Exceptionally Strong
>250
>8
15
Very Strong
100-250
4-8
12
Strong
50-100
2-4
7
Average
25-50
1-2
4
Weak
10-25
Use of UCS preferred
2
Very Weak
2-10
-do1
Extremely weak
<2
-do0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Table: Terms for Strength of Rock Material (IS: 4464-1985)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Term
Compressive Strength (kg/cm2)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Very Weak
<12.50
Weak
12.50-50.0
Moderately weak
50 to 125
Moderately Strong
125 to 500
Strong
500 to 1000
Very Strong
1000 to 2000
Extremely Strong
>2000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tables2.ISCodeGuidelinesonRock
Table: Rock Quality in Terms of Weathering Grades of Rock Mass (IS: 4464 1985)
Terms
Fresh
Slightly
Weathered
Moderately
weathered
Highly weathered
Completely
Weathered
Residual Soil
Description
No visible sign of rock material weathering; perhaps slight
Discoloration on major discontinuity surfaces
Discoloration indicates weathering of rock material and
discontinuity surfaces. Weathering may discolour all the rock
material
Less than half of the rock material is decomposed or
disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discoloured rock is present
either as a continuous framework or as core stones.
More than half of the rock material is decomposed or
disintegrated to a soil. Fresh or discoloured rock is present
either as a discontinuous framework or as core stones.
All rock material is decomposed and/or disintegrated to soil.
The original mass structure is still largely intact.
All rock material is converted to soil. The mass structure and
material Fabric is destroyed. There is a large change in
volume, but the soil has not been significantly transported.
Grade
I
Interpretation
CR: >60%
II
CR: 40 60%
III
CR: 25 40%
IV
CR: 11 25%
CR: 0 10%
VI
CR=0; but N>50
Tables2.ISCodeGuidelinesonRock
Rock Quality Designation (RQD) of Rock (IS: 13365 (Part 1) 1998.
Rock Quality Designation
( RQD )
Diagnostic Description of
Rock
Exceeding 90%
Excellent
90 % - 75 %
Good
75 % - 50 %
Fair
50 % - 25 %
Poor
Less Than 25 %
Very Poor
Rock Quality Designation : Sum of Length of Core Pieces greater than 100mm /
Length of Run
Table: Net Safe Bearing Pressure Based on RMR

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Classification No.
I
II
III
IV
V
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Description of Rock
Very Good
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
RMR
100-81
80-61
60-41
40-21
20-0
qns (t/m2)
600-448
440-288
280-151
145-90-58
55-45-40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10
Upto Nvalueof60,StratamaybedefinedasSoil.Beyond
60orRefusal,StratamaybeconsideredasWeatheredor
Weakrock.
MEDIUM
WEAK
VERY WEAK
WEAK
1.4
VERYWEAK
0.5
1.0
WEAK
2.0
MOD WEAK
MODSTRONG
STRONG
10
40
4
MODWEAK
MODSTRONG
5.0
10
20
STRONG
VERY
STRONG
Kulhawy (1991)
EXTREAMLY
STRONG
Cole&Stroud
(1977)
STRONG
50
100
ProposedRevision
ToBS5930
200
500
UCS(MPa)
ClassificationofRockMaterialStrength (Kulhawy &Phoon,1993;Cole&Stroud,
1977)
11
Shear
Strength
2
KN/m
40000
Approx.
N Value
Strength/
Consistency
*
Strong
Grade
Breakability
Difficult to break
against solid object
with hammer
Penetration
Cannot be
scratched with
knife
Scratch
Moderately
strong
Broken against
Solid object with
hammer
Can just be
scratched with
knife
Broken in hand by
hitting with hammer
Scratched with
knife. Can just be
scratched with
thumb-nail
Broken by leaning
on sample with
hammer
No penetration with
knife
Broken by hand
Penetration to abt.
2mm with knife
Easily broken by
hand
Penetration to abt.
5mm with knife
20000
Cole&StroudChart
600
10000
8000
6000
400
Manyconsultantsfeelthat
GradeC,D,EandFmaterial
cannotbeconsideredas
socket
4000
Moderately
weak
2000
200
Scratched with
thumb-nail
Weak
1000
800
100
600
80
Hard or
very weak
400
GradeCandabovewould
giveaveryhighendbearing
60
Very stiff
40
Penetrated by thumbnail to about 15mm

with knife
200
Stiff
Indented by thumb
Firm
Penetrated by thumb
with effort
soft
Easily penetrated
by thumb
100
20
80
IS:2911(Part1/Sec.2)2010
usesCole&StroudChartfor
Piledesign
60
10
40
8
6
20
4
10
2
N.B.
Very soft
* Geol. Soc. Working Party Report (1970) and CP 2004 (1972) except that the designation 'hard' for
soil materials has been given a separate identity which is analogous to very weak for materials
classifiable as rock.
Grades and shear strengths for rocks refer to intact specimen. The N value, however, is an in-situ
test and includes some effect of discontinuities. For cohesive soils the correlation between N
values and in-situ strength assumed is that given by Stroud (1974) for clays of low plasticity.
Fig. 2.4. Scale of Strengths and N Values for Weak Rocks and Soils
(Cole and Stroud, 1977).
12
RELEVANTQUESTIONSONROCKSOCKETING
13
RELEVANTQUESTIONSONROCKSOCKETING
HowdoyoudifferentiateWeatheredrock,WeakandHardrock?
Howmuchsocketingisrequired?
Whataretherockparametersthataffectthecapacityofrocksocketed
piles?
Isroughnessfactorofsocket,andmethodofrockdrillingquantifiedduring
capacityanalysis?
Howtoaddressfieldterminationforsocketedpiles?
IstherecommongroundofunderstandinginIndiabetweentheContractors,
DesignersandtheClientsonthematterofsocketingrequirements?
AreLoadtestsonrocksocketsreallyusedforsocketdepthoptimization?
Arethepaymentsforpileboringinvariousrockcategoriesstandardized?
WhatisaLargeDiameterandaSmallDiameterPile?
14
BEHAVIOUROFROCKSOCKETEDPILES
15
Linear/ElasticPhase:
Shearstrainsareelastic.
Majorloadsarecarriedinsidewallshear.
Pileexhibitselasticbehaviour underthisstage.
NonLinearPhase:
Slipstartsattherockconcreteinterface.
Increasingportionofloadtransferredtothepile
base.
Rockconcretebondisbroken,andconstant
frictionalresistanceisdeveloped.
Thestructuralpileexhibitselasticbehaviour even
underthisphaseunderhighpileloaden
16
Fullsideshearmobilizedat
relativelysmallpile
movements
Load
Qu
Largemovementsrequired
tomobilizeBaseResistance
QB
QS
Pilemovement
Behaviour ofSocketedPiles
17
FactorsAffectingLoadCapacityofSocketedPile:
Socketgeometry.
Modulusofrockatthesideandthepilebase.
Strengthofrockatthesideandthepilebase.
Socketwallcondition&roughness.
Conditionatbottomofsocket.
Layeringofrock,presenceofclayseams.
Creeps.
18
DESIGNAPPROACHESFORROCKSOCKETEDPILES
19
ROCKSOCKETEDPILES:DESIGNAPPROACHESININDIA
ElasticMethod
UsingRockStrengthofsocketmaterial
UsingprovisionsofIS:145931998
UsingIRC782000,Amendment54,dated28th May2009.
UsingIS:2911(Part1/Section2)2010
20
ROCKSOCKETEDPILES:DESIGNAPPROACHES
ElasticAnalysis
ChartsbasedonoriginalFE
analysisofMattes&Poulos
(1969)
ExtendedbyPells &Turner
(1979)toaccommodate
practicalrangeofmodulus
ratioKandL/Dratioof
socket
PresentschartsforElastic
Settlements,andLoad
distributionalongpile.
Settlement of rock-sockets
with clean base
(Pells & Turner, 1979)
Load distribution in a socket

with a clean base
(Pells & Turner, 1979)
10
21
ElasticAnalysis(Example,continued)
ElasticAnalysis(Example)
For12mmdisplacement,w,Load,Q=
Forpiledia.D=1m;Socketdepth,L=2.0m
L/D=2
w.Er.D/(2.Ip)=28845300N
Pileconcretegrade:M30
or2884.5MT
Avg.UCSofsocketmaterial,r:20MPa
Ep=5000.Sqrt(30) =27386.1MPa
Er=215.Sqrt(r) =961.51MPa
Ep/Er =28.48
ForL/D=2,&Ep/Er =28.48,
InfluencefactorfromChart,Ip=0.2
Safeload,2884.5/1.5=1923.00MT
Notes:1.Elasticsolutionstobeusedonlyas
guideline
2.AFactorofsafetyof3tobefurtherused
foraccountingnonlinearity,heterogeneity,
andvariationinworkmanship
22
UsingRockStrengthofsocket
UCSofsocketmaterialisusedasabasis
CoreRecovery&RQDofrockmassmaybeusedtoarriveatfield
UCS
Sideshearandbaseresistanceofsocketempiricallyrelatedto
theUCSvalue
Example,
Max.Sideshear,fmax=0.4(c)0.5
Max.Baseresistance,qmax =3.0(c)0.5
(Zhang&Einstein,1999)
(Zhang&Einstein,1999)
Afactorofsafetyof3maybeusedforsafesideshearand2.5for
safebaseresistance
Exercisecaution,whilearrivingatsafecapacity.Capacitytobe
confirmedbyfieldloadtests
11
23
IS:14593 1998
Thecodeattemptstogiveguidelineforsocketedpileofdiameter 1500mm
SuggestedMinimumSocketlengthaspertable:
SuggestedMinimumSocketLength
RockType
ls
Soundrelativelyhomogeneousrock
includinggranite,gneiss
1to2D
Moderatelyweathered,closelyjointed
includingschist,slate
2to3D
Softrocks,sedimentaryrocksincluding
hardshale,sandstones,siltstone,
mudstone
3to 4D
NOTEDisthediameterofpile.
24
IS:14593 1998
BetteroptionfordesignisusingUCSvalues
SafePileLoad
Where,
qc
Nd
Ap
D
Is
Nj
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
safeloadcapacityofpile,inMT;
uniaxialcompressivestrengthofrock,T/ ;
depthfactor=O.8O.2ls/D,l 2;
areaofpiletoe,
/4;
diameterofpile,inm;
socketlengthintotherock,inm;
rocksocketslideresistancereductionfactor(Fig.1);
rocksocketcorrectionfactor(Fig.2);and
valuesasperFig.2ofIS12070areapplicable,
12
25
IS:14593 1998
26
UsingIRC782000(latestamendment)
SpecifiestwomethodsforsocketedpilesandstatedinAppendix5ofIRC78(Clause
709.3.1)
AppliedwhencoresofrockcanbetakenandUCSestablishedbylaboratorytests
Where,
Qall
Re
Raf
Ksp
=
=
=
=
=
Ultimatesocketedpilecapacityinrock;
Allowablepilecapacity;
Ultimatebaseresistance;
Ultimatesideshear;
Empiricalcorrectionaspertablebelow;
Ksp maybelinearlyinterpolated
(CR+RQD)/2
Ksp
30%
0.3
100%
1.2
13
27
UsingIRC782000(latestamendment)
CR
CoreRecovery(%)
RQD
Rockqualitydesignation(%)
qc
AverageUCSofrockcorebelowpile
df
Depthfactor=(1+0.4lsoc/D) 1.2
As
Socketedsurfacearea
Cus
Ultimateshearstrengthofsocketmaterialalongsocketlength
0.225
3.0MPa forM35pileconcrete
(3.0x
)forothergradepileconcrete
28
UsingIRC782000(latestamendment) METHOD2
ApplicablewherestrataishighlyfragmentedwithverylowRQD&CRvalue,or
whereUCS<10MPa
UsesextrapolatedSPTvaluesasperTable
ShearStrength
ModeratelyWeak
Weak
VeryWeak
ApproximateNValue
300 200
200 100
100 60
Cohesion(MPa)
3.3 1.9
1.9 0.7
0.7 0.4
Where,
Nc
=
=
=
Averageultimateshearstrengthbelowpilebase
Ultimateshearstrengthalongsocket
9
14
29
IS:2911(Part1/Section2)2010
AppendixB7&B8addressedtopilesinRock
B8Addressestosocketedpiledesigninweathered/SoftRock
UsesColeandStroud(1977)Chart
DecipheringproperNvalueofrockiskeyfactor
/
/F
Where,
F=3,
=0.9(Recommended)
ForN 60,stratumistreatedasweatheredrockratherthansoil
30
FIELDTERMINATIONCRITERIAFORSOCKETEDPILES
15
31
FIELDTERMNATIONCRITERIAFORSOCKETEDPILES
Appliedfortwocases:
PilingbyPercussionmethod(Chiseling)
PilingbyHydraulicrigswithTorquemeasurement
CHISELENERGYCRITERIA
E=(W.H.n)/A.d
E=ChiselenergyinT.m/m2/cmpenetration
W=ChiselweightinT
H=DropofChiselinm
n=Reductionfactorusuallyrangingfrom0.6to0.8.
A=CSAreaofpile(m2)
d=Averagechiselpenetrationperblow(Takenas
averageofnumberofblowsoveraperiodof
30minutes).
32
GUIDELINESOFENERGYCRITERIA
Energyvalue,Eof40.0T.m/m2/cmcorrespondstostratumhaving
SPT=50.
ForarockrequiringaboutE=225T.m/m2/cm,
Datye (1990)suggestsrockpilefrictionof15T/m2 andEndBearing
Resistanceof450T/m2
FoundationstratumisassumedtostartwhenEnergy,Eof75
T.m/m2/cmpenetration
16
33
TERMINATIONCRITERIAFORHYDRAULICRIGS
ConceptofPilePenetrationRatio(PPR),inT.m/m2/cmpenetrationis
used
PilePenetrationRatio(PPR)forRotarypiles=2NT.t
AP
t=timeinminutes
A=C.S.areaofpileinm2
P=penetrationincm
N=RPMofhydraulicmotor
T=TorqueinTm
Tcanbeknownfrom,equation
HPofhydraulicmotor,HP=2NT
4.5
HPistakenas30to40%ofratedHPoftherig.(forT=180kN.m,HP=
325)
34
ROCKSOCKETINGTECHNIQUES INDIANCONTEXT
17
35
A Heavy Duty Rig with Rock Auger,

Akola, near Mumbai, India
Piling through sandy overburden at

Noida, with 180kN.m torque rigs
Boring & Socketing under constraints

Lo-drill rig in operation at Gangtok,
Sikkim, India
36
Boring through overburden soil at Noida,

near Delhi, India
18
37
Piling works with Tripod rigs using

Chiseling method at Gangtok, Sikkim
38
Rock Auger : Ready for use at Akola,

Central India
Rock Bucket: ready for use at Akola,
Central India
19
Rock Auger
39
Cleaning Bucket
40
CONCLUDINGREMARKS
20
41
CONCLUDINGREMARKS
Rockasamaterialisadebatedareaandfrictioniscommonin
Contracts
DesignapproachesinIndiaareconservative,andthereisarare
agreementonthesocketingrequirements
Designapproachesforrocksocketedpilesareyettogainconfidence
duetovariability
ModernRigsandtoolsforsocketinghavebeenintroducedinIndia,but
stilltoestablishitsfootholdintermsofcostrecovery
TerminationcriteriawithPercussionmethodsarewellestablished
Terminationcriteriaforhydraulicrotaryrigsisyettogainwide
acceptance,andisstillamatterofresearch
42
REFERENCES
21
REFERENCES
43
Basarkar,S.S.(2004).AnalyticalandExperimentalStudiesonRockSocketedPilesin
MumbaiRegion,IITBombay,2004.
Datye,K.R.(1990).BoredpilinginBombayregion.Proc.IndianGeotechnical
Conference(IGC)1990,Bombay,571588.
Deere,D.U.,andMiller,R.P.(1966).EngineeringClassificationandIndexPropertiesof
IntactRock.TechnicalReportNo.AFWLTR65116,AirForceWeaponsLaboratory,
KirtlandAirForceBase,NewMexico.
IRC:782000. StandardSpecificationsandCodeofPracticeforRoadBridges.SectionVII
Foundations&Substructures(2ndRevision),Amendmentno.54,dated28/5/2009.
IS:2911(Part1/Section2). Design&ConstructionofPileFoundations CodeofPractice
Part1ConcretePiles,Section2,BoredCastInsituConcretePiles.
IS4464:1985(Revised2004). CodeOfPracticeForPresentationOfDrillingInformation
andCoreDescriptionInFoundationInvestigation.
IS133651(1998). Quantitativeclassificationsystemofrockmass Guidelines,Part1:
RMRforpredictingofengineeringproperties
IS:14593:1998. Design&ConstructionofBoredCastinSituPilesFoundedonRocks
Guidelines.
REFERENCES
44
Jumikis,A.(1979).RockMechanics.TransTechPublications.
Kulhawy,F.H.(1978).Geomechanical modelforrockfoundationsettlement.Jr.of
Geotech.Engnr.Div.,Proc.ASCE,Vol.104(GT2),211227.
Mattes,N.S.andPoulos,H.G.(1969).Settlementofsinglecompressiblepile.Jr.ofSoil
Mech.andFound.Div.,ASCE,95(1),189207.
analysis
Pells,P.J.N.andTurner,R.M.(1979).Elasticsolutionsforthedesignand
ofrocksocketedpiles.Can.Geotech.Jr.,16,481487.
Rowe,R.K.andArmitage,H.H.(1987).Adesignmethodfordrilledpiersinsoftrock.
Can.Geotech.Jr.,24,126142.
Zhang,L.andEinstein,H.H.(1998).Endbearingcapacityofdrilledshaftsin rock.Jr.
ofGeotech.andGeoenvr.Engnr.,ASCE,Vol.124(7),574584.
22
45
THANKYOU
23

Basarkar

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Basarkar

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

WorkshopProgramDFI2013Conference,IITBombay

Rock Socketing using Reverse

Piling with 180kN.m Torque Hydraulic

Piling with Tripod rigs at Gangtok,,

CR=0; but N>50

Table: Net Safe Bearing Pressure Based on RMR

Penetrated by thumbnail to about 15mm

Load distribution in a socket

A Heavy Duty Rig with Rock Auger,

Piling through sandy overburden at

Boring & Socketing under constraints

Boring through overburden soil at Noida,

Piling works with Tripod rigs using

Rock Auger : Ready for use at Akola,

Вам также может понравиться