Report On Piled Foundations

Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
SAIGON EAST WEST HIGHWAY
FINAL REPORT
PILE FOUNDATIONS
W. HOWKINS
April 2002
/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/269876001.doc
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
DESIGN REPORT: PILE FOUNDATIONS.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
2
3
Overall soil conditions........................................................................................................................... 2

Soil parameters.................................................................................................................................... 2
Pile Capacities...................................................................................................................................... 5
3.1
Empirical method for granular soils............................................................................................... 5
a. Bored piles.................................................................................................................................... 6
3.2
Static method for granular soils..................................................................................................... 7
a. End bearing................................................................................................................................... 7
b. Shaft resistance............................................................................................................................. 9
3.3
Static method for cohesive soils.................................................................................................... 9
3.4
Adopted design parameters........................................................................................................ 10
4 Foundation Conditions........................................................................................................................ 12
4.1
NH1 Interchange......................................................................................................................... 12
4.2
Nuoc Len Bridge.......................................................................................................................... 12
4.3
Rach Cay Bridge......................................................................................................................... 13
4.4
Lo Gom Bridge............................................................................................................................ 13
4.5
Cha Va Bridge............................................................................................................................. 14
4.6
Calmette Bridge........................................................................................................................... 14
4.7
Khanh Hoi Bridge........................................................................................................................ 14
4.8
Ca Tre Lon Bridge....................................................................................................................... 15
4.9
Ca Tre Nho Bridge....................................................................................................................... 15
4.10 Hanoi Highway Flyover............................................................................................................... 15
4.11 Footbridges................................................................................................................................. 16
5 References:........................................................................................................................................ 19
TABLES
Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 -
Pile Capacity Calculation Sheet............................................................................................... 11

Major Bridges: estimated pile tip elevations.............................................................................17
Footbridges: estimated pile tip elevations................................................................................18
FIGURES
Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 -
Profile of soft organic clays along the project road....................................................................2

SPT versus Unit Weight............................................................................................................. 3
SPT versus undrained strength................................................................................................. 3
SPT depth correction factor, CN................................................................................................. 4
Friction angle versus N60............................................................................................................ 5
Shaft friction factor for driven and bored piles.........................................................................6
Bearing capacity factor Nq from various sources.......................................................................8
Tomlinsons adhesion factor for piles in cohesive strata............................................................9
APPENDICES
1.
2.
3.
Comparison of pile design methods for granular soils

Major Bridges Pile Capacities
Footbridges Pile Capacities
DRAWINGS
01 10 Plan and Soils Profiles of Major Bridges
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
OVER ALL SOIL CONDITIONS.
Beneath a thin surface layer of topsoil or fill, the uppermost natural soil layer, which was found across
almost the entire length of the road, was a very soft to soft, organic clay of medium to high plasticity. The
thickness of this layer, which is shown on Figure 1, was found to vary from 25 to 40 m between km 0 and
km 5.5 and then to change suddenly to less than 5 m along the bank of the Ben Nghe Canal up to km 14.
On the Thu Thiem side, the thickness of the organic clay was generally found to range between 10 and
20 m except between km 18.7 and 20.5 where it was generally less than 5 metres.
Figure 1 -
Profile of soft organic clays along the project road
Beneath the soft organic clay, medium dense sandy soils were mostly encountered down to elevation 30
to 40 m, where very stiff to hard clays were found to extend 15 to 20 m. The clay was found in turn to
overlie dense to very dense sands.
SOIL PAR AMETERS
The soft organic clay was found to have SPT N values of 0 to 3 blows/ft, and corresponding undrained
shear strengths typically about 10 to 20 kPa, reaching 30 to 40 kPa near the bottom of the layer. Moisture
contents were generally over 100 per cent in the upper part of the layer, well above the liquid limit.
Organic contents were found to be about 10 per cent.
The underlying medium dense sand layers had N values ranging from 12 to 30 blows/ft. This is not a
competent layer for the founding of piles. The very stiff to hard clay layer has generally high SPT
resistances of 30 to 50, corresponding to undrained shear strengths of 180 to 300 kPa. However, it is not
until the underlying sand layers are reached that a satisfactory end bearing capacity can be mobilised for
driven or bored piles.
The unit weight of the various soil layers depends predominantly on their natural moisture contents, and
thus their densities. In the pile calculations, the effective overburden pressure has been calculated
assuming the relationship between the unit weight and N value given in Figure 2 below. The plotted points
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
in the Figure represent the approximate ranges of unit weight suggested by Meyerhof for different relative
densities.
2.4
Unit w eight - t/m3 .
2.2
2.0
= 0.2478.loge(N) + 1.1782
1.8
1.6
1.4
Points from empirical data
1.2
published by Mey erhof, Ref 1.
1.0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
SPT 'N' - blow s/ft
Figure 2 -
SPT versus Unit Weight
Shear strengths of cohesive and granular soils have been correlated with SPT values by Terzaghi & Peck
and later modified by Meyerhof (1). Various undrained shear strength relationships are shown in Figure 3,
the upper being the Terzaghi & Peck relationship and the lower being that suggested in the British Code,
CP2004, 1972. The centre line has been drawn as a best fit of the vane test results carried out for the
project and the upper boundary of the unconfined compression tests carried out for this project, the Binh
Thuan Raod and the Maunsell tunnel borings 1 (2). The equation of this line is Su = 20 + 5.N, where Su is
measured in kPa. It should be noted that this line does not pass through the origin. This is consistent with
field results: the split spoon sampler may sink the full 45 cm under the weight of the rods and hammer
giving a zero N value, even though the clay have a shear strength of 20 kPa. This line has been used in
the pile capacity calculations.
300
Terzaghi & P eck
Design line
Tunnel borings (1997)

Vane tests EW Hwy
250
CP 2004, 1972
Binh Thuan Rd
EW Hwy
200
150
Vane tests
100
Unconfined tests
50
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
SP T - N
Figure 3 -
SPT versus undrained strength
The measured compressive strengths have been halved to give undrained shear strength.
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
The unconfined tests all lie below the design line, and this is attributed to the normal degree of sample
disturbance which is to be expected. The vane tests results may be taken as the true measure of
undrained shear strength, and these points are both above and below the line.
In developing a relationship between the angle of friction of a cohesionless soil and the measured SPT
resistances, it was found that the N values should be corrected for overburden pressure which gives an
additional apparent resistance in deep borings which is not attributable to shear strength. The SPT
correction for both hammer efficiency and depth is given in the US Corps of Engineers Manual, EM 11101 (3) as follows:
N60 = CER..NSPT
equ. 1
where CER is the hammer energy correction factor (= 1 for a free fall hammer),
CN is the depth correction factor.
SP T Depth Correction Factor Cn
1.8
Correction factor - CN .
1.6
1.4
Cn =7.6873.p-0.4591
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Overburden pressure p - kPa
Figure 4 -
SPT depth correction factor, CN
The relationship between CN and effective overburden pressure is given in the COE Manual on the basis
of data from Tokimatsu and Seed (4) as shown in Figure 4 and this was used in the spread sheets to
calculate N60 .
The relationship between N60 and friction angle, , is taken from the range of values proposed by
Meyerhof as given in Table 3-1 of the COE Manual. These values are plotted below in Figure 5, and were
found to give a good straight line fit when is plotted against log10 N. This line is defined by
= 4.1057.loge(N60) + 24.707
equ. 2
This relationship has been used in the spreadsheets to calculate the bearing capacity of piles in granular
strata.
The correlation between and SPT blow counts is difficult to verify since only disturbed samples can be
taken from the granular soil strata and triaxial tests can only be made on recompacted samples. Although
the use of SPT resistances to predict friction angles and relative densities is only approximate, it still
provides a rational method of estimating pile capacities. However, such estimates must be confirmed by
full scale load testing during construction.
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
50
Friction angle -
45
40
35
= 4.1057loge(N60) + 24.707
30
25
20
1
10
100
N 60 - blows/ft
Figure 5 -
3
3.1
Friction angle versus N60
PILE C APACITIES
Empirical method for granular soils
a. Driven piles
Since it is difficult to measure the in-situ shear strength parameters of granular strata, an empirical
relationship was proposed by Meyerhof in 1976 (5) between the capacity of driven piles and SPT
resistance. This relationship, which is valid only for cohesionless soils, has become widely accepted as
giving a reasonable estimate of pile bearing capacity: it is quoted in Leonards, Foundation Engineering,
(6), the COE Manual EM 1110-1, the Navys Design Manual 7.02 (7), and Hsai-Yang Fangs Foundation
Engineering Handbook (8).
For driven piles, the ultimate bearing capacity is given by:
Total ultimate capacity
End bearing capacity
Shaft friction capacity
Shaft resistance
Qult = Qt + Qs
Qt = At.m.Nt
Qs = As.Lp.fs
fs = n.Nave
kN
kN
kN
kPa
equ. 3
equ. 3.1
equ. 3.2
equ. 3.3
Allowable capacity
Qall = (Qs + Qp)/F
kN
equ. 3.4
where
m, n are empirical coefficients,

At is the cross-sectional area of the pile at the tip (m 2),
As is the surface area of the pile per unit length (m 2),
Lp is the embedded length of the pile in bearing strata (m),
Nave is the average corrected SPT resistance over the length of the pile,
Nt is the SPT resistance at the pile tip.
F is the factor of safety, here set at 3.0.
It should be noted that the coefficients m and n are not dimensionless but have the dimensions of force
per unit area. Various references, compared in Appendix 1, give bearing resistances in tons/ft 2, some in
kips/ft2 and some in kPa. In the following text, the values of m and n are in kPa.
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
There is a consensus among the references named above on the values of m and n for driven piles.
Expressed in SI units, for driven piles, m = 400 and n = 2. The end bearing capacity calculated by the
above equation was found to agree quite well with the capacities derived from the static formulae
described below. However, the shaft resistances for driven piles in medium dense soils were somewhat
lower than those calculated from the static formulae. In such cases, a better agreement was found by
using n = 3 since the empirical formula tends to underestimate the friction angle of looser soils. In denser
soils, there was good agreement between the static and empirical formulae using n = 2, and this value
was therefore adopted in the calculations.
In silty sands or very fine sands, Leonards recommends that the corrected SPT resistance, N, should be
used to estimate pile capacity. This is also corroborated by the Navy Manual, which recommends that m =
300 be used for silts. N is given by the formula:
N = 15 + (N 15)/2
where
for N > 15
equ. 4
N is the measured SPT driving resistance in blows/foot.
In applying the above equations, only dense granular soil strata should be considered. Where soft soil
strata overlie dense strata, the soft layers do not contribute to the piles capacity, and in some cases
detract from it due to negative skin friction from consolidation of the soft layers. Shaft resistance in these
soft strata is therefore ignored.
In cohesive strata, the empirical formulae are not valid and pile capacities are calculated based on the
measured or derived undrained shear strengths as described in Section 3.3 below.
a.
Bored piles.
With bored piles, no displacement or densification of soil occurs during installation and lower values of the
coefficients m and n are to be expected. For end bearing, Fang recommends m = 120, ie. 30 per cent of
the value for driven piles; the Navy Manual states that the bearing resistance is 1/3 of the value for driven
piles, ie. m = 128 in SI units. For shaft resistance, Fang recommends n = 1, ie. 50 per cent of the value
for driven piles, and this is also recommended by the US Navy. The Corps of Engineers does not give
empirical formulae for bored piles.
3.0
2.5
y = 3.276E-159.2999
Shaft friction factor -
Driven piles
Bored piles
2.0
1.5
1.0
y = 2.53E-1810.923
0.5
0.0
30
32
34
36
38
40
Friction angle -
Source: US, COE EM 1110-1
Figure 6 -
Shaft friction factor for driven and bored piles
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
While the empirical coefficients for end bearing give results which are comparable with the static
formulae, correspondence is not so good with the shaft resistance. As shown in Figure 6, COE found that
shaft resistances for bored piles were about one third of those for driven piles. On the basis of these
considerations, the following m and n coefficients have been adopted:
Driven piles:
Bored piles:
3.2
a.
m = 400, n = 2
m = 133, n = 0.67
Static method for granular soils

End bearing
The end bearing capacity of a pile is given by the Terzaghi equation:

Qt = At ( c.Nc + ..B.N + .d.Nq)
equ. 5
where Nc, Ng, Nq are the dimensionless bearing capacity factors depending on the angle of
friction ,
c is the effective cohesion of the soil,
is the unit weight of the soil,
d is the depth of the pile tip.
For cohesionless soils, c = 0 and, for deep foundations, ..B.N is small compared with .d.Nq. The
above equation may therefore be simplified to:
Qt = At.qt
equ. 5.1
where qt = pt.Nq
equ. 5.2
and
pt is the effective overburden pressure at the pile tip.
The value of Nq, which is dependent on friction angle alone, has been studied by many researchers giving
a wide variety of results. Some of these, which have been quoted above, are shown in Figure 7.
The Terzaghi and Peck line, D, which was developed for shallow strip footings, was found to give very
conservative estimates of end bearing capacity for driven piles, but was found by Fang and Caltrans (9)
to give reasonable estimates for bored piles. This line has therefore been used for bored piles.
The COE Manual 1110-2 (10) recommends that end bearing capacities for driven piles be based on
values between curves B and C. Fang also gives tip bearing coefficients between these curves, shown
on the figure as single points. Curve B gives capacities about 1/3 higher than C, and the latter more
conservative values have therefore been adopted for calculating driven pile end bearing capacities.
In applying equation 5.1, many researchers have found that, although q t is directly dependent on pt up to
certain depths, there appears to be a limiting depth below which there is no increase in bearing
resistance. The COE Manual EM 1110-2 defines this critical depth beyond which the end bearing capacity
is constant as 10xB for loose sands, 15xB for medium dense sands and 20xB for dense sands, where B
is the width of the pile. The COE Manuals are not completely clear on where this depth should be
measured from if the bearing strata are overlaid by a thick soft clay stratum. In the Navy manual, it is
clearly stated that the critical depth should be taken as 20xB below the bearing stratum.
Fang is rather sceptical about the critical depth concept, both when applied to end bearing and also when
applied to shaft resistance. Referring to shaft friction, he writes It has been suggested that the above
effective stress relationship ceases to be valid at a certain critical depth equal to 10 to 20 pile diameters.
Below the critical depth, the unit shaft resistance would be constant and equal to the value at the critical
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
depth. However, the concept of critical depth is unproven and in question. It should therefore be applied
with caution, if atall.
For the present calculations, the US Navy guidelines have been followed, with the critical depth being
measured from the bottom of the soft upper clay layers.
In COE Manual 1110-1, the Meyerhof method gives an upper limit for bearing capacity, independent of
depth and overburden pressure in the following equation:
QL = 48.At.Nqp.tan'
equ. 6
where Nqp is a limiting bearing capacity factor taken from Curve A.

This equation was found to give end bearing values of about half of those given by Equation 5.1 and
considerably below the values given by the empirical method.
Deep foundations - Bearing Capacity Factor N q

1000
A
'A' Meyerhof (high)
'B' Meyerhof (low )
'C' Tomlinson
'D' Terzaghi & Peck

'E' USN driven piles
'F' USN - bored piles
'G' Nordlund
Fang - Nt values
100
Nq
10
G
1
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Friction angle - - degrees
Final Design Report

Figure 7 -
Piled Foundations
Bearing capacity factor Nq from various sources
Limiting values of ultimate end bearing resistance are given in various sources. Caltrans gives a
maximum qt value of 90 ksf (4,300 kPa) for bored piles and Tomlinson suggests a maximum of 11,000
kPa.
b.
Shaft resistance
The static formula for shaft resistance is:

Qs = L.As.po'.K.tan
equ. 7
where L is the length of a pile segment

As is the unit area of the pile circumference,
po' is the effective overburden pressure at the mid point of the pile segment,
K is the earth pressure coefficient, and
is the friction angle between the soil and the pile.
Driving displacement piles causes an increase in the lateral earth pressure due to displacement of the soil
and densification in medium of loose sands. The actual value of K depends both on the friction angle and
the overconsolidation ration of the stratum. A wide range of factors are quoted for K, from 0.5 for loose
sands to between 1.0 and 2.0 for dense sands. In the calculations for driven piles, a value 0.8 has been
selected. For bored piles, where there is no densification from the pile installation, 1/3 of this value has
been selected. This is in accordance with the curves for driven and bored piles shown in Figure 6.
3.3
Static method for cohesive soils
The empirical equations, 3.1 to 3.3, are not valid for cohesive soils and the static method based on
undrained shear strengths must be used in stead. The undrained shear strength, Su, of a cohesive layer
is derived from the relationship between Su and SPT N shown in Figure 3. The bearing capacity
equations for piles in cohesive strata are not dependent on overburden pressure so that the critical depth
factor does not apply. The end bearing capacity may then be calculated using the following equation:
Qt = At.Su.Nc
equ. 8
where Su is the undrained shear strength,

Nc is a bearing capacity factor depending on depth. For D/B > 4, N c = 9.
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
Fa =-6.28E-08Su3 +4.56E-05Su2 - 1.08E-02Su +1.156
0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Undrained shear strength - Su - kP a
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
Figure 8 - Tomlinsons adhesion factor for piles in cohesive strata

Shaft resistance is given by the following equation:
Qs = (L.As.Su.Fa)
equ. 9
where Fa is the adhesion factor given in Figure 8.

The adhesion between the pile and the clay depends solely on the undrained shear strength of the clay.
For soft clays, the adhesion is equal to the undrained shear strength, but for stiffer clays, the adhesion
becomes progressively less than the shear strength. Tomlinsons (11) relationship between adhesion and
undrained shear strength, here shown in Figure 8 for concrete or timber piles, is widely accepted and has
been adopted in the calculations.
For bored piles, COE and Caltrans give a limiting value of 80 ksf (3,840 kPa) for end bearing resistance
and 5.5 ksf (264 kPa) for shaft friction, with special attention being paid to the effects of bentonite on the
adhesion factor.
3.4
Adopted design parameters
A comparison of the various methods of calculating pile capacities, which have been described in the
previous sections, is given in Appendix 1. This appendix also gives the parameters adopted in the
calculations.
An example of the pile capacity calculation sheet is shown in Table 1. Where very soft soils are
encountered, no capacity is transferred to the pile. Where cohesive soils are encountered, C is entered
in the soil strata column and the undrained shear strength is used to calculate tip and shaft resistances as
described in Section 3.3. Where granular strata are encountered, G is entered in the soil strata column
and both the empirical and static methods are used to calculate pile capacity as described in Sections 3.1
and 3.2. Different Nq and shaft resistance factors are used for driven and bored piles.
The parameters may be summarised as follows:
Soil type
Driven piles
Cohesive strata
Granular
strata
Empirical
method
Static Method
Bored piles
Nc = 9
Fa from Fig. 8
m = 400
m = 133
n=2
n = 0.67
Nq from Fig. 7, Curve C
Nqp from Fig. 7, Curve A
K = 1.0, = 0.8
K = 0.33, = 0.8
In view of the considerable differences in bearing capacities that can be obtained using the various
methods described above, especially in the choice of Nq, some careful judgement is needed in
determining the design values.
In granular strata, the basis of the static method is the effective friction angle, which is inferred from the
SPT resistances. This relationship is only approximate and, in any case, the in-situ strength properties of
granular soils are very dependent on the type and installation method of the piles (ie. driven or bored).
Both the empirical method and the static method are thus dependent on empirical relationships based on
SPT values. Equal weight has therefore been placed on the results derived by both methods and the
required tip levels for driven piles have therefore been set by taking the average of the total capacity lines
derived by both methods.
For bored piles, the required tip elevation has been set according to shaft resistance. Again, an average
has been taken of the values derived by the static and empirical methods.
10
Table 1 - Pile Capacity Calculation Sheet
Lo Gom Bridge
Bridge
Boring
Station
Bored(b)/driven(d)
Pile width
B
Depth soft soil Ds
Critical depth Dc
Shaft area
As
Pile area
At
Depth
Lo Gom
LG1
4+501
D
0.45
41.7
50.7
1.80
0.20
m:
N
field
(blows/ft)
Strata
Depth
m
0.0
1.5
4.15
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
19.3
21.3
23.3
25
27
29
31
33
35
37
39
41
42.3
45
47
49
51
53
55
57
59
61
63
65
6
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
12
48
46
40
35
25
20
41
42
40
40
42
45x45cm driven piles
m
m
m
2
m /m
2
m
Radian factor
Soil
strata
F
F
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
SW
CH
CH
CH
CH
CL
CL
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
G
G
G
G
unit wt
g
t/m3
Eff.o'burden
po'
kPa
1.90
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.45
1.79
2.14
2.13
2.09
2.06
1.98
1.92
2.10
2.10
2.09
2.09
2.10
6.50
19.74
31.43
39.60
48.42
57.25
66.08
74.90
83.73
92.56
98.30
107.13
115.97
123.47
132.31
141.13
149.97
158.80
167.64
176.47
185.30
194.13
204.26
234.37
256.48
277.90
298.68
317.82
335.87
357.42
379.08
400.50
421.93
443.59
Empirical formulae:
Qt = At. m. N
Qs = (L.As .n.N)
m
400
n
2
0.02
pdesign
N60
kPa
blows/ft
N'
corr.
blows/ft
N*
design
blows/ft
kPa
Su
19.74
31.43
39.60
48.42
57.25
66.08
74.90
83.73
92.56
98.30
107.13
115.97
123.47
132.31
141.13
149.97
158.80
167.64
176.47
185.30
194.13
204.26
234.37
256.48
277.90
277.90
277.90
277.90
277.90
277.90
277.90
277.90
277.90
12
3
3
1
2
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
8
30
28
23
20
14
11
21
21
20
19
20
6
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
2
3
12
48
46
40
35
25
20
41
42
40
40
42
50
30
30
25
30
25
30
30
30
35
35
35
30
35
30
35
35
35
35
30
35
260
250
220
195
145
120
-
Ad. factor
Fa
0.72
0.87
0.87
0.91
0.87
0.91
0.87
0.87
0.87
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.87
0.83
0.87
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.83
0.87
0.83
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.32
0.36
0.41
-
'
deg
DQs
kN
33.2
37.2
37.2
36.9
36.8
36.9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
411
293
257
223
186
176
295
302
288
288
302
Empirical Formulae
Qs
Qt
kN
kN
max =
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
56
467
759
1017
1240
1426
1602
1898
2200
2488
2776
3078
Static formulae: granula strata

Qt = At. pt'.Nq (driven piles)
Qt = At. pt'.Nqb (bored piles)
QL = 48.At.Nqp.tan'
Qs = (L.As.p0'.K.tan)
Shaft resist. factorr Ffa
1.00
Static formulae: cohesive strata

Qt = At.qt = At.9.c
Qs = (L.As.Ca)
Ca = Su.Fa
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
972
474
456
401
355
264
219
3321
3402
3240
3240
3402
Qult
kN
Ngtv. friction
DQn
Qn
kN
kN
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1028
941
1215
1418
1595
1691
1821
5219
5602
5728
6016
6480
97
125
87
82
94
82
94
94
94
68
105
105
80
105
94
105
105
105
105
94
105
-
97
222
309
391
485
568
662
756
850
918
1023
1127
1207
1312
1406
1511
1615
1720
1825
1919
2023
-
Cohesive strata
DQs
Qt
kN
kN
max =
411
293
257
223
186
176
474
456
401
355
264
219
K.tand
DQs
kN
Nq
Granular strata
Nqp
Nqb
max =
Qt
kN
2227.5
QL
kN
0.37
178
41
106
26.8
1711
674
0.42
0.42
0.42
0.42
0.42
424
424
420
419
420
73
73
70
69
70
208
208
197
193
197
44.2
44.1
42.4
41.9
42.4
4104
4096
3916
3860
3921
1536
1532
1437
1407
1439
Figure 7, Curve C
Curve A
Curve D
DQs
kN
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
178
411
293
257
223
186
176
424
424
420
419
420
Static Bearing Capacities

Qs
Qt
Qult
kN
kN
kN
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
178
588
881
1138
1362
1548
1724
2148
2572
2992
3410
3830
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1711
474
456
401
355
264
219
4104
4096
3916
3860
3921
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1889
1062
1337
1539
1717
1812
1943
6252
6668
6908
7271
7751
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
FOUND ATION CONDITIONS
There are 13 major bridges and 10 footbridges for which subsoil investigations were carried out. The soil
conditions at each bridge site has been assessed and pile capacities have been estimated in accordance
with the design procedures described in the previous section. The results of the pile bearing capacity
calculations for each bridge have been given in Appendices 2 and 3 and the required tip elevations are
summarised in Tables 2 and 3 at the end of this section.
For driven piles, the required tip elevations are determined from the total pile capacity, end bearing plus
shaft resistance. For 350 and 450 mm square piles, target ultimate capacities of 2,000 and 3,000 kN have
been set. For bored piles having larger diameters of 750, 1000 and 1500 mm, end bearing is only
mobilised at quite large settlements compared with shaft resistance. The required pile tip elevations have
accordingly been set where the shaft resistance on its own reaches the working load, here taken as 2,000
for the 750 mm diameter piles, 3,000 kN for 1000 mm diameter piles and 5,000 kN for 1500 mm diameter
piles.
The following paragraphs give brief descriptions of the soil conditions at each bridge site with reference
being made to the Reports on Soil Investigation prepared by the Consultants (12) under separate cover.
4.1
NH1 Interchange
The site of the interchange, shown on Drawing 01, is heavily built up on the north west side of the existing
road, but is open paddy land on the opposite side. Four borings were made at the interchange site: five
had originally been scheduled, but access was denied to the drilling team to carry out HI2. HI1 had to be
moved about 40 m away from its planned location due to access difficulties.
Beneath 0 to 2 m of fill, the borings encountered soft organic clay down to 20 to 22 m depth. SPT
resistances of 1 to 4 blows/foot were recorded with corresponding vane strengths of 17 to 48 kPa.
Beneath the soft upper clay stratum, medium to dense sands, clayey sands and sandy clays were
encountered to the end of the borings, at 40 to 60 metres depth. SPT resistances were generally between
25 and 30 blows/foot, with a few layers giving up to 40 blows. A 2 m clayey layer was encountered at 39
m depth in Boring HI3 where blow counts dropped to 15: a similar drop in blow count was recorded in
Boring HI4 at about the same depth. In Boring HI5, gravelly sand was encountered below 50 m depth
having SPT blow counts of 28 to 31.
The results of the pile capacity calculations are shown in Appendix 2.1. For driven 450 mm piles, the
required bearing of 3,000 kN is reached at about elevation 26 m, except at boring HI5, where piles
should be taken down below the sandy clay layer at 38 m. The required bearing is reached at 40 m.
Bored piles need to be taken down much further than the driven piles since the required shaft resistance
is not reached until tip levels of - 53 to 60 m have been reached. The same tip levels were estimated for
both sixes of bored pile.
Negative friction on the piles has been estimated due to settlements in the very soft clay under
embankment loads, such as may be expected at abutment approach ramps. For the 450 mm driven piles,
up to 1,160 kN may be expected, and up to 2,000 and 3,000 kN for the 1000 mm and 1500 mm bored
piles respectively.
4.2
Nuoc Len Bridge
Similar subsoil conditions to those described above were encountered at the Nuoc Len Bridge. The bridge
site, shown on Drawing 02, is low lying ground most excavated as fish ponds. Here, six borings were
made to between 30 and 60 m depth. The upper very soft organic clay was encountered from ground
level to depths of 22 to 25 m. SPT blow counts varied between 1 and 4 blows/foot and vane shear
13
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
strengths varied between 19 and 52 kPa. A layer of firm plastic clay, 1.5 to 7 m thick, was encountered
under the soft clay in the three borings at the west end of the site having SPT resistances of 5 to 7
blows/foot.
Beneath the upper clay layers, medium to dense sands were encountered in all the borings to the depths
drilled. SPT resistances were generally fairly constant at 30 to 40 blows/foot, although in Borings NL3 and
NL4, looser sands were found down to about 45 m depth. In two of the borings, a 1m stiff sandy clay layer
was encountered at 37 to 41 m depth. Gravelly sand found at 53 m depth in Boring NL4.
The required tip elevations, shown in Appendix 2.2, are similar to those for the NH1 interchange. Driven
450 mm piles will reach their required bearing of 3,000 kN at about elevation - 30 to - 40 m. The deeper
levels are required under the centre of the channel, Borings NL3, NL4 and NL5, where the upper part of
the sand layer is less dense than at the other borings. Tip elevations for bored piles are estimated to vary
between 50 to 63 m, the lower levels also being estimated for Boring NL4.
As at the NH1 interchange, negative friction forces are also expected to be significant. These have been
estimated up to 1,100, 1,980 and 2,970 kN for the 450 mm driven and 1000 mm and 1500 mm bored
piles respectively.
4.3
Rach Cay Bridge
Two borings were made at the Rach Cay Bridge site as shown on Drawing 03. The very soft organic clay
was found to be 20 to 23 m thick, and to have vane shear strengths of 19 to 43 kPa. Three SPTs gave
blow counts of 1 blow/foot. Beneath the clay, loose clayey sand was encounterd down to 35 m depth with
SPT resistances of 3 to 7 blows/foot. Below the clayey sand, an 8 m layer of dense medium fine sand
was encountered in both borings. In Boring RC1, this was in turn underlain by a 9 m thick layer of very
stiff clay (N = 24 to 38) and dense medium fine sand (N = 27 to 31) down to the end of the boring at 60 m.
The required pile tip elevations for the driven 450 mm piles depend in this case on the depth of the very
stiff clay layer. The overlying dense sand is not considered sufficiently thick to develop the required full
ultimate capacity so that piles will need to be taken down into the very stiff clay. The required ultimate
capacity of 3,000 kN will probably be achieved in the middle of this layer, ie. at about 50 m. The bored
piles will need to be taken deeper to mobilise the required shaft resistance. They will therefore be founded
in the underlying dense sand at elevations 57 and 59 m for the 1000 and 1500 mm diameter piles
respectively. These estimated tip elevations are given in Appendix 2.3.
Negative friction forces have been estimated up to 875 kN for the 450 mm driven piles and up to 1,500
and 2,300 kN for the 1000 and 1500 mm bored piles.
4.4
Lo Gom Bridge
The Lo Gom Bridge has the most critical foundation conditions of any of the bridge sites. Six borings were
made to depths of 55 to 70 m, as shown on Drawing 04. The very soft organic clay was found to extend
down to depths of between 39 and 42 m below ground: SPT resistances varied between 1 and 4
blows/foot, and vane shear strengths varied from 16 to 43 kPa.
Beneath the very soft clay, a 1.5 to 6 m thick layer of medium to dense sand was found in which SPT
values of about 20 blows/foot were recorded. Below the sand, a 7 to 13 m layer of very stiff clay to sandy
clay was encountered in all the borings in which SPT resistances of 25 to over 50 blows were recorded.
Below the clay, dense sand was again encountered to the depths bored.
The foundation conditions are quite uniform across the bridge site. Piles will need to be taken down to the
dense sand layer beneath the very stiff clay to achieve sufficient bearing capacity. The estimated required
tip elevations, given in Appendix 2.4, were between 52 and 56 m for driven piles, and 54 and 64 m
for bored piles.
14
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
Due to the 40 m thick layer of soft organic clay, high negative friction loads are likely to be caused by
consolidation settlements beneath the approach embankments. These are estimated to be up to 2,200
kN for 450 mm driven piles and up to 3,800 and 5,700 kN for 1000 and 1500 mm diameter bored piles.
4.5
Cha Va Bridge
The foundation conditions at the Cha Va Bridge site are much better than at the previous bridges, see
Drawing 05. 1.5 to 3 m of fill was found in the land borings, CV 4, CV2 and CV7, below which the soft
organic clay layer was only found to be 1.5 to 3 m thick and was not found at all in Boring CV4. Within the
next 10 m, firm sandy clays and clayey sands were found with SPT resistances of 9 to 16 blows/foot.
Beneath this, medium dense sands were encountered down to depths of 35 to 40 m with SPT blow
counts typically ranging from 10 to 20 blows/foot.
Beneath the medium dense sand stratum extending down to elevation 48 to 49 m, very stiff clay was
found in all the borings interspersed with a layer of stiff sandy clay. Beneath the clay, dense sand was
encountered to the depths bored.
The pile capacity calculations, given in Appendix 2.5, show that both driven and bored piles need to be
taken down to the very stiff clay layer to reach the required bearing capacities. The required tip elevations
for 450 mm driven piles were estimated to be between 41 and 49 m, while for bored piles, they were
estimated between 38 and 45 m.
Negative friction loads are not expected at this site, since the very soft clay stratum is less than 3 m thick
and this will be excavated during construction of the abutments.
4.6
Calmette Bridge
Seven borings were made at the Calmette Bridge site, shown on Drawing 06: five on the main line of the
bridge and two additional beneath the lateral approach ramps on the south side of the Ben Nghe Canal.
Beneath 1 to 2 m of fill, very soft organic clay was encountered down to depths of between 5 and 10 m.
Beneath this, medium dense sands interbedded with firm sandy clays and medium dense clayey sands
were found to extend down to elevation 38 m, where very stiff clay was encountered in all the borings.
The stiff clay layer extended down to 52 to 53 m, beneath which dense to very dense sand was found.
To obtain the required bearing capacities, both driven and bored piles will need to be taken down to the
very stiff clay layer below 38 m, although driven piles near Boring CF2 may refuse in the dense sand
just above this layer. Estimated tip elevations, given in Appendix 2.6, vary between 33 and 50 m for
the driven 450 mm piles and 41 to 48 for the 1000 and 1500 mm diameter bored piles.
Negative friction loads due to consolidation beneath abutment fill could reach 350 kN for the 450 mm
driven piles and 600 and 920 kN for the 1000 and 1500 mm bored piles respectively.
4.7
Khanh Hoi Bridge
Five borings were made at the Khanh Hoi Bridge site as shown on Drawing 07. 2 to 4 m of fill was
encountered in the land borings: beneath this and from the canal bed in Boring KH3, very soft to soft
organic clay was found to extend down to between 5 and 9 m depth. SPT resistances varied between 1
and 3 blows/foot and vane shear strengths of 18 to 55 kPa were recorded. Beneath the soft clay, a very
dense lateritic gravel or gravelly sand layer 4 to 6 m thick was encountered in Borings KH1 and KH2.
Beneath this, and below the soft clay in the other borings, medium dense silty and clayey sands and firm
sandy clays were encountered down to elevation 20 to 23 m. Below this level, clean medium dense
sands were found to extend down to a layer of very stiff to hard clay encountered at 29 to 33 m. This
stratum was found to be 17 m thick in Boring KH3, below which very dense gravelly sand was found.
The founding stratum in all the borings is the very stiff clay in which SPT resistances ranged from 27 to
over 50 blows/foot. To reach the set pile capacities, tip levels of 34 to 39 were estimated for the driven
15
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
450 mm piles, and 34 to 41 for the bored piles, as shown in Appendix 2.7. Potential negative friction
loads of 460 kN are estimated for the driven 450 mm piles and 800 and 1200 kN for the 1000 and 1500
mm bored piles respectively.
4.8
Ca Tre Lon Bridge
Five borings were made at the Tre Lon Bridge site to depths of 50 to 65 m as shown on Drawing 08. The
site is in low-lying swampy ground with very soft organic clay encountered from the ground surface to
about 15 m depth. Vane shear strengths were measured at both abutment borings and showed the
strength to increase from 15 to 20 kPa near ground level to 30 to 35 kPa at the base of the layer. Below
the very soft clay, a 5 to 6 m thick layer of stiff to very stiff clay was encountered in all the borings with
SPT resistances of 12 to 18 blows/foot.
Beneath the stiff clay, medium dense clean sands, silty and clayey sands and sandy clays were found
interbedded in all the borings. SPT resistances were typically between 15 and 25 blows/foot. In Borings
TL1 and TL4, these sandy layers were underlain at about 52 m depth by a thin firm to stiff clay layer with
SPT blow counts dropping to as low as 9 blows/foot. Below this, dense sand was encountered in both
borings where SPT resistances were between 35 and 41 blows/foot .
The required pile tip elevations given in Appendix 2.8 were estimated at 31 to 33 m for the driven 450
mm piles. For the bored piles, required tip elevations varied from 48 to 54 m, with tip levels for the 1500
mm diameter piles being about 1 m lower than for the 1000 mm piles.
Potential negative friction loads are likely to be quite significant. They were estimated at up to 580 kN for
the 450 mm driven piles and 1,000 to 1,500 kN for the 1000 and 1500 mm bored piles.
4.9
Ca Tre Nho Bridge
Very similar conditions to the above were found at the Ca Tre Nho Bridge site where five borings were
made to depths of 50 to 67 m as shown on Drawing 09. Here the soft organic clay was encountered to
depths of 15 to 24 m, with vane shear strengths between 13 and 42 kPa. SPT resistances varied between
0 and 5 blows/foot. Beneath the organic clay, stiff clays and sandy clays were encountered down to
depths of 25 to 30 m with SPT blow counts of 7 to 18. Beneath this, a 7 to 10 m thick layer of very stiff to
hard clay was found to overlie interbedded layers of sandy clays, clayey to silty sands and clean sands.
These layers were medium dense to dense with SPT blow counts ranging between 10 and 40.
Pile tip elevations have been estimated as shown in Appendix 2.9. All piles need to be taken down
through the very stiff clay layer to the medium dense to dense sandy stratum encountered below -37m.
For the 450 mm driven piles, required tip elevations were found to vary from 39 m at the west abutment
to 48 m at the east abutment. For the bored piles, slightly shallower tip elevations were estimated: 35
and 37 m for the 1000 and 1500 mm piles at the west abutment to 44 and 47 m for the two pile sizes
at the east abutment.
Potential negative friction loadings on driven 450 mm piles also varied from 650 to 1,270 kN at the west to
east abutments respectively. Corresponding loads for the two bored pile sizes were estimated at 1,125
and 1,687 kN at the west abutment and 2,217 and 3,326 kN at the east abutment.
4.10 Hanoi Highway Flyover

Four borings were made to depths of 50 to 60 m at the site of the Hanoi Highway Flyover as shown on
Drawing 10. Beneath a fill layer 1 to 2 m thick, very soft organic clay was encountered down to depths of
10 to 12 m, with vane shear strengths of 11 to 46 kPa. SPT resistances varied from 1 to 3 blows/foot.
Beneath the organic clay, medium to stiff clay and sandy clay was encountered down to between 17 and
20 m depth with SPT blow counts of 5 to 15. Below this, medium dense to dense clean sands and clayey
sands occasionally interbedded with thin sandy clay layers were found down to the depths sampled. SPT
resistances in the sandy stratum ranged between 14 and 30 blows/foot. In Borings HHF1, HHF2 and
16
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
HHF3, an intermediate 10 to 4 m thick layer of very stiff to hard clay or sandy clay was found at 37 to
43 m with SPT resistances of 20 to 44 blows/foot.
Required pile tip elevations are given in Appendix 2.10. For driven 450 mm piles, adequate bearing can
be derived from the upper medium dense to dense sandy stratum, and tip elevations vary from 24 to 27
m. The bored piles need to be taken deeper and founded in the lower sand layers. Here tip elevations of
between 37 and 47 m have been estimated for the 1000 and 1500 mm piles, the larger piles being
founded about 1 m below the smaller ones.
Potential negative friction loads of 430 to 530 kN were estimated for the 450 mm driven piles, 760 to 930
kN for the 1000 mm bored piles and 1,140 to 1,390 kN for the 1500 mm bored piles.
4.11 Footbridges
Ten footbridges have been investigated; three at the NH1 Interchange, four across the Ben Nghe Canal
and three at the Hanoi Highway Interchange. At each footbridge site, two borings were made to depths of
between 30 and 60 m.
The subsoil conditions for the six footbridges at the two interchanges are similar to the conditions
described for the main interchange structures in 4.1 and 4.10 above. The subsoil conditions for the four
footbridges across the Ben Nghe Canal are similar to those which have been described for the Cha Va
and Calmette bridges.
Smaller piles than those adopted for the major bridges have been selected for the footbridges: 350 mm
driven piles and 750 mm and 1000 mm bored piles. Charts showing the pile bearing capacities are given
for each bridge site in Appendix 3.1 to 3.10. The required pile tip elevations are given in Table 3.
At the NH1 interchange, the required tip elevations were estimated to vary from 32 m to 42 m for the
350 mm driven piles and from 57 m to 64 m for the bored piles. Along the Ben Nghe Canal, the tip
elevations ranged between 28 m and 45 m for the driven piles and between 38 m and 55 m for the
bored piles. At the Hanoi Highway Intersection, the driven piles need to be taken down to between 19
and 31 m and the bored piles to between 31 m and 46 m.
Table 3 also gives estimates of potential negative friction loads. These were found to be most critical at
the NH1 Interchange and at May Ruou where the soft organic clay layer is deepest. Here, negative
friction loads of 700 to 1,550 kN were estimated for the 350 mm driven piles and 1,220 to 2,680 kN for the
1000 mm bored piles. The other Ben Nghe footbridges had little or no negative friction forces. At the
Hanoi Highway, the negative friction loads were estimated to range between 300 and 625 kN for the
driven piles and 625 and 990 kN for the bored piles.
17
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
Table 2 - Major Bridges: estimated pile tip elevations

Bridge
Boring
Station
NH1 Intersection
HI3
HI4
HI5
NL2
NL3
NL4
NL5
RC1
RC2
LG1
LG3
LG5
LG6
LG4
CV4
CV2
CV5
CV6
CV7
CF1
CF2
CF3
CF4
CF5
KH1
KH2
KH3
KH4
KH6
TL1
TL2
TL3
TL4
TL5
TN1
TN2
TN3
TN4
TN5
HHF1
HHF2
HHF3
HHF4
km
0+325
0+360
0+395
0+812
0+847
0+882
0+921
3+780
3+806
4+501
4+556
4+585
4+632
4+695
7+901
7+899
7+911
7+916
7+906
13+191
13+171
13+178
13+163
13+169
13+937
13+900
13+879
13+847
13+865
17+052
17+089
17+127
17+164
17+202
17+623
17+660
17+967
17+735
17+772
21+211
21+285
21+340
21+387
Nuoc Len
Rach Cay
Lo Gom
Cha Va
Calmette Flyover
Khanh Hoi
Ca Tre Lon
Ca Tre Nho
Hanoi Highway Flyover
Ground
level
m
1.30
1.50
0.30
0.90
-0.50
-1.90
1.00
1.20
1.00
1.30
1.10
-0.80
1.30
1.30
2.10
3.80
-0.90
-0.70
1.90
1.50
1.70
1.30
2.20
1.70
2.26
1.97
-2.44
2.75
2.35
0.61
0.83
-2.90
0.40
0.10
-1.05
0.58
-3.40
-0.07
0.10
1.42
1.51
1.78
1.83
Depth to
firm
stratum
m
21.8
21.5
21.7
22.0
23.0
21.5
27.0
20.6
23.2
41.7
38.5
41.5
41.5
39.0
5.3
0.0
1.5
1.5
3.5
10.4
5.1
6.2
5.9
10.5
5.0
7.2
5.5
8.8
8.7
14.5
14.1
11.5
14.5
16.8
15.3
16.5
15.6
19.6
17.5
12.0
11.5
11.5
10.0
Design Pile Tip Elevation

1000
1500
450x450
driven
bored
bored
m
m
m
-25.7
-55.7
-55.7
-25.5
-53.5
-53.5
-39.7
-59.7
-59.7
-32.1
-50.1
-52.1
-40.5
-55.5
-57.5
-37.9
-62.9
-62.9
-38.0
-56.0
-57.0
-50.8
-56.8
-58.8
-39.0
< -45
< -45
-55.7
-55.7
-57.7
-52.9
-53.9
-56.9
-51.8
< -57
< -57
-55.7
-60.7
-63.7
-52.7
-60.7
-63.7
-42.9
-38.9
-39.9
-43.2
-42.2
-42.2
-48.9
-43.9
-44.9
-41.7
-41.7
-42.7
-41.1
-38.1
-40.1
-44.5
-45.5
-46.5
-33.3
-41.3
-41.3
-44.7
-43.7
-44.7
-49.8
-46.8
-47.8
-42.3
-43.3
-44.3
-38.7
-39.7
-40.7
-34.0
-37.0
-38.0
-37.4
-34.4
-34.4
-39.3
-40.3
-41.3
-38.7
-35.7
-36.7
-31.4
-50.4
-50.4
-32.2
-53.2
-54.2
-32.9
-47.9
-48.9
-31.6
-51.6
-52.6
-30.9
-50.9
-51.9
-39.1
-35.1
-37.1
-37.4
-34.4
-35.4
-45.4
-39.4
-43.4
-42.1
-39.1
-41.1
-47.9
-43.9
-46.9
-25.6
-36.6
-38.6
-24.5
-38.5
-40.5
-27.2
-44.2
-45.2
-24.2
-46.2
-47.2
Negative Friction
1000
1500
450x450
driven
bored
bored
kN
kN
kN
956
1668
2502
994
1735
2603
1159
2023
3035
860
1501
2252
1134
1979
2969
935
1632
2448
1064
1857
2785
777
1356
2033
875
1528
2292
2023
3532
5297
1794
3131
4696
1995
3481
5222
2201
3842
5763
1871
3266
4899
352
614
921
187
327
491
259
451
677
248
427
641
352
614
921
462
807
1210
271
473
709
504
879
1319
462.4
807.1
1210.7
486
848
1272
486
848
1272
396
692
1038
500
872
1308
579
1011
1516
645
1125
1687
806
1407
2111
719
1254
1882
971
1695
2542
584
1408
2113
435
759
1139
483
843
1265
479
837
1255
532
928
1393
Design pile capacity criteria:

- 450x450 mm driven piles: Qt = 3,000 kN.
- 1000 mm bored piles: Qs= 3,000 kN.
18
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
Table 3 - Footbridges: estimated pile tip elevations

Depth to
Design Pile Tip Elevation
Negative Friction
firm
350x350 750 1000 350x350 750 1000
stratum
driven
driven
bored
bored
bored
bored
m
m
m
m
kN
kN
kN
Footbridge
Boring
Station
km
FB1
FB1-1
0+650
0.21
21.0
-31.8
~ -60
725
1221
FB2
FB1-2
FB2-1
0+650
0+107
0.22
1.73
22.0
22.0
-35.8
-34.3
897
834
1566
1456
FB3
FB2-2
FB3-1
0+154
0+503
1.48
1.39
26.4
24.5
-41.5
~34
-61.5
-
1052
1122
1836
1958
FB3-2
0+551
1.28
27.0
-33.7
-54.7
958
1671
MR1
MR3
5+177
5+179
1.50
1.50
30.0
33.0
-34.5
-33.5
1448
1535
2526
2679
U1
U3
5+932
5+934
1.80
1.40
5.6
5.4
-45.2
-43.6
-46.2
-45.6
-47.2
-46.6
230
213
402
372
603
558
Binh Tay
BT1
BT3
BH1
7+145
7+145
9+900
1.90
1.95
2.10
0.0
0.0
0.0
-29.1
-28.1
-27.9
1.9
-32.1
-37.9
1.9
-35.1
-38.9
BH3
B1-1
B1-2
9+900
21+263
21+014
1.63
1.63
1.05
0.0
11.3
11.0
-28.4
-19.4
-20.0
-38.4
-46.4
-43.0
-39.4
-
626
454
626
792
B2-1
B2-2
B3-1
B3-2
21+036
21+042
21+630
21+630
1.12
1.10
2.10
1.95
10.3
10.5
13.0
13.0
-20.9
-20.9
-30.9
-30.1
-40.9
-35.9
-30.9
-38.1
326
313
500
564
731
703
873
984
May Ruou
BH
B1
B2
B3
Ground
level
Design pile capacity criteria:

- 350x350 mm driven piles: Qt = 2,000 kN.
19
Final Design Report
Piled Foundations
REFERENCES:
1. Meyerhof G.G. (1956), Penetration tests and bearing capacity of cohesionless soils, JSMF, Proc.
ASCE, 82, No. SM-1, pp 866-1 to 866-19.
2. Construction & Irrigation Services Company, Investigation & Design Enterprise (1997), Soil
Investigation Report on Saigon River Crossing, for Maunsell Vietnam.
3. US Army Corps of Engineers, Bearing Capacity of Soils, Manual EM 1110-1-1905, October 1992.
4. Tokimatsu and Seed (1984), Simplified Procedure for the Evaluation of Settlements in Sands due to
Earthquake Shaking, Report No. UCB/EERC-84/16, University of California, Berkeley.
5. Meyerhof G.G. (1976), Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations, ASCE Journal of the
Geotechnical Division, Vol. 102, G73, pp 197 228.
6. Leonards G.A. (1962), Foundation Engineering, McGraw-Hill Book Company.
7. US Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Foundations and Earth Structures, Manual DM
7.02, September 1986.
8. Hsai-Yang Fang (1991), Foundation Engineering Handbook, Van Nostrand Reinhold.
9. California Department of Transportation, Caltrans (2000), Bridge Design Specifications, Section 4
Foundations.
10. US Army Corps of Engineers, Design of Pile Foundations, Manual EM 1110-2-2906, January 1991.
11. Tomlinson M.J. (1957), The adhesion of piles driven in clay soils, Proc. 4 th ICSMFE, London, pp 66
71.
12. Saigon East West Highway Project, Reports on Soil Investigation,
Package 1A,
Package 1B,
Package 2A,
Package 2C, the Consultants, January April 2002.
20

Report On Piled Foundations

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

Report On Piled Foundations

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Final Design Report

SAIGON EAST WEST HIGHWAY

Final Design Report

DESIGN REPORT: PILE FOUNDATIONS.

Overall soil conditions........................................................................................................................... 2

Pile Capacity Calculation Sheet............................................................................................... 11

Profile of soft organic clays along the project road....................................................................2

Comparison of pile design methods for granular soils

Final Design Report

OVER ALL SOIL CONDITIONS.

Profile of soft organic clays along the project road

SOIL PAR AMETERS

Final Design Report

Unit w eight - t/m3 .

Points from empirical data

published by Mey erhof, Ref 1.

SPT 'N' - blow s/ft

SPT versus Unit Weight

Terzaghi & P eck

Tunnel borings (1997)

SPT versus undrained strength

Final Design Report

Overburden pressure p - kPa

SPT depth correction factor, CN

Final Design Report

Friction angle versus N60

Qall = (Qs + Qp)/F

m, n are empirical coefficients,

Final Design Report

N is the measured SPT driving resistance in blows/foot.

Shaft friction factor -

Shaft friction factor for driven and bored piles

Final Design Report

Static method for granular soils

The end bearing capacity of a pile is given by the Terzaghi equation:

pt is the effective overburden pressure at the pile tip.

Final Design Report

where Nqp is a limiting bearing capacity factor taken from Curve A.

Deep foundations - Bearing Capacity Factor N q

'D' Terzaghi & Peck

'F' USN - bored piles

Friction angle - - degrees

Final Design Report

Bearing capacity factor Nq from various sources

The static formula for shaft resistance is:

where L is the length of a pile segment

Static method for cohesive soils

where Su is the undrained shear strength,

Undrained shear strength - Su - kP a

Final Design Report

Figure 8 - Tomlinsons adhesion factor for piles in cohesive strata

where Fa is the adhesion factor given in Figure 8.

Adopted design parameters

Table 1 - Pile Capacity Calculation Sheet

45x45cm driven piles

Static formulae: granula strata

Static formulae: cohesive strata

Static Bearing Capacities

Final Design Report

FOUND ATION CONDITIONS

Nuoc Len Bridge

Final Design Report

Rach Cay Bridge