Pile Foundations Part-1

CE 632
CE-632
Foundation Analysis and
Design
Pile Foundations
1
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant
Indian Standards on Piles
IS 2911 : Part 1 : Sec 1 : 1979 Driven cast in-situ concrete piles

IS 2911 : Part 1 : Sec 2 : 1979 Bored cast-in-situ
cast in situ piles
IS 2911 : Part 1 : Sec 3 : 1979 Driven precast concrete piles
IS 2911 : Part 1 : Sec 4 : 1984 Bored precast concrete piles
IS 2911 : Part 2 : 1980 Timber piles
IS 2911 : Part 3 : 1980 Under reamed piles
IS 2911 : Part 4 : 1985 Load test on piles
IS 5121 : 1969 Safety code for piling and other deep foundations
IS 6426 : 1972 Specification for pile driving hammer
IS 6427 : 1972 Glossary of Terms Relating to Pile Driving Equipment
IS 6428 : 1972 Specification for pile frame
IS 9716 : 1981 Guide for lateral dynamic load test on piles
IS 14362 : 1996 Pile boring equipment - General requirements
IS 14593 : 1998 Bored cast-in-situ piles founded on rocks - Guidelines
IS 14893 : 2001 N
Non-Destructive
D t ti IIntegrity
t it T
Testing
ti off Pil
Piles (NDT) Guidelines
When is it needed
Top layers of soil are highly compressible for it to support

structural loads through shallow foundations
foundations.
Rock level is shallow enough for end bearing pile

foundations provide a more economical design
design.
Lateral forces are relatively prominent.
I presence off expansive

In
i and
d collapsible
ll
ibl soils
il att th
the site.
it
Offshore structures
Strong uplift forces on shallow foundations due to shallow

water table can be partly transmitted to Piles.
For structures near flowing water (Bridge abutments, etc.)

to avoid the problems due to erosion.
3
Types of Piles
Steel Piles
Pipe
piles
Rolled steel H-section
H section piles
Concrete Piles
Pre-cast
Piles
Cast
Cast-in-situ
in situ Piles
Bored-in-situ piles
Timber Piles
C
Composite
it Pil
Piles
4
Steel Piles: Facts
Usual length: 15 m 60 m
Usual Load: 300 kN 1200 kN
Advantage:
g
Relatively less hassle during installation and easy to achieve

cutoff level.
Hi h driving
High
d i i force
f
may be
b used
d for
f fast
f t installation
i t ll ti
Good to penetrate hard strata
Load carrying capacity is high
Disadvantage:
Relatively expensive
Noise pollution during installation
Corrosion
Bend in piles while driving

5
Concrete Piles: Facts
Pre-cast Piles:
Usuall llength:
U
h 10 m 45
4 m
Cast-in-situ Piles:
Usual length: 5 m 15 m
Advantage:
Relatively cheap
It can be easily combined with concrete superstructure
Corrosion resistant
It can bear hard driving
Disadvantage:
Difficult to transport
p
Difficult to achieve desired cutoff
6
Types of Piles Based on Their Function and Effect

of Installation
Pil b
Piles
based
d on th
their
i ffunction
ti
End Bearing Piles

F i ti Piles
Friction
Pil
Compaction Piles
Anchor Piles
Uplift Piles
Effect of Installation
Displacement
Di
l
t Pil
Piles
Non-displacement Piles
7
Displacement Piles
In loose cohesionless soils
Densifies the soil upto

p a distance of 3.5 times the p
pile diameter
(3.5D) which increases the soils resistance to shearing
The friction angle varies from the pile surface to the limit of
compacted soil
In dense cohesionless soils
The dilatancy effect decreases the friction angle within the zone of
p
p
pile ((3.5D approx.).
pp
)
influence of displacement
Displacement piles are not effective in dense sands due to above
reason.
In cohesive soils
Soil is remolded near the displacement piles (2.0 D approx.) leading

to a decreased value of shearing resistance.
Pore
Pore-pressure
pressure is generated during installation causing lower
effective stress and consequently lower shearing resistance.
Excess pore-pressure dissipates over the time and soil regains its
g
strength.
Example: Driven concrete piles, Timber or Steel piles

8
Non--displacement Piles
Non
Due to no displacement during installation, there is no heave in

the ground.
g
Cast in-situ piles may be cased or uncased (by removing

casing as concreting progresses). They may be provided with
reinforcement
i f
t if economical
i l with
ith th
their
i reduced
d
d di
diameter.
t
Enlarged bottom ends (three times pile diameter) may be

provided in cohesive soils leading to much larger point bearing
capacity.
Soil on the sides mayy soften due to contact with wet concrete
or during boring itself. This may lead to loss of its shear
strength.
Concreting
C
ti under
d water
t may b
be challenging
h ll
i and
d may resulting
lti
in waisting or necking of concrete in squeezing ground.
Example: Bored cast in-situ or pre-cast piles

9
Load Transfer Mechanism of Piles
With the increasing load on a pile initially the resistance is offered by side friction
and when the side resistance is fully mobilized to the shear strength of soil, the
rest of load is supported
pp
by
yp
pile end. At certain load the soil at the p
pile end fails,
usually in punching shear, which is defined as the ultimate load capacity of pile.
10
Load Transfer Mechanism of Piles
The frictional resistance

per unit area at any
depth
Qz
qsz =
S .z
S = perimeter of pile
Ultimate skin friction

resistance of pile
Qsu
Ultimate point load
Q pu = q pu . Ap
z
Qs
q pu = bearing capacity of soil

Ap = bearing area of pile
Ultimate load capacity

in compression
Ultimate load capacity

in tension
Qu = Q pu + Qsu
Qu = Qsu
Qupp
Qus
Qu
11
Point Load capacity

p
y of Pile: General Bearing
g
Capacity approach
Ultimate bearing capacity of soil considering general bearing

capacity equation. Shape, inclination, and depth factors are
included in bearing capacity factors
q pu = cN c* + qN q* + 0.5 DN*
Since pile diameter is relatively small, third term may be dropped

out
q pu = cN c* + qN q*
Hence Pile load capacity
Q pu = q pu . Ap = cN c* + qN q* . Ap
12
Point Load capacity

p
y of Pile: Meyerhofs
y
((1976))
Method
Granular soils:
Point bearing capacity of pile increases with depth in sands and
reaches its maximum at an embedment ratio L/D = (L/D)cr.
Therefore, the point load capacity of pile is
Q pu = Ap .q.N q* < Ap .qul

qul = 0.5Pa N q* tan
Pa = Atmospheric
p
ppressure
(L/D)cr value typically ranges from 15D for loose to medium sand to
20D for dense sands.
Correlation of limiting point resistance with SPT value
qul = 0.4 ( N )
L
4 Pa ( N )
D
N value shall be taken as an average for a zone ranging from 10D

above to 4D below the pile point.
Saturated Clays:
Q pu = N c* .cu . Ap = 9.cu . Ap
13
Point Load capacity

p
y of Pile: Vesics ((1977)) Method
Pile point bearing capacity based on the theory of expansion of cavities
Q pu = Ap .qup = Ap . c.N c* + o N*
1 + 2Ko
3
o =
Mean effective normal stress at pile end

N* =
f ( I rr )
I rr =
I r = rigidity index =
N c* =
Ir
1 + Ir
avg vol strain at pile end

Reduced rigidity index of soil
Gs
Es
=
( c + q tan ) 2 (1 + s )( c + q tan )
I
+
+
ln
1
( rr ) + 1
3
2
Type of soil
Ir
Sand
75-150
Silt
50-75
Clay
150-250
Baldi
B
ldi ett al.
l (1981):
(1981)
For mechanical
cone resistance
Ir =
3
q f qc
For electric cone

resistance
Ir =
11.7
7
q f qc
14
Point Load capacity of Pile: Janbus

Janbu s (1976) Method
Q pu = Ap c.N c* + q.N q*
N = tan + 1 + tan 2
*
q
) (e
2
2 tan
60o 90o
Clay
Sand
N c* = N q* 1 cot
15
Point Load capacity of Pile:

Coyle and Costellos (1981)
Method for Granular Soils
Q pu = Ap .q.N q*
L
ratio
N is a function of
D
L is length of pile below G.L.
*
q
16
Point Load Capacity

y of Pile resting
g on Rock
Goodman (1980):
Q pu = Ap .qu ( N + 1)
N = tan 2 ( 45 + 2 )
qu = unconfined compression strength of rock
= effective friction angle of rock

To consider the influence of distributed fractures in rock
which
hi h are not reflected
fl
db
by the
h compression
i tests on smallll
samples, the compression strength for design is taken as
( qu )design =
( qu )lab
5
17
Frictional Resistance of Pile: In Sand
The frictional resistance of pile may be

computed as
Qsu = S .L. f sz
f sz = K . v .tan f sL
The unit frictional resistance increases with

the depth and reaches its maximum at the
depth of approximately 15D to 20D, as shown
in the adjacent figure.
K v
Soil-Pile
S
il Pil iinterface
t f
ffriction
i ti angle
l varies
i ffrom
0.5' to 0.8.Earth pressure coefficient
depends on both soil type and pile installation.
18
Frictional Resistance of
Pile: In Sand
Bhushan ((1982)) suggested
gg
that the
value of K and K.tan for large
displacement piles can be
computed as
Coyle and
C t ll
Castello
(1981)
K = 0.50 + 0.008Dr
K .tan
t = 0.18
0 18 + 0.0065
0 0065Dr
Coyle and Castello (1981) proposed
that ultimate skin frictional resistance
of pile can be computed as
Qsu = ( f s )av .S .L
= K . v .tan
tan .S .L
Avg effective overburden
19
Frictional Resistance of Pile: In Sand

Zeitlen and Paikowski (1982) suggested
that limiting fs is automatically accounted
for by the decrease in with effective
confining pressure which may be used to
compute K and .
v
= o 5.5log
o
Failure
Envelope
Effective vertical stress at the depth of interest

Effective confining
g stress during
g triaxial test
Friction angle obtained through triaxial testing at some confining pressure o.
Typical values of K from a number of pile tests:
20
Frictional Resistance of Pile In Clays: -method

Proposed by Tomlinson (1971):
f s = .cu
Empirical adhesion factor
21
Frictional Resistance
of Pile In Clays:
-method
Randolph and
Murphy (1985)
Randolph and Murphy (1985):
Qsu = .cu .S .L
Sladen (1992):
f s = .cu = h .tan
and
h = K o , NC v
correction factor for soil disturbance on sides
With the above relationships, can be determined as a

function of effective overburden and undrained shear
strength
t
th
n
= C1. v cu
C1 and n are constants depending on soil

properties and type of pile installation
22
Frictional Resistance of
Pile In Clays: -method
Proposed by Vijayvergiya and Focht (1972):
( f s )av = ( v + 2cu )
M
Mean
undrained
d i d shear
h
strength
t
th
varies with the length of embedded pile
Ultimate skin friction resistance of pile
Qsu = ( f s )av .S .L
Value of v and cu are computed as

weighted average over the embedded
depth of pile
This method usually overpredicts the
capacity of piles with embedded
length less than 15 m.
23
Frictional Resistance of Pile In Clays: -method

In saturated clays displacement piles induce excess pore pressure near
pile surface during
p
g installation which eventually
y dissipates
p
within a month
or so. Hence, the frictional resistance of pile may be estimated on the
basis of effective stress parameters of clay in a remolded state.
f s = . v = K tan R . v
Effective friction angle of remolded clay at certain depth
Earth pressure coefficient may be estimated as the earth pressure at rest:
K = (1 sin R )
For Normally Consolidated Clay
K = (1 sin R ) OCR
For Over Consolidated Clay
Total frictional resistance of pile:
Qsu = f s .S .L
24
IS:2911 Pile Load Capacity in Cohesionless Soils
25
IS:2911
S 9 Pile
e Load
oad Capac
Capacity
ty in Co
Cohesionless
es o ess So
Soils
s
26
For
Driven
Piles
For
Bored
Piles
27
IS:2911
S 9 Pile
e Load
oad Capac
Capacity
ty in Co
Cohesionless
es o ess So
Soils
s
28
IS:2911
S 9 Pile
e Load
oad Capac
Capacity
ty in Co
Cohesionless
es o ess So
Soils
s
Soil movement
Bored P
Pile
Driven Con
nical Pile
e
Driv
ven Circu
ular Pile
It seems logical that K value shall be close to the coefficient of earth

pressure at rest Ko as described in earlier methods. However,, type
p
yp of
installation has a major impact on how the earth pressure may vary from
Ko, as shown in the figure below.
29
IS:2911 Pile Load Capacity in Cohesionless Soils

IS code recommends K-value to be chosen between 1 and 2 for
driven piles and 1 and 1.5 for bored piles. However, it is advisable
to estimate this value based on the type of construction and fair
estimation of the disturbance to soil around pile
pile. Typical values of
ratio between K and Ko are listed below.
30
IS:2911 Pile Load Capacity in Cohesive Soils
For v cu 1 = 0.5 v cu
For v cu < 1 = 0.5 v cu
0.25
0.5
, but >/ 1
, but </ 0.5 and >/ 1

31
IS:2911 Pile Load Capacity in Cohesive Soils
32
Meyerhofs
y
Formula for Driven Piles based on SPT value
For Sand:
For L/D > 10
A limiting value of 1000 t/m2 for point bearing and 6 t/m2 is suggested
For NonNon-plastic silt and fine sand:
For Clays:
33
IS:2911 Pile Load Capacity in NonNon-Cohesive

Soils Based on CPT data
The ultimate point

bearing capacity:
34
IS:2911 Pile Load Capacity in NonNon-Cohesive

Soils Based on CPT data
The ultimate skin friction resistance:
Correlation of SPT and CPT:
35
Pile Load Capacity:

p
y Other Correlations with
SPT value
36
Point Load Capacity of Pile: Correlation with CPT

data by LCPC Method
q pu = ( qc )eq .kb
Get the average qc value
f a zone 1.5D
for
1 D above
b
to
1.5D below the pile tip.
Equivalent avg
avg.
cone resistance
Empirical bearing
capacity factor
Eliminate the qc values

that are higher than
1.3(qc)avg or lower than
0 7(qc)avg.
0.7(q
Compute the (qc )eq as

g of the
an average
remaining qc values.
Briaud and Miran (1991):
kb = 0.6 for clay and silt

kb = 0.375 for sand and gravel
37
Pile Load Capacity:

Correlation with CPT by
Dutch Method
Compute the average qc value for

a zone yD below the pile tip for y
varying from 0.7 to 4. Define qc1
as the minimum value of above
(qc)avg.
Average the value of qc for a zone

pile tip,
p, and g
get
of 8D above the p
qc2. Ignore sharp peaks during
averaging.
Calculate
qp
Atmospheric
p
Pressure
qc1 + qc 2 )
(
=
k 150. p
2
kb = 1.0 for OCR = 1

kb = 0.67 for OCR = 2 to 4
38
Pile Load Capacity: Correlation with CPT by Dutch

Method
q p = R1 R2
( qc1 + qc 2 ) k 150. p
2
R1 = Reduction factor as function of cu

R2 = 1 ffor electrical
l t i l cone penetrometer
t
t
R2 = 0.6 for mechanicsl cone penetrometer
39
Pile Load
Capacity:
Correlation
with CPT data
in Sand by
Dutch Method
Electric Cone
Mechanical Cone
Frictional cone
resistance
40
Pile Load Capacity: Correlation with CPT data in

Clays by Dutch Method
Frictional cone
resistance
41
Allowable Pile Capacity
Factor of Safety shall be used by giving due consideration to the

following points
Reliability of soil parameters used for calculation

Mode of transfer of load to soil
Importance of structure
Allowable total and differential settlement tolerated by structure
Factor of Safety as per IS 2911:
42

Pile Foundations Part-1

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

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

Pile Foundations Part-1

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CE 632

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Indian Standards on Piles

IS 2911 : Part 1 : Sec 1 : 1979 Driven cast in-situ concrete piles

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Top layers of soil are highly compressible for it to support

Rock level is shallow enough for end bearing pile

Lateral forces are relatively prominent.

I presence off expansive

Strong uplift forces on shallow foundations due to shallow

For structures near flowing water (Bridge abutments, etc.)

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Steel Piles: Facts

Relatively less hassle during installation and easy to achieve

Good to penetrate hard strata

Load carrying capacity is high

Noise pollution during installation

Bend in piles while driving

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Concrete Piles: Facts

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Types of Piles Based on Their Function and Effect

End Bearing Piles

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

In loose cohesionless soils

Densifies the soil upto

In dense cohesionless soils

Soil is remolded near the displacement piles (2.0 D approx.) leading

Example: Driven concrete piles, Timber or Steel piles

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Due to no displacement during installation, there is no heave in

Cast in-situ piles may be cased or uncased (by removing

Enlarged bottom ends (three times pile diameter) may be

Example: Bored cast in-situ or pre-cast piles

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Load Transfer Mechanism of Piles

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Load Transfer Mechanism of Piles

The frictional resistance

Ultimate skin friction

Ultimate point load

q pu = bearing capacity of soil

Ultimate load capacity

Ultimate load capacity

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Point Load capacity

Ultimate bearing capacity of soil considering general bearing

Since pile diameter is relatively small, third term may be dropped

Hence Pile load capacity

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Point Load capacity

Q pu = Ap .q.N q* < Ap .qul

N value shall be taken as an average for a zone ranging from 10D

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Point Load capacity

Pile point bearing capacity based on the theory of expansion of cavities

Mean effective normal stress at pile end

avg vol strain at pile end

For electric cone

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Point Load capacity of Pile: Janbus