See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309809481

CALCULATION ASPECTS OF PILE FOUNDATION IN EUROCODE 7

Article · June 2010

CITATIONS READS

0 762

3 authors, including:

Paweł Więcławski
Gdansk University of Technology
14 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Paweł Więcławski on 10 November 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 From Research to Design in European Practice, Bratislava, Slovak Republic, June 2 – 4, 2010

CALCULATION ASPECTS OF PILE FOUNDATION IN EUROCODE 7

Kazimierz Gwizdała 1, Tadeusz Brzozowski 2, Paweł Więcławski 3
1, 2, 3
Gdansk University of Technology, ul. Narutowicza 11/12, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland
1
Prof. Ph. D., D. Sc., kgwiz@pg.gda.pl
2
Ph. D., Civ. Eng., tbrzo@pg.gda.pl
3
M. Sc., Civ. Eng., pawelwieclawsky@wp.pl

ABSTRACT: Introduction of the Eurocodes to the engineering practice requires series of

economical and technical analyses. Application of reliable calculation methods should be
based on verified relations supported by soil investigations. In the paper some results of load
tests of piles and selected calculation methods based on the results of CPT tests are
presented. Essential differences of calculated values of pile bearing capacity are shown. The
differences are of significant importance from the view point of foundation dimensioning and
total costs of the construction.

1. Introduction

Evaluation of bearing capacity and settlements of individual piles and pile groups is still
difficult research and engineering problem. The execution of piles using various technologies
causes significant changes in natural stress state existing in natural subsoil. In general,
driven and displacement piles improve foundation conditions over the pile shaft and under
the base due to soil compaction and increase of shear strength. In turn, bored piles causing
an extraction of the soil on the ground surface, induce loosening of the soil and decrease the
stresses in direct neighborhood of the pile.
In order to take into account the above phenomena, the calculation methods should
include at least the parameters referring to the soil type (cohesive and non-cohesive), type of
the pile and its detailed technology, soil state and natural stress state in a subsoil.
In engineering practice the reliable calculation methods are elaborated by individual
European countries. Some summary of the practical methods for calculation of pile
foundations was the seminar “Design of Axially Loaded Piles. European Practice”, held in
Brussels in 1997. Presently, an unification of various calculation methods is contained in
a system of Eurocodes. In Eurocode 7 some general calculation principles are assumed.
Design of pile foundations has been described in details in Section 7 of Erocode 7.
According to the Eurocode recommendations, a design of pile foundations should be made
using one of the following approaches:
a) based on the static load test results, the consistency of which with other comparable
experiences has been proved by calculations or in some other way,
b) based on empirical or analytical calculation methods, the reliability of which has been
confirmed by static load tests in comparable conditions,
c) based on dynamic load test results, the reliability of which has been revealed by static
load tests in similar soil conditions and for the same type of piles,
d) based on the observation of the behaviour of comparable pile foundations, provided
that the data were verified by field tests (site investigations and soil testing).
It should be stressed out that according to the Eurocode, the basic, most preferable
design method for piles are static load tests. Next, it is suggested to apply empirical and
analytical methods, dynamic load tests with dynamic formulae and at the last, data from
engineering experience gained from observed foundation behaviour in similar soil and
loading conditions. Additionally, the behaviour of an individual pile in the group of piles as
well as a rigidity and strength of cap construction should be also considered.
The calculation approaches a, b, c and d given by Eurocode 7 are formulated in a quite
general manner and do not contain detailed, nether measuring nor calculation methods. In
the next parts of the paper some practical calculation methods from approach “a” and “b” will
be described.

2. Evaluation of the pile bearing capacity based on subsoil investigations

For an evaluation of the bearing capacity of piles, the results of Investigations of a subsoil
are very often used. One of the groups of parameters used, there are geotechnical
parameters obtained from laboratory tests.
In general, two groups of methods can be distinguished in this case, namely:
• the methods making use of effective parameters obtained from drained tests,
• the methods based on total parameters, undrained tests.

The second group of parameters widely used in the design of pile foundations are the results
of in situ tests. They are mainly based on the CPT, DPT, DMT or pressiometer tests. In this
case direct and indirect calculation methods are applied.
Calculated bearing capacity Rc;d of the pile can be determined from the following relation:

Rc ; k R b ; k Rs ; k
Rc ; d = or Rc ; d = + (1)
γt γb γs
Characteristic values should be calculated from the following relation:

⎧ (Rc ; cal )mean (Rc ; cal )min ⎫

Rc ; k = Rb ; k + Rs ; k = Min ⎨ ; ⎬ (2)
⎩ ξ3 ξ4 ⎭
where ξ3 i ξ4 are correlation coefficients dependent on the number of geotechnical profiles
investigated. The values of the coefficients can be determined in national appendix. Some
exemplary values are given in Eurocode 7. (Rc;cal)mean = (Rb;cal + Rs;cal)mean denotes mean
value and (Rc;cal)min = (Rb;cal + Rs;cal)min is a minimum value.
According to Eurocode 7, characteristic values for the resistance under the pile base Rb;k
and over the pile shaft Rs;k are determined from the following relations:

Rb;k = Ab qb;k (3)

Rs ; k = ∑As;i qs;i ;k (4)
where qb;k is a characteristic value of the unit resistance under the pile base, qs;i;k –
characteristic value of the unit resistance over the pile shaft in subsequent soil layers, Ab –
calculated area of the pile base, As;i – calculated area of the pile shaft in the subsequent soil
layers.
Fundamental significance for the reliability of calculations has a reliable determination of
the unit resistances under the base and over the shaft of the pile. There exist a number of
calculation methods, which can be used for practical calculations. Assumption the respective
method should be based on comparative analyses and statistical methods making use of the
results of static load tests. The values of unit resistances under the pile base should be
referred to the magnitude of displacements and should also take into account a definition of
ultimate loads according to the assumptions given in Eurocode 7. Calculated areas of the
base and the shaft should consider real technological conditions for the given pile type.

Table 1. Some methods of evaluation of pile bearing capacity based on soil investigations and SPLT

Resistance – Vesic’s method (1977)

under the base – Coyle & Castello’s method (1981)
Non-cohesive
soils Resistance – β method (Bowles, 1996)
over the shaft – Coyle & Castello method (1981)
Resistance
– q = 9⋅cu
Indirect under the base
Methods based on in situ investigations

methods – α - Tomlinson’s method

(Tomlinson, 1971/1995)
Cohesive soils – α - API method (Reese, 1984)
Resistance
over the shaft – β method
(Reese, 1982; AASHTO, 1996/2000)
– λ method
(US Army Corps of Enginners, 1977)
– EN 1997-2:2007
– LCPC method
(Bustamante, Giasenelli; 1982)
– Schmertmann’s method
(Schmertmann, 1978)
Direct – De Ruiter’s & Beringen’s method
The results of CPT tests
methods (De Ruiter, Beringen; 1978)
– Aoki & Velloso method
(Aoki, Velloso; 1975)
– Penpile method (Clisby, 1978)
– Gwizdała & Stęczniewski method
(Gwizdała, Stęczniewski; 2007)
PN – 83/B – 02482
Static pile load EN 1997-2:2007
tests (SPLT) – EN 1536: 2000 Bored piles
– EN 12699: 2001 Displacement piles

Indirect methods
•  α method
α method belongs to the group of indirect methods for evaluation of pile bearing capacity
represented by resistance over the pile shaft. In the literature one can mainly find a method
elaborated by Tomlinson (1971) as well as a method proposed by L.C. Reese with his co-
workers from American Petroleum Institute.  According to them, the unit resistance can be
determined by the following formula:
fs = α ⋅ cu (5)

where α is an adhesion coefficient dependent on the pile diameter and undrained shear
strength of cohesive soil cu.

•  β method
β method, known also as method of total stresses allows to determine unit skin friction from
the following expression:
fs = β ⋅ σ'v = K s ⋅ tg δ ⋅ σ'v (6)

making use of effective vertical stress σ’ν , friction angle between soil and pile material and
coefficient of earth pressure over the pile shaft Ks.
Unit resistance under the base can be calculated from the relationship:

q = Nt · pt (7)

where Nt is bearing capacity coeficient dependent on effective angle of internal friction of the
soil and pt is the effective horizontal stress at the base of pile.

• λ method
In the method the unit resistance over the pile shaft depends on pile lenght, state of cohesive
soil i.e. its shear strength and effective vertical stress distributed over the pile.

fs = λ(σ’νm + 2cum) (8)

The value of λ reduction coefficient is determined depending on the pile length (Vijayvergiya
& Focht ,1972).

Unit resistance under the base of the pile can be calculated from simple empirical relation
based on soil shear strength cu:
q = 9 · cu (9)

This relation is used in order to determine the unit resistances under the pile base also in
α method (Tomlinson, 1979/1995, Reese, 1984), β method (Reese, 1982; AASHTO,
1996/2000) and λ method (US Army Corps of Engineers, 1977).

• Direct methods based on CPT test results

It is a group of methods serving for evaluation of pile bearing capacity directly based on the
results obtained from CPT tests. The values of unit resistances under the base and over the
shaft of the pile are calculated in terms of relations making use of both: cone resistance and
skin friction of the penetrometer.

• Method proposed in EN 1997-2:2007

The method is analogous to DIN 1054.

• LCPC method (Bustamante, Giasenelli; 1982)

Bustamante and Gianeselli (1982) have presented the design method of piles in terms of
parameters directly related to the type of the pile and the soil.

• Meyerhof’s method (Meyerhof, 1976)

This method serves for the determination of bearing capacity of pile shaft. This is typically
approximation method for approximate values of the resistances. The skin friction over the
pile shaft is determined either by the resistance under the pile base or skin friction of the
penetrometer.

• De Ruiter’s & Beringena’s method (De Ruiter, Beringen, 1978)

In the method the resistance under the base is calculated using average qc value,
determined for the length of 8 pile diameters above the pile base and 4 pile diameters below
it. The method can be applied for both cohesive and non-cohesive soils. Depending on the
soil type, the unit resistance under the base and skin friction can be calculated.

• Schmertmann’s method (Schmertmann, 1978)

The resistance under the pile base is determined analogically to De Ruiter’s & Beringen’s
proposal, (1978). The result obtain is next reduced by respective value depending on the
undrained shear strength of the soil

• Aoki & Velloso method (Aoki, Velloso, 1975)

This method is based on CPT test results (cone resistance) and load tests on the basis of
which empirical coefficients α, F1, F2 are defined. The coefficients are next used in the
formulae for the calculation of unit resistances under the base and skin friction.

• Penpile method (Clisby, 1978)

This is totally empirical method in which any coefficients in the relations proposed have been
determined based on numerous field investigations of a subsoil. The method allows for
estimation of pile bearing capacity with high margin of safety.

• Gwizdała & Stęczniewski method (Gwizdała, Stęczniewski, 2007)

One of methods making use of CPT test results is the method elaborated in Poland.
According to it, the unit resistance under the pile base can be calculated by:

qbu = ψ1 ⋅ q c (10)

and unit skin friction of the pile:

q csi fsi
fs = or fs = (11)
ψ 2i ψ 3i

The values of bearing capacity coefficients ψ1, ψ2i i ψ3i have been defined based on
numerous field tests and determined for two pile types i.e. driven piles (Vibro) and large
diameter bored piles. These values are presented as a function of cone resistance qc which
is selected depending of the soil type. Significant role in the calculation procedure is
respective determination of zone under the pile base in which average value of the
resistance is assumed. The authors of the method have proposed three schemes illustrating
the manner of averaging of qc value and the range of impact zone, which is to be assumed
for calculations, depending on the soil conditions.

3. Evaluation of bearing capacity based on static pile load tests (SPTL)

In many countries all over the world, static pile load tests were and still are considered as
most reliable method for evaluation of bearing capacity and settlements of piles and pile
foundations. Also in Poland, in Polish Piling Code PN-83/B-02482 this way has been
assumed as most valuable. Based on good engineering practice, the Authors of Eurocode 7
distinguish static load tests as the only way of reliable design of pile foundations.

• SPLT according to PN - 83/B-02482 (Tejchman, et al., 1985)

According to PN-83/B-02482 the number of static load tests should depend on the total
number of piles under the design construction. The values of maximum load are as follows:
Qmax ≥ 1.5 Nt – in the case of compressive load test, where Nt denotes design value of
compressive bearing capacity,
Qmax ≥ 1.8 Nw – in the case of tensile load test, where Nw denotes design value of tensile
bearing capacity,
Hmax ≥ 1.5 Hr – in the case of transverse load test, where Hr denotes design value of
transverse load.
During the final stage of loading the pile is totally loaded and permanent displacement are
recorded. Based on the results of load tests, the load-settlement relationship can be
determined as well as change of load and settlement as a function of time. These relations
are next used to determine the ultimate loads a single pile can transfer.

• Static Pile Load Test according to EN 1997-1:2004

Based on static pile load tests the characteristic value of bearing capacity can be calculated
from the following formula, (EC 7):

⎧ (Rc ; m )mean (Rc ; m )min ⎫

  Rc ; k = Min ⎨ ; ⎬  (12)
⎩ ξ1 ξ2 ⎭

where, ξ1, ξ2 – correlation coefficients dependent on a number of load tests and determined
based on the results of tests performed.
The tests should be executed up to the ultimate load for which ultimate bearing capacity
can be deduced. It was assumed that ultimate bearing capacity of the pile corresponds to the
load causing a settlement equivalent to 10% of the pile diameter. It should be noted, that
many years experience gained from static load tests executed in Poland indicates that is very
rare case when one deals with so large settlements. Thus, this recommendation increases
the total cost of load tests and significantly elongates testing time.

4. Calculation examples

Example 1
Bearing capacity analysis of bored pile based on static load test. Large diameter bored pile
φ 1500 mm, 15 m long , design load Qr = 5186 kN. The pile base embedded in low plasticity
sandy clay with some interbeddings of gravel.

Fig. 1. Load-settlement curve of bored pile

Table 2. Test results

PN-EN 1997-1:2004 PN-EN 1997-1:2004
Design load Static load test PN-83/B-02482
(ξ1 = 1.4) (Simpson, 2007: ξ1 = 1.55)
 0
Qr [kN] Qmax [kN] k⋅Nc [kN] Rc;d [kN] Rc;d [kN]
1 2 3 4 5

3260 4898 3918 3180 2873

FB = Qi/Qr (Bearing Capacity Factor)

1.00 1.50 1.20 0.98 0.88

Example 2
Bearing capacity analysis of Vibro – Fundex pile, φ 610 mm in diameter and 9.5 m long,
driven by DELMAG 30 diesel hammer, based on static load tests and direct methods making
use of the results of CPT tests. Design load Qr = 1034 kN, the base of the pile embedded in
silty clays.

Fig. 2. Load-settlement curve of Vibro – Fundex pile

Fig. 2. CPT test results

Table 3. Test and calculation results for Vibro – Fundex pile

 Bearing Correlation coefficient Characteristic Partial Calculated
capacity
based on
ξi value of coefficient of bearing
(acc. to EN 1997:2004 bearing resistance capacity
characteristic
Type of the Tab. 4.4., Tab. 4.9.) capacity
Method parameters
method
Fs (ξ1, ξ2 for s = 0.1D)
Rc;k γt Rc;d

[kN] ξ1 ξ2 ξ3 ξ4 [kN] [–] [kN]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Design load Qr – – – – – – – 1034

Bearing capacity
based on SPLT
QmaxSPLT 1758 – – – – – – –
acc. to
PN-83/B-2482
PN-83/
1758 – – – – – k = 0.8 1406
Methods based /B-02482
on SPLT EN 1997-1:
1758 1.4 1.4 – – 1256 1.1 1142
2004
EN 1997-2:
2007 2378 – – 1.4 1.4 1699 1.1 1545
(DIN 1054)
LCPC
Bustamante
1980 – – 1.4 1.4 1414 1.1 1285
& Giasanelli
(1982)
Schmertmann
2340 – – 1.4 1.4 1671 1.1 1519
(1978)
De Ruiter
& Beringen 2251 – – 1.4 1.4 1608 1.1 1462
Methods based (1978)
on soil α - Tomlinson
investigations 1239 – – 1.4 1.4 885 1.1 805
(1971)

α - API (1984) 1538 – – 1.4 1.4 1098 1.1 998

Aoki & Velloso

1146 – – 1.4 1.4 819 1.1 745
(1975)

Penpile -
1152 – – 1.4 1.4 823 1.1 748
Clisby (1978)
Gwizdała -
Stęczniewski 2308 – – 1.4 1.4 1648 1.1 1498
(2007)

5. Summary

In Poland, static load tests have been applied from many years as reliable method for
evaluation of real bearing capacity of piles. Recommendations given in Eurocode 7 are
consistent with Polish engineering practice, however execution procedure of SPTL as well as
interpretation of test results based on load-settlement curve still require to be elaborated in
details.
In the engineering practice, almost always, the maximum settlement during the SPTL test
is lower than 10% of pile diameter. It has undoubted impact on further interpretation of the
results (ultimate loads and design economy – see Table 2 and 3).
Calculation of pile bearing capacities, even based on direct methods making use of CPT
test results, can reveal significant differences. It was confirmed by some calculation
examples presented in this paper, see Table 3, column 10, for few selected calculation
methods. For large diameter bored pile the reliable values were obtained in terms of the
method recommended by EN 1997-2:2007 as well as Gwizdała and Stęczniewski, 2007,
Schmertmann, 1978, De Ruiter & Beringen, 1978 as well as Bustamante & Gianeselli, 1982.
It should be also pointed out that the recommendation of reliable calculation method
should be done based on detailed technical and economical analysis considering elements
of statistics and pile load test results.

References

1. Aoki, N. and Velloso, D. A. (1975). An Approximate Method to Estimate the Bearing Capacity of
Piles. Proceedings of 5th Pan-American Conference of Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Bueno Aires, Vol. 1, 367 – 376.
2. Bustamante, M. Gianeselli L.(1982). Pile Bearing Capacity Prediction by Means of Static
Penetration CPT. Proceedings of 2nd European Symposium on Penetration Testing, Amsterdam,
Vol. 2, 493 – 500.
3. Coyle, N. M. and Castello, R. R. (1981). New Design Correlations for Piles in Sand. Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 107(GT7), 965 - 986.
4. DeRuiter, J. and Beringen, F. L. (1979). Pile Foundations for Large North Sea Structures. Marine
Geotechnology, 3(3), 267 – 314.
5. Fellenius, B. (1975). Test Loading of Piles and New Proof Testing Procedure. Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 101(GT9), 855 – 869.
6. Fellenius, B.H. (1980). The Analysis of Results from Routine Pile Load Tests. Ground
Engineering, Sep. pp. 19 – 31.
7. Gwizdała, K., (1997). Polish design methods for single axially loaded piles. Design of Axially
Loaded Piles – European Practice, Brussels, 291 – 306.
8. Gwizdała, K., Stęczniewski, K. (2007). Determination of the bearing capacity of pile foundations
based on CPT test results. Proceeding of the 3rd International Seminar on Soil Design
Parameters from In Situ and Laboratory Tests, Poznań, September 2006.
9. Meyerhof, G. G. (1956). Penetration Tests and Bearing Capacity of Cohesionless Soils. Journal
of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 82(1), 1 - 19.
10. Meyerhof, G. G. (1976). Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 102(3), 197 - 228.
11. Meyerhof, G. G. (1983). Scale Effect of Ultimate Pile Capacity. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, ASCE, 109(6), 797 - 806.
12. Reese, L. C. and O’neill, M. W. (1988). Drilled Shafts; Construction Procedures and Design
Methods, Report No. FHWA-HI-88-42, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Washington D.C.
13. Reese. L. C. and O’Neill, M. W. (1989). New Design Method for Drilled Shaft from Common Soil
and Rock Test. Proceedings of Congress Foundation Engineering: Current Principles and
Practices, ASCE, Vol. 2, 1026 – 1039.
14. Schmertmann, J. H. (1970). Static Cone to Compute Static Settlement Over Sand. Journal of Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering Division, ASCE, 96(SM3), 1011 – 1042.
15. Schmertmann, J. H. (1978). Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test, Performance and Design. U.S.
Department of Transportation, FHWA-TS-78-209.
16. Schmertmann, J. H., Hartman, J. P., and Brown, P. R. (1978). Improved Strain Influence Factor
Diagrams. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 104(GT8), 1131 – 1135.
17. Simpson, B. (2007) Proposed changes to correlation factors.
 18. Tejchman A., Gwizdała K., Kłos J., Application of In situ tests for evaluation of pile bearing
capacity. Proc. Of the 11th Int. Conf. on Soil Mech. and Found. Eng., San Francisco 1985, 1479 –
1482.
19. Tomlinson, M. J. (1971). Some Effects of Pile Driving on Skin Friction. Proceedings of
Conference on Behavior of Piles, ICE, London, 107 – 114.
20. Vesic, A.S. (1972). Expansion of Cavities in Infinite Soil Mass. Journal of Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering Division, ASCE, 98(3), 265 – 290.
21. Vesic, A. S. (1977). Design of Pile Foundations. NCHRP Synthesis of Practice No. 42,
Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., pp. 68.
22. Vesic, A. S. (1963). Bearing Capacity of Deep Foundations in Sand. Hwy. Res. Board Rec. No.
39, 112 – 153.
23. Vijayvergiya, V. N. and Focht, J. A. (1972). A New Way to Predict Capacity of Piles in Clay. OTC
paper 1718, 4th Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, TX.
24. ISSMFE Subcommittee on Field and Laboratory Testing, Axial Pile Loading Test, Suggested
Method. ASTM Journal, June 1985, 79-90.
25. ASTM Designation D 4945, Standard Test Method for High-Strain Dynamic Testing of Piles.
26. DNV – OS – J101, Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures. October 2007.
27. EN 1997-1:2004, Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 1. General rules.
28. EN 1997-2:2007, Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 2. Ground investigations and testing.
29. EN 1536:2000, Execution of special geotechnical works. Bored piles.
30. EN 12699:2001, Execution of special geotechnical works. Displacement piles.

View publication stats