CONVENTIONALAND BOX-SHAPED PILED RAFTS

HeinzBrandl,Institute
for SoilMechanicsand GroundEngineering,
Technical
University
of Vienna,Austria
RobertHofmann,Geotechnical Engineering,
Perchtoldsdorf,
Austria

Box-shaped pile and diaphragm wall foundationshaveprovedsuitablefor transferring heavy

loadsof bridges,powerplants,tanks,towersor otherbuildingsin a concentrated form intothe
ground.The bearing-deformation behaviourand the earthquakeresistanceof such "box-
foundations" are superiorto thoseof conventionalpilegroups.The reasonliesin the reduction
of lateralsoil displacementand in the compositeeffect betweenconcreteelementsand the
enclosedsoil. The paper describesresultsof comprehensive model tests and in situ
measurements, theoreticalaspectsand casehistories.

INTRODUCTION . Close contactor free gap betweenraft and soil

Box-shapedfoundationswere originallyconstructedas beneath;
. Singlepiles.
a combination of sheetpilewalls(similarto cofferdams)
with a cappingraft. The sheet piles restraineda lateral
Tests with conventional pile groups and singlepiles
soil movement,but did not transferessentialvertical
loads.Later,the bearingcapacitycould be significantly were conducted to compare the load-settlement
improvedby usingbored piles or diaphragmwalls as behaviour of the differentpilepatterns.
Furthermore,
the
wellas jet groutingor the deep-mixing technique.Along following parameters were varied to check their
influence:
the circumference of suchfoundation-boxes, boredpiles
shouldbe installedin a secantor at leastcontiguous
r Pilediameterd = 15 to 37 mm;
form, so that shear stressescan be taken along their o Pilelength| = 250to 600 mm;
connectingline. In the case of an intermittentpile . Densityof soily = 16.3to 16.8 kN/m'.
installation,the spaces betweenthe piles should be
strengthened by üet-)groutingto provideclosedwalls, eq üiväiefit
especially in non-cohesive ground.In specialcases,this -tl\ \.
dlSrneler [)

methodmay be more cost-effective than the installation {

of secantpiles. B O x $ l
(srnall)
ts
Properlyconstructedbox-shapedfoundationsact as a :
compoundbody consistingof piles (diaphragmwalls 'tI
etc.) and the enclosedsoil. This quasi-monolith can
transferhigh verticaland horizontalforces. Piles and
"pot"
cappingraftforma box whichacts physicallylikea
turnedupsidedown.Consequently, the settlementsare i'
smallerthan for conventionalpile groups, and the BOX M
earthquake higher.Pileboxes
is significantly
resistance {nredium) i
N,
reoresentthe classicalform of a piled raft foundation
utilisingthe enclosedsoil core as an integratedload
transfermember. I

\
MODELTESTS 20 6 cnr

Comprehensivemodel tests were performed to (1?8 mnl

investigate parameters influencing the bearing- BOX L

settlementbehaviourof box-shapedpile foundations. (large)
The researchprogramcomprised70 tests includingthe
following testseries(Hofmann2001;Brandl& Hofmann
2 0 0 1) :
. Pile boxeswith inner piles (accordingto design
practice);
o PileboxeswithoutinnerPiles;
a Pile boxes without soil infill (simulatingzero-
stiffnessof the enclosedsoil); r-_'- - ---- 19,0 cm -- -- -- * -
"concrete"(simulatinga
Pile boxes filled with usedfor the standard
Figure1. Patternof the box-foundations
monolithic block); mödeltests (scale 1:50).EquivalentdiameterD for a circular
Conventional pilegroups(axialspacinga > 2d); box-foundationindicatedfor box S.
 "efficiency"
Duringthe teststhe load-settlement curvesuntilfailure, the Q/(Ady) ratio - hence the geotechnical of
the settlementtroughsand the pile forcesin five or six small boxes is relatively greater, whereby, of course,
measuringlevelswere registered(in steps). large box-foundationsas a whole can take higher total
loads due to their larger area and pile number. The
Figure1 showsthe standardtypes of investigatedbox- hatched zone between pile box without infill and
foundations (Hofman2001, Brandl& Hofman2001). monolithicblock in Figure 6 depends on the bond factor
The pilepatternwas similarto the designof foundation between piles/piles and piles/soil or on the stiffness of
alternativesfor a long river bridge,wherebytype S 1= the enclosed soil core respectively.The border line for a
smallbox)was constructed finally. monolithicblock can be consideredthe limit value for a
Figure2 showstypicalconventional pile groupswhich deep-seated raft foundation or a caisson (completely
wereinvestigated for comparison;therefore,theyexhibit filled with concrete).
somesimilarity to the outlinesof the modelpile boxes.
The model scale was 1:50 and the test soil a dry a 1(Ad.'i)
uniformsand of OJ/2mm with an internalfriction of 0 100 20ü 400 600 800
aboutQ= 35 o.The fill densityof usuallyY= 16,7kN/m3
lay slightlyabovethe mean valueof lmin= 14,9kN/m3
andymax= 17,6kN/m3. 0.4
! C1,6

i.g,rI @ @ @ @ @ 0,8

;
* s w
1.0
t
ol & # # ^di

'w@ I6 piles

w*_w_*w' J U . üc m
Figure3. Influenceof pile numberand pile length(l) on the
| . 4C {:nl

load-settlementbehaviour of conventionalpile groups (to

/-\ '1 Figure2). Dimensionless interpretation:
,,hr
s = settlement, Q = total load on the foundation, 6 = pile
diameter,
A = foundationarea (withinoutlineof pilegroup),y = densityof
,,@@@g&., soil.

& @ { & l .dmü

'wt
{\j
0l(Ad")
0 1000 1500

i - . . -
ü @ @'
0,!
0.4
i . . ..*30.S cm --.. -_*-e
0,6
!
pilegroupsusedfor model
Figure2. Patternof conventional ; s.B
tests(scalel:50) as a comparison to Figure1. Brokenline j.0
indicates areaA andcircumference
equivalent U.
= 2d. a)= 16piles;b)= 20 piles.
Axialpilespacing i.ä

Figures3 to I show some test resultsin normalised

Figure4. Dimensionless curvesfor the pilebox
load-seltlement
diagrams. Thedataaregivendimensionless to enablea
S. Pilelength| = 40 cm.
direct comparisonwith resultsgained for conventional s = settlement, Q = total load on the foundation, 6 = pile
pile groups or from in situ measurementson diameter,
constructionsites. Moreover,dimensionlessdiagrams A = foundationarea(withincircumference of pilebox),
canbe appliedmoreeasilyto largerscales. T = densityof soil.

Figure3 illustratesthat the pile lengthwithinthe group a I (A,d i)

has a greaterspecificinfluencethan the numberof 10{10 1500
piles.In principle,
such a tendencycouldbe foundfor
the conventional pile group as well as for the box- 8,2
shapedpilefoundation butshouldnotbe generalised. In 0,4
the caseof box-foundations, the influenceof pilelength
ü,s
smaller,especially
is relatively for a slenderness of l/D
>2.5whereD is the (equivalent) boxdiameter. s,s
- B ö x l v i t hi n i e r p i l e s
ö 1,0
Figures 4 and 5 demonstrate the effect of pile '1,2 lio) wriiloui innsl Prl€$
arrangement and intensityof bond withinthe pile box.
of inner piles reducesthe settlement 1,4
The installation l3ör withDlitsand intill

which can be expressedby a cell-factorqo < 1.0. A

comparison of thesetwo figuresand Table1 showsthat Figure5. Similarto Figure4, but pile box L
ComparingFigures4 and 5 also demonstrates the
influence of the box size on the load-settlement Q s o i l= r . Q t o t a l (1)
behaviour.Fromthe dimensionless diagramsit can be henceQ pile= (1 - rc). Q total (2)
deducedthat pilesof a smallbox-foundation exhibita whereby0<r<0.4
higher relative effectiveness. Nevertheless, the
allowabletotalload of the largepile box is, of course, The box-factorincreaseswith the stiffnessof the soil
higher. core.Usuallyit liesbelowr < 0.4.A highervaluecan be
obtainedif the soil core is improvedby jet groutingor
a / (A.d.7) deepmixing.
50, 100ü 1t
Figure 9 shows the box-factorfor limit loads, which
characterisea beginningsteepeningof the load-
settlement curve. The r-lines should not be
.i.5
extrapolated linearlyto valueshigherthan AlUld= 2. lt

'of I u e g r e eo f h o n d.
is ratherrecommended to designpileswith a box-factor
that then is kept constant(for safety reasons).Under
failureload the forcesconcentratein the piles,because
I the ratioof stiffnessof pilesto plastifiedsoil increases.
- it This causes a decreaseof the box-factorx. Figure9
demonstratesthe great influenceof the cell size(s)on
s/0 no b6nd full bond
{n}0nolith) the load transfer via the soil core(s).The portion of
(Eoo,t".r" = 0) (Erort,r'.e = Etrte) externalload directlytakenby the enclosedsoil of the
Figure6. Influence
of stiffness
of enclosedsoilor bondeffect box-foundation increases withthe "hydraulic radius"A/U
between pilesandenclosed S; pile
soilof the box-foundation or AiUld.A cohesionof the soilhas no significant effect
lengthl=40cm. on the ratioQsoil but it influencesthe loadtransfer
/Qtotar,
mechanismof the piles,hencethe percentage of skin
The different load transfer of a single pile, a frictionforceand base resistanceforce.
conventionalpile group and a box-shapedpile Figure 9 represents only one among various
foundationis illustratedin Figure7. lt showsthat the correlationsbecause the box- factor deoends on a
normalised total load carriedby boxes is higherthan seriesof oarameters:
thatcarriedby conventional pilegroups. r RatiotuU/d;
. Slenderness of the box-foundation, l/D:
a / {A d.i) . Ratioof stiffnessof concretemembers(Econsere) to
0 1000 150c soil(Esoir);
**.*;\'-.*-
-..+-----

ü.) a Multi-cellularpatternof the boxfoundation;

-0.4 a Ratioof serviceloadto limitor ruotureload:
Q -oa o Settlement.
-f.8
i
. 10 i The portionof externalloaddirectlytransferredfromthe
.trJ decreaseswith pile lengthI
raft into the soil (Qsoir/Qtotar)
* I
and box slendernessl/D respectively.The main
Figure7. Comparisonof load-settlement behaviourof a single reductionoccurs between l/D = 0 (i.e. flat foundation
pile,a conventionalpile group(20 piles,i.e. a in Figure2) and where the raft takes lOO o/oof Qtot"r)and l/D = 0.5 to
a smallpile box (20 piles,i.e. S in Figure1). Pile length| = 50 0.75wherethe raft usuallvtakesabout60 to 30 % of
cm. Qtotat.

The influenceof size and shape of the foundationbox
on the load-settlementbehaviour is summarised in
Figure I for the standard model tests (Figure 1)and a
pile lengthof 50 cm, whereby the resultsfor pile lengths
between40 and 60 cm also lie within the hatchedzone.
The influence of the ratio of box area A to box
circumferenceU increaseswith the limit pile load. This
"hydraulic
ratio correspondsto the radius" R. Hence,
boxes with a small hydraulicradius (i.e. long-stretched)
can transfer higher loads than those with a square or
circular shape. This coincides well with the theory
because square or circular foundationscause a higher
in the ground.
stressconcentration
The portionof externalload directlytaken by the soil
core increaseswith increasinghydraulicradiusof the
pilebox,assuminga similarpilearrangement. Fromthe
"box-factor"
r couldbe deduced:
modeltests,a
The transferof verticalloads by a box-shapedpile
foundationconcentrates ratheron the innerpilesthan
on the outerones.This effectincreases with increasing
total load (e.9. Figure 10) and can be explainedby
Figure11:The loadflowingfromthe raftdirectlyintothe
soilcausesa silopressurethere,hencea negativeskin
frictionalongthe piles.In the lower part of the inner
pilesthe negativeskinfrictionmay changeto a positive
value, but the resultantskin friction force Qsiusually
remainsnegative.Consequently, the inner piles are
loadedmore intensively. Sucha loaddistribution could
also be observedin clay, while in conventional pile
groupsthe load concentrates ratheron the outerpiles
(according to the base pressuredistribution beneatha
rigidraft).
 13 0.45
tl, Figure8. Summarising resultsof modeltestson
0,d pileboxesS, M, L (Figure'l).Pilelengthl= 50
u cm.
uJ 0,35 Ql, = limitload (sumof externalload,actingon
t-* the box in the level of pile heads); s =
LU
ä settlement; 6 = pile diameter; T= densityof
<(
soil,
A = foundationarea (of the pile box), U =
uJ circumference of the pile box
ö
\ 0'15
!-""
Z o,J
UJ
*u o.os AiU . 5.2
AiU - 3.4 -A/U = 3,9
J ....-AtU . 2.8
A/i.l * 2 il
l * o
ul r0 300 400 s00 600
t/)
Q1;* i {A.d.1}
tangent piles. In the case of contiguousor even
A/U/d [1]
pile walls,a loadtransferringclosurecan be
intermittent
obtainedby jetgroutingbetweenthe spandrels.
1 4 r.6 18 2 2.?
**-r--*-*t-*-*r**
l
: The effectiveness of pilesformingcrosswalls in a deep
box-foundationcan be quantifiedby dividing the
settlementreductionby the increaseof the proportional
o "-i. i pile numberwhen addinginner pilesto form a multi-
F
t) cellularpattern.The model test exhibitedthat piles
{tL *---j*.
1 i . . . - j , - . ,
wilhorit innef pils$
- *J-
forming cross walls in long-stretchedboxes have a
{
X I ..,:,r.-.^.-:1.-
iilrsr vrrss larger effect than those in square-shapedor circular
o 0.s+ ) cells(Table'l).
m
I
I i ! - =, . : - l lo,. r
I
T

Figure 9. Box-factorr of box-foundations versus the ratio

iK t J " o 1 1 / U 1 o i uI 1
L-$
A/U/d,whereA = area of pile box, U = circumferenceof pile Qratt 0*.1
box.d = pilediameter.Derivedfrom modeltests.

B A $ EP R E S S U R [ Q s[ k N / m " ]
40n 800 1?ü0

E
E
(t 10
f"*
z
UJ
ä 0.^ a^..
ul outer pile
J
t"*
F 3 Ü F
- n. , a l\\ p
ul
Q
x'}-
iNä

Figure10.Basepressure
pileboxS (Figure
of the pilesversussettlement
1).Pilelength | = 50cm.
of the

The base pressureof the piles increaseswith the size

^Nt""
t\l
highersilo
of the soilcellsbecauselargercellsfacilitate L iN
pressures. In the upperzone of the box,the ringwalls
are subjectedto a lateralearth pressuredifferencethat
is directed outward. With increasing depth, the
horizontal silo pressureis widelycompensated by the
* ü $ $ $
il, 4 Q.,,,t 0" , Q5o11
Qn 1
earth pressureat rest acting on the outer face of the
box-foundation. Therefore,adjacentpilesshouldexhibit Figure 11. Scheme of load transfer in a box-shapeddeep
sufficientbondalongtheirconnecting line(mainlyin the foundationwith innerpile-or diaphragmwalls.
upperzone),i.e. secantpiles are advantageous over
 of innerpilesformingstiffeningcrosswalls
Table1. Efficiency intothe groundand the bearing-settlementbehaviourof
Resultsfrom modeltests(Fiq.1)
in a boxfoundation. the box-shapedfoundation.The in situ crosssectionof
NumberNumberof ni , ^^r^,,SettlementAsl the pile box correspondsto box S of the modeltests
of innerpiles-"o | uuf/o., reduction / n; ( F i g u r e1 ) .
outer n, Äs (o/o) / n
piles
A large bridge was constructedfor an expressway
no
crossingthe riverDanube.The groundconsisted of a 5
S (smafl) 18 2 1'l 18 1,62 to 6 m thick cover of rivergravelunderlainby dense
M (medium) 20 4 20 30 1,50 sands (with silty interlayers)exhibitingan internal
L (large) 24 8 33 38 1,14 frictionof A = 32oto 36'. The dry densityof the sand
variedbetweenyo= 15 to 17.5kN/m"(meanvalue16.5)
IN.SITUMEASUREMENTS
AND CASEHISTORIES corresponding to a void ratioof n = 0.43to 0.33.Three
piles,the raft and the enclosedsoil of the main pier
Numerousdata from in-situmeasurements have been were instrumentedwith pressure cells and strain
collected over a period of about 30 years. They gauges(vibrating wiresystem).
comprise stress and deformation/settlement
measurementsof box-shaped deep foundationsof The largediameterboredpiles(d = 1.2m)wereinstalled
bridges,hydropowerplants,industrialbuildings and fromshipand thereforeonly in a contiguous and not in
high-risebuildings.The ground plan of the box- a secantpattern.Consequently, the upperpart of the
foundationswas rectangular,circular, ellipticalor enclosedsoil core (i.e.the loosesandygravel)had to
polygonaland mostly stiffened by transversaland/or be improvedby jetgrouting in order to obtainsufficient
longitudinalwall elements.Sometimessinglepiles or bond effectand sheartransferbetweenpilesand soil.
diaphragm wallpanelswere installedadditionallywithin Furthermore, inner erosiondue to groundwaterflow
the cells(for staticreasons;to compensate installation shouldbe avoidedby thismeasure.The foundation was
failuresetc.).The groundconditionsvariedfrom very designedto withstandship impactsof 2000tons and 6
clay, from loose to
soft clay to stiff overconsolidated m deep riverbedscouringwith a safetyfactorof F > 1.2
dense sands,gravel, heterogeneous colluvium,from againstbasefailure.
weatheredslopedepositsto decomposedrock.
In the first phases of loading,the measurements
The wall systemsand the way of installationwere also showeda quick increaseof soil pressureimmediately
different.Bothhave an influenceon the load-settlement beneaththe cappingraft up to ov^= 0.5 MN/m' and
behaviourof the box-shapedfoundations. Diaphragm somewhatlater to ov = 0.6 MN/m'. This stress level
walls,for instance,providea bettertransferof shear remainedratherconstantthen; increasingloadsfrom
forces betweenthe concrete panels than contiguous the bridge deck during ongoingconstruction caused
oile walls.but on the other hand have a smallerskin only an increasein pile loads. Under serviceload
friction. the portionof externalverticalloadsdirectly
conditions,
transferredby the raft into the ground variedbetween
The in-situ measurements confirmed that the 35 to 40 %. This coincidesverv well with the results
percentageof loadtakeneitherby the cappingraftor by fromthe modeltests.
the piles (or diaphragmwalls) depends on various
parameters, suchas: On the site,the directloadtransferfromthe raft intothe
. Cross section (incl. pile pattern etc.) and groundcouldbe expectedto be somewhathigherthan
slenderness of the foundation-box; in the modeltests.This was due to the in-situground
. Ratioof stiffnessof concreteelementsand soil; improvement by jet grouting,causinga higherstiffness
. Magnitudeand distributionof external loads of the enclosedsoil core. Moreover,this measure
(V,H,M); causeda loadredistribution from the outerpilesto the
o Ratioof serviceloadto ultimate(failure)load; inner piles. The observedsettlementscorresponded
. Groundproperties; wellwiththe settlement prognosis.
. Verticaland horizontal displacement of the soil; ':{
. Magnitudeand distribution of the contactstress -l:--"

betweenraftand soil; a s * *-o *

. Foundation depth;
f:W
fi
. Depthof excavation(construction pit); - w* -
o lnstallationfactors. : r ' . , , , W a r r

Consequently, the results of in-situ measurements

scatterrelativelywidely, includingvariousalterations
alsoduringthe construction period.In the following,
two
case histories are selected which represent widely
Figure12. Groundplan of the deep boxjoundationof a river
different densesandandweakclay.
soilconditions: pier of an expresswaybridge.Correspondsto pile box S of
't).
modeltesls (Figure Blackpilesare fullyinstrumented. Earth
Figure 12 shows a recent example where site pressurecellsare placedwithinthe soil core.Pilediameterd =
conditionswere simulatedin model tests in order to 1.2m. Soil:densesand.
investigatein detailthe load transferfrom the structure
CONCLUSIONS
Deep box-shapedfoundationshave provedsuitablein
all kindsof soilsto transferhigh,concentrated loadsinto
the ground or to withstand high lateral forces from
creeping(e.9.beneathhighembankments on weakclay
or in unstable slopes).Usually,box-foundations
consist
of bored (or augered) piles or diaphragmwalls,
arrangedin a cellularpattern.The enclosedsoil core
cannotmovelaterallyand becomespart of a composite
body or "quasi-monolith" with a high earthquake
resistance.Dimensionlessload-settlement diagrams
derivedfrom model tests show the advantageoi box-
shapedpilefoundations over conventional pile groups.
This is also validfor boxesand groupsof diaphragm
wall elements,deep-mixing or jet-grouting
foundations.
The results of comprehensive model tests and
numerous in situ measurements (since 1970)
correspondvery well. Consequently, in spite of the
theoretical complexity, the bearing capacity and
settlementbehaviourof such foundationscan be
calculatedwith sufficientaccuracyfor use in practice.
As varioustheoreticalidealisations and approximate
assumptions are unavoidable, calculationsshouldnot
be limitedto one method. Limit case analysesare
recommended to assessthe maximumand minimum
forcesin the cappingraft and deep foundationelements
(monolith-theory and singleelement-theory).
REFERENCES
BRANDL, H., 1987. Deep box-foundationswith oiles ano
diaphragm walls in weak soils. dn Soulheast Asian
GeotechnicalConference. Bangkok.
BRANDL, H., 1988. Die übertragungkonzentrierterhoher
Lasten in weichen Untergrund.ld Baftic Conferenceon Soit
Mechanicsand FoundationEng. TalliniEstonia.
BRANDL,H., 1998.Pilefoundationsin heterogeneous
ground.
7' Int. Conference & Exhibition on piiing and Deep
FoundationsfDF,).Vienna.
BRANDL, H., 1998. Foundation strengtheningand soil
improvementfor scour-endangered
riverbridges.11thDanube-
EuropeanConf.on SoilMech.and Found.Eng., Porec/Croatia.
In Geotechnical
Hazards,A.A. Balkema/Rotterdam.
BRANDL,H. and HOFMANN,R., 2001. Tragfähigkeits- und
Setzungsverhaltenvon Kastenfundierungen. ResearchReport.
Federal Ministry for Traffic, lnnovation and Technology.
Vienna.
HMIVAR, W., 1979.Tragverhalten von Brunnengründungen.
Vol. 14, lnstitutefor Soil Mech. and Geotechn.Enq., Technical
University.Vienna.
HOFMANN, R., 2001. Trag- und Setzungsverhalten von
Pfahfkästen.Doctor Thesis,TechnicalUniversity,Vienna.
JAPANESE GEOTECHNICALSOCIETY, 1998. Remedial
MeasuresagainstSoil Liquefaction.
A.A. Balkema/Rotterdam.
MINDLIN. R.D..1936.Forceat a Pointin the Interior
of a Semi
InfiniteSolid.Physics,Vol.7