A misconception of Eurocodes

on structural design of
foundation bored piles

By: Er. Yet Nai Song

BE seminar
25 Sep 2018
A. Streamlining As-built piling
submission
B. Guidelines to identify rock
during piling
C. Structural design of bored
pile to Eurocode 2
2
 (A)
Streamlining
as-built piling
submission
 BC Act 9(4)(e) &
BC Regulation 23(1)
BC Reg 23(1)(c) requires QP to
submit the as-built piling record
within 28-day of completion of
the pile installation.

4
 What need to be submitted WITHIN
28 days of completion ?
• BC Act Section 9(4)(e) & BC Regulation 23(1)(c) require QP to
submit as-built piling plan, within 28 days of completion of piling
works.

1) Notice of completion of all piling work,

2) Record plans showing full details of piling
work
3) Certificate of supervision by QP

Failure to do so is a contravention !
5
 Why need to submit
within 28 days ?

Timely intervention by regulating

body and timely remedial work to
ensure sound building foundation,
and avoid severe repercussion.

6
 Is it possible to do it
within 28 days ?

Hong Kong – Building (administration)

Regulations 25(1) & (2)
• Builder to take 7 days to submit as-built record
information to QP

• QP to take 14 days to submit to Building

Authority

Total = 21 days
7
 Diagnose Cause of
delayed submission

Pile eccentricity is the main

reason for the delay in
submission of as-built piling
record.

8
 This non-compliance must NOT
be continued.

BCA is reviewing to streamline the process.

a) To consider that pile ECC need not to be submitted for

as-built piling record to obtain “IN ORDER” status. But
Pile Length need to be in order.

b) All Pile load test reports also need to be submitted

together with as-built piling records.
 Penalty for contravening
Building Control Act Section 9(4)(e)
Building Control Act Section 9(10)

• Any QP who contravene the Act will be liable on

conviction -
A fine upto $20,000 or
Imprisonment upto 12 months or
Both

10
 QP to visit piling site frequently to
be fully aware of site status
• Frequent site visits by QP
• Early detection of piles constructed
significantly shorter than what have been
designed
• Take timely remedial action to address piles
constructed with major deviation, before
pilecap and superstructure are constructed.
11
 (B)
Guidelines to Identify
Rock During Piling
Drafted by a joint industry
workgroup chaired by
GeoSS and BCA
 Objective of the guidelines

• Consistent basis for industry to classify rock at

piling site to :

(a)help piling builders to identify and allocate

right type of machineries and equipment to
be deployed for piling site involving rock
drilling

(a)Minimise contractual dispute while ensuring

piles are constructed to required rock socket
 Checklist for identification of
rock at piling site (a proposal)
• A checklist consisting of 7 items covering the rock
strength, hardness, angularity, slake in water, and
whether rock coring tool used

• To classify whether the rock samples retrieved from

pile bore is rock (i.e. of Moderately weathering grade
G3/S3 or above)

• All 7 criteria must be fulfilled to be classified as G3/S3

rock

• It provides a more objective and consistent basis for

site personnel to determine whether the rockhead has
been encountered at site, in accordance to
QP(design)’s intent
Checklist on rock identification (a proposal)
S/N Criteria
1 Close correlation of rock description and depth of occurrence to
the nearest borehole
2 Rock coring tool is used for boring e.g. Rock Auger, Core Barrel
with “bullet teeth” or roller bits.
3 Size of rock sample larger than 100mm cube
4 Rock sample cannot be broken by hand
5 Angularity can be observed on the rock sample
6 Rock sample does not slake in water (5 minutes or more)
7 Point load test index Is(50)
 Point Load Index Test (ASTM D5731-08)
• Point load index test provides a more objective approach to
determine strength of the rock retrieved form pile bore.

• The point load test apparatus uses a hydraulic ram

mounted inside a reaction frame. Pressure is provided by a
hand operated pump until rupture of the rock sample.

• Strength value determined from point load test apparatus

is referred to as point load test index
Is = P/De2
where P = Force needed to rupture the rock sample,
De = Equivalent core diameter (= D for diametral tests)
• Size correction will then be applied to obtain an unique
strength value, Is(50) corresponding to a diametral test with
D = 50mm.

Is(50) = F x Is where F = (De/50)0.45

 Certificate of Calibration

Point load test apparatus has

to be calibrated by an
accredited laboratory.
 An example of piling site using point
load test - granitic bedrock
• G3 granitic rock – is identified by testing 3 rock samples
• Criterion adopted : All 3 rock samples must have Is(50) > 2 MPa
Example of piling site using point load test
– sedimentary rock
• S3 sedimentary rock – is identified by testing 3 rock samples
• Criterion adopted: Average of 3 rock samples Is(50) > 3 MPa
 Criteria for Rock classification at piling site
(A Proposal)
To be classified as rock i.e. G3 or S3 :
• Minimum 3 rock samples from EVERY PILE are
chosen for point load test index test at site.
• Both criteria below must be fulfilled:
(a) Average value of ALL samples rock Is(50) ≥ 3 MPa
(b) Every individual rock samples Is(50) ≥ 2 MPa

We need your feedback! 20

 How to determine the Point Load Index
Test Is(50) for G3/S3 rock ?
During site investigation stage,
• QP to specify point load test index tests on rock obtained from
investigation boreholes

to determine Is(50) value for the specific rock type encountered at

piling site

• QP to specify unconfined compressive strength tests on these rock

cores from boreholes to confirm weathering grade of rock.

• Test results to be shown in site investigation report

 A recommendation for QP
- Piling site involving rock drilling
Site investigation stage
• QP to specify point load index test to be carried out on the rocks
expected to be encountered during piling work
• To conduct unconfined compression test on the rock to confirm
the weathering grade of the rock
• To obtain the Is(50) corresponding to the rock type G3 / S3

Design stage
• To specify the Point load Index tests requirement on the drawings
for every pile
• To specify minimum Is(50) value to be achieved in order to be
classified as rock
 (C)
Structural design of
bored piles based
on EC2
 Contents
1. Structural design of bored pile based on Eurocode 2

Comparison between Eurocode and CP4

Verification of in-situ concrete strength by testing

2. Design of fully reinforced pile

3. Example of unacceptable structural design of bored

pile

24
(1) Structural design of
bored pile based on
Eurocode 2
 Structural design of bored pile (Lightly reinforced)
Eurocode 2 & BS EN1536
• EN 1992-1-1:2004 Cl 12.3.1(1)

fcd,pile = αcc,pl fck / [ Ɣc x kf ]

fcd,pile = 0.3636 fck Lightly reinforced

• SS NA 1992-1 αcc,pl = 0.6

• EN1992-1-1 Cl 2.4.2.4 (1)
Ɣc = Partial factor for concrete = 1.5
• EN1992-1-1 Cl 2.4.2.5 (2)
kf = Factor for cast in place pile without permanent casing = 1.1
 Minimum bored pile reinforcement
• To use fcd,pile = 0.3636 fck, the following minimum pile
reinforcement should be provided :
Percentage reinforcement
1) Minimum longitudinal reinforcement as in Eurocode 2 Table
9.6N is provided

Length of reinforcement
2) Length of reinforcement to go beyond soft or loose soil as
recommended in EN1536, subject to a minimum of 10m from
pile cut-off-level
 Minimum longitudinal reinforcement
SS EN 1992-1-1 Clause 9.8.5 (Eurocode 2)

• Bored pile should be provided with minimum longitudinal

reinforcement As,bpmin related to pile cross-sectional area, Ac.
• For the detailing of longitudinal and transverse reinforcement in
bored piles, see EN 1536:2010.

Øp
≤0.798m 0.5%Ac
0.5%-0.25%Ac
>1.13m 0.25%Ac
• The minimum diameter for the longitudinal bars should not be less than 16 mm. Piles should
have at least 6 longitudinal bars. The clear distance between bars should not exceed 200
mm measured along the periphery of the pile. 28
Minimum length of reinforcement
EN 1536:2010
7.1.2 Bored piles design shall take into
account the construction tolerances given in
8.1 and the execution conditions as set in
Clause 8.
Soft clay
7.1.7 A bored pile should be
reinforced over any length of soft or
loose soil.
Competent soil
layer or
7.5.2.8 Concentric layers of longitudinal bars bedrock
should be avoided where possible.

7.5.2.10 For circular piles, non symmetrical

cage should be avoided.
29
Bored piles without permanent casing
• Eurocode 2 EN 1992-1-1 - Clause 2.3.4.2 (1)P

Effective pile cross-sectional area to be reduced by 20mm

to 50mm, to allow for uncertainties and concreting
procedures.

if dnom < 400 mm, d = dnom - 20 mm

if 400 ≤ dnom ≤ 1000 mm, d = 0,95 dnom
if dnom > 1000 mm, d = dnom - 50 mm
- Where dnom is the nominal diameter of the pile.

This means that the reduction factor may ranges from 4% to 10%,
depending on the pile diameters.
 Is this reduction factor adequate ?

• Is this factor adequate to cater for underground

concreting with no formwork, adverse soil,
tremie method ?
• It depends largely on construction
WORKMANSHIP.
• Designer should consider WORKMANSHIP and
EXECUTION CONDITIONS in design of pile.

31
Comparison on pile
design between
Eurocode and CP4
 Wind loading
CP4
• CP4 Clause 2..3.2.4.3 allows wind
load to be ignored in foundation load
if it is less than 25% of (dead load +
live load)
• If wind load exceeds 25%, only the
excess over 25% need to be
considered in foundation load
CP4
Eurocode
• No such allowance for
wind load in Eurocode
• BS EN 1990:2002 Cl
4.1.1 (1)P Wind
loading is classified as
a variable action (Q)
Comparison between EC2 with CP4 (nominally reinforced pile)
f cd,pile = 0.3636 f ck
EC2 f cd,pile ≈ 1.35G k + 1.5Q k ≈ 1.4 Q a
f ck ≈ 0.8 f cu
0.3636 × 0.9025 × 0.8f cu
Qa ≈ ≈ 0.187 f cu
1.4
Above is based on 1m dia pile. For 2.5m dia pile, Qa ≈ 0.20 fcu .

Qa ≈ 0.187 to 0.20 fcu with no limit imposed.

CP4
Qa = 0.25 fcu, subject to maximum of 7.5 MPa
 Comparison of EC2 and CP4
fcd,pile = 0.3636 fck for lightly einforced bored pile using EC2

When adopting characteristic concrete cube strength fcu of 40 MPa or

more, allowable working compressive stress will exceed 7.5 MPa.

Concrete C20/25 C25/30 C28/35 C32/40 C35/45

grade,
fck/fcu
CP4 6.2 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5

EC2 1m dia 4.7 5.6 6.9 7.5 8.4

EC2 2.5m dia 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0

Caution on the use of fcu more than 40 MPa in design as they may
NOT be achievable due to adverse casting condition underground.
 Verification of in-situ
concrete strength through
testing
 Concrete core tests
Using higher concrete grade fcu > 40 MPa in
design in EC2 will result in much larger structural
capacity as compared to CP4.

• For bored piles using concrete grade fcu > 40 MPa in design
resulting in working compressive stress exceeding 7.5 MPa,
minimum 5% of piles to be subject to concrete core test.

• This requirement has to be complied for buildings of 10-

storeys and above to ensure that design concrete strength of
bored pile can be achieved at site (Joint BCA/ACES/IES
Circular 2016).
Compression test on cored specimen from bored pile

Test method:
BS EN12504-1:2009 taking and
preparation of cored specimens

Cored specimen of concrete extracted

from bored pile for compression test

38
 Requirement on pile profile test
• For bored piles supporting buildings of 10-storeys or more,
Quality Control Test Recommended test schedule

Pile Profile Test 100% of working piles with Φ >1.8m,

which either
to assess (i) have no steel casing going through soft
verticality and or loose soil layer during construction
or
shapes of pile (ii) have no redundancy*.
bore prior to
concreting For piles Φ ≤1.8m, QP shall determine the number of pile
profile tests needed.
 When there is no steel casing through the soft clay
Changing level of
stabilizing fluid

Pile bore stability problem

resulting in:
Temp Steel Casing
• Soft toe Soft or
• Inferior concrete quality Stabilizing fluid loose
soil
Potential Zone of
Soil concern
To ensure good pile, collapse
steel casing should
Competent Soil
pass through soft or layer
loose soil layer ! Soil debris
 What is Pile Profile test ?
To assess verticality and shapes of pile bore prior
to concreting of bore pile.

A common type of pile profile test : Koden test

• KODEN test utilizes principle of ultrasonic
wave travel from sensor to pile shaft and
reflect to the sensor through the bentonite
slurry.
• Emission/reception of signal is carried out in
2 directions (X-X, Y-Y).
(2) Design of fully
reinforced pile
Structural design of bored pile (Fully reinforced)
Eurocode 2
• EN 1992-1-1:2004 Cl 3.1.6(1)

fcd,pile = αcc fck / [ Ɣc x kf ]

fcd,pile = 0.515 fck Fully reinforced

• SS NA 1992-1 αcc = 0.85

• EN1992-1-1 Cl 2.4.2.4 (1)
Ɣc = Partial factor for concrete = 1.5
• EN1992-1-1 Cl 2.4.2.5 (2)
kf = Factor for cast in place pile without permanent casing = 1.1
Comparison between EC2 with CP4 (Full reinforced pile)
EC2 f cd,pile = 0.515 f ck
f cd,pile ≈ 1.35G k + 1.5Q k ≈ 1.4 Q a
f ck ≈ 0.8 f cu
0.515 × 0.9025 × 0.8f cu
Qa ≈ ≈ 0.265 f cu
1.4
Above is based on 1m dia pile. For 2.5m dia pile, Qa ≈ 0.282 fcu .

Qa ≈ 0.265 to 0.282 fcu with no limit imposed

CP4
Qa = 0.25 fcu, subject to maximum of 7.5 MPa
 Lightly reinforced vs fully reinforced
• By changing from lightly reinforced to fully reinforced in design,
there is a sharp increase of 42% in pile structural capacity (as αcc has
increased sharply from 0.6 to 0.85).

fcu (MPa) 30 35 40 45
Lightly reinforced (0.3636fck) 5.6 6.5 7.5 8.4
0.187 fcu 1m dia
Fully reinforced (0.515fck) 0.265 fcu 1m dia 7.9 9.3 10.6 11.9
Fully reinforced (0.515fck) 0.282 fcu 2.5m 8.5 9.9 11.3 12.7
dia

Eg. If adopt 0.265 to 0.282 fcu for fcu= 45 MPa fully reinforced pile
design, adopted stress of 11.9–12.7 MPa will be 59%- 69% over 7.5 MPa.

The question is: Can the cast-in-situ concrete in bored pile

achieve fcu of 45 MPa ???
 Concrete core test
• For all cases of bored pile design as fully
reinforced, the compressive stress on pile will
exceed 7.5 MPa.
• minimum 5% of piles to be subject to
concrete core test to verify in-situ strength of
concrete
• This is a requirement of
 (3) An example of
unacceptable
structural design of bored pile
 An example of unacceptable
structural design of bored pile
EN 1992-1-1:2004 Cl 5.8.9(4)

Design axial resistance of section, NRd under Biaxial bending of RC

column, has been erroneously and unconservatively used as the
structural capacity of bored pile, which is as follows:

NRd = Acc fcd + As fyd = 0.515 fck Ac + 0.87 fyk As

Taking NRd = 1.35 Gk + 1.5 Qk ≈ 1.4 Qa

1.4 Qa ≈ 0.515 fck Ac + 0.87 fyk As

Qa ≈ 0.265 to 0.282 fcu Ac + 0.621 fyk As

 Design of full reinforced bored pile
socketed in rock to CP4
Allowable structural capacity of pile may be
determined as axially loaded short columns in
accordance to SS CP65.
CP4 Cl 7.4.5.3.1
Pu = 0.4 fcu Ac + 0.75 fy As

Applying minimum FOS =2,

Qa = 0.2 fcu Ac + 0.375 fy As
 Can we use NRd as axial structural capacity of
bored pile ?
Eurocode 2
RC column under
Bi-axial bending,
Qa ≈ 0.265 to 0.282 fcu Ac + 0.621 fyk As
NRd
CP4
Rock socketed
bored pile
Qa = 0.2 fcu Ac + 0.375 fy As

• Concrete component is 31% to 40% higher than CP4

• Steel component is 65% higher than CP4
Hence, NRd should not be used as structural capacity of
bored pile.
Why misconception ?
• There is no closed form equation in Eurocode 2 for
compressive axial structural capacity of bored pile.
• NRd is the normalizing parameters used in evaluating a
column subject to bi-axial bending moments, cannot
be used as axial capacity of a RC pile cast underground

• Bored pile cast underground is largely

different from RC column constructed
above ground.
51
 How is it different ?
How casting of RC bored pile
underground is different from casting RC
structures above ground?
• Soil acts as formwork for casting pile is much
more uncertain compared to steel formwork for
casting beams or columns
• Intrusion/contamination of concrete by soil,
stabilising fluid, water or trapped air during
concreting
• Concrete are not compacted
 You can’t see the constructed
bored pile underground !

Defects in foundation bored piles are

hidden underground.
• They could not be seen or readily
detected at the completion of pile
construction.

53
 Allowable settlements for pile
working load test
• Working load test should be carried out to a
minimum 1.5 times or 2 times characteristic load
acting on the pile, with allowable maximum
settlement at pile top generally not exceeding 15
mm or 25 mm respectively.
• When you design your pile to take higher compressive
stress, check that the settlement criteria is still fulfilled.
• Pile settlement is also affected by workmanship and
execution conditions. Consider them in design !
54
Model factor has been revised
• Enterprise Singapore has made
amendment to Singapore National Annex
to SS EN 1997-1:2010 (2018)
• Model factor 1.2 – 1.4 has been revised
to 1.35 – 1.55.
• Please use revised model factor in your
geotechnical design of foundation pile.

55
Implementation date

56
Concluding remarks
QP to take into account adverse execution condition
1 underground when designing bored pile for its
structural and geotechnical capacity.

QP is encouraged to adopt point load index test to

2 assist them to identify the bedrock when bored
piles need to be rock socketed to ensure adequate
capacity.

QPs are reminded of requirement to submit as-built

3 piling record plan, WITHIN 28 days of completion of
piling works.
THE END