NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Module 8
(Lecture 33)
PILE FOUNDATIONS
Topics

1.1 PILE-DRIVING FORMULAS

1.2 NEGATIVE SKIN FRICTION

Clay Fill over Granular Soil

Granular Soil Fill over Clay

1.3 GROUP PILES

1.4 GROUP EFFICIENCY
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

PILE-DRIVING FORMULAS

To develop the desired load-carrying capacity, a point bearing pile must penetrate the
dense soil layer sufficiently or have sufficient contact with a layer of rock. This
requirement cannot always be satisfied by driving a pile to a predetermined depth
because soil profiles vary. For that reason, several equations have been developed to
calculate the ultimate capacity of a pile during driving. These dynamic equations are
widely used in the field to determine whether the pile as reached satisfactory bearing
value at the predetermined depth. One of the earliest of these dynamic equations-
commonly referred to as the Engineering News Record (ENR) formula-is derived from
the work-energy theory. That is,

Energy imparted by the hammer per blow = (pile resistance) (penetration per hammer
blow)

According to the ENR formula, the pile resistance is the ultimate load , expressed as

= [8.118]
+

Where

= ( , . 4 )

The pile penetration, S, is usually based on the average value obtained from the last few
driving blows. In the equations original form, the following values of C were
recommended.

For drop hammers: C = 1 in. (if the units of S and h are in inches)

For steam hammers: C = 0.1 in. (if the units of S and h are in inches)

Also, a factor of safety, = 6, was recommended to estimate the allowable pile

capacity. Note that, for single- and double-acting hammers, the term can be replaced
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

by (where = = ).
Thus

= + [8.119]

The ENR formula has been revised several times over the years, and other pile-driving
formulas also have been suggested. Some of them are tabulated in table 1.

The maximum stress developed on a pile during the driving operation can be estimated
from the pile-driving formulas presented in table 11. To illustrate, we use the modified
ENR formula:

+ 2
= + +

In this equation, S equals the average penetration per hammer blow, which can also be
expressed as
1
= [8.120]

Where

Table 11 Pile-Driving formulas

Name Formula

Modified ENR + 2
formula =
+ +

Where

= 0.1 . ,

Typical values for E

NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Single- and double-acting hammers 0.7-0.85

Diesel hammers 0.8-0.9

Drop hammers 0.7-0.9

Typical values for n

Cast iron hammer and concrete pile (without cap) 0.4-0.5

Wood cushion on steel piles 0.3-0.4

Wooden pile 0.25-0.3

Michigan State 1.25 + 2

Highway =
+ +
Commission
formula (1965)

Where

= (
. )

= 0.1 .

A factor of safety of 6 is recommended.

Danish formula
(Olson and Flaate, =

1967) + 2

Where
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Pacific Coast +
( ) +
Uniform Building
=

Code formula +

(International
Conference of
Building Officials,
1982) The value of n should be 0.25 for steel piles and 0.1 a for all other
piles. A factor of safety of 4 is generally recommended.

Janbus formula
=
(Janbu, 1953)

Where

= 1 + 1 +

= 0.75 + 0.14

=
2

Gates formula = ( )
(Gates, 1957)

If is in , then S is . = 27, = 1, is in
.
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

If is in , then S is in mm, = 104.5, = 2.4, is in

= 0.75 for drop hammer; = 0.85 for all other hammer

Use a factor of safety of 3.

Navy-McKay
=
formula
1 + 0.3

Use a factor of safety of 6.

Thus

+ 2
= (1/)+0.1 [8.121]
+

Different values of N may be assumed for a given hammer and pile and calculated.
The driving stress can then be calculated for each value of N and / .

= 100 2

The weight of the pile is

100 2
= (80 )(150 / 3 ) = 8.33
144

If the weight of the cap is 0.67 ,

= 8.33 + 0.67 = 9

Again, from for an 11B3 hammer,

Rated energy= 19.2 = =

Weight of ram= 5

Assume that the hammer efficiency is 0.85 and that = 0.35. Substituting these values
in equation (121) yields

(0.85)(19.22) 5+(0.35)2 (9) 85.37

= 1 = 1
+0.1 5+9 +0.1

Now the following table can be prepared:

NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

() (2 ) / (/2 )

0 0 100 0

2 142.3 100 1.42

4 243.9 100 2.44

6 320.1 100 3.20

8 379.4 100 3.79

10 426.9 100 4.27

12 465.7 100 4.66

20 569.1 100 5.69

Both the number of hammer blows per inch and the stress can now be plotted in a graph,
as shown in figure 8.47. If such a curve is prepared, the number of blows per inch of pile
penetration corresponding to the allowable pile-driving stress can be easily determined.

Figure 8.47

Actual driving stresses in wooden piles are limited to about 0.7 . Similarly, for concrete
and steel piles, driving stresses are limited to about 0.6 0.85 , respectively.
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

In most cases, wooden piles are driven with hammer energy of less than 45
( 60 ). Driving resistances are limited are limited mostly to 4-5 blows per inch of
pile penetration. For concrete and steel piles, the usual N values are 6-8 and 12-14,
respectively.

Example 11

A precast concrete pile 12 . 12 . in cross sections in driven by a hammer. Given:

= 30

= 0.8

= 7.5

= 80

= 0.4

= 550

= 3 106 /2

Number of blow for last 1 in. of penetration = 8

Estimate the allowable pile capacity by the

a. Modified ENR formula (use = 6)

b. Danish formula (use = 4)
c. Gates formula (use = 3)

Solution

Part a
(0.8)(3012 .) 7.5+(0.4)2 (12.55)
= 1 = 607
8
+0.1 7.5+12.55

607
= = 101
6

Part b

=
+
2

Use = 3 106 /2 .
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

(0.8)(3012)(8012)
2 = 310 6
= 0.566 .
2(1212) / 2
1000

(0.8)(3012)
= 1 417
8
+0.566

417
= 104
4

Part c

= ( ) = 27(0.8)(30) [1 18] 252

252
= = 84
3

NEGATIVE SKIN FRICTION

Negative skin friction is a downward drag force exerted on the pile by the soil
surrounding it. This action can occur under conditions such as the following:

1. If a fill of clay soil is placed over a granular soil layer into which a pile is driven,
the fill will gradually consolidate. This consolidation process will exert a
downward drag force on the pile (figure 8.48a) during the period of
consolidation.
2. If a fill of granular soil is placed over a layer of soft clay, as shown in figure 8.
48b, it will induce the process of consolidation in the clay layer and thus exert a
downward drag on the pile.
3. Lowering of the water table will increase the vertical effective stress on the soil at
any depth, which will induce consolidation settlement in clay. If a pile is located
in the clay layer, it will be subjected to a downward drag force.

In some cases, the downward drag force may be excessive and cause foundation failure.
This section outlines two tentative methods for the calculation of negative skin friction.
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Figure 8.48 Negative skin friction

Clay Fill over Granular Soil (Figure 8.48a)

Similar to the method presented in section 12, the negative (downward) skin stress on
the pile is

= [8.122]

Where

= = = 1

= =

= 0.5 0.7

Hence the total downward drag force, , on a pile is

2
= 0 ( ) = [8.123]
2

Where

If the fill is above the water table, the effective unit weight, , should be replaced by the
moist unit weight.
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Granular Soil Fill over Clay (figure 8.48b)

In this case, the evidence indicates that the negative skin stress on the pile may exist from
= 0 = 1 , which is referred to as the neutral depth (see Vesic, 1977, pp. 25-26, for
discussion). The neutral depth may be given as (Bowles, 1982):
( ) 2
1 = 2 + [8.124]
1

Where

=
,

For end-bearing piles, the neutral depth may be assumed to be located at the pile tip (that
is, 1 = ).

Once the value of 1 is determined, the downward drag force is obtained in the following
manner. The unit negative skin friction at any depth from = 0 = 1 is

= [8.125]

Where

= = 1

= +

= 0.5 0.7

= 0 1 = 0 1

21
= ( )1 + [8.126]
2

If the soil and the fill are above the water table, the effective unit weights should be
replaced by moist unit weights. In some cases, the piles can be coated with bitumen in the
downdrag zone to avoid this problem. Baligh et al. (1978) summarized the results of
several field tests that were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of bitumen coating in
reducing the negative skin friction. Their results are presented in table 12.

A limited number of case studies on negative skin friction is available in the literature.
Bjerrum et al. (1969) reported monitoring of downdrag force on a test pile at Sorenga in
the harbor of Oslo, Norway (noted as pile G in the original paper). This was also
discussed by Wong and The (1995) in terms of the pile being driven to bedrock at 40 m.
Figure 8.49 a shows the soil profile and the pile. Wong and The (1995) estimated the
following:
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Figure 8.49 Negative skin friction on a pile in the harbor of Oslo, Norway [based on
Bjerrum et al., (1969); and Wong and The (1995)]

: , = 16 /3

, () = 18.5 /3

So

= 18.5 9.81 = 8.69 /3

= 13

: 0.22

, = 19 9.81 = 9.19 /3

: = 40

, = 500

Thus, the maximum downdrag force on the pile can be estimated from equation. (126).
Since it is a point bearing pile, the magnitude of 1 = 27 , so

21 ( )
= ()( )[ 2 + (13 2) ](1 ) + 2
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Or
(27)2 (0.5)(9.19)(0.22)
= ( 0.5)(0.22)[(16 2) + (8.69 11)](27) + = 2348
2

The measured value of maximum was about 2500 (figure 8. 49b), which is in
good agreement with the calculated value.

Table 12 Summary of Case Studies of Bitumen-Coated Piles(After Baligh et al.

(1978))

Downward drag Test loadings

Case number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Soil type Fill, Fill and Fill and Sand Silty Silty Sand
sand, and silty clay clay and clay clay fill,
clay silty clay,
clay and peat

Pile type Cast-in- Steel Steel Steel 6 RC 6 RC Precast

place pipe pipe pile piles piles concrete
concrete
380
Pile cross = 530 450
section (mm) = 300 300 300
= 500 = 760 300 300

Length in 25 26 40 25 7-17 9-16 24

contact with
settling soil
(m)

Installation Predriven Enlarged Enlarge Driving Driving Driving Driving

method casing tip and tip and
slurry casing

Bitumen
coating

Type (pen

25 ) 20/30 80/100 80/10 60/70 60/70 80-100 43
RC-0 special
Coating cutback grade
thickness
(mm) 10 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.2 1.2 10
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Measured
shaft
resistance

Uncoated 70-80 120 300 180 31-40 31-40 160

pile (ton)

Coated pile
(ton) 5-7 10 15 3 10-33 20-42

Coating
effectiveness
(%) 92 92 95 98 30-80 30-80

Predicted
downdrag

Coated pile
(ton) 0.1 2-11 5 0-23

Coating
Effectiveness
(%)
100 91-98 98 87-100

Example 12

Refer to figure 8. 48a; = 3 . The pile is circular in cross section with a diameter of
0.5 m. For the fill that is above the water table, = 17.2 /3 = 36 .
Determine the total drag force. Use = 0.7 .

Solution

From equation. (123),

2
= 2

= (0.5) = 1.57

= 1 = 1 36 = 0.41

= (0.7)(36) = 25.2
(1.57)(0.41)(17.2)(3)2 25.2
= = 23.4
2
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Example 13

Refer to figure 8. 48b. Here, = 2 , = 0.305 , = 16.5 /3 ,

= 34 , = 17.2 /3 , = 20 . The water table coincides with the top
of the clay layer. Determine the downward drag force. Assume = 0.6 .

Solution

The depth of the neutral plane in given in equation (124) as

2
1 = +
1 2

Note that in equation (124) has been replaced by because the fill is above the water
table, so
(202) (202) (16.5)(2) (2)(16.5)(2)
1 = + (17.29.81) (17.29.81)
1 2

242.4
1 = 8.93; 1 = 11.75
1

Now, referring to equation (126), we have

21
= ( )1 + 2

= (0.305) = 0.958

= 1 34 = 0.44

= (0.958)(0.44)(16.5)(2)[(0.6 34)](11.75)
(11.75)2 (0.958)(0.44)(17.29.81)[ (0.634)]
+ = 60.78 + 79.97 = 140.75
2

GROUP PILES

GROUP EFFICIENCY

In many cases, piles are used in groups, as shown in figure 8.50, to transmit the structural
load to the soil. A pile cap is constructed over group piles. The pile cap can be contact
with the ground, as in most cases (figure 8.50a), or well above the ground, as in the case
of offshore platforms (figure 8.50b).
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Figure 8.50 Pile groups

Determining the load-bearing capacity of group piles is extremely complicated and has
not yet been fully resolved. When the piles are placed close to each other, a reasonable
assumption is that the stresses transmitted by the piles to the soil will overlap (figure 8.
50c), reducing the load-bearing capacity of the piles. Ideally, the piles in a group should
be spaced so that the load-bearing capacity of the group should not be less than the sum
of the bearing capacity of the individual piles. In practice, the minimum center-to-center
pile spacing, , 2.5 , and in ordinary situations, is actually about 3 3.5.

The efficiency of the load-bearing capacity of a group pile may be defined as

( )
= [8.127]

Where

=
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

() =

Many structural engineers use a simplified analysis to obtain the group efficiency for
friction piles, particularly in sand. This type of analysis can be explained with the aid of
figure 8. 50a. Depending on their spacing within the group, the piles may act in one of
two ways: (1) as a block with dimensions , or (2) as individual piles. If the
piles act as a block, the frictional capacity is () . [Note: = perimeter of
the cross section of block= 2(1 + 2 2) + 4 , = average unit frictional
resistance.] Similarly, for each pile acting individually, . (Note: =
perimeter of the cross section of each pile.) Thus
( ) [2( 1 + 2 2)+4] 2( 1 + 2 2)+4
= = = [8.128]
1 2 1 2

Hence
2( 1 + 2 2)+4
() = [8.129]
1 2

From equation (129), if the center-to-center spacing, , s large enough, > 1. In that
case, the piles will behave as individual piles. Thus, in practice, if < 1,

() =

And, if 1,

() =

There are several other equations like equation (129) for the group efficiency of friction
piles. Some of these are given in table 13.

Feld (1943) suggested a method by which the load capacity of individual piles (friction)
in a group embedded in sand could be assigned. According to this method, the ultimate
capacity of a pile is reduced by one-sixteenth by each adjacent diagonal or row pile. The
technique can be explained by referring to figure 8.51, which shows the plan of a group
pile. For pile type A, there are eight adjacent piles; for pile type B, there are five adjacent
piles; and for pile type C, there are three adjacent piles. Now the following table can be
prepared:
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Figure 8.51 Felds method for estimation of group capacity of friction piles

Table 13 Equations for Group Efficiency of Friction Piles

Converse-Labarre equation (1 1)2 + (2 1)1

= 1
901 2

() = 1 (/)

Los Angles Group Action

= 1 [ ( 1)] + 2 (1 1)
equation 1 2 1 2
+ 2(1 1)(2 1)]

Seiler and Keeney equation 111 1 + 2 2 0.3

= 1 +
(Seiler and Keeney, 1944) 7( 2 1) 1 + 2 1 1 + 2

Pile type No. of No. of adjacent Reduction Ultimate

Piles piles/pile factor for each capacity
pile

A 1 8 8 0.5
1
16
B 4 5 5 2.75
1
16
C 4 3 3 3.25
1
16
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

6.5
= ()

(No. of piles)( ) (reduction factor)

Hence
( ) 6.5
= = = 72%
9

Figure 8.52 shows a comparison of field test results in clay with the theoretical group
efficiency calculated from the Converse-Labarre equation (table 13). Reported by Brand
et al. (1972), these tests were conducted in soil for which the details are given in figure 8.
7 from chapter 3. Other test details include

= 6

= 150

= 2 2

= 1.5

Figure 8.52 Variation of group efficiency with / (after Brand et al., 1972)
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Pile tests were conducted with and without a cap (free-standing group). Note that for
/ 2, the magnitude of was greater than 1.0. Also for similar values of / the
group efficiency was greater with the pile cap than without the cap. Figure 8.53 shows
the pile group settlement at various stages of the load test.

Figure 8.53 Variation of group pile settlement at various stages of load (after Brand et al.,
1972)

Figure 8.54 Variation of efficiency of pile group in sand (based on Kishida and
Meyerhof, 1965)
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Figure 8.55 Behavior of low-set ad high-set pile groups in terms of average skin friction
(based on Liu et al., 1985)
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Figure 8. 55 (Continued)

Figure 8.54 shows the variation of group efficiency () 3 3 group pile in sand
(Kishida and Meyerhof, 1965). It can be seen that, for loose and medium sands, the
magnitude of group efficiency is larger than one. This is primarily due to the
densification of sand surrounding the pile.

Liu et al. (1985) reported the results of field tests on 58 pile groups and 23 single piles
embedded in granular soil. Test details include

, = 8 23

, = 125 330

, = 2 6

Figure 8. 55 shows the behavior of 3 3 pile groups with low-set and high-set pile caps
in terms of average skin friction, . Figure 8.56 shows the variation of average skin
friction based on the location of a pile in the group.

Figure 8.56 Average skin friction based on pile location (based on Liu et al., 1985)
NPTEL ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Based on eh experimental observations of the behavior of group piles in sand to date, the
following general conclusions may be drawn.

1. For driven group piles in sand with 3, () may be taken to be

, which includes the frictional and the point bearing capacities of individual
piles.
2. For bored group piles in sand at conventional spacings ( 3), () may be
taken to be 23 34 (frictional and point bearing capacities of individual
piles).