PILED FOUNDATIONS FOR VERTICAL LOADS

SYMBOLS level foundations.

(c) In sands to induce compaction.
Notation Dimensional Analysis (d) In bridgework to transfer the load below the scour level.

A = Area L2
B = Breadth or diameter L
c = cohesive component of shear strength M L-1 T-2
D = depth L
d = depth factor -
E = modulus M L-1 T-2
f = skin friction per unit area M L-1 T-2
F = Force M L T-2
H = Height of layer or socket L
K = coefficient -
N = blow count -
Nc* = bearing capacity coefficient (cohesion) -
Nq* = bearing capacity coefficient (surcharge) -
PR = limit pressure from penetration test M L-1 T-2 Figure 1. Comparison of stressed zone beneath
q = stress or pressure M L-1 T-2 (a) single pile; (b) pile group.
qp-cone = cone tip resistance per unit area M L-1 T-2
qu-cone = unconfined strength of rock core M L-1 T-2
Q = load M L T-2
S = settlement L
Sp = pile spacing L
α = coefficient -
γ = unit weight M L-2 T-2
δ = friction angle between two different materials Angle
ρ = elastic deformation L
σ = stress M L-1 T-2
-1 -2
τ = shearing stress ML T
φ = angle of internal friction Angle

Subscripts etc. where not identified above

a = adhesion
c = cone
d = allowable design value Figure 2. Comparison of single pile and group behaviour of
fp = failure of tip piles and bearing.
g = group
m = pressuremeter value
n = negative skin friction value As illustrated in Figures 1 and 2 a distinction has to be made
o = zero strain (i.e. at rest) or overburden between the ultimate bearing capacity of single piles and that of a group
p = pile tip in which the sum of individual pile capacities may be affected by "group
s = shaft value action". In practice the design of piled foundations is also based, as
u = undrained illustrated in Figure 3, on the type of soil and strata forming the
´ = effective of intergranular value foundation material. For construction, piles may be subdivided into four
¯ = average value broad classification systems as:
1. Displacement (or large-displacement) piles
2. Small-displacement piles
INTRODUCTION 3. Non-displacement piles
Piles may be used for a variety of reasons including resistance 4. Composite piles
to uplift and lateral loading. Herein comment is restricted to the support
of building foundations subject to vertical loading. For a more
comprehensive review of pile design and construction practice reference
may be made to the work of Tomlinson (1977). Some of the reasons for
piling a foundation are:
(a) To transfer the load from the surface through poor strata to
underlying firmer material. In the majority of cases, where piles are
used, they represent the only possible means of prohibiting ultimate
failure or excess settlement induced by the loading at the surface.
(b) For reasons of economics or speed; provided that a safe design is
achieved, the ultimate cost is normally the criterion of engineering
design, and in difficult country, the use of piles may be a speedy and Figure 3. Illustration of (a) friction and (b) end-bearing piles.
economical alternative to the construction of near ground surface

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 163
 Displacement (or large-displacement) piles: comprise solid-
section piles or hollow-section piles with a closed end, which are driven
or jacked into the ground and thus displace the soil. All types of driven
and cast-in-situ piles come into this category.
Typical driven displacement piles are:
1. Timber (round or square section, jointed or continuous).
2. Precast concrete (solid or tubular section in continuous or jointed
units).
3. Prestressed concrete (solid or tubular section).
4. Steel tube (driven with closed end).
5. Steel box (driven with closed end).
6. Fluted and tapered steel tube.
7. Jacked-down steel tube with closed end.
precast concrete piles. The exact area of contact with the rock and the
depth of penetration into rock, as well as the quality of rock at the
foundation level, are largely unknown. Consequently, the determination
of the load capacity of such deep foundations can not be reliably made by
design methods, and should be made on the basis of driving observations.
Even when piles are test loaded, instability of piles groups may occur such
as where the piles are terminated on a sloping rock formation as shown in
Figure 6.

Typical driven and cast-in-place piles are:

a. Steel tube driven and withdrawn after placing concrete.
b. Precast concrete shell filled with concrete.
c. Thin-walled steel shell driven by withdrawable mandrel and then
filled with concrete.

Small-displacement piles: are also driven or jacked into the

ground but have a relatively small cross-sectional area. Typical small
displacement piles are:
1. Precast concrete (tubular section driven with open end, or cruciform Figure 4. Typical socketed-in-rock pile.
section).
2. Prestressed concrete (tubular section driven with open end, or
cruciform section).
3. Steel H-section.
4. Steel tube section (driven with open end and soil removed as
required).
5. Steel box section (driven with open end and soil removed as
required).
6. Screw pile.
7. Screw cylinder.

Non-displacement piles: are formed by first removing the soil

by boring using a wide range of drilling techniques. Concrete may be
placed into an unlined or lined hole, or the lining may be withdrawn as the
concrete is placed. Preformed elements of timber, concrete, or steel may
be placed in drilled holes. Typical non-displacement piles are:
1. Concrete placed in hole drilled by rotary auger, baling, grabbing,
airlift or reverse-circulation methods (bored and cast-in-situ).
2. Tubes placed in hole drilled as above and filled with concrete as
necessary.
3. Precast concrete units placed in drilled hole.
4. Cement mortar injected into drilled hole.
5. Steel sections placed in drilled hole.
6. Steel tube drilled down.

Composite piles: In addition numerous types of composite

construction may be formed by combining units in each of the above
categories, or by adopting combinations of piles in more than one
Figure 5. Piles driven to rock (a) tightly closed joints; (b)
category. Thus composite piles of a displacement type can be formed by
clay filled joints; (c) inclined joints; (d) steeply inclined
jointing a timber section to a precast concrete section, or a precast
joints.
concrete pile can have an H-section jointed to its lower extremity. T h e
selection of the appropriate type of pile from any of the above categories
depends primarily on
1. The location and type of structure. LOAD CAPACITY OF DEEP FOUNDATIONS ON ROCK
2. The ground conditions. The load capacity of deep foundations founded on or into rock
3. Durability. depend on a number of factors as given below.

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN OF DEEP FOUNDATIONS ON ROCK 1. Design Assumptions

Deep foundations sitting on or socketed into rock normally
carry heavy loads. As shown in Figure 4 they may be bored or excavated
and cast-in-place. In this case the area of contact with rock is known and
the load capacity can be evaluated by design methods as outlined later.
Deep foundations may, as shown in Figure 5, also be driven to
rock. This includes steel H piles, pipe piles driven with a closed end or
In most cases where cast-in place deep foundations are
socketed into rock (Figure 4) the depth of the socket is typically 1 to 3
times the diameter of the foundation. The exact design of such deep
foundations varies from region to region. Three different design
assumptions are in common use:
(a) The load capacity is assumed to be derived from point resistance

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 164
 only. This assumption can be considered as safe, since the bearing Ksp = an empirical coefficient that depends on the spacing of the
capacity of the rock is available, irrespective of the construction discontinuities as given below but also includes a factor of
procedure. However, if the bottom of the excavation is not properly safety of 3.
cleaned, the bearing capacity may not be mobilized before large
settlements occur due to the compression of mud remaining in the
bottom of the socket.
(b) The load capacity is assumed to be derived from the bond between
concrete and rock along the surface perimeter of the socket. This
assumption is not necessarily safe. Theoretical considerations
indicate that a uniform mobilization of the bond is possible only if
the modulus of elasticity of both concrete and surrounding rock are
of the same order to magnitude (Coates, 1967). Furthermore the
available bond strength is highly dependent on the quality of the rock
surface on the walls of the socket.
(c) The load capacity is assumed to be derived from both point resistance
and lateral bond. This assumption leads to high load capacities. It
should not be used unless it can be proved applicable by means of
full scale load tests or well-supported local experience.

Figure 7. Bearing pressure coefficient Ksp

NOTE: The factors influencing the magnitude of coefficient Ksp are

Figure 6. Illustration of group failure for piles driven to a
shown graphically in Figure 7 to provide additional understanding of the
sloping rock surface.
effects of discontinuities. The relationship given in Figure 7 is valid for
a rock mass with spacing of discontinuities greater than 300 mm,
2. Allowable Bearing Pressure from Properties of Rock Cores: thickness of discontinuities less than 5 mm (or less than 25 mm if filled
Any design based on rock cores depends on the quality of the with soil or rock debris) and for a foundation width greater than 300 mm.
rock. Rock may be considered as sound when the unconfined For sedimentary or foliated rocks, the strata must be level or nearly so.
compression strength is in excess of 850 kPa and the spacing of
discontinuities is in excess of 1 metre. This includes rock of very low
strength. Where rock is sound, and its discontinuities are closed and are Spacing of Discontinuities Ksp
favourably oriented with respect to the applied forces, the strength of a
rock foundation is generally much in excess of design requirements. Any Very wide > 3 metre 0.4
investigation of a rock foundation should, therefore, be concentrated on: Wide 1-3m 0.25
(a) The identification and mapping of all discontinuities in the rock mass Moderately close 0.3 - 1 m 0.1
within the zone of influence of the foundation including the
determination of the thickness of discontinuities.
(b) An evaluation of the mechanical properties of these discontinuities;
frictional resistance, compressibility and strength of infilling Conditions are frequently encountered where the rock is of
material; and very low strength, has discontinuities at a very close spacing, or is
(c) The identification and evaluation of the strength of the rock material. weathered or fragmented. It is common practice in such cases to consider
Such investigations should be carried out by a person competent in this the rock as a granular mass and to design the foundation on the basis of
field of work. conventional soil mechanics. However, the strength parameters necessary
for such a design are difficult to evaluate.
The final determination of the bearing pressure of rock results
from the analysis of the influence of the discontinuities on the behaviour If the rock meets the requirements of having favourable
of the foundation. As a guideline, in the case of a rock mass with characteristics the estimation of the allowable design bearing pressure of
favourable characteristics (i.e., the rock surface is perpendicular to the a deep foundation embedded in rock may be obtained from the properties
foundation, the load has no tangential component, the rock mass has no of rock as follows:
open discontinuities), the allowable bearing pressure may be estimated for
a non-embedded load (pile tip resting on the rock surface elevation) from q a ' qu&core Ksp d (2)

q a ' Ksp qu&core (1) where

d = depth factor = [1.0 + (0.4 Hs/B)] # 3.0 (3)
where Hs = depth of the socket in rock having a strength qu-core
qa = the allowable design bearing pressure of surface rock B = diameter (breadth) of the socket
qu-core = the average unconfined compressive strength of rock cores, as
determined from ASTM D2938-71, and This method is generally not applicable to soft stratified rocks

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 165
such as shales or limestones. For these rocks the values of the basic achieve particularly in sedimentary rocks although rotary drilling methods
parameter qu-core are generally not representative of the actual mechanical
minimize this problem. The design method should therefore be used with
properties of the rock mass due to the effect of sampling disturbance and
great caution and a careful visual inspection of the rock socket before
the absence of discontinuities in the test specimens. concreting is mandatory. To ensure the safety of the design it is common
practice to limit the load capacity Qd determined by this method to the
The allowable bearing pressure as obtained from this method maximum value resulting from the smaller of methods (2) or (3) if both
should be checked against the range of values shown in Table 1. rock cores and pressuremeter tests have been performed.

3. Allowable Bearing Pressure from Pressuremeter Test Results: SETTLEMENTS OF DEEP FOUNDATIONS ON ROCK
In situ pressuremeter tests permit the determination of the Settlement analysis of piles sitting on or socketed in rock is
strength of the rock mass, including the effect of joints and weathering. very difficult and frequently unreliable because of the discontinuous
Where performed properly the pressuremeter test gives a strength index nature of rock masses.
of the rock mass called the limit pressure, PR. The test and the
corresponding design methods are best applied to weathered or closely In general, in sound rock, settlements are minute and can be
jointed rocks and for soft rocks in general. neglected. Important rock settlements are generally associated with the
presence of open joints in the rock mass and, in sedimentary rocks, with
The allowable design bearing pressure is given by: the occurrence of seams of compressible material. Where such conditions
are expected to exist special investigations and analysis by a person
1 competent in this field of work is generally necessary.
qa ' [K b (pR & p o) % σo] (4)
3
Settlements may also result from the presence of debris
where
between the bottom of the concrete shaft and the rock surface. Careful
qa = the allowable design bearing pressure
inspection of the bottom of each excavation is necessary to eliminate this
σo = overburden stress (effective if appicable)
problem especially in the case where the deep foundation has been
po = the at rest horizontal stress in the rock at the elevation of the
designed according to the previous sections.
pile tip
pR = the limit pressure as determined from the pressuremeter tests
In some cases, such as for deep foundations of large
in the zone extending 2 pile diameters above and below the
dimensions or those carrying high loads, a settlement analysis may be
pile tip, and
desirable. Three methods are available.
Kb = an empirical bearing capacity coefficient as follows:
1. Settlements from Tests on Rock Cores:
Elastic moduli measured on rock core samples have little
relation in the actual settlement behaviour of rock masses, since the
Depth of Socket 0 1 2 3 5 7
influence of joints and other rock discontinuities is neglected. A
Pile Diameter
settlement analysis based on such moduli must include arbitrary
Kb 0.8 2.8 3.6 4.2 4.9 5.2 assumptions on the influence of joints, and is therefore of limited practical
value.

2. Settlements from Pressuremeter Tests:

Settlements can be estimated on the basis of in-situ
4. Load Capacity from Bond Between Concrete and Rock:
pressuremeter tests. To do so, a large number of tests must be performed
For a pile socketed into rock (Figure 5) it is sometimes
to allow for an assessment of the variability of elastic moduli of the rock
assumed that the entire load from a pile is transferred to the rock by
mass, including some measure of the influence of joints and other
adhesion between the concrete of the socket and the surrounding rock.
discontinuities.
The allowable load capacity is given by:
As a first approximation the settlement is given by:
Qa ' π B Hs τa (5) qa B
S ' (6)
where 9 αm E
Qa = the allowable design load on the pile
B = the pile diameter or breadth where
Hs = the depth of the socket in sound rock, and S = the settlement
τa = the allowable design bond strength between the concrete and qa = the design pressure
the rock. B = the tip diameter (breadth) of the pile
E = the average pressuremeter modulus in the zone extending 3
The available bond strength τa is a function of the strength of diameters below the pile tip
the concrete and the rock as well as the quality of the contact area αm = a coefficient which is a function of the structure of the rock
resulting from the excavation process. τa is generally higher than the bond mass as follows
strength normally considered in concrete design due to the Poisson's Ratio
effect in the confined concrete socket.
Spacing of <3 1-3 0.3-1 80-300
Design values of 650 to 2000 kPa are applicable to good Discontinuities m m m mm
construction methods and sound unshattered rock. Much lower values,
however, are likely on actual sockets where the construction process has αm 1 0.75 0.5 0.25
produced a poor contact area.

This design method is based on the assumption that the walls This method is applicable to homogeneous as well as to
of the socket are of sound rock, unshattered by the excavation process and stratified rock masses. In the latter case the modulus to be used in the
are clean from any drilling mud or smear. This may in fact be difficult to formula is taken as a weighted average of the moduli measured in the

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 166
different strata, provided the moduli do not differ by more than a factor of Piles in granular soils derive their load carrying capacity from
10. The effect of thin horizontal joints or compressible seams cannot be both (Figure 3) point resistance and shaft friction. The relative
taken into account in this method and the results may be misleading if contributions of point resistance and shaft friction to the total capacity of
such joints or seams occur. the pile depend essentially on the density and shear strength of the soil and
on the characteristics of the pile. A typical graph of the separate
3. Settlements from Plate Load Tests: components for a driven pile at various depths of penetration is shown in
In situ plate load tests may be used to assess the settlement Figure 8.
behaviour of a rock mass under a deep foundation. The importance of size
effects on the results of such tests should be recognized. Ideally the plate It is usual to distinguish between a displacement pile and a
should be of the same diameter as the deep foundation. For practical non-displacement pile.
reasons, however, this is seldom possible and smaller plates are generally
used. The results obtained from loading smaller plates may generally be ALLOWABLE LOAD ON A SINGLE PILE IN GRANULAR SOIL
considered representative of the actual foundation behaviour provided the Allowable loads for piles should be determined from field
diameter of the plate is not less than half the diameter of the foundation, tests. These tests are generally not performed until construction of the
and is always in excess of 300 mm. final structure. For preliminary design some method is needed to obtain
approximate allowable loads. Such empirical methods are based on
Plate load tests are difficult to carry out properly and results are standard site investigation tests.
frequently variable. To obtain a reliable evaluation of the foundation
behaviour a series of tests have to be carried out. The cost of such tests 1. Method Based on the Standard Penetration Test:
is high. In general the tests are only justified by projects of a very large The ultimate bearing capacity of a single pile in granular soils
size or when the structure to be supported is very sensitive to settlements. may be estimated from the results of the Standard Penetration Test as
suggested by Meyerhof (1956).
The performance and interpretation of such plate load tests
should be carried out be a person competent in this field of work. Qf ' 400 N Ap % 2 N As (7)

GENERAL COMMENTS ON PILES IN GRANULAR SOILS where

The following sections cover the design of all kinds of piles Qf = the ultimate pile load, kN
embedded in granular soils,i.e., gravels, sands, and non-cohesive silts. N = the average standard penetration index at the pile tip elevation,
The design methods described are applicable only to unstratified deposits blows/300 mm
where granular soils extend to a significant depth beneath the lowest part Ap = the cross-sectional area of the pile tip, m2
of the deep foundation or to layered deposits where granular soils are N̄ = the average standard penetration index along the pile shaft
underlain by more competent materials such as tills or rock. blows/300 mm with a maximum value of 50, and
As = the surface area of the pile shaft, m2.
In cases of layered deposits where granular soils are underlain Note the equation is empirical so the correct dimensional units must be
by compressible materials the design methods described under the section used.
dealing with piles in layered deposits should be used.
The Standard penetration Test is subject to many errors and much
care must be exercised when using the test results. For this reason a
minimum factor of safety of 4 should be applied to Qf. The allowable load
capacity of a pile is therefore:
Qf
Qd # (8)
4

2. Method Based on the Theory of Plasticity:

The allowable load on a single pile in a granular soil may be
estimated from the friction angle of the soil by use of the theory of
plasticity (or ultimate bearing capacity theory).

The ultimate bearing pressure of a pile in a granular soil of

Figure 8. Illustration of build up of resistance with depth of
piles driven into cohesionless soil.
constant density increases in a linear manner with increase in effective
overburden pressure only down to a certain depth called the critical depth
(Figure 8). Investigations up to the present time indicate that there is very
little increase in end bearing pressure or shaft friction below this critical
value. The ratio of the critical depth Dc to the pile diameter B increases
with increase in the angle of shearing resistance, φ, and in the density of
the soil. For most pile applications where the breadth of the pile is small
in comparison with the buried depth of the tip Dc/B ranges between a
value of 7 at φ = 30E to 22 at φ = 45E. For shallow foundations the
relationships given in the chapter on ultimate bearing capacity should be
consulted. Since the density of most granular soils increase with depth
and since many other factors influence the validity of theoretical estimates
of pile capacity in granular soil, reference should be made to Meyerhof
(1975) before finalising pre-design estimates. In addition, in the absence
of a load test, a factor of safety or at least three should be applied to any
theoretical computation.
For piles with a length in granular soil less than Dc the ultimate

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 167
point resistance is given by: to carry out in coarse gravels and in sands that are very dense.

The ultimate load capacity of a single pile in granular soil may

(
qfp ' γ) Dp N q (9) be determined from:

where Qf ' qp&cone Ap % fcone As (14)

qfp = ultimate point resistance
γ' = effective unit weight of the soil where
Dp = length (depth) of the pile tip embedment Qf = ultimate pile load
Nq* = a bearing capacity coefficient for piles as derived from qp-cone = point resistance per unit area from cone tests. (It is
Berezantsev (1961). Nq* is given as a function of the angle of recommended that for piles with B > 500mm the design value
shearing resistance φ of the soil as follows: of qp-cone should be between the limits of the minimum
measured qp-cone and the measured average qp-cone.)
φ = 25E 30E 35E 40E Ap = cross-sectional area of the pile tip
Nq* = 15 30 75 150 fcone= average skin friction measured by cone tests. (The use of a
cone equipped with a friction sleeve is recommended.)
Considering the exponential increase of Nq* with φ the selection of a As = surface area of the pile shaft.
design value of φ should be made with caution.
The results of static cone penetration tests are more
For lengths of piles in excess of Dc, the ultimate point reproducible than those of the Standard Penetration Test and a greater
resistance is constant and equal to: confidence can be put in the design method basad upon them.
(
qfp ' γ) Dc N q (10) The factor of safety to apply to Qf should be between 2.5 and
3 depending on the number of cone tests performed and on the observed
variability of the test results; the lower value of factor of safety should
The ultimate unit skin friction at any given value of only be used when a large number of results with a variability of less than
overburden, fs, in homogeneous sand may be expressed by: ± 10% of the average have been obtained.
)
f s ' K s σo tanδ # f c (11) 4. Method Basad on Load Tests:
The design of piles on the basis of theoretical or empirical
where methods, as previously described, are the subject of some uncertainties
Ks = the coefficient of earth pressure on the pile shaft due to:
σ/o = the given effective overburden (a) the soil properties can not be measured with great accuracy and are
δ = the angle of friction at the sand-pile contact always variable within a building site.
fc = the maximum value of F at and below the critical depth (b) the correlation between the soil parameters and the bearing capacity
of a pile include a margin of error;
The value of Ks tan δ is influenced by (a) the angle of shearing (c) the actual driving or placing conditions vary from pile to pile and can
resistance of the soil, (b) the method of pile installation (c) the not be properly taken into account.
compressibility of the soil, (d) the original horizontal stress in the ground, Therefore, the best method of assessing the bearing capacity
and (e) the pile size and shape. It increases with increases in the in situ of piles is to load test typical units.
density and angle of shearing resistance of the soil and with the amount
of displacement experienced. It is higher for large displacement piles than 5. Compacted Concrete Piles:
for H piles. The value of Ks tan δ is a minimum for bored piles which Compacted concrete piles in granular soils derive their bearing
develop about one quarter of the resistance generated around large capacity from the densification of the soil around the base. The bearing
displacement piles. Reliable values for Ks tan δ can only be obtained from capacity of such piles is therefore entirely dependent on the construction
load tests. method and can only be assessed from load tests and from well
documented local experience.
The factor of safety to apply to qfp and fs should be at least
equal to three. 6. Resistance to Pile Penetration:
In some granular soils the ultimate capacity of driven piles is
The resulting allowable load on a single pile with a diameter subjected to change with time during or following driving. In dense
(breadth) B and a length (depth in soil) Dp, is computed as follows: saturated fine grained soils such as non-cohesive silts and fine sands, the
for Dp < Dc ultimate capacity may decrease after initial driving. This is known as
2
relaxation. The driving process is believed to cause the soil below the pile
1 qfp π B π B Dp fs tip to dilate thereby generating negative pore pressures and a temporary
Qa ' % (12)
3 4 2 higher strength. When these pressures dissipate the resistance reduces.
On the other hand temporary liquefaction and consequent failure, or
where qfp and fs are computed at depth = Dp. dropping resistance to pile penetration, may also occur in saturated fine
for Dp > Dc grained sands or silts. The probability of liquefaction is greater in loose
2 than in dense sand, but even in dense material liquefaction can occur if
1 qfp π B f π BDc
Qa ' % s % fs π B(Dp & Dc) (13) there are a sufficient number of stress cycles, or if the magnitude of the
3 4 2
stress cycle is large enough, or if the confining pressure is low. After the
where qfp and fs are computed at depth Dc. temporary pore pressures dissipate the indication of true capacity is given,
in initial redriving, by the return to a higher resistance to pile penetration.
3. Method Based on Static Penetration Tests: Because the resistance to pile penetration may increase (freeze) or
The allowable load on a pile in granular soil can be computed decrease (relaxation) after final set, it is essential that retapping be carried
from the results of static cone penetration tests (Dutch cone). The test is out once equilibrium conditions in the soil have been re-established. The
best suited for silts and sands that are loose to dense. The test is difficult time for the return of equilibrium conditions can be determined only by
trial. The resistance developed in the first five blows of retap are

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 168
generally indicative of the equilibrium resistance. However, even with
retapping, load testing may be required to appraise the final working load. Qactual Dp
ρ ' (16)
The effects of freeze should be treated with great caution in large pile A E
groups because of the effects of group action.
where
7. Driving Resistance: Q = applied pile load
The penetration per blow decreases rapidly after a set of 5 A = average cross-sectional area of the pile
blows per 25 mm for friction piles and 10 blows per 25 mm for end- Dp = length of the pile
bearing piles. There is little justification in requiring sets higher than 10 E = modulus of elasticity of the pile material
blows per 25 mm with friction piles and a final set of 20 blows per 25mm The ultimate or failure load would produce a settlement approximately 3
for an end-bearing pile may only be warranted if driving is easy in the soil time as great.
above the bearing stratum.
2. Settlement from Load Tests:
ALLOWABLE LOAD ON A PILE GROUP IN GRANULAR SOIL Since time effects are usually negligible in granular soils, the
It is common practice to define the allowable load on a pile settlements observed during load tests can be considered as representative
group in granular soil as the sum of the allowable loads of the individual of the long behaviour of the pile.
piles in the group. However, it is known that piles in groups in granular
soils develop a larger load capacity than isolated piles: their group SETTLEMENT OF A PILE GROUP IN GRANULAR SOIL
efficiency, defined as the ratio of the ultimate load capacity of a pile in a The settlement of a pile group in granular soil is evaluated on
group to that of the same pile when isolated, is greater than 100%. Where empirical experience and the methods are less reliable than those used for
it would be necessary to take this effect into account in design, the single piles because of the limited data that are available. It is
influence of pile spacing and pile cap should be considered. The effect of recommended that the settlement of a pile group be evaluated on the basis
spacing is such that: proposed by Skempton et al (1953).
(a) piles at a spacing greater than seven times the average pile diameter
act individually The settlement of a pile groups Sgroup is always larger than that
(b) piles act as a group at spacings varying from 2.5 to 7 times the of the individual piles forming the group.
average pile diameter Sgroup ' αg S (17)
(c) piles should not be installed at spacing less than 2.5 times the average
pile diameter. where
S = settlement of a single pile under its allowable load
The effect of the pile cap is such that if the pile cap is in α = group settlement ratio; a function of the dimension of the
g
contact with granular soil then experience has shown that the soil develops group and of the pile spacing, or of the ratio Bg/B (i.e. the
a bearing capacity which increases the apparent group efficiency. This width of the pile group to the diameter of the individual piles
additional bearing capacity should not be relied on. as follows:
Bg/B = 1 5 10 20 40 60
SETTLEMENT OF A SINGLE PILE IN GRANULAR SOIL αg = 1 3.5 5 7.5 10 12
Many factors that can not be included in theoretical analysis
influence the actual settlement of piles, with the result that estimates based PILES IN COHESIVE SOILS
only upon considerations of the elastic properties of the soil and pile For practical design of piles in clay engineers generally must
material are generally so inaccurate as to be of no practical value. Instead, base their calculations of the working and failure loads on conditions at
estimates of settlements of piles are based upon empirical relationships. a relatively short time after installation. The reliability of these
calculations is generally assessed by loading tests also made a relatively
1. Empirical Methods: short time after installation although time effects may be appreciable.
For normal load levels, the settlement of a single pile in
granular soils is a function of the ratio of applied load to ultimate load
capacity and of the diameter of the pile.

For normal load levels, the settlement of a displacement pile

may be estimated from the empirical formula (approximated from Vesic,
1977):
Qactual α B
S ' % ρ *
(15)
Qa
*
The Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual assumes Qactual = Qa and
α = 0.01. For a load tested pile S for a single pile will be known.
where
S = settlement of pile head
Q = applied pile load
Qa = maximum allowable design load
α = a coefficient approximately
0.01 to 0.01 for driven piles in sand and
0.045 to 0.09 for bored piles in sand
B = pile diameter or breadth
ρ = elastic deformation of pile shaft.
For the purpose of this analysis it is common practice to assume
Figure 9. Results of loading a compressive pile to failure.

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 169
 bearing capacity of the pile. This increase in capacity occurs at a slower
rate around a dense concrete or a steel pile than around a timber pile.
Load testing of a pile in clay should not be carried out without an
awareness of these processes. It is advisable to delay load testing for at
least two weeks after driving and preferably for a longer period.

3. Pore Water Pressures Induced by Driving:

Driving piles in clay generates high pore water pressures, the
effect of which is to:
(a) temporarily reduce the bearing capacity of the piles,
(b) affect the process of reconsolidation of the clay around the pile
thereby making it necessary to delay the application of the load,
Figure 10. Friction pile force distribution (a) at point 'A' in (c) alter the natural stability condition in sloping ground. (Examples
Fig. 9; (b) at point 'B' in Fig. 9; (c) at point 'D' in Fig. 9. exist of landslides triggered by pile driving operations.)
As demonstrated by Lo and Stermac (1985), pore water
When a pile driven in cohesive soil is subject to an increasing pressures at the end of driving can, in a first approximation, be assumed
compressive load (over a period of days) the resulting load settlement equal to the effective initial overburden pressure along the full length of
relationship is as shown in Figure 9. Up to point A the curve is relatively the pile within a ring equal in width to the pile diameter. As
elastic. At point B when full skin friction is developed, some slippage reconsolidation of clay around the pile occurs the high pore water
occurs between A and B but this is small and if unloading occurs to point pressures are diminished by gradual redistribution of stresses to the less
C only a small permanent set occurs. Generally movements of about disturbed soil further from the pile.
1/2% of the diameter are required to mobilize full skin friction while
movement of about 10% of the diameter would be required to mobilize the
full base resistance (shown by point D). Further load then causes the pile ALLOWABLE LOAD ON A SINGLE PILE IN COHESIVE SOILS
to plunge downwards producing large settlements. Piles in cohesive soils generally derive their load capacity from
shaft adhesion or friction. However, in very stiff clays or in cohesive tills,
The mobilization of resistance of a pile in cohesive soil occurs a substantial point resistance may be mobilized which, for large diameter
first along the shaft as given by Figure 10(a) corresponding to point A in bored piles, may represent the total bearing capacity of the pile.
Figure 9. Then at the point B in Figure 9 full skin friction is mobilized
along with partial end resistance as shown in Figure 10(b). At point D in
Figure 9 maximum end resistance is also mobilized as shown in Figure
10(c). In fact in some clays some loss of skin friction may have occurred
at this point, however, this is generally neglected so that the concept of
separate evaluation of shaft and base resistance forms the basic of `static'
calculations of the pile carrying capacity.

1. Limitations of Design Methods:

Design methods for piles in cohesive soils are in some cases
of doubtful reliability. This is particularly so for the bearing capacity of
friction piles in clays of medium to high shear strength. Therefore, the
design methods described in later sections must be used with caution and
essentially only for:
(a) the preliminary design of large foundations. In this case in situ full
scale load tests should be performed as part of the final design or at
the beginning of construction.
(b) the design of small foundations, provided adequate safety factors are
used.
Settlements of groups of friction piles in clay are estimated by
means of the methods normally used for shallow foundations with an
additional empirical assumption concerning the transfer of load from the
piles to the soil. Consequently, settlement estimates will be reliable only
in terms of an order of magnitude. Differential settlements are difficult to
predict.

2. Disturbance Caused by Driving:

Piles driven into cohesive soils induce some disturbance which
is a function of:
(a) the soil properties, particularly sensitivity,
(b) the geometry of the pile foundation (diameter of piles, number and
spacing of piles in the groups), and
(c) the driving method and sequence.

This disturbance results in a temporary loss of strength in some

soils and a corresponding reduction of support provided by the piles. In
some cases such as in soft sensitive clays, complete remoulding of the clay Figure 11. Typical design factors for adhesion based on soil
may occur with the result that further construction becomes impossible. shear strength for different penetrations into stiff clay
The effect of disturbance diminishes with time following driving as the (e.g. Tomlinson, 1970)
soil adjacent to the pile consolidates. This results in an increase in the

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 170
1. Total Stress vs Effective Stress Approach:
Until recent times, it was the general practice to evaluate the
bearing capacity of piles in clay from a total stress approach (i.e., on the
basis of the undrained shear strength cu of the clay). Empirical
correlations between cu and the point resistance and skin friction on a pile
have been developed, but these have not proved entirely reliable,
particularly for cu in excess of 25 kPa and analysis in terms of effective
stresses appear more rational.
100 kPa derives its bearing capacity from both shaft adhesion or friction
and point resistance.
The shaft friction of such a pile however, cannot be predicted
with any degree of reliability because little is known of the effect of
driving on the adhesion and on the final effective contact area between
clay and pile. For preliminary design, however, the relationship shown in
Figure 11 can be used.

2. Driven Piles in Clays where cu < 100 kPa: For final design purposes it is suggested that the ultimate
A pile driven in clay with an undrained shear strength of less bearing capacity be determined by pile loading tests. Tapered piles have
than 100 kPa derives its load capacity almost entirely from shaft adhesion been suggested as a means for developing closer contact. However, the
or friction. effective stress analysis above suggests that more shaft and end bearing
For estimating the ultimate capacity in terms of total stresses, it is area should be provided at lower levels to take advantage of the higher
common practice to determine the ultimate load capacity of a single pile friction and end bearing resistance available.
from the formula:
4. Bored Piles in Clays where cu > 100 kPa:
Qf ' α cu As (18) Large diameter bored piles with or without enlarged or belled
bases are successfully used in clays or cohesive tills where cu > 100 kPa.
where
They derive their load carrying capacity from both shaft adhesion or
Qf = the ultimate load capacity
friction and point resistance. Present design methods have been derived
α = the adhesion factor, derived from Figure 11
from extensive studies on bored piles in London clays. Considering the
cu = the undrained shear strength
unusual properties of these soils, the generalization of empirical design
As = the surface area of the pile shaft.
parameters to other types of cohesive soils should be made with caution.
The values of α are empirical and actual adhesion may differ significantly
from these values depending on the geometry of the foundation, the
In estimating the shaft adhesion in terms of total stresses the
driving method and sequence, the properties of the clay and time effects.
ultimate load may be obtained from:
The ultimate capacity of piles resulting from the above formula should be
confirmed by load tests. Qfs ' ca As (22)

In estimating the ultimate capacity in terms of effective stresses where

recent investigations suggest that the ultimate load capacity of a single Qfs = ultimate shaft resistance
pile in clay may be derived from: As = surface area of pile shaft
ca = ultimate adhesion.
Qf ' As τs (19) Experience shows that:
where ca ' 0.3 to 0.4 cu (23)
Qf = ultimate load capacity
As = surface area of pile shaft
τs = average effective shaft friction The actual value of ca is greatly affected by the excavation
τs is normally computed at various depths along the pile shaft and the total process which may cause remoulding or softening of the clay, and by the
integrated over the embedment depth. structure of the clay such as its degree of fissuring. it is recommended that
ca be determined from the minimum undrained shear strength cu, and that
)
τs ' σo K o tanδ (20) it be limited to a maximum of 100 kPa.

where In estimating the shaft adhesion in terms of effective stresses

σo' = effective overburden pressure at the considered depth the same approach and formula as given for driven piles may be applied.
Ko = at rest earth pressure coefficient However, the earth pressure coefficient Ko is highly dependent upon the
δ = effective angle of friction between the clay and the pile shaft. geological history of a particular clay. It is therefore impossible to give
typical values of (Ko tan δ), and the method may be applied only where Ko
This method requires that Ko and δ be known. Both parameters are has been determined by appropriate methods or evaluated from load tests.
difficult to measure. However, available test results indicate that, for
(
clays with cu less than 100 kPa, which are not heavily over consolidated, Qfp ' N c cu Ap (24)
the factor (Ko tan δ) varies only from 0.25 to 0.40. For design purposes
a typical value of 0.3 may be used, so that: where
Qfp = ultimate point load
)
τs ' 0.3 σo (21) Ap = cross-sectional area of pile point
cu = minimum undrained shear strength of the clay at pile point
level
It is recommended that the calculated ultimate pile capacity be Nc* = a bearing capacity coefficient which is a function of the pile
confirmed by load tests. point diameter as follows:
Point Diameter Nc*
To obtain the allowable load capacity of the pile, from the ultimate Less than 0.5 m 9
capacities given by Equations (18) and (19), it is recommended that a 0.5 to 1 m 7
factor of safety of at least 2.5 be applied and that load tests also be carried Greater than 1 m 6
out during construction of the foundation. In cases where no load tests are
performed, a factor of safety of at least 3.0 should be applied. In very stiff clays and tills were samples are difficult to retrieve
and cu is not easily measured, the pressuremeter method of estimating the
3. Driven Piles in Clays where cu > 100 kPa: allowable bearing pressure may be used.
A pile driven in clay with an undrained shear strength in excess of

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 171
 The allowable loads on bored piles are determined from a should be applied to the ultimate pile capacity.
combination of shaft adhesion and point resistance, after the application
of appropriate factors of safety. The relative contribution of the shaft ALLOWABLE LOAD ON A PILE GROUP IN COHESIVE SOIL
adhesion and the point resistance is a function of the rigidity of the pile If piles in groups are driven through soft clay, loose sand, or
and the compressibility of the clay around the shaft and below the base of fill, to terminate in a stiff clay, there is no risk of general shear failure of
the pile. the group provided that there is an adequate safety factor against failure
of the single pile. However, the settlement of the group must be
If the soil below the base has the same or greater calculated as described later.
compressibility than the soil around the shaft, the allowable design load
on the pile may be taken as If it is necessary to terminate a group of piles entirely within
a soft clay (this is not desirable practice) then the safety factor against
1 'block failure' of the group must be calculated. The ultimate bearing
Qd ' (Qfs % Qfp) (25)
2.5 capacity of the block of soil encompassed by the group shown in Figure
12 is calculated as though the group was a footing of depth Dp, width B
and length L. Because the side of such a footing is ideally the cohesive
If the soil below the base has the same or less compressibility
shearing strength cu of the clay. If the piles are large displacement piles
than the soil around the shaft, the allowable design load on the pile may
and considerable remoulding has occurred the cu would have been reduced
be taken as:
to a value close to its remoulded value along the block sides. In all cases
1 the possibility of block failure should be checked as well as the possibility
Qd ' Q (26)
2 fp of failure by individual action. Terzaghi and Peck (1967) recommend a
factor of safety of 3 against block failure.

While the above formulas may be considered as limiting cases,
the decision to consider shaft adhesion in addition to base resistance must
be made with care and only after properly designed and interpreted load
tests are carried out. Such tests should indicate whether or not the
resistance available is commensurate with strain both around the shaft and
at the base, and any possibility of reduction in that resistance with time.
The selection of the allowable load should be based upon permissible pile
movement, as determined from these tests.
1. Piles in Clays where cu < 100 kPa:
When a group of driven friction piles are formed in clays with
undrained shear strengths of less than 100 kPa and block failure does not
govern, then the ultimate load capacity of the group is usually less than the
sum of the ultimate load capacities of the individual piles in the group.
For spacings of 2.5 to 4 times the average pile diameter, the group
efficiency can be taken to be equal to 70% of the sum of the capacities of
the individual piles.

5. Pile Capacity from Load Tests: 2. Piles in Clay where cu > 100 kPa:
The ultimate load capacity of piles in clays should be It is common practice to neglect group effects in the
determined or confirmed by means of full scale load tests. determination of the load capacity of pile groups in clays with cu in excess
of 100 kPa. Thus the capacity of the group is given by the lesser of a block
Load tests cannot be performed slowly enough for an failure or the sum of the capacity of the individual piles.
evaluation of the time-settlement behaviour of piles in clays; only the
ultimate load capacity may be determined. Under such conditions it is SETTLEMENT OF A SINGLE PILE IN COHESIVE SOIL
recommended that the method, known as the constant rate of penetration 1. Piles in Clays where cu < 100 kPa:
method, is best suited for a rapid and accurate evaluation of the ultimate Piles in clays where cu is less than 100 kPa are seldom used as
pile capacity in clays. single piles but they act as single piles in groups where the spacing is in
excess of 7 times the pile diameter and where the pile cap is not in contact
with the soil. In this case limited field observations indicate that the
settlement is due to local shear deformations along the pile shaft rather
than to consolidation settlements, and is therefore very limited. If such
cases occur it is recommended that special analyses, based on load tests
be performed.

2. Piles in Clays where cu > 100 kPa:

Because of their high load capacity, bored piles in stiff clays
are often used as single piles.

The analysis of settlement of single piles in stiff clays is

difficult at the present time because little data is available on the actual
behaviour of such piles. Discussions on the validity of available methods
of analysis are found in the reference list at the end of these notes.

Where it is important to evaluate settlements the use of load

tests, designed, carried out and interpreted by a person competent in this
field is recommended.

SETTLEMENT OF A PILE GROUP IN COHESIVE SOIL

1. Introduction:
Settlements of groups of piles in clay are estimated by means
Figure 12. Block foundation behaviour of pile group in a of methods normally used for shallow foundations, after application of an
deep soft soil deposit. additional empirical assumption concerning the transfer of load from the
pile group of the soil. Total and differential settlement predictions will
To obtain the allowable pile capacity a factor of safety of 2.5 therefore be less reliable for pile groups than for footings.

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 172
2. Suggested Method: 2. Magnitude of Negative Skin Friction:
The following method, proposed by Terzaghi and Peck (1948), The most common method of computing negative skin friction
and confirmed by limited field observations, is suggested for the τn is to assume
evaluation of the settlement of pile groups in clay. The load carried by the
pile group is assumed to be transferred to the soil through a theoretical τn ' α cu (27)
footing located at 1/3 the pile length up from the pile point (Figure 13).
where
The load is assumed to spread within the frustum of a pyramid of side
α = the adhesion factor given in Figure 11
slopes at 30E and to cause uniform additional vertical pressure at lower
cu = the undrained shear strength
levels, the pressure at any level being equal to the load carried by the
group divided by the cross-sectional area of the pyramid at that level. The
For an isolated pile the total force Fn due to negative skin
settlement calculation then follows the method used for shallow
friction is therefore:
foundations.
Fn ' τn As (28)

where
As = the area of pile in contact with the settling clay layer.

For pile groups the maximum force Fn on a pile is limited by

the weight of clay between the piles so that:
2
Fn ' τn As # S p H γ (29)

where
Sp = the pile spacing
H = the thickness of the clay layer
γ = the unit weight of clay

Field observations on instrumented piles have shown that the

magnitude of negative skin friction is a function of the effective stress
acting on the pile and may be expressed as:
)
τn ' σo K tan γ (30)

where
σ/o = the effective overburden pressure including the stress from the
consolidated portion of the fill
K = the coefficient of earth pressure equal to or greater than Ko
δ = the effective angle of friction between the clay and the pile
material.
Figure 13. Stress distribution beneath pile group in clay
For all practical purposes it may be assumed that:
using theoretical footing concept.
)
τn ' 0.3 σo (31)

NEGATIVE SKIN FRICTION OF PILES IN COHESIVE SOIL

3. Means for Reducing the Negative Skin Friction:
1. Introduction:
For piles driven to rock the occurrence of negative skin friction
When a clay deposit, in which or through which piles have
means that a considerable increase of structural strength and bearing
been installed, is subject to consolidation, the resulting downward
capacity above that needed to carry the building load will be required.
movement of the clay around the piles induces downdrag forces on the
Negative skin friction acting on driven piles may be reduced by the
piles. This force, which tends to reduce the usable pile capacity, is called
application of bituminous or other viscous coatings to the pile surfaces or
negative skin friction.
in the case of steel piles by using the electro-osmosis technique. For cast-
in-place piles floating sleeves have been used successfully. The choice of
Negative skin friction develops in cases where piles are placed
the appropriate method and the evaluation of its effectiveness, in any
in soil that is consolidating under an applied load, or where a fill is placed
particular case, should be left to a person competent in this field of work.
around an existing pile foundation. It develops in clay deposits subject to
general subsidence resulting from lowering of the ground water table or
SPECIAL PROBLEMS: PILES IN COHESIVE SOILS
other causes. It may also be generated by reconsolidation of the
1. Piles Driven Near Slopes:
remoulded clay layer around any driven pile. The magnitude and
As discussed earlier driving piles in clay generates pore water
significance of negative skin friction in the design of piles in clays differs
pressures in clay. After driving, these pore water pressures are distributed
widely from case to case.
in the clay mass over a considerable distance from the piles. If piles are
driven in the vicinity of a slope, the increase in pore pressure produced by
Negative skin friction is a pile capacity problem only in the
driving may cause failure of the slope. This phenomenon must be taken
case of a true bearing pile on rock, where the pile capacity is generally
into account in design, particularly in sensitive clays by:
controlled by its structural strength and where settlements of the pile are
(a) analysis of the stability of the slope before and after driving, and
negligible. In all other cases of piles bearing in compressible soils, where
(b) instrumentation of the clay layer for pore water pressure
the pile capacity is controlled by point resistance and shaft adhesion or
measurements during driving.
friction, the problem of negative skin friction may be regarded as a
settlement problem (see Fellenius, 1972).
If necessary, pore water pressures can be reduced by:
(a) the use of proper driving techniques and sequences (preboring is an

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 173
 efficient way of reducing pore water pressures), and the use of floating sleeves or by the application of bituminous or other
(b) the use of drain strips attached to the surface of the piles. viscous coatings applied to the pile surface.

2. Heave Due to Pile Driving: PILES IN LAYERED DEPOSITS

When piles are driven in clays, the volume of soil displaced by Piles are commonly driven through a layer of soft soil to a
the pile generally causes a heave of the soil surface. The heave of competent stratum or through alternating layers of competent and non-
adjacent piles may also occur, possibly resulting in a reduction in the competent soils. In such cases the pile foundation is generally designed
capacity of these piles. This problem is of particular significance when in accordance with the methods already described but with modification
large pile groups are driven. contingent upon the prevailing subsoil conditions. In designing such piles
particular attention should be paid to:
Experience has shown that the heaved volume at the ground (a) the relative stiffness and strengths of the different layers penetrated
surface is generally of the order of 40% to 60% of the pile volume. If by the piles. (This will lead to an evaluation of the probable relative
such heave is unacceptable, preboring is the method usually applied to contribution of these layers to the pile capacity), and
reduce it. (b) the stratigraphy immediately below the pile tip which influences the
stability and the settlement of the pile groups.
3. Piles in Swelling Clays:
Piles driven in swelling clays may be subjected to uplift forces ALLOWABLE PILE CAPACITY OF PILES IN LAYERED SOIL
in the upper active layer as the result of the swelling process. The effect The relative contribution of the various strata penetrated by a
of these forces on the structural integrity of the piles or on the pile to the capacity of that pile is primarily a function of the relative
deformations of the foundation must be taken into account in design by: stiffness of these layers and of the type of pile.
(a) neglecting the contribution to the bearing capacity of that part of the
pile embedded in than active layer of swelling clay,
(b) ensuring that the uplift resistance of that portion of the pile located (1) End Bearing Piles:
below the active layer of swelling clay is sufficient to withstand Piles extending through layers of weaker soils to a very
uplift forces generated in the swelling clay layer, and competent stratum such as bedrock or very dense till or gravel should be
(c) ensuring that the structural resistance of the pile is sufficient to assumed to derive their bearing capacities only from the resistance
withstand the uplift forces. mobilized in this supporting stratum. Because of the comparatively high
stiffness of the supporting stratum and the pile, the relative displacements
of pile and soil in the upper layers are generally insufficient to mobilize
any significant shaft friction.

Similarly for compacted concrete piles it should not be assumed that

any other resistance will be mobilized other than that obtained at the
compacted base.

(2) Piles in a Two-layer Deposit:

For piles extending through a layer of soft soil of some depth into a
deep deposit of competent soil, such as sand, it is generally assumed that
their bearing capacities are derived from only the point resistance and skin
friction developed in the lower layer. The upper layer is considered to
contribute to the pile capacity only by increasing the overburden pressure
used in the computation.

In cases where the bearing stratum is granular soil the critical depth
is taken from the upper surface of that stratum.

(3) Piles in a Multi-layer Deposit:

Figure 14. Safety of pile group against punching failure.
If necessary, uplift forces may be eliminated by isolating the
piles from the swelling clay in the active layer. This can be achieved by
Piles driven through a multi-layer deposit may derive their load
capacities from both skin friction and point resistance. However, the
evaluation of the relative importance of skin friction and point resistance
are difficult and may need to be confirmed by load tests. Whenever
possible, piles in multi-layer deposits should be driven to a layer of
sufficient strength and thickness that it may be assumed that they derive
their load capacity entirely from that layer. In such a case, the load
capacity may be determined according to the methods previously given.
It is essential to check that the bearing layer extends below the proposed
pile tip elevation to a depth sufficient to ensure safety against a punching
failure of the bearing layer into a lower weaker material. Safety against
a punching failure may be evaluated by the following empirical method.
The total load Q on the pile group is assumed to be transferred to the soil
through a theoretical footing located at the base of the pile group. The
load is assumed to be spread within the frustum of a pyramid with side
slopes at 30E. The resulting stress q' at the upper limit of the lower
weaker layer may then be calculated as shown in Figure 14. In the general
case where this layer is of cohesive soil with an undrained shear strength
cu the margin of safety against a punching failure will be sufficient if:
qe ' # 3 cu (32)

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 174
SETTLEMENT OF PILE GROUPS IN LAYERED SOILS force portante des pieux dans le sable". Ann. Inst. Tech. Bati, Travaux
The methods of evaluating settlements of pile groups previously Pubs, 63-64, 285-290.
given are applicable to groups in layered deposits provided the layer in
which the pile tips are located extends to a depth at least equal to 3 times
the width of the pile group below the base of the group. Van Der Veen, C., and Boersma, L, 1957. "The bearing capacity of a pile
predetermined by a cone penetration test". Proceedings of the Fourth
Where alternating layers of compressible and non-compressible soils International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
are present below the pile tips, the settlement is assumed to originate in the London, Volume 2, pp. 72-75.
compressible layers only. The total load Q on the pile group is assumed
to be transferred to and distributed in the soil as indicated in Figure 14. Vesic, A.S., 1969. "Experiments with Instrumented Pile Groups in Sand".
The stresses acting on the compressible layers below the pile tips are Conference on Performance of Deep Foundations, American Society for
computed and the corresponding settlements are determined according to Testing Materials, Special Technical Publications 444, pp. 177-222.
standard settlement analysis. This analysis usually leads to an
overestimate of the settlements. Vesic, A.S., 1970. "Tests on instrumented piles, Ogeechee River site".
Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, Proceedings
American Society of Civil Engineers, Volume 96, No. SM2, pp. 561-584.

REFERENCES Vesic, A.S., 1977. "Design of pile foundations". National Cooperative

Highway Research Program, Synthesis of highway Practice No. 42,
Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual, 1978, Canadian Geotechnical Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., p. 68.
Society, Montreal
Yang, N.C., 1970. "Relaxation of pile in sand and inorganic silt". Journal
Chellis, R.D., 1961. Pile Foundation, 2nd Ed., McGraw Hill, New York. of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, Proceedings American
Society of Civil Engineers, Volume 96, No. SM2, pp. 395-410.
Tomlinson, J.J., 1977. Pile Design and Construction Practice, Garden
City Press Ltd., Letchworth. Piles in Cohesive Soils

Deep Foundations on Rock Barnard, R., 1956. Pipe piles for bridges and buildings. Armco Bulletin
561, Armco Drainage and Metal Products Inc., Middleton, Ohio.
Coates, D.F., 1967. Rock Mechanics Principles, Mines Branch
Monograph 874, Queen's Printer, Ottawa, p. 358. Bjerrum, L. and Johannessen, I., 1961. "Pore pressures resulting from
driving piles in soft clay". Proceedings of the Conference on Pore
Menard, L., 1965. "Regles pour le calcul de la force portante et du Pressures and Suction in Soils, London, Butterworths, pp
tassement des foundation en fonction des resultats Pressiometriques".
Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Bjerrun, L., Johannessen, I.J. and Eide,O., 1968. "Reduction of negative
Engineering,Paris, Volume 2, pp. 11-15. skin friction on steel piles to rock". Proceedings of the Seventh
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
DeBeer, E.E., 1963. "The scale effect in the transportation of the results Mexico, Volume 2, pp. 27-34.
of deep sounding tests on the ultimate bearing capacity of piles and
caisson foundations". Geotechnique, Volume 13, pp. 39-75. Bozozuk, M., 1972. "Downdrag measurements on a 160 ft. floating pipe
test pile in marine clay". Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Volume 9, pp
Ireland, H.O., 1957. "Pulling tests on piles in sand". Proceedings of the 127-136.
Fourth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, London, Volume 2, pp. 42-45. Brezinski, L.S., 1969. "Behaviour of an overpass carried on footings and
friction piles". Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Volume 6, pp. 369-382.
Kishida, H., and Meyerhof, G.F., 1965. "Bearing capacity of pile groups
under eccentric loads in sand". Proceedings of the Sixth International Burland, J.B., 1973. "Shaft friction of piles in clay - a simple fundamental
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Montreal, approach". Ground Engineering, Volume 6, No. 3, pp. 30-42.
Volume 2, pp. 270-274.
Clark, J.I., and Meyerhof, G.G., 1972. "The behaviour of piles driven in
Lee, K.S. and Seed, H.B., 1967. "Cyclic stress conditions causing clay. I. An investigation of soil stress and pore water pressure as related
liquefaction of sand". Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation to soil properties". Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Volume 9, pp. 351-
Division, Proceedings American Society of Civil Engineers. Volume 93, 373.
No. SM1, pp. 47-70.

Meyerhof, G.C., 1956. "Penetration tests and bearing capacity of Clark, J.I. and Meyerhof, G.G.,1973. "The behaviour of piles driven in
cohesionless soils". Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, clay. II. Investigation of the bearing capacity of using total and effective
Proceedings American Society of Civil Engineers, Volume 102, No GT3, strength parameters". Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Volume 10, pp. 86-
pp 195 - 228. 102.

Robinsky, E.I. and Cragg, C.G.B., 1973. "Volume displacement effects Cummings, A.E. Kerkhoff, G.O. and Peck, R.B., 1950. "Effect of driving
on pile capacity in coarse sand". Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Volume piles into soft clays". Transactions of the American Society of Civil
10, No. 4, pp. Engineers, Volume 115, pp. 275-285.

Selby, K.G., 1970. "Pile tests of Beach River". Canadian Geotechnical Eide, P., Hutchingson, J.N. and Landva, A., 1961. "Short and long term
Journal, Volume 7, No. 4, pp. 470-471. loading of a friction pile in clay". Proceedings of the Fifth International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Paris,
Skempton, A.W., Vassin, A.A. and Gibson, R.E., 1953. "Theorie de la Volume 2, pp. 45-53.

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 175
Flaate, K., 1972. "Effects of pile driving in clay". Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, Volume 9, pp. 81-88.

Fellenius, B.H., 1972. "Downdrag n piles in clay due to negative skin

friction". Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Volume 9, pp. 323-337.

Lo, K.Y. and Stermac, A.G., 1965. "Induced pore pressures during pile
driving operations". Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Montreal, Volume 2, pp.
285-289.

Orrje, P., and Broms, B., 1967. "Effects of pile driving on soil
properties". Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division,
Proceedings American Society of Civil Engineers, Volume 93, No. SM5,
pp. 59-74.

Skempton, A.W., 1959. Cast-oil-place bored piles in London clay.

Geotechnique, Volume 9, pp. 153-173.

Stermac, A.G., Selby, K.G., and Devata, M., 1969. "Behaviour of various
types of piles in stiff clay". Proceedings of the Seventh International
conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Mexico,
Volume 2, pp 239-246.

Terzaghi, K., and Peck. R.B., 1948, 1967. Soil Mechanics in Engineering
Practice, J. Wiley and Sons, N.Y.

Tomlinson, M.J., 1971. "Some effects of pile driving on skin friction".

Proceedings of the Conference on the Behaviour of Piles, The Institute of
Civil Engineers, London,pp. 107-113 (see reply to Discussion).

Trow, W. and Bradstock, J., 1972. "Instrumented foundations for two 42-
storey buildings on till, Metropolitan Toronto:. Canadian Geotechnical
Journal, Volume 9, pp 290-303.

Whitaker, T., 1970. The design of piles foundations. Pergamon Press,

London.

Whitaker, T., and Cooke, R.W., 1966. An investigation of the shaft and
base resistance of large bored piles in London clay. Proceedings of the
Symposium on Large Bored Piles, Institution of Civil Engineers,
London,pp. 7-49.

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 176
Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 177
EXAMPLE 1 EXAMPLE 2
Illustrative Example of Why Pile Driving Formulae based on Calculate the allowable bearing capacity load of a pile cast-in-place
Energy Input Don't Work and socketed into rock. The socket/pile diameter is 300 mm and the
______________________________________________________ socket depth is 500 mm. Site investigations established the rock
___ discontinuities as having a thickness of 3 mm spaced at 500 mm. The
rock strength was measured as 4000 kPa.
qallowable ' qu&core Ksp d
&&&&&&&&&&&&&
qu&core ' 4000 kPa
&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Discontinuity Spacing
3 %
Socket Diaameter
Ksp [Fs OF 3] '
Discontinuity Thichness
10 1 % 300
Discontinuity Spacing
500
3 %
300
'
3
10 1 % 300
500
' 0.279 OR FROM FIGURE
&&&&&&&&&&&&&
H 500
d ' 1.0 % 0.4 s ' 1.0 % 0.4 ' 1.67 # 3.0
B 300
&&&&&&&&&&&&&
q a ' 4000 0.279 1.67 ' 1860 kPa
π B2
Qa ' qa ' 131 kN
4

ENERGY OF IMPACT
' W H W H
VELOCITY OF WEIGHT ON IMPACT
' 2gH 2g 2H '
MOMENTUM OF IMPACT
º ' W 2gH
W W
' 2 gH
g 2g

To solve problem momentum of impact needs to be equated to

momentum dissipation after impact. Presently only the "Wave
Equation" method of analysis attempts to do this with any degree of
exactness and even so it cannot account for pile freeze or relaxation.

Since momentum of impact is driving force and note energy it

becomes obvious why Pile driving Formulae based on energy
considerations don't give good results.

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 178
EXAMPLE 3 EXAMPLE 4
Calculate the allowable bearing capacity load of a cast-in-place and Calculate the failure bearing capacity load of a cast-in-place socketed
socketed pile into rock. The socket/pile diameter is 300 mm and the pile into rock. The socket/pile diameter is 300 mm diameter and the
socket =depth is 500 mm. Tests established the allowable shaft bond socket depth is 500 mm. Pressuremeter tests gave a limit pressure
shearing strength as 550 kPa. of 6000 kPa and an at rest lateral pressure in rock of 1000 kPa. The
effective overburden on the tip of the 20 m length pile 200 kPa.
Qallowable ' π B Hs τa
Depth of Socket 0 1 2 3 5 7
' 3.14 0.3 0.5 550 Pile Diameter
' 259 kN
Kb 0.8 2.8 3.6 4.2 4.9 5.2

FAILURE CAPACITY OF PILE ' Qf

q f ' K b (pR & p o) % σo/
&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Hs
K b ' FROM TABLE ' 1.67
B
GIVES approx 3.3
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
q f ' 3.3 (6000 & 1000) % 200
' 16.7 kPa
Qf ' π 0.152 × 16.7 ' 1.18 kN

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 179
EXAMPLE 5 EXAMPLE 6
Estimate the settlement of a pile socketed in rock on the basis of the Calculate for a 400 mm pile driven 20 m into sand the (a) failure shaft
following in-situ pressuremeter test data: resistance; (b) failure base resistance (c) allowable bearing capacity
Design tip contact pressure = 4 MPa.; load. Standard Penetration blow counts gave an average over the
Socket dia. = 0.4 m.; shaft length of 10 blows/300 mm and a count at the tip elevation of 30
Average pressuremeter modulus over 3 diameters below = 40
thekPa.;
tip blows/300 mm. Neglect pile weight.
Discontinuity spacing in rock = 0.5 m.;

Settlement is approximated by: (a) Qshaft ' 2 N Ashaft

' 2 10 π 0.4 20
qd B 4 0.4 ' 502 kN
S ' '
9 αm E 9 0.5 40
' 0.0089 m ' 8.9 mm (b) Qbase ' 400 N Atip
π 0.42
' 400 30
where 4
S = the settlement, ' 1508 kN
qd = the design pressure,
B = the tip diameter (breadth) of the pile, Qf Q % Qb
E = the average pressuremeter modulus in the zone extending (c) Qallow ' ' s
4 4
3 diameters below the pile tip, 502 % 1508
αm = a coefficient which is a function of the structure of the rock '
4
mass as follows
' 502 kN
Spacing of <3 1-3 0.3-1 80-300
Discontinuities m m m mm

αm 1 0.75 0.5 0.25

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 180
EXAMPLE 7 BLOCK ACTION
Calculate the bearing capacity of a 12 m long pile driven into Perimeter distance of block = 4 sides of (5 x spacing + Dia)
sand having a water table at the ground surface. The diameter of the = 4 x 6.3 = 25.2 m.
pile is 0.3 m. The soil unit weight is 19 kN/m3 and friction angle 30E.
Neglect the self weight of the pile and assume the coefficient of earth Dc max of block ' 6.3 x 7 > 12m
pressure = 1 - sinφ and δ = 2φ/3. (A) Neglect depth limitations (B)
Assuming critical depth Dc = 7B. Compare the bearing capacity of a
6 x 6 pile block having a spacing of 1.2 m using the above pile data Qs ' 25.2 mo (γ & γw ) (1 & sinφ) z (tanφ) dz
Df

with the piles (a) as a block (b) singularly.

______________________________________________________ NOTE: φ rather than δ is used since in a block failure the
___ foundation side is made of soil. Thus a soil to soil failure is occurring

mo
12
NO LIMITATION ON Dc ' 25.2 (18 & 9.81) (1 & sin30) tan30 z dz
) ( (
QB ' Ab γ Df Nq
where ' 30 Nq
Note Nγ term is small (Df > > B) and neglected 122
' 25.2 (8.19) 0.5 (0.577) ' 4.28 MN
π 2
' 0.32 (18 & 9.81) 12 (30) ' 208 kN
4
QB ' Ab (γ) Df N q d q s q % 0.5 γ) B Nγ dγ sγ ) % water uplift

mo
Df
Qs ' π Dia (γ & γw ) (1 & sinφ) z (tanδ) dz
From bearing capacity chart for φ = 30E; Nq = 18; Nγ = 17
12
z2
' π 0.3 (18 & 9.81) (1 & sin30) tan20
2 0 Df φ
d q ' dγ ' 1 tan (45 % ) # 10
' 101 kN 10 B 2
sq ' 1
QT ' QB % Qs ' 208 % 101 ' 309kN B
sγ ' 1 &
2.5 L
LIMITATION ON Dc = 7B d q ' dγ ' 1.33
si ' 1
( π
Q B ' A b γ) D c N q ' 0.32 (18 & 9.81) (7×0.3) 30 sγ ' 0.6
4
' 36.4 kN
QB ' 6.32 [ (18 & 9.81) 12 (18) 1.33 × 1

m
Qs ' (perimeter distance) (side friction) dz % 0.5 (18 & 9.81) 6.3 (17) 1.33 × 0.6 ]
' 6.32 [ 2.34 % 0.35 ] ' 107 MN % Water Uplift
NOTE:& side friction constant below Dc
Dc

m
' π Dia [(γ & γw) (1 & sinφ) z tanδ] dz QT ' QB (including water uplift) % Qs & Ab D γ
0
Dp
' QB (excluding water uplift) % QS & Ab D (γ & γw)
m
% π Dia [(γ & γw) (1 & sinφ) Dc tanδ] dz
Dc
7×0.3 ' 107 % 4.28 & 6.32 x 12 x 8.19 x 10&3 ' 106 MN
z2
' π 0.3 (18&9.81) (1&sin 30) tan20
2 0 SINGULARLY
12
% π 0.3 (18&9.81) (1&sin 30) (7×0.3) tan20 (z) 7×0.3
Neglecting Dc limitation = 36 x 309 = 11.1 MN
' 3.1 % 29.2 ' 32.3 kN
With Dc limitation = 36 x 68.7 = 2.47 MN

QT ' 36.4 % 32.3 ' 68.7 kN

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 181
EXAMPLE 8 Df
A storage tank 14 metres in diameter when full and including its
m
foundation results in a pressure of 200 kPa on its base. This tank is Adehsion ' π 14 2.5 z ' 35 MN
build on a foundation of 100 piles each 385 mm in diameter driven in 0

a deep bed of clay.

Note full shear strength is used in block failure since foundation is
The clay's properties are
made of soil (ie soil to soil failure)
cu
φu ' 0; ' 0.25; γ ' 19.81kN/m 3 Failure resistance ' Base resistance & SelfWt. % Adhesion
)
σo ' 75 % 35 ' 109 MN
π 200
Tank load ' 142 ' 31 MN
The water table is at the surface. The contact requires a factor 4 1000
of safety of 2 against failure of each individual pile based on shaft 109
resistance only. Calculate the required length of pile rounded Block faiulre F of s ' 31 ' 3.5
upwards to the nearest metre assuming the adhesion between clay
and pile is 0.67 cu. Calculate the factor of safety against block failure
of the required pile depth. Assume Nc for a circle increases linearly
from 6 at the surface to 9 at a depth 3 times the diameter of the circle
and remains constant at this value for greater depths.
______________________________________________________
___
SHAFT RESISTANCE OF SINGLE PILE
Shearing strength
)
' cu ' 0.25 σo ' 0.25 (γ & γw ) z ' 2.5 z kPa

Adhesion ' 0.67 cu ' 1.675 z kPa

Shaft adhesion'
Df
z2
mo
Df 2
π Dia ca dz ' 2.02 ' 1.01Df kN
2 o

Load per pile '

π tank 2 q π 200
' 142 ' 308kN
4 Dia No of piles 4 100

2
Df
F of S ' 2 ' 1.01
308
ˆ Df ' 24.7 ' 25 m ( to nearest metre rounded up )

BLOCK FAILURE OF GROUP

Base resistance ' ( cu N c % γ Df ) ( Area of base ) ' 151 MN
Self Wt. of block ' γ Df ( Area of base ) ' 76 MN
π
Base res. & Self Wt. ' cu N c ( tank dia. )2
4
3 (25) π
' 0.25 (10) 25 6 % 142 ' 75 MN
42 4

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 182
 Blank Page

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 183
 Blank page

Piled Foundations for Vertical Loads -- GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING-1997 -- by G.P. Raymond© 184