C han of Horiz ge ontal Stres s ( KPa)

Drag Load and Dow ndrag

What We Know and How to Design for It

Interpretation of a series of tests performed at different times

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 6 0 7 0

Cell D1
5 D ay s 1 D ay 8 D ay s 4 Months 22 Month s

Results thought due to set-up explained as Increase in Horizontal Effective Stress

B engt H. Fellenius

M em ov ent (mm )

7 0 6 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 10 0 150 2 00 25 0

5 D ay s 1 D ay 8 D ay s 4 Months 22 Month s

Results plotted According to Movement Pa th

Mov ement ( m m)

Felle nius 200 2

Tests on instrumented 280 mm square precas t concrete piles in Drammen, Nor way
LOA D (K N)
0 0 2 4 6 50 100 150 20 0 25 0 3 0 0

LOA D (K N ) 0 2 4 6 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 R esidual T rue minu s R esidual

D E PTH (m)

P il D A e
10 12 14 16 18

Sand

D EP TH (m)

True

8 10 12 14

Pile BC , Tapered

16 18

A. Distribution of residual load in Piles DA and BC before start of the loading test
2

B. Load and resistance in Pile DA for the ultimate load applied in the test
5

Data from Gregersen et al., 1973

Does unloading /reloading add anything of value to a test?

& D O U R 235 EC T

Result on a test on a 2.5 m diameter, 85. 5 m long pile at My T huan Bridge, Vietnam
30 LEV E L A Do wnw d, S TA GE S 1 a nd 5 ar

F ana s s E ly i

Load (MN)

20
T t Data es

10

0 0 50 1 00 150 200 250

Movement (mm)

The unloading/reloading cycle is an atavist, a remnant of a distant past! Engineers of today are unaware of that the concept of factor-of-s afety applied to an ultimate resistanc e (capacity) wa s once a novel approach. Before that approa ch was brought into practice, testing was by mea suring load-movement and the net movem ents afte r unloading (sever al cycle s) was thought to show the pile toe load-movement r esponse. True 50 ye ars ago and true today: when something new is proposed, people try to incorporate it into the old. Especially for loading tests on instrumented piles, occasional unloading/reloading will add nothing of value, but might sever ely impair the ev aluation of the test re sults. As will holding the load levels for different lengths of time. Each load should be kept on the pile an equal length of time!

Compilation of Norw egian results

Drag load cm cm

10

Study in Japa (Endo et al., 1969) n

Profile of test site an d pil es

8

Close d-toe, Ope n-toe, Incli ned, a nd sh ort pil e

11

0 0

EF ECT F IVE ST RESS AND PORE PRESSURE (KPa) 10 0 20 0 30 0 4 00

PILE SHORTENING (m m )
0 0 5 10 15
0 0 30 0

PIL E L OAD (KN ) 60 0 9 00 1 , 00 2 1,5 00

CONS ISTEN CY LIMIT S (%) 0 0 20 40 60 80

Fill Sandy

PORE PRES SU RE (K Pa) 100

0 0 50 10 0 150 20 0

F L IL 5 ' z a t e rful l f d s si p ati on o f i ex ce ss po re p r ss ure e

5 Di stri bu ti n o c al cu a ted from l = 0.3 ti me s z o r ' f ac t al ex ce ss u u M ea su r d e di stri bu t o n i 20 u nc oa t d e

Sil t

10

10

10

10 Bi um en t co ated un co ated
DEP H (m) T

10

DEPT H (m )

DEPTH (m )

15

DEP TH (m)

20

u
25

' z

20

DEP TH (m)

M e arin C ay l

15

15

C la y

April 19 66 20 J un e 1964 30

20

25

25 Bi u me n t co ate d

30
S il t

30

Sta r o f t Bed r ck o

Grav e l

30

30

35

40
35
35

S lt i Sand

40 Hydros ta tic D s tribut on i i 50

Notice the distinct Force Equilibr ium, the Neutral Plane

50

Distrib utio n of soil stress, exce ss pore pressu re, soil s ettleme nt, and pil e shorte nin g. Hery a site. (Data from Bjerr um et al., 196 9).

Soil pr ofil e and pore pr essur e distri buti on

9

Data f ro m En do e t al. 19 69

12

LOA ( K D N)
0
3,500
# 2

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

LOAD (KN )

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
= 0.30 = 0.40

3,000 2,500

# 3 # 4 # 5 # 6 # 7

#5 #6

500

1 ,000 1,5 00 2 ,000 2,5 00 3 ,000 3,5 00

2 9 DAYS

0 5 10 15
1 2 4 DAYS

LOAD ( KN)

#2 #3 #4 #5 #6

2 7 5 DAYS 4 0 0 DAYS 6 7 2 DAYS

Calcu late d C rve u

= 0.35

2,000

#4
1,500 1,000 D EPTH (m)

20 25 30 35 40

#7

#3
500

#
0 0 20 0 400 600 80 0 1, 00 0

D P TH (m) E

Me asure d lo ad

35

45 50

#7
40
= 0.25

DAY S AFTE R START

45

Loa ds from shorte nin g of close d-toe p il e June 19 64 thro ug h March 1 96 7 (Data from End o et al., 196 9)

50

13

Measured load distribution and di tribution matched to measured s values in effective stress anal si . (Data from Endo e al., 1969). y s t

16

Combining the Pile cE43 distributions of load and of settlement measured June 1964 th rough Ma rch 1967
Loa d Distri butio n Settleme nt Distrib ution

Study o two instrumen f ted, pre cast concre piles dri en through marine clay te v and into sand a Bckebol, Gteborg Sweden (Fellenius 1972) t ,

Pile Soil

N.P.

Notice t he incre asing mobiliz atio n of toe resist ance

(Endo et al., 1969)

Notice t he incre asing move me nt o f th e pile to e

14

17

LO AD (KN )
0
San dy Si t l

500

1 0 0 1 ,5 0 2 , 0 0 2 ,5 0 3 ,0 0 3 0 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 ,5
0

SETT LEMENT (m m)
0 5 0 1 0 0 1 0 5 20 0

0 5 10

1800 1600
Sec o l oa nd d pl c e on pi e s a d l Fi rs t l oa pl c e d a d on p l e i s

2 m th c k fi l i p aced over si te l

M & M5 1

FORCE AT GAGE (KN)

P le i
10 15

1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0

M2 & M6

M3 & M7

DE OTH (m)

C l a y

15 20 25 30 35 40

M & M7 3

20

Soi l

M2 & M6

25 30

S i l t S a n d

Neutral plane
Open -toe Pil e C o s ed l -toe P l es i
35

M1 & M5
M4

40 45 T e o Pe e ti n n tra o

M4

45 50

Closed -toe Pile

50

500

1, 000

1, 500

2,000

2, 500

3, 000

3,500

DAYS AFTE R END OF DRI VING

Load di tribution in the three long piles together and settlement of soil and piles s measured March 1967 672 days after start. (Data from Endo et al., 1969).
15

Measured loads in piles versus time after driving

18

F ORC E AT GAG E (KN)

0 0

50 0

10 0 0

15 0 0

20 0 0

V ariabl load e

LOAD (KN)
2 00 400 600
Ol d
S lt i & C ay l

0
Tw o mont s h

0
T o y ears w later (74 5 d ay s)

10

after s tart ) ( 57 d ay s 5

= L IVE LOADS

20

= 0.5

Fil l

Placing t he fill

10

30

DEPT H (m)

15

Mar n e i Cla y

Note, the dra gloa d was elimin ated by the live lo ad

2,650
40

1 923

1988 0

Neutr al Plane

20

Clay
Weak Sha le Bedro k c and Residu al Soil

50

Tha t th e to e resist ance is s mall is due t o t hat t he move me nts are not large en oug h t o mobiliz e a ny la rge r t oe resist ance

25
60

30

Distribution of load in Piles I and II

19

22

Data from Leung, Radhakrishnan, and Tan (1991)

CASE #10
M EASURED

STRESS (K ) Pa 0 0 50 10 0 15 0 2 0 0 25 0

S ETTLEME NT (mm )

0 0 5 10

1 00 200 30 400 500 0

CAL CUL ATED FINAL (a fte r8 0 y ear ) s

10

(' Z) f
DEPTH (m) DE PTH (m)
15

Inoue, Y., T amaoki, K., Ogai, T ., 1977. Settlement of building due to pile downdrag. Proc. 9th I CS MFE, T okyo, Vol.1, pp. 561 564.

15 20 25 30 35 40

20

( ' Z )i
25

P R C S OLI D TI O E ON A N S TR E S S ,

'c

30 35

The settl em ent meas ur ed a t d ept h amo unt ed t o o nly a few millim ete rs, but t his wa s enou gh to f ully mobiliz e th e nega tive s kin frictio n

A Do wn drag C ase
A three-storey building with a foo prin of 15 m by 100 m founded on t t 500 mm diame open-toe pipe piles driven through sand and silty clay ter to bearing in a sand layer a abou 35 m depth The piles had more t t . than adequate capaci y to carry the building. Two years after t construction, the building was noticed to have settled some 150 mm. Measurements during the following two years showed about 200 mm additional settlemen The building was de t. molished at that time .

40

Distrib utio n of measur ed a nd ca lcul ated co nso lid atio n settleme nt

Force gage locations 20

CASE #7
Leung, C.F, Radhakri hnan, R., and Siew-Ann Tan (1991) presented a case history on s instrumented 280 mm square precast concrete piles driven in marine clay in Singapore

< 102 m >

Note, the distribution of negati e v skin friction is linear (down to the beginni g of the transition zone) n indicating the proportionality to the effective overburden stress

SAN FILL D
FIN E SAN D

% S I TY C LAY: w = w L = 40 - 60%; u = 40 L K P

FIN SA D E N

Neut ral Plane

S ILTYC LAY: w = w L = 40% - 60%; = 80 u S ILT & SA ND

FI E SA N ND

21

Pile Toe De pth

Inou e 1 977

SAN FILL D FINE SA ND % ; S LTY CLA w = w L = 40 - 60% u = 40 I Y: K P FIN SA D E N S ILTYCLA w = w L = 40% - 60%; = 80 Y: u
S ILT & SA ND

Highly loaded (max allowed by code)

Pro vinc e A

Pr ov ince B

Lightly loaded

30 m lon g pil s d e e riv n to b edrock

XXXX
NEUTR AL PLAN E

FI E SA N ND

50 m lo g n p i e s d ri ve n to l s h a b a rri g ft e n

Marin e clay on bedr ock

Settlemen be t tween piles in Row 6 and Row 10 from Sep. 1967 through May 1969 = 150 mm.

Slope 1 : 100 (Sep 67 Apr 71)

One Bridge Two foundations

Inou e 1 977

28

Stres s a nd Pres sure (KPa )

0 -5 0 5 1 0 2 0 0 400 600 8 0 0

LO AD SETTLEMENT
Bu ilding

A CAS E HIS TORY OF A S TRI P-MALL FOUNDE D ON P ILE S

S AN D

L oad in Pile
CLA Y Settling L ayer

So il se tl ment t e

GROUND SURFACE

Depth (m)

1 5 2 0 2 5 3 0 3 5 4 0 4 5

D epth (m)

S AND

Final E ff ctiv e e Stress

CLAY

S AN D

54 ft ( 1 m) 6

The s oils inv est igati on revealed 54 f t (16m) of no-s trength "muc k". Design c al led for 54 f t long piles . Des igner dis count ed all s haft resis tanc e c ont ribution.

Pore P re ssure

"C u e rr nt" E ff ctiv e e Stress

sil t S AN D

Speculative distribution
Data f ro m In ou e 19 77

Limestone bedroc k providing good bearing

29

Two case histories

on Damaging Drag Load and Damaging Downdrag

G ROUND SURF ACE

54 ft (16m) of "muck'

Limestone bedrock provi ding good bearing

27

Strip-Mall as designed

30

A real DOWNDRAG case

ORIGINAL GROUND S URFA CE 5 f t (1.5m ) of fill adde d be fore the piles wer e dr ve n i

Pile toe response for where the settlement is small (1) and where it is large (2)
LOAD an d RESIS TANCE
0 0 1 ,5 0 0 0 0

SE TTL EMENT

Utimate Resistance

NE UTRAL PLAN E 1

DE PT H

54 ft (1 6m) of "mu ck"

N EUTRA L P LANE 2

1 2
Toe P enet rations = Movement into the soil

5 ft ( 1.5 m) of "muc k"

X x X x X x X x X x X x X x X

Limest one bedroc k providing good bearing

31

Note, the mag nitu de of settleme nt affects not only the m agn itud e of toe resistanc e but als o the le ngth of the Tran sition Zone

34

T he distribution of load at the pile cap is governed b y the load-transfer beh avior of the piles. T he design pile can be said to be the ave rage pile. Howe ver, t he loads can differ considerably between t he piles depending on toe resistance, length of piles.

Pile toe res po nse for where the settlem ent is small (1) and where i t is large (2), sh owi ng toe pene trati on
LOAD a nd RESI TA NCE S
-50 0 0 1, 000 0 0

A 1

SETTLEMENT
200

U tm a i te R e s tance si

DE PTH

NEUTRAL PLA E 1 N NEUTRAL PLANE 2

0

T he location of the neutral plane is Natures compromise in finding the equilibrium. If the end result by design or by mista ke is that the neut ral plane lies in or above a compressible soil layer, the pile group will settle even if the total factor of safety appea rs to be acceptable.
32

TO E PENETRA TI N O
0

TOE RESISTANCE C

12

Toe Res s tan es i c

Toe Penetra s tion

2 3

Note, the mag nitu de of settleme nt affects not only the m agn itud e of 35 toe resista nce but a lso the l engt h of the Transition Zone:

The princ ip les of the mec han ism are i ll ustrated in the foll owi ng thre e di agram s

Load-movement relations
Pile sh aft by t-z relation Pile toe b y q-z rel ation
R = MVM NT^Ex p
10 0

80

SHAFT

R1 R2
TOE
Ex p. =0.05

= (

1 exp ) 2

R esis tance (%)

60

40

Ex p. =0.10 Ex = 0 p. .20

20

Ex p.= 0.33 E p. = 0 x .50 Ex p. =0.75

The mo bilize d to e r esista nce, Rt, is a f uncti on of th e Net Pil e T oe M ovem en t 33

0 0 20 40 60 80 100

Movement (%)
36

Similarly for the LRFD : Do not include the drag load when dete rmining the factored re sistance !
60 0

50 0 40 0

R1 R2

= (

1 e xp ) 2

Drag l oad n ot sub trac ted fr om t he fact ore d r esista nce

FA T OR D R E S S A C E C E I T N

Drag l oad fac tor ed and sub tra cted !

FA TO R D R S S N E C E E I TA C F A OR D R S S T A CT E E I NCE m nus FA C R E D R G O D i TO D A L A LO AD (K N) Fact or s =0 . and 1. 5, es pect vel y 6 r i

LOAD (KN)

LO AD (KN)
2,0 00

C P CT Y A A I

C A T AP CI Y

30 0 20 0

DEP TH (m )

Alternative expression
R1 = 1 e bw R2
0 5 10 15

0 0

5 00

1,0 00

1,50 0

2,5 00
0

500

1,0 00

1,5 00

2 ,000

2 ,500

10
D AG LO AD R

D EPTH (m)

10

10 0 0

b = Constan = t about 0.04 0.15 w = Penetration,

15

15
D R G LO A A D

MOVEMENT (mm )

20

20

37

The location of the neu plane (i.e the location of the force equilibrium tral ., and the settlement e quilibr ) canno be de ium t termined u sing factored loads and resistan ces! Mother Nature doe not do factoring s .

40

A quote from a textbook * ) assigned to 4th Year students at sev eral North A meric an Univer sities Piles locate in settling s layers are subjecte to negative sk d oil d in friction called downdrag. The settleme of the soil layer causes the nt friction forces to act in the same direction as the loa ding on the pile. Rather tha prov n iding resis tance, the ne gative skin fr iction im poses additional loa on the pile. The net effect is that the pile load ds capacity is reduce and pile settleme increases. The allowa d nt ble loa ca d pacity is given as:

Imagine a shaft-bearing pile (no toe resistance) with a certain capacity and an allowable load for a factor o sa f fety of 2.0 . If a factor of safe o 2 is applied also to the drag load and the drag load ty f .0 is subtracted from the allowable load . . . , then ? The allowable load becomes zero ! Imagine tha sa pile designed for uplift: Logically, if one subtracts the t me drag load for the pu case should one not add it for the pull case ?? sh , !!?? Do you think tha there s a diffe t i rence in bearing capacity be tween an ordinary precast and a prestressed pile? The stress in the pile has nothing to do with the bearing capacity.

Qallow =

Qult Qneg FS

If yo u thi nk this ghas tl y reco mme nda tio n is c orrect, you hav e not been pa yin g atten tio n !

*) Compassion perhaps misd irectedcompels me not to id entify th author e

38

41

Do not include the drag load when dete rmining the allowable load!

Drag l oad n ot sub trac ted fr om t he allowa ble l oad

A LLO WAB LE 5 LO A D - ( Fs = 2. )

Drag l oad su btr acte d!

A LLO WA LE LO A D mi us B n D R G LO D 0 A A *1.

LO AD (KN )
1 ,5 0 0 2 ,0 0 0

C PA C TY A I

LOAD (KN )
1 ,0 0 0 1 0 ,5 0 2, 00 0

C P C TY A A I

0 0

50 0

1 ,0 0 0

2 ,5 0 0 0

500

2 ,5 0 0

Negative-skin-friction/drag-load does not diminish capacity. Drag load (and dead load) is a matter for the pile structural strength, and the main question is if there is settlement that can cause downdrag. T he approach is expressed in The Unified Design Method.

1 0

DEP TH (m)
D AG LO D R A

DEP TH (m)

1 0

1 5

1 5
D A LO D R G A

2 0

2 0

39

42

Example of where pile le ngth is governe by settleme as oppose to capacity d nt d

The Unified Design Method is a three-step approach

1. The dead plus live load must be smaller than the pile capacity divided by an appropriate factor o safety. The drag load is no included f t when designing against the bearing capaci y. t 2. The dead load plus the drag load must be smaller than the structura stre l ngth divided with a appropriate factor o sa f fety. The live load is not included because live load and drag load cannot coexist. 3. The settlement of the pile (pile group) must be smaller than a limit ing
value. The live load and drag load a not included in this analysis. re
Depth (m)

A xial Load (KN ) 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,00 0 4,00 0

Set tlemen t (m m)

0 0

100

200

300

1 0

10
A fter w ick dr ain effect

With out wick dr ains

Pri ma ry a n d Se co n a d ry

2 0

20

3 0

30

4 0

40

5 0

50

43

Sandpoint, Idaho

46

Axial design for seismic condition

Cons trui ng the N eutral Pla ne a nd Determi nin g the All owa ble Loa d
44

Settlement analysis by the Equivalent Footing Method

FIL ,etc. LS

Liquefaction (Adapazari, Turkey)

G .W.

Eq v a e n Fo ti g ui l t o n p a ce d a t t e L o ca ti n l h o o th e Ne u l Pl a e f tra n

Th e c o p ss b i i ty i n th s m re i l i z o e m u t b e o f so i l a n p e n s d il c o bn d m i e

Ecombined

Apile E pile + Asoil E soil A pile + Asoil

2 d s ti b u o :1 i r ti n

Se ttl me n o f th e p i e d fo u d ti n i s c a se d e t l n a o u b y th e c o p s si o o th so l d u t i n e se m re n f e i e o cr a o f e cti ve stre ss be o w the n utra l pla ffe l e ne fro m e xte rn l l o a a p i e to th e p l e a a d p l d i s nd, fo r e xa mp l e fro m fi s , e b n me n , l o a s o n , ll m a k ts d a d a ce n fo u d ti n s, a d l o we n o f j t n a o n ri g g ro u d a r t b e . n w te a l

2 d stri b u o :1 i ti n

45 Photo courtesy of Noel J. Gardner, Ottawa

48

Liquefaction (Adapazari, Turkey)

CASE HISTORY EXAMPLES

49 Photo courtesy of Noel J. Gardner, Ottawa

The Unified Method Applied to Seismic (Liquefaction) Design

L OAD and RE SI STANCE (KN)

0 0 5
L u efia b zo n iq le e

LO AD and RE SIS TANCE (KN)

0 0 5
L iquefied!

1,0 00

2,000

3,000

4,000

1 ,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

10

10

DE PT H ( m)

15 20 25 30 35

DE PT H ( m)

15 20 25 30 35

The New Inter nati ona l Airp ort, Bangk ok Thai la nd

Lique facti on i n q li mite d thic knes s zo ne occur rin g ab ove the ne utr al pl ane i s of no p ractic al c onse que nce fo r th e pile s.

Data from
Fox, I., Du, M . and Butt ling,S . (200 4) and Buttling, S. (200 6)

What about liquefaction occu rring below the neutral plane?

LOAD and RES IST A LOAD a nd R S IS TANCE (KN E NCE (KN) )
0 0
0 0

THAILAND

1,000 1,000

2,000

3,00 3,000 300 , 00

4,000

S ud den increased settl ment e 0 5 10 D EPTH (m) 15 20 25 30 35

S ETT LE MEN T

5 5 10 10

D PT H DEP TH ((m) E DE PT H m)

15 15 20 20 25 25 30 30 35 35
Liquefied! L qu e i d! Liquefied! i fe

Increase in t e o penetratio penetrati n o

Pile toe oadP l e toel oadi l moveme curve ovement curve nt m

54

Current and Future (long-term) Pore Pressure Di tribution s

Po re Pres sure (KPa )
0 0 5 10 15
YE AR
1 975 0 D p to Grao u n ter T b e (m) e th wa a l 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
D esi gn P hase

The desig n (resis tance distri bu tio n) for 600 mm diam eter bored pile i nstalle d to a 30 m em bed men t de pth.
Sh or t- Te rm
500
,0 0 Qd = 1 4 KN Fs = 2 .0

LOA D (K N)
RULT = 2 7 KN ,8 0

Lo ng -T erm
Qd = 1 , 4 0 KN 0 F s = 2 .0

LOAD (K N)
RULT = 2 6 KN ,1 0

100

200

30 0

400

Nearby Observations of Groundwater Table

1 98 0 1 98 5 1 99 0 19 95 20 00 20 05 2 01 0

0
Fs = 2 o n o n .0 l g te ca p c i y rm a t

Dep th (m)

20 25 30 35 40 45 50
S ho t Te m r- r ( Current) L ong-Term

10 D EPTH (m)
D EPTH (m)
C nst r c t on o u i P ase h

10

20

Qn = 7 7 KN 0

20

Settle ment occ urring below t is h depthis the key to t e h desi n g

Qn = 5 0 KN 0 Cl a y

30

Sa n d

30

Pumping (mining) o groundwa has reduced the pore pressure In 1996 f ter s. during the beginning of the de sign process, pu mping in the area was stopped. Pore pressu measu re rements indicate that the desired e ffect is being reached; the pore pressure are rising. s

The extensive testing and the conserva tive assumption on fu ture pore . ctural streng of the pile is mo than th re pressures allowed an F s of 2.0 The stru ,500 KN 1,800 KN adequate for the load at the neu plane: Q d + Q n 1 tral
Data from Fox, I., Du, M . and But tling, S. (2 004)

T he settlements for the piled foundations were calculated to:

Construction Long-term Total

Trellis Roof Pylons Terminal Building Concourse

20 mm 30 35

90 mm 15 20

110 mm 45 55

The clay is so and normally consolidated wi h a modulus nu ft t mber smaller than 10. All foundations the trellis roo terminal buildings, concourse, walkways, etc. f, are placed on piles. The stress-bulbs from the various foundations will overlap ea ch others areas resulting in a co mplicated se ttlemen analysis. t

* * *

Example fr om a actual pr n oject somewhere in Europe

Several static loading tests on instrumented piles were performed to establish the load-transfer conditions at the site at the time of the testing, i.e., short-term conditions. Effective stress analysis of the test results for the current pore pressures established the coefficients applicable to the long-term conditions after wat er tables had stabilized.

A 300 mm diameter pile installed to a depth of 25 m through a surficial 2 m thick fi ll placed on a 20 m thick layer of soft clay deposited on a thick sand layer.
LO AD (K N) 0 0
DEAD L AD O L IVE L OAD CAPACITY F ILL

500

1,0 00

1,5 00

2 ,000

A static loading test has been performed and the evaluation of the test data has establi hed that s the pile capacity is 1,400 KN. Applying a factor of safety of 2.0 results in an allowable load of 700 KN (dead load 600 KN and live load 100 KN). The drag load is 300 KN. The desi ner insisted on subtracting the drag load g from the capacity (consi ered available onl from d y below the neutral plane) before determining the factored resi tance (then = 900 KN). The action s load was considered to be the sum of dead load, live load, and drag load, which sum already before multiplication by the load factor was larger than the factored resi tance! The test results were stated to s show that the 1,400 KN capacity pile piles was inadequate to support the 700 KN load. The designer required longer piles and a consi erably d increased number of piles.

A
1 0 DEP TH (m)

B
C L A Y Neut al p a r l ne

A total of 25,000+ piles were installed. The desig n em ploye d the u nifie d pil e desi gn metho d.

1 5
DRAG L AD O

2 0

2 5
TOE RESISTANCE

S A N D

3 0

!! $$$ !!
Fellenius 2006

60

Graphic Illustration of the Case

Piled foundations in current codes

Pi e-h l ead s l em ts ett en G ro und su f ce ra se e me ttl nt 200

LOA D (KN ) 0 0 500 1,0 00 1,5 00 2,00 0

S ETTLEMEN T ( KN) 50 100 150

0 0

The Canadian Building Code and Highway Design Code (1992), as well as the Hong Kong Code (Geo Guide 2006) appl the Unified Design method. That is, the drag load is onl of y y concern for the structural strength of the pile. Indeed, the Canadian Hi hway Code even g states that for piles shorter than aspect ratio (b/L) than 80, the design does not have to check for drag load. However, the design must always check for downdrag. The Manual of US Corps of Engineers indi ate a similar approach (but less expli it), stating c c that the drag load constitutes a settlement problem. The ASCE Practice for the Design and Installation on Pile Foundations (2007) includes the following definitions and statements:

10 D EPTH (m)

10 DE PTH (m)

15

Ne l pl ne utra a Forc e e l ib qui rium

15

Neu pla tral ne Eq se me ual ttle nt

DOWNDRAG: The settlement due to the pile being dragged down by the settling of surrounding soil; DRAG LOAD: Load imposed on the pile by the surrounding soil as it tends to move downward relative to the pile shaft, due to soil consolidation, surcharges, or other causes. And: In some cases, the allowabl load, as well as the pile embedm depth, is governed e ent by concerns for settlement and downdrag, and by concern for structural strength for dead load plus drag load, rather than by capacity.

20

20

25

25 Pil t e p trati ns e o ene o

30

30

61

64

The Unifie Method (repeate Illustration) d d

LOAD and RE SIS TANCE ( KN) 0 0
DEAD L OAD

SETTL EMENT (mm)

0

500

1,000 1,50 0 2,000 2,50 0 3,000 0 5

PIL E "CAPACITY"

SETT EM ENT OF L PIL E HEAD 20 10

30

40

50

60

70

80

The FHWA has pr oduc ed one of the mos t ex tensi ve r ece nt g uid elines doc um ent. T he f ull r efe ren ce is: Repo rt N o. FHWA-NHI -0 5-0 42, Desi gn a nd C ons truc tion of D rive n Pile Fou nd ation s - V olum e I and II. Nation al Hig hway Instit ute , F ede ral Hi ghw ay Ad minist rati on, U .S. De par tm ent of Tra nsp ort ation ,
Washin gto n, D.C. , April 20 06. 1, 450 pa ges.

5 10 15 DE PTH (m) 20 25
DRAG L D OA

10 15 DE PTH (m) 20 25 30 35
TOE ) RESI TANCE * S NEUTRAL PL ANE

The issue of dr ag lo ad and dow nd rag , is c over ed i n a bou t 20 of the tot al nu mb er of p ag es. I n all essen tial p art s, th e FHWA do cu ment ad he res t o t he p rinci ples of t he U nified Desi gn Met hod. The FHWA doc ume nt i ndica tes t he followi ng c rite ria f or i den tifying a dr ag lo ad and /or dow nd rag pro blem . If any on e of th ese c rite ria is me t, d rag loa d a nd down dr ag s hall b e co nsid ere d in the desi gn.

Th e cr it er ia ar e:
1. The settl em ent of t he gro und sur fac e ( afte r th e pil es a re i nstall ed) will be lar ger th an 1 0 mm (0. 4 in ). 2. The piles will be l on ger tha n 2 5 m (8 2 ft ). 3. The com pr essibl e soil l aye r is t hicke r th an 10 m ( 33 f t). 4. The wate r t able will be lowe red m ore tha n 4 m (13 ft) . 5. T he heig ht o f th e e mb ank men t to be plac ed o n t he gro und sur fac e exc eed s 2 m (6.5 ft) .
T M OVEM ENT T OE HAT M OBIL IZES T TOE HE R ESI TANCE S

30 35 40 45
) i t * Po rt o n o f the o e e i r s s tan ce wi l h a ve l de ve o pe d fro m h e d ri vi g l t n

40 45

Note however, that negative skin friction is usually fully mobilized at a movement between the pile and the soil of about 1 mm, not 10 mm. Where settlement is smal ler than 10 mm, downdrag is not the problem. However, for piles longer than 30+ m (100+ ft), the drag load plus dead load might be of concern for the structural strength of the pile.

62

65

Factors of safe ty an d L RFD

The most recen AASH LRFD Specifica t TO tions has applied the requiremen of t t ctored service the Eurocode 7 in tha the drag load (factored) is added to the fa load (dead plus live) and the condition is applied that the resistance is the pile capacity minus the drag load (factored):

I FOR YOUR SAFETY, PL EASE KNOW, I KNOW, . . . T RIED HOLD ON TO TH E HAND RAILS TO EXPLAIN T HE REAL WORLD T O THE CODE WRITERS? BU T HAVE Y OU EVER

fq Qf + f n Qneg fr (Rult Qneg )

?!?

63

66

Eurocode Guide , Example 7.4 (Bo red 0.3 m d iameter pi le)

Q (unfactored) = 300 KN
FILL SOFT CLAY 5.0 m

Piled r aft foundation with loads supported by contact stre s and pil s s e

Av rage unit sha ft r esistance, r s = 20 KP e a

Rs = 94.2 KN; Rs = Q n

U neven load on raft suppor ted by the pi es l (Fs = 1. 0) Remaining load on r aft evenly distributed as con t ct s ess a tr

SILTY CLA Y

Average r s = 50 KP a
11.5 m

CA ULATI ON LC S fq* 300 + fn*94 543/f r 1.35 *300 + 1.35 *94 543/1.0
532 543

Ev enly distributed oad on the r aft supported by evenl dis ibuted piles (Fs = 1. 0) l y tr

Rs = 543 KN

Rt = 0 K ? ! N

(Alternative: If fr = 1.1, the e ngth l n the silty cl y becomes 12.4 m) i a

" The sett lement due to the fil l is suff icient to develop maximum negative skin f ri ct ion in the s oft clay ".
The Gui de st ates th at th e tw o rs -v alues ar e f rom eff ectiv e str ess c alcul ation . The values co rrel ate to s oil u nit wei ghts of 18 KN/ m3 an d 19 .6 KN/ m3, -co efficie nts of 0. 4 in bo th lay er s with gr ou ndwa ter tabl e a t gr ou nd s urf ace, an d a fill str ess o f 3 0 KPa. The Gui de st ates th at t he neu tral plan e lies at the i nte rfac e o f th e tw o clay l aye rs, which b ase d o n th e inf or mati on given in t he exa mple, ca nnot be cor rec t. Bu t th ere is a good de al m or e wr ong with this desi gn ex am ple.

67

70

Analysis using the same numerical values for the pile shaft, but including the benefit of a small toe resistance
LOAD (KN )
0 20 0
F s = 2. 5

SETT LEMEN T (m m)
80 0 1, 00 0
0

Piled pad foundation with loads suppor ted by co ntact stress and p l es i

400

600

5 D EP TH (m )
D EP TH (m)

10
M imu ax m L oad = 5 KN 00 Qn = 2 KN not 94 K N 00 Rt 125 KN

1 0

Neut a r l Pla ne THE K EY QU ESTION : s i the settlem acce a ent pt ble?

Conventional raf t or mat Enginee red Backfill

Geotextle i

15

1 5 T oe M eme ov nt 2 0

R f = 76 0/ 1. 35 K > 1 . 35*3 00 K N N R f = 560 K N > 4 05 K N

20

= Fact red resi tan o s ce

If the se ment is accep ttle table, there is room for shortening the pile or increasing the load. Tha would raise the location o the neutral plane. Would then the pile t f settlemen still be a t cceptable?
68 71

Piled Raft an d Piled Pa d F ou nda tio ns

Conventional piled found ations w f oor suppor t d on the piles or as a gr ound slab ith l e

69

The Bi-D irectional Static Loading Test The O-cell Te st

Jorj Osterberg 2001

Schematics of the Osterberg O-Cell Test

(Meyer an d Scha de 1 99 5)

The O-cell ca n als o be i nstall ed i n a driv en p ile. Her e in a 600 mm cyl ind er pi le w ith a 40 0 mm central v oid

Telltales and Grout Pipe

Pile Head

Upward Load THE O-CELL Downward Load

2 5

Three O-Cells inside the reinforcing cage

(My Thuan Bri dg e, Vietnam)
3 6

EXAMPLE 1

Results of an O-cell test on a 2.8 m by 0.8 m, 24 m deep barrette in Manila, The Philippines
Load (K N)
0 - 60 - 50 - 30 5,000 1 0,000 15,0 00 20,00

Load-Movement Curves
9 ,00 0 8 ,00 0 7 ,00 0
O Cell -

LOAD (KN)

- 40

6 ,00 0 5 ,00 0 4 ,00 0 3 ,00 0 2 ,00 0 1 ,00 0 0 0 20 40 60 80 M O VEM ENT ( mm)

Strain-Gage Lev #1 el

M ovement (m m)

- 20 - 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Upward Upward

Approximate extension of the toe movement to the zero conditions

Stra n -G e i ag Level #2

Downwar d

S train-Gage Level #4

1 00

12 0
10

EXAMPLE 2

Searching for the Residual Load

12 0 10 0 80 60 40 20 0 -2 0 -4 0 -6 0 -8 0 0 2,0 00 4 ,00 0
Weight of Shaft R esi ual d Load LOWE R PLATE DO WNW ARD MVMNT

Shaft

5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0. 0 0.5 1.0 1 .5 2.0 P I E C O M RES SION (m L P m)
I NDI CA EDRESI DUA L OA T L D

LOAD (KN)

UP PER PLATE UP WARD M VMNT

Toe

6,0 00

8 ,00 0

1 0, 00 0

O-Cell test on a 1,250 mm diameter, 40 m long, bored pile at US82 Bridge in Washington, Mississippi installed into dense sand
8

9,000 8,000 7,000

9 ,0 0 0 8 ,0 0 0

MO VEMENT (mm)

O-Cell Load

7 ,0 0 0 6 ,0 0 0 5 ,0 0 0 4 ,0 0 0 3 ,0 0 0 2 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0 0 0 .0 25 .0 5 .0 0 7 5 .0 100 .0 1 2 .0 5 1 0 .0 5 PLATESEPARATION (OPENING ) (m m )

LO AD (KN)
11

Resistance Distribution
LO A (KN) D
0 0 5 10
S t a n -Gag e r i L eve l #4

From the O-Cell results, one can produce the load-movement curve that one would have obtained in a routine Head-Down Test Head down

A VER AGE U NIT S HA FT R ESISTA NC E ( KPa)

8,000 10,000
Cl ay Si t l

2 ,000

4,000

6,0 00

G.W.0
5 10

100

200

30 0

400

D EPTH (m)

15 20 25 30 35 40

DEPT H (m )

S rai n-Ga ge t Le vel # 3 S rai n-Gag e t Lev el # 2 S rai n-Ga ge t Le vel # 1

San dy Si t l

15 20 25 30 35 40

O-Cel l L eve l Pi e T oe l

De ns e Sa nd wi h t Gr vel a

The unit shear resistance at shaft failure corresponds to a beta coefficient of about 1.0. 9

LO AD (KN)

6,000

O-Cell Load

12

EXAMPLE 4

Kahuk u Brid ge acr oss Kameh ame ha H igh way, Ha wa ii Test on 600 mm, 17 m lo ng, bor ed p ile
LOA D (ki s) p
0 0 100 200 300 400 500 6 00 700 800
0 0 100 200

LOA D k i s) ( p
3 00 400 5 00 600 700 800

10

10

S E U A VE P C L TI FU LL Y MOB LI ZE I D

20

20

30

30

D E TH (ft) P

40

D E TH f t) P (

A P OX MA E P R I T D
40

O-c el l
50

O-ce l
50

60

S haf t and t oe esi st ances r ar e not ul y mobi i zed f l l b el w t he O cel l o -

60

70

70

D TA FR OMO-C E L TE S A L T

C V R E TO ON E T D H A -D O N "TE T" E D W S
80

13

80

16

EXAMPLE 5

O-Cell Results Shown Two Ways

Test at Bangk ok A irport
120 100
9 ,00 0 8 ,00 0 7 ,00 0 6 ,00 0 5 ,00 0 4 ,00 0 3 ,00 0 2 ,00 0 1 ,00 0 0
R si dua l Lo ad e Wei ght of S haf t Toe Move ment S ha f t M veme nt o

MOVEMENT (mm)

80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 -60 -80 0 2,000 4 ,000 6,000 8,000 10, 00 0

LOA D ( KN )

20

40

60

80

1 00

1 20

LOAD ( KN)

M OVE ENT (mm) M

14

17

EXAMPLE 3

Finding a Soft Pile Toe

20 10 0 MOVEMENT (mm )
RE BOUND W HEN UNLOA DING

Stage 1 Lower Cell activa ted Upper cell closed Stage 2 Lower Cell open Upper Cell activa ted Stage 2 Lower Cell closed Upper Cell activa ted

- 10 - 20 - 30 - 40 - 50 - 60 - 70 - 80 0 2

COM PRESSION OF SOFT SOIL AT TO E

6 8 10 APPLIED L OAD (MN)

12

14

16

Data from
Fox, I ., Du, M. an d But tlin g,S. (2004 ) Buttli ng, S . (200 6)

Toe load-move ment for a pile with a so toe at Albuquerque, New Mexico ft 15 (Data from Osterberg and Hayes, 1999)

18

Downward movemen during test phase 1 2, and 3 ts s ,

LOAD (KN)
0 0 25 P3 2,00 0 4,000 6,000 8 ,000 10,00 0
0 0 2 , 000

L o ad KN) (
4, 0 00 6, 00 0
0 0 2, 000 4, 00 0

Loa (KN) d
6 ,0 0 0 8, 00 0 1 0, 00 0 1 2, 00 0

1 2
P1 P2

5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Stage 3
5 10 15

S t ge 1 a

S t age 2

S ag e 3 t

MOVE MENT (m m)

50 75 100 125 150 175

De pth (m )

De p (m) th

20

25

30

35

? ?

Acti ve Ce l l In c t ve , Op n Ce l l a i e In c t ve , Cl se d Ce l a i o

40 45

4 8 mm Down wa r d Mo ve me nt

40

45

Concern w expressed (Buttling 2006) that the toe res as istance (Phase 1) was 3,000 KN and the shaft resistance for the lower segment w as 5,000 KN (P e 2), while in Phas 3 the has e combined shaft and toe resis tances w only 6,000 KN Should not the Phas 3 resis ere . e tance be 8,000 KN rather than 6,000 KN (i.e., the sum of the values 5,000 KN and 3,000)? 19

22

Dow nwa rd toe mov eme nts are best pl otted p er sequ enc e of testing

The lowe strain-gage values are very suspect st

LOAD F OR LOWEST STRAIN- GAGE (KN)
0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,5 00

LOAD (KN) LOAD ( KN)

0 2,00 0 2 ,000 4,000 4,000 6,0 00 6,000 8,000 8,000 10 00 10,0,000
0 0

Stage 2

DO WNWARD MO V (mm) ( m MOVEMENT EMENT m)

( Stage 3)

25 25
P1

1 2 1 2
PP2 2 P3

3 3
50

75 75 1 00 10 0 1 25 12 5 1 50 15 0 1 75 17 5
Active Cell Active C ell Inactiv Open Cell ell Inactiv e, Open C e, Inactiv C lo sed el l Inactiv e, Clo CCel e, sed l

P3 P1 and P2 d ata co mb ined

MOVEMENT ( mm )

50 50

Stage 1
100

Stage 3
150

200

20

23

EXAMPLE 6

Load Distri butions for th e Bangkok Airport Te st

Loa (KN) d
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 2,00 0 4,0 00 6 , 00 0

O-Cell tests for Hacienda Elena Development, Guay nabo, Puerto Rico

Loa (KN) d
0 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 ,0 0 0 4 ,0 0 0 6 0 ,0 0

Stage 1

Sta ge 2

De pth (m )

De pth (m )

2 0 2 5 3 0 3 5 4 0 4 5

6 2 mm Do wn a w rd Mo v e e t m n

1 1 m m to 0 e M o ve me n t

Sta e 3 g M ax Lo d a

21

24

EXAMPLE 7

Pensacola, Flori da
O-cell Test Results
2 0 1 0 0

410 mm diameter, 22 m long, precast concrete pile driven into silty sand

M OV EM T ( m EN m)

Cl aye y Si t l

-1 0 -2 0 -3 0 -4 0 -5 0 -6 0 -7 0 -8 0 0 1, 00 0 2 ,0 0 0 3 ,0 0 0 4 0 ,0 0 5 ,0 0 0

Sapro i t le Hard Cl ay

W ea t ered h Bed rock

LOAD ( KN)

25

Measured load-movements can be simulated (fitting) to t-z and q-z relations

Pile shaft by t-z relation; Pile to e by q-z rel atio n
R = MVM NT^Ex p
10 0

Pensacola, Florida, U SA

60

50

80

SHAFT TOE

MOVEM ENT (m m)

R1 R2

= (

1 exp ) 2

40

30

Resistance (%)

60
Ex p. =0.05

20 10

40

Ex p. =0.10 Ex = 0 p. .20 Ex p.= 0.33

20
E p. = 0 x .50 Ex p. =0.75

-10 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2, 500

0 0 20 40 60 80 100

LOAD ( KN )

Movement (%)

26

Pensacola, Florida, U SA

Fitting Re sults
O-cel l Test R esul ts
w UniP le S imulation ith i
1 00 5,0

MOVEMENT (mm )

1 00 0,0

Co b ni g t e m i n h t-z an q-z d curves

-1

LOAD (KN)

H ead
Extrap a ti n o ol o f O-c e l dat l a

-2

Exp 0.2 .= 0 5,0 00

Shaft
Ex p 0. 5 .= 5

-3

Toe
0 0 10 20 3 0 4 0 50 60 70

-4
MO VEMENT (mm)

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

LOAD (KN )
27

Pensacola, Florida, U SA

4, 000 Exp. = 0. 45

Lo ad- Move ments . Me asur ed an d Fitte d to Un iPile Ca cu a tion. l l

5 0

3, 000 3, 000

4 0 3 0

LOA D (K N)) LOAD (KN

2, 000 2, 000

M VEMENT (mm) O

CURVE FIT
Strain-Gage Lo cations

2 0 1 0 0 -1 0 -2 0 -3 0 -4 0

Upw ard Mo vement

1, 000 1, 000

TEST

Dow nw ard Movement

0 0 0 0 2 4 6 8 2 4 6 8 D OW NW ARD TOE MOVEMEN T (mm ) DOW NWA RD TOE MOVEMEN T (mm) 10 10

O-c el l

-5 0 0 5 ,0 0 0 1 ,0 0 0 0 1 ,0 0 5 0 20, 00 0

LO AD (KN )

34

Pensacola, Florida, U SA

Test Results Processed for Design Analysis

LOAD (KN) LOAD (KN) 1 ,00 0 20 ,00 155,00 0 20 ,0000

5,000

4,000
3 5,00 0

0 0

0 0

5 ,000 5 , 00 0

1 0,00 0 1 0,00 0

25 ,000 25 , 00 0

30,0 00 30,0 00

0.30

E x = 0.15 p.

HEA D
3 0,00 0 O t ffse Li mi t

L OAD (KN )

3,000
2 5,00 0

5 5

TE ST
L AD (KN)) O

10 10

0.45

CURV E FIT 1,000

SHAFT
1 5,00 0

DEPTH (m ) DE PTH (m)

2,000

2 0,00 0

15 15

0.30

TO E

1 0,00 0

20 20

5,00 0

0 0 1 0 20 30 40 50 6 0
0 0 10 20 30

M ea u s red an Cal ul ted d c a Load ovem e Curves -M nt p Simula lus ted Pi e He l ad L oad-Movem e nt
40 50 60 70

25

___ 1.20

UPWARD SHAFT MOVEM ENT (m m )

M OVEMENT (m m

30

35

EXAMPLE 8

EXAMPLE 9

Bridge ove r Panama Can al, Paraiso Reach, Republic of Panama

O-cell test on a 2.0 m (80 inch es) di ameter, 30 m (1 00 ft) deep s haft dril led i nto the Pe dro Mi gue l an d Cuc arach a formati ons, Febru ary 20 03.

Torre Chapultepec, Mexico City, Mexico

O-cell T est on a 700 mm diameter 34 m dee p bored pile
0 m - 26 m desiccated clayey silt

5 m 34+ m dense sand and silt

33

Torre Chapultepec, Mex ico City, Mexico

0

D OWN WARD MO VEMENT (mm)

- 50 - 100 - 150 - 200 - 250 - 300 - 350 - 400 0 5 00 1 ,000

Toe-Up O-c ell Test

O-cell Tests on an 11 m long, 460 mm square precast concrete pile driven in silica sand in North-East Florida
(Data from McVay et al. 1999)

1, 500

2,0 00

2,5 00

LOAD ( KN)

A stu d y o f Toe an d Shaft Resista nce Respo nse to Load ing

40

Torre Chapultepec, Mex ico City, Mexico

0 0

Cone Stress, qt (MPa)

10 20 30 40 0 0

Slee Friction (K Pa) ve

1 00 2 00 30 0 0 0.0

Fricti n R ati (%) o o

0.2 0. 4 0 .6 0.8 1.0

10,000 10, 000

8,000 8, 000
D EPTH (m )

LOA D LOAD (KN )

6,000 6, 000

D EPT (m) H

D EPTH (m)

4,000 4, 000

PRE S

Head-Down T est Test

2,000 2, 000

10

10

10

2b

12

12

12

0 0 20 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

14

14

14

MOV EMEN T (m m) MOV (m

CPT soun din g next to an 1 1 m lon g, 460 mm sq uare precast concrete p il e driv en in s ilic a san d in N orth-East Flor ida
Data from Bullock et al. 2005, 1999 41

Torre Chapultepec, Mex ico City, Mexico

0

Toe Re sista nce Respo nse

1,600 1,400 CELL LOAD (KN)

D OWN WARD MO VEMEN T (mm) OWNW ARD M OVEMENT

- 50

Toe-Up Toe-U p O-c ell Test

1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200 0 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

2 1 3

- 100 - 150 - 150 - 200 - 250 - 300 - 350 - 400 0 500 50 0 1,000 1 ,000 1, 500 2,000 2, 000 2,500 2,5 00

T OE MOVEM ENT (mm)

LOAD ( KN) (KN)

Load-mo vement curves for the pile toe.

Data from Bullock et al. 2005, 1999

The two first cycles and beginning of the third cycle

42

1,600 1,400 CELL L OAD (KN) 1,200 1,000 800

Unit Sh aft Resist ance , r s ( KPa ) 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

-5 5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75
= 0.80 = 1.60 = 1.00

Shaf t Res istan ce, Rs (KN) 0 0 2 4 DEPTH ( m) 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 500 1 ,000 1,50 0 2 ,000 2,50 0 3 ,000

50

100

1 50

200

600 400 200 0 T OE MOVEM ENT (mm )

D EPTH (m)

E-F L CP C Sc h e m rtma n n Du tch Me y e o f rh Be ta Te ts s

= 0. 0 2

16 18 20
E -F LCP C

Load-mo vement curves for the pile toe during all four load cycles

Distributions of unit and total shaft resistances

Data from Bullock et al. 2005, 1999

43

Data from Bullock et al. 2005, 1999

46

Co ne Stress, qt (MPa)
0 0 10 20 30 40

D EPT (m) H

PRES
10

12

2b

14

44

Data from Bullock et al. 2005, 1999

Shaft Resista nce Respo nse

SHA T LOAD-M OVEM ENT DIA F GRAM F R M O-CELL T EST S O

1,60 0
PD A CAP WA P 1 8 m n. O R i B 1hB R O EO D

1,40 0

1,20 0 8 h ours LO AD (KN) 1,00 0

16 da s y 4 day s

80 0

60 0

40 0

20 0

0 0 5 1 0 15 20 25 30 3 5 40 4 5 50 C ELL EXT ENSION (m m ) UPWARD M OVEM ENT (mm )

Data from Bullock et al. 2005, 1999

45

ShinHo and MyeongJi Housing Project,

in the estuary of the Nakdong River, Pusan, Korea Project Managers: Drs. Song Gyo Chung and Sung Ryul Kim, Dong -A University, Busan Dong-

AIR VIEW (S hinho Site)

SITE PLAN (SH Site)

Si ty c lay l

0 0

Co n S tress , q t (MPa e )
10 20

Sl e e F tio fs ( Pa e v ric n, K )
30 0 0 25 50 75 100 0 0

P Pre s u (KPa ore s re )

500 1, 000 1, 500 0 0

F tio Ra to, fR (%) ric n i

1 2 3 4 5

Pr o file

FILL
10 10 10 10

The ques tio ns to resolv e in the de sign

1. What is the capaci y in the different layers? t

20

20

20

20

DE P H (m) T

DE T H (m) P

30

DE P H (m) T

DE T (m) P H

Silty C LAY (mari e) n

30

30

30

2. What is the depth to the force equilibrium/settlement equilibrium, i.e., the neutral plane 3. What will be the maximu load in the pile? Is the structural m strength adequate?
Very dense S AND

40

40

40

40

SAN D
50

SILT&CLA Y

50

50

50

60

60

60

60

4. What is the se ttlemen of the pile as a function of the location o t f the neutral plane .

10

0 0

Co n e Stres s, q (MPa) t
10 20

Slee ve F t o n (KPa) ric i

0 0 2 00 400 0 0

Po re Pre ss u (K ) re Pa
25 0 500 7 50 1, 000 0 0

F rictio Ratio (%) n

1 2 3 4 5

30

Profile

10

10

10

10

Mixed

20

20

20

20

D EPT H (m )

D EPT H (m )

DEPT (m) H

DEPT (m) H

CLAY
30

The shaft resistance: The toe resistance:

10,000 KN 5,000 KN KN

30

30

30

Pile structural strength 12,000 KN

40 40 40 40

SAN S AN D D

(when groute 16,000 KN d)

50

50

50

50

05- 08- 08 Mye ongji Site C -blo ck

Reduced pore pressure (dilation)

11

The Unifie Method for Design of Pile Foundations d d (typica only ; the numbers are not applicable to this s l ite)
LOAD and RE SIS TANCE ( KN) 0 0
DEAD L OAD

First S hinho O-cell te st pile

P R S (B / 200m m) E l

SETTL EMENT (mm)

0

500

1,000 1,50 0 2,000 2,50 0 3,000 0 5

PIL E "CAPACITY"

SETT EM ENT OF L PIL E HEAD 20 10

C n e St e ss , q (MPa) o r
2 50 3 00
0
t

30

40

50

60

70

80
0 5 10

50

1 00

1 50

2 00

10

20

30

12A, 1 2B, 12C, 1 2D

PR S E

5 10 15 DE PTH (m) DE PTH (m) 20 25

DRAG L D OA

H IG T o f E H FA LL ( cm)

10
10

10 15
DEPTH (m )

15 20 25
20

20

20 25 30 35
NEUTRAL PL ANE

30 35 40 45

10 20

DEP TH (m )

30

40

30 35 40 45
) i t * Po rt o n o f the o e e i r s s tan ce wi l h a ve l de ve o pe d fro m h e d ri vi g l t n

40
50
50
01A, 01B

TOE ) RESI TANCE * S

40 45

T M OVEM ENT T OE HAT M OBIL IZES T TOE HE R ESI TANCE S

55 60
60

12

S TRA IN ()
-3 00 0 5 -200 -100 0 100 20 0 300 400

9d

Strain measured during the 218-day wait-period between driving (grouting) and testing .

15d 23d

10 15 20

30d 39d 49d

DE PTH (m)

25 30

59d
35 40 45 50 55 60

82d

99d 122d 218d Day of Test

13

A tan E- modu of 30 G lus Pa, this strainchang corresp e onds to a oad ch l ange o 3,200 KN f

16

Temperatu Record re s The O-cell Toe- up Test

70

Upper O-ce plate continued ll upward during the unloading, but pile head did notmove ?!?

60

50 T EMP E R U AT RE ( C )

Temperat ure at v arious depths in t he grout of a 0.4 m center hole in a 56 m long, 0. 6 m diameter, cy inder pile. l

30

MO VEM ENT (mm)

40

30

-30

Breaking out the O-ce ll bottom plate

20

10

-60

Plunging ?!?

0 0 24 48 72 96 12 0 144 168 19 2 216 240

-90 0 1, 000 2, 000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000

HOU RS AFTE R GROUTING

LOAD T OE-UP T EST (KN)

14

17

Strain Record s
30
30 0 25 0

25

UPWA RD MO VEMENT ( mm)

20 0 15 0 ST R AIN ( ) 10 0 50 0 -5 0 -10 0 -15 0 -20 0 0 24 48 72 96 120 144 168 192 2 16 24 0 H OURS AF TER GROUTING

20

15

10

The p ile head did not move. A 16 mm pile shaft comp ressio n is not pos si le. b Pile mu st be cr ush ed abo ve (an d below? ) O-cell plat e.

0 0 1,00 0 2,00 0 3 ,000 4 ,000 5 ,000 6 ,000 7,0 00

LO AD TOE- UP TEST ( KN)

15

18

LO A 1st TOE-UP ( KN) D

-5,000 0 0 5, 000
- 5,000 0

L OAD 2n d T OE- UP ( KN)

0 5, 000

We have got the strain. How to we get the load?

Load is stress times area

10

10

20

20

DEPTH ( m)

D EPTH ( m)

30

30

Stress is Modulus (E) times strain

40

40

19

= E
22

50

50

The modulus is the key

60
60

1,500

3.0 mm mvmnt up
SG-1 SG-2

For a concrete pile or a concre te-filled bored pile, the modulus to use is the combined modulus of concrete, reinforcement , and steel casing

Strain-G age Loa d (KN)

1,000

500

E comb =
Ecomb Es As Ec Ac
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,0 00 6,000 O -c ell Load 2n d To e-up (KN)

Es As + E c Ac As + Ac
combined modulus modulus for steel area of steel modulus for concre te area of concrete

-500

-1,000

= = = = =

20

23

Now The Hea d-d own Test

10, 000

For a concrete pile or a concre te-filled bored pile, the modulus to use is the combined modulus of concrete, reinforcement , and steel casing

LOAD HEAD-DO WN TESTS (KN)

9, 000 8, 000 7, 000 6, 000 5, 000 4, 000 3, 000 2, 000 1, 000 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

E comb =
Ecomb Es As Ec Ac = = = = =

Es As + E c Ac As + Ac
combined modulus modulus for steel area of steel modulus for concre te area of concrete

MO VEMENT (mm)

21

24

 The modulus of steel is 200 GPa (207 GPa for those weak at heart) The modulus of concrete is. . . . ? Hard to an swer. There is a so o relation to the cylinder strength and the rt f modulus usually appears as a value around 30GPa, or perhaps 20 GPa or so, perhaps more. This is notgood e nough ans wer a be vague is not necessary. nd ing The modulus ca be determine fr the strain meas n d om urements . Calcula first the cha nge of s train for a cha nge of load. te

The Shinho te st pile head-down te st

LO AD , 2ndH EAD-D OWN (K N) L AD, O HEA D-DO WN (KN)

0 0 2 ,0 0 2 00 00 4 ,0 0 ,0 0 0 6 ,0 0 8 ,0 0 0 0 8 ,0 0 1 0 ,0 0 , 0 10 00

= 1.0

1 0
RE I U L SD A ( maxi mum)

= 0.4 (0.2

2 0

D EPTH (m) DEP T (m H )

= 0.1 (0. 1)
3 0 3 0

Et =

4 0 4 0

Values are known

T R E R E I TA N E ( f r U SS C o max m um r esi dual oa d) i l

Af e r t Unl oa di ng Unl oa di ng

= 0.7 (0.2) = 0.3 (0.1

5 0 5 0

PR UMED R I D ES ES UALL O AT AD ST RT OF O- E L T ST A C L E
ZE R LI E S A S R OF O N E I T TA R ZE R O LI N I S A T S TA TTOF 2N D H A D D OWN TE S E DD S 2N D H E A - - OWN T E TT

6 0 6 0

25

28

Example of T angent Modulus Plot

100 90
0

L O D, 2nd H EA D- DOWN (KN ) A

2,00 0 4 ,000 6,0 00 8,00 0 10,00 0

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

= 1. 0

TANGENT MODULUS (GP a)

80 70 60

10
RE S DU L I A (max m um) i

= 0 .4 (0.25

20

D EP TH (m)

50 40 30 20 10 0 0 200 4 00 6 00 80 0

= 0.1 (0.1 )
30

40

Best F it Line

T RUE RE S I T NCE (f r S A o max m um resi du al l oa d) i

Afte r Un o a d n l i g

= 0.7 (0.2 ) = 0.3 (0. 1

50

PRE SUMED RES AL L OA AT IDU D ST ART OF O-CE L T L EST

Z ROL I E I A T S A R OF E N S T T 2ND H A D- OW N T S T E D E

MI CROSTRA IN
26

60

29

The Shinho te st pile head-down te st

First Head-d own Test
60
C H ANGE OF S TRE SS /CH AN GE OF STR AIN , Mt (G a) P SG-12 C D SG-12 A B SG 11 SG-10

50 40 30 20 10 0 0 500 STRAI N () 1,000 Q =A(-0.0035() + 29 )

2

SG-9 SG-8

Estimating Residual Load Distribution at Start of the O-ce ll Test

LOA D, 2nd HE AD -DO WN ( KN)

0 0 2,000 4,00 0 6,0 00 8, 00 0 1 0,000

= 1.0

10
RE I D L S UA (max mu m) i

= 0.4 (0. 2

20

D EPTH (m)

= 0.1 (0.1)
30

40
Aft r e Un o a n g l di
T RUE RE S S T N (f or I A CE max mu m r si dual o ad) i e l

= 0 .7 (0.2)

50

P UMED RES AL L RES IDU OADAT S RT OF O-CE L T T TA L ES

Z RO LI E I A S T RT OF E N S T A 2ND H A D E -DOWN T S E T

= 0.3 (0.1)

1,500

60

The s h aded forc e area c orrespon ds to a s h orten ing o ju t a t 3 m f s bou m

27

30

FHWA tests on 0.9 m diameter bo red piles One in sand and one in clay
(Baker e al., 1990 and Briaud e al , 2000) t t .
Co n S es s a n S T N-I n e x e tr d P d M ( P a an d b / 0 . m ) l 3 0 0 10 20 30 40 0 0 Co n S s s (MP a) e tre 10 20 30 40

Silty Sand
DE T m ) P H (

Si ty l San d
4 D P T (m ) E H 4

Clay

qc N
Sand

Clay

10

10

P le 4 i
12 12

P le 7 i

Note, just bec aus e a strain- gag e has r egister ed som e strain valu es dur ing a test do es not g uara ntee that the d ata are useful. Un avoi da ble er rors an d natur al var iati ons am ount to abo ut 50 microstra in to 10 0 microstra in. Therefor e, the test must be des ign ed to ach iev e strain va lu es at least of ab out 60 0 microstrai n, prefer ably 1, 000 mi crostrai n an d bey on d. If the impos ed strai n are sma ll er, the relativ e errors and im prec isi on wil l be too l arge, a nd int erpretat ion of the test data b ecom es uncerta in, caus in g the inv estment in i nstrume ntatio n to be l ess than mea ni ngful. The test shou ld e ng age the pil e materi al u p to at least half the stren gth. Preferab ly, aim for reac hin g clos e to the materia l strength (structur al stren gth).

31

34

RESULTS: True Load-transfer curves

LOAD (KN) LOAD (KN)
00 0. 0 0 0.
M asur ed e D st i but on i r i

Residual load
Residual Loa d is the same as Drag L oad . T he distinction made is that by residual load we mean the locked-in load present in the pile immediately before we start a static loading test. By drag load we mean the load present in the pile in the long-term Residual load as well as drag load can develop in coarse-grained soil just as it does in clay soil

LOAD (KN ) ) LOAD (KN

4, 0000 0 4, 0 5, 0000 0 5, 0
00 0. 0. 0 0 1, 1, 0000 00 2 , , 00 00 2 00 3 , 000 3 , 000 4, 0000 0 4, 0 5, 5, 0000 00

1 , 000 1 , 000

2 , 000 2 , 000

3, 0000 0 3, 0

2. 0 0 2.

2. 2. 0 0
Tr ue

Res d ual i L oad

DE PTH (m ) DEP TH (m)

4. 0 0 4.

T rue Di st ri ut o n b i

D st r b ut o n i i i

4. 4. 0 0

D EPT H (m) D EPT H (m)

6. 0 0 6.

6. 6. 0 0

MM r r d easu e d easu e D st bubt onon i D st i u t iir i i r R si ua e d Loa d

8. 0 8. 0

8. 8. 0 0

1 0. 0 1 0. 0

1 2. 0 1 2. 0

PILE 7 PILE 7 C LAY C LAY

1 0. 0. 0 10

PILE 44 PILE SAN DD SAN

1 2. 2. 0 10

Both residual load and dragload de velop at ve ry small movements betw een the pile and the soil

32

35

Results of analysis of a Monotube pile in sand

(Fellenius et al., 2000)
LOAD (KN )
0 0 1, 000 2 ,000 3,0 00

Toe Resistance
A
1,2 00 1,0 00

TO T L E E LTALE

HE AD

Res d ual i L oad

Mea ured s R esis ta e nc

L OAD (KN)

8 00 6 00 4 00 2 00

DEPTH (m)

10

TOE

15
True Res s tance i
0 0 5 10 15 2 0 25

Does not this shape of measured toe mo vement suggest that there is a distinct toe capacity?

20

MOVEMENT (mm)

25

(Fellenius et al., 2000)

33

36

Also the best field work can get messed up if the analysis and
A
1,2 00 1,0 00 TO T L E E LTALE HE AD

conclusion effort loses sight of the history of the data

1,200

HE AD
1,000 800 600
6, 00 0 5, 00 0
S A C T TI

L OAD (KN)

LOAD (KN)

8 00 6 00 4 00 2 00 0 0 5 10 15 2 0 25

ST N C AT AMI C WAP AP

6, 00 0 5, 00 0
S TI C TA

S A N MC T T A I C P P A WA

TOE

TOE
LO AD (K N)
400 200 0

L A (KN) O D

4, 00 0 3, 00 0 2, 00 0 1, 00 0 0 0 2 5 50 75 10 0 12 5 150 1 75 20 0

4, 00 0 3, 00 0 2, 00 0 1, 00 0 0 0 25 50 75 10 0 12 5 1 50 1 75 200

"Virgin" Toe Curve

10

15

20

25

MOVEMENT (mm)

M OVEMENT ( mm )

M VEME NT (mm) O

MOVE MENT (mm)

No, it only appears that way when we forget to consider the residual toe load (also called the initial, or virgin toe movement)
37 40

Of course, we must consider also other aspects:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

The O-Cell test with a couple of strain gages, judiciously placed, will provide:
Separate values of shaft and toe resistances Estimate of residual load Load-transfe r for the pile Pile-toe load-moveme nt curves (q-z function) Results that can be extrapolated to ot her piles Data necessary fo r settlement analysis

38

41

Interpretation of a series of tests performed at different times

C han of Horiz ge ontal Stres s ( KPa)
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 6 0 7 0

Cell D1
5 D ay s 1 D ay 8 D ay s 4 Months 22 Month s

Results thought due to set-up explained as Increase in Horizontal Effective Stress

M em ov ent (mm )

7 0 6 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 5 0 10 0 150 2 00 25 0

5 D ay s 1 D ay 8 D ay s 4 Months 22 Month s

Results plotted According to Movement Pa th

39

Mov ement ( m m)

Fellenius 2002