FINAL REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED POWER PLANT AT MM2100, BEKASI, WEST JAVA

5.3

Liquefaction

Liquefaction due to earthquake shaking will occur on saturated sand layer located at depth shallower than 15.0m below ground surface. Loose sand layer will mostly be susceptible to liquefaction. The shallowest sand layer in the project site is located at depth of 13.0m to 18.0m in the borehole BH-1, but this sand layer is very dense with SPT N-values of more than 40 resulting in that liquefaction will not occur to this sand layer. Therefore, liquefaction is very unlikely to occur in this project area.
5.4 Shallow Foundation

We do not recommend the use of shallow foundation for any important and settlement sensitive structure because of the relatively low bearing capacity of the original top layer. Shallow footing may be used for ordinary, or unimportant, or not heavy building such as nonstoried building or 1-storied (ground plus first floors) building at the maximum. Placing 1storied building with shallow footing on fill layer should be avoided because of possible softening of fill soil due to water intrusion which may result in excessive differential settlement. Allowable bearing capacity for shallow footing on original soil in cut area is 5.0 ton/m2.
5.5 Driven Pile

The most reasonable and acceptable foundation for any important and settlement sensitive structure to be constructed here is driven pile. This is because driven pile is easy and fast to install and can transfer working load to a competent layer at deeper stratum by by-passing the top soft layer, resulting in very small experienced settlement. We propose the use of hollow cylindrical precast prestressed concrete spun pile (PC pile) for driven pile because this type of pile is readily available in Indonesia market, superior against corrosion attack compared to steel pile for corrosive environment like this area, and far cheaper than steel pipe pile. The available size in Indonesia market is 300mm outer diameter (od) with 65mm wall, 350mm od with 70mm wall, 400mm od with 75mm wall, 500mm od with 90mm wall, and 600mm od with 100mm wall. We propose the use of PC pile for foundation of structures in plant site.
5.5.1 Axial pile capacity

For design purpose we have prepared curves of ultimate axial capacity (compression and uplift) against pile embedment depth for PC pile of 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, and 600mm outer diameters for each borehole point as shown in Plate 2. Interpolation can be made for pile size in between. Calculation of axial pile capacity follows procedure as recommended in API Recommended Practice 2A-WSD (RP 2A-WSD).
PT. SOILENS

10

DOCUMENT REVISION DATE

: : :

0 AUGUST 2012

FINAL REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED POWER PLANT AT MM2100, BEKASI, WEST JAVA

For foundation of a particular structure designer may use boring point closest to that structure as reference for determination of pile capacity. The following table shows the estimated maximum embedment depth that can be achieved by PC pile at each boring point based on common refusal, i.e. ten blows per inch, during pile driving. However, pile embedment should also be determined from requirement of pile capacity based on design of the upper structure.
Table 5.1: Estimated maximum pile embedment based on driving refusal at each boring point measured from the planned plant elevation of +34.000m LWS Estimated Embedment Depth (m) from +34.000m LWS 10.0 13.5 15.5 18.0 21.5 30.0 22.5

Location

Borehole

Plant Site (Planned Plant Elevation: +34.000m LWS)

BH-1 BH-2 BH-3 BH-4 BH-5 BH-6 BH-7

5.5.2

Lateral pile capacity

Pile response against lateral loading is analyzed using p-y method. Several lateral loadings are analyzed to know response of pile to such loadings. Fixed-headed condition (i.e. top of pile embedded monolithically into the pile cap) is assumed in the analysis. The top layer mostly influences lateral capacity of pile. Based on this we present only one single set of analysis for lateral response of pile and average parameters was used since the top layer until about 16.0m depth is almost identical over the project area.
Table 5.2: Soil parameters for pile response against lateral load at the plant site (BH-1 through BH-7) with depth measured from planned plant elevation of +34.000m LWS Elevat- Depth Parameters Soil ion (m) N Su Ks Note eff 50 +34.000 0.000 Clay 5 16.2 49.1 1.25 122,204 Above water +27.000 7.000 Clay 5 16.2 49.1 1.25 122,204 Above water +27.000 7.000 Clay 5 6.4 49.1 1.25 122,204 Under water +20.000 14.000 Clay 20 6.9 196.2 0.51 548,659 Under water -5.000 39.000 Clay 40 7.4 392.4 0.32 1,117,266 Under water Note: N = SPT N-value, blows/foot eff = effective unit weight, kN/m3 Ks = modulus of subgrade reaction, kPa/m Su = undrained strength for clay, kPa 50 = strain at one-half deviator stress, %
PT. SOILENS

11

DOCUMENT REVISION DATE

: : :

0 AUGUST 2012

FINAL REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED POWER PLANT AT MM2100, BEKASI, WEST JAVA

The result of analyses on pile response against lateral loading is shown in Plate 3. Lateral capacity is determined by the allowable maximum top deflection tolerable to the upper structure and by the structural capacity of pile cross-section, i.e. allowable maximum bending moment of the pile under consideration. Pile manufacturer usually provides the allowable maximum bending moment or cracking moment of each particular pile size. For the above pile sizes, common cracking moment for PC pile available in Indonesia market is as the following.
Table 5.3: Cracking moment of PC pile Pile size Cracking Moment (kN.meter) 300mm, 65mm wall 22.56 400mm, 75mm wall 53.96 500mm, 90mm wall 103.01 600mm,100mm wall 166.77 Note: Compressive strength of concrete: 49.0 MPa

We should consult pile manufacturer for confirmation of the above cracking moment. The following is pile lateral capacity including top deflection for fixed-headed condition at +3.000m LWS based on the above analysis.
Table 5.4: Allowable bending moment, lateral capacity, and top deflection Location Main Plant Pile Size (mm) Mall (kNm) Hu (kN) Ytop (cm) PC300 22.56 31.59 0.13 PC400 53.96 57.11 0.18 PC500 103.01 88.40 0.21 PC600 166.77 122.40 0.23 cracking moment (= allowable bending moment) of pile cross section lateral load resulting in the cracking moment top deflection of pile due to Hu

Note: Mall = Hu = Ytop =

If top deflection should be smaller than the above value for a particular pile size then the allowable lateral load for that deflection can be determined from the curve.
5.5.3 Negative friction

As the settlement will finish during construction period and will occur only in the proposed switch yard without deep foundation, down drag force will not be experienced by pile installed in the other area.
5.5.4 Design capacity of pile

Allowable design capacity of pile could be obtained from the curves in Plate 2 by dividing ultimate capacity read from the curves with a safety factor.
PT. SOILENS

12

DOCUMENT REVISION DATE

: : :

0 AUGUST 2012

FINAL REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED POWER PLANT AT MM2100, BEKASI, WEST JAVA

We propose the use of safety factor of not less than 2.5, either for compressive capacity or for uplift capacity.
5.5.5 5.5.5.1 Pile group effects Lateral loading

The lateral capacity curves presented in this report are for a single pile and do not consider group effect. Analyses based on Fleming et al (1992) show that no reduction in lateral capacity due to pile group effects is envisaged provided the pile spacing center-to-center is 4.5 pile diameter or greater. Study conducted by Prakash (1962) concludes that reduction can only be ignored if pile spacing center to center is equal to or greater than 8.0 pile diameter. However, relative positions of piles in a group will determine reduction factors to be applied to piles if piles in a group are closely spaced.
Side-by-side piles

Experimental studies conducted by Prakash (1962), Cox et al (1984), Wang (1986), and Lieng (1988) all have included loading tests on side-by-side piles. All studies show that the reduction is negligible if the spacing is greater than three times the pile diameter. Reese et al (2003) propose the best fit curve for analyzing reduction factor of side-by-side piles in a group, as the following: s for 1 < < 3.75 : a = 0.64 b s : a = 1.0 for > 3.75 b where:
s b
0.34

s = spacing center-to-center between pile b = pile diameter a = reduction factor

Line-by-line piles

Although various experiments by researchers on this problem were conducted in different soil conditions, the influence of soil properties on reduction factors is not possible to quantify at present. Therefore, reduction factors are based only on the relative positions of the piles in a group by separating piles to leading piles and trailing piles. Reese et al (2006) propose the best fit curve for analyzing reduction factor of line-by-line piles in a group, as the following: For leading piles:
s for 1 < < 4.0 b s for > 4.0 b
PT. SOILENS

s : bL = 0.7 b

0.26

: bL = 1.0

13

DOCUMENT REVISION DATE

: : :

0 AUGUST 2012

FINAL REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED POWER PLANT AT MM2100, BEKASI, WEST JAVA

For trailing piles in a line: for 1 < for

5.5.5.2 Axial loading

s < 7.0 b

s : bT = 0.48 b

0.38

s > 7.0 b

: bT = 1.0

The axial capacity curves presented in this report are for a single pile and do not consider group effect. For spacing commonly used in practice, i.e. 2.5 to 4 pile diameter center-to-center, group efficiency for piles driven in cohesive soil is on the order of 0.7 to 0.85 (Poulos and Davis, 1980). For piles in sand group efficiency may often be greater than 1. That is because the capacity of a pile in cohesionless soil is increased with an increase in the effective stress. The overlapping zones of stress at the base of a group of piles increases the effective stress and that result in an increase in end bearing. Fleming et al (1992) recommend a minimum pile spacing of 3 pile diameter for a group of piles. We recommend that pile in a group be installed with spacing of not less than three pile diameter center to center. As the pile tip will rest on stiff to hard clay or dense sand, and applied safety factor is not less than 2.5, it is considered appropriate to use group efficiency of 1. However, settlement of group of pile should be a major consideration in evaluating the performance of a pile group in compression. If settlement to occur is beyond an acceptable limit then pile arrangement in the group may have to be redesigned, or longer pile in order that pile tip rests on incompressible layer should be considered.
5.5.6 Pile installation

Pile should be driven using hammer having enough ram weight. Hammer with ram weight of at least 2.5 ton should be used to drive pile. Diesel hammer of at least K-25 or equivalent can be used for PC pile of 300mm diameter, K-35 or equivalent for PC pile of 400mm and 500mm diameters, K-45 for PC pile of 600mm diameter.
5.5.7 Loading test

Probe pile(s) is (are) proposed to be installed at representative area before performing intensive pile driving to establish driving criteria based on the local condition of the subsurface layer. On the probe pile(s) we strongly propose carrying out static loading test(s) to confirm the pile capacity as described in this report. Pile driving analyzer (PDA) with CAPWAP analysis can be performed as additional dynamic loading test to save time and money since static loading test is expensive and time consuming. We do not recommend PDA alone without calibration from static loading test because PDA is prone to error especially if operator is not well trained and does not have long record of experiences. PT. Soilens has its own new generation PDA equipment from USA for dynamic loading test if such a test, along with static loading test, is required to confirm pile capacity.
PT. SOILENS

14

DOCUMENT REVISION DATE

: : :

0 AUGUST 2012