Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Methods of Evaluation of
Deep Foundations
Full-scale static load
tests on test piles
Analytic methods,
based on soil
properties from
laboratory and/or insitu tests
Dynamic Methods,
based on dynamics
of pile driving or
wave propagation
Concepts to Review
Resistance to load
Prediction and
Verification
At what load will the pile fail? (Bearing Capacity)
How much will pile deflect under service loads?
(Settlement)
Prediction on basis
of site investigation
and laboratory
testing
Verification by
some method of
load testing
Reaction Piles
Procedure
Disadvantages
Advantages
Advantages
Gives reference
capacity
Relatively slow
loading minimises
dynamic
components
Can customise to
include creep
effects
Can be
instrumented to
yield static
resistance
distribution & end
bearing
Disadvantages
Time consuming
Expensive
Done on specially
designated piles
Often done
carelessly or
inaccurately
Davissons
Method
Advantages
Somewhat Conservative
Matches Dynamic Analysis
Failure Criterion (Quake)
Relatively Independent of
Judgement (E-Mod. for
concrete, timber; diameter)
Disadvantage
Capacity/Settlement a
Function of Pile Properties
NAVFAC DM 7.02
p. 7.2-229
Osterberg Test
Advantages and Disadvantages
Shaft is loaded upward
rather than in
downward direction
Tensile vertical strains
near toe will cause
cracking in soil
Maximum movement is
at the pile toe rather
than pile top
Only for specially
prepared piles
No reaction load
needed
Requires jack load only
half of test load
Settlement
In the case of critical
structures, settlement
analysis will be
performed using a t-z
method computer
program
o Example of one is in the wave
equation analysis routine at
vulcanhammer.info
where
o S = total settlement
o Sf = elastic settlement
o Ss = shaft settlement
o Sp = toe settlement
Sp
o
o
o
o
C wQ p
Bq pu
Elastic Settlement
Sf = (Qp+*Qf)L/(A*Ep)
o Qp = toe resistance = Q Qs >
0
o Qf = ultimate shaft resistance
(or working load if Q < Qf
o Q = applied or working load
o = load distribution factor
o 0.5 < < 0.7, generally assume 0.6
o L = pile length
o A = pile cross-sectional area
o Ep = elastic constant of pile
material
Driven
Piles
Bored
Piles
Sand
(dense to
loose)
0.02-0.04
0.09-0.18
Clay (stiff
to soft)
0.02-0.03
0.03-0.06
Silt (dense
to loose)
0.03-0.05
0.09-0.12
Shaft Settlement
Ss
Cs Q f
Lq pu
Value of Cs shown in
table at the right for
both driven and bored
piles
If Q < Qf, use Q
Settlement Example
Coefficients
Use Cs = 0.03
Cw =
(0.93+0.16*(30/1.5)1/2)(0.03) =
0.049
= 0.6
Solutions
Sp = (0.049)(0)/((1.5)(7.529)) = 0
Sf =
(0+(0.6)(50))(30)/((0.191)(43200
00)) = 0.001 = 0.013
Ss = (0.03)(50)/((30)(7.529) =
0.007 = 0.080
Group Effects
Stress Zones
in
Supporting
Soils
Basic Relationships in
Group Capacity
Basic relationship
Eg
Qgu
Qu
Cohesionless Soils
o
o
Considerations
Pile Spacing
Drilled shafts vs. driven piles
Cohesive vs. cohesionless soils
Individual vs. block failure
Drilled Shafts
Smallest of four
options:
Drilled shaft method for
cohesionless soils (always
good for drilled shafts)
D
B
N = 51+
1+
9
5B
5Z
*
c
Group Settlements
Pile group settlements can be
treated in a similar manner to
those of shallow foundations
Settlements can be divided into
two types
Quick Methods
Immediate
settlements group
settlement factor
Long-term
consolidation
equivalent mat
method
Cohesionless Soils: Group
Settlement Factor
o
o
o
o
o
o
Fg = Sg/S = (Hw/B)
Sg = group settlement
Fg = group settlement factor
Hw = width of pile group
B = pile diameter
S = settlement of single pile
Cohesive Soils:
Equivalent Mat Method
Cohesive
Soils:
Equivalent
Mat
Method
Group Settlement
Example
Find: Immediate settlement
of 3 x 3 pile group, Hw = 22.5'
Compute group
settlement factor for
sands (use sands for
settlement calculations,
since they are at the
base of the group)
Compute group
settlement
g = (0.093)(3.87) = 0.36"
Questions