Indian Geotechnical Conference 2010, GEOtrendz

December 1618, 2010

IGS Mumbai Chapter & IIT Bombay

Group Efficiency Factor for Pile Groups in Clay

Under Uplift Loading

Ayothiraman, R. Tank, Rajeev Kumar

Assistant Professor Former UG Student
e-mail: araman@civil.iitd.ac.in e-mail: rajeeviitd06@gmail.com

Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Delhi, New Delhi

ABSTRACT
This paper presents group efficiency factors developed for pile groups embedded in clay, subjected to uplift
loading. Group efficiency factors are obtained for piles in different type of clays namely, soft clay, medium stiff
clay and stiff clay. Group efficiency factors are calculated for pile 22 and 33 pile groups, in which pile diameter
(d) is taken as 500 mm. Different S/D ratio (2, 3 and 4) and L/D ratio (10, 20 and 30) of pile are considered. It is
found that group efficiency factor is always greater than one for piles subjected uplift loading irrespective of
spacing. Also, it is inferred that group efficiency factor does not depend upon L/D ratio, but dependent on S/D for
piles embedded in clay.

1. INTRODUCTION direction changes. In addition, weight of pile is also resisting

When soil at shallow depth is of poor quality, piles are the uplift load. Single pile with different Length (L) to
mainly used as foundation of superstructures. Uplift load Diameter (D) ratio of pile are considered like, L/d = 10, 20,
may come on the pile foundations supporting tall buildings, 30 and 40. Diameter of the pile is taken as 500 mm for all
transmission towers, mooring systems, submerged cases. Clays with different consistency ranging from soft to
platforms, tall chimneys, jetty structures, etc. due to high stiff clay are considered in the present analysis and the
wind loads/wave loads acting in the lateral direction. various parameters used for estimating the uplift capacity
Behaviour of single pile under uplift load is well- of pile are given Table 1.
established and classical solutions are available for Table 1: Soil Properties Considered
estimating the uplift load carrying capacity of pile. But,
Consistency Adhesion Cu Sat. Unit Weight
piles are installed in group in general. Group efficiency is of Clay Factor () (kN/m2) (kN/m3)
an important parameter for design of pile group and group
Soft Clay 0.7 20 20
efficiency of pile group under vertical/lateral loads is well- Medium
understood, but it is not investigated for pile groups 0.4 40 20
Soft Clay
subjected to uplift load. This paper presents analysis and Stiff Clay 0.3 70 20
estimation of group efficiency factors of pile groups The unit shaft resistance during the uplift loading is
subjected to uplift load for clay soil conditions. Group given by:
efficiency factors of 22 and 33 group of piles embedded
fs = cu (1)
in clays are calculated for different length of piles and
spacing between the piles and are presented in this paper. The total uplift resistance of single pile is estimated using
the following expression:
2. UPLIFT RESISTANCES OF PILES Qus = fs p + W (2)
Single Pile in Clay where, Qus = Ultimate uplift resistance of single pile; p =
It is assumed that uplift resistance of piles in clay is also perimeter; W = weight of pile; = adhesion factor; cu =
due to shaft resistance between clay and pile, which is undrained cohesion of clay. The ultimate uplift resistance
similar to shaft resistance of piles under compressive loads. of single pile calculated for different L/d ratio of pile and
However, the direction of resistance changes, as the loading consistencies of clay is shown in Fig. 1.
32
Fig. 1: Ultimate Uplift Resistance of Single Pile
It is found that the uplift resistance of single pile
increases with L/D ratio of pile and undrained shear
strength of clay, as expected.
Group of Piles in Clay
It is assumed that Block failure mechanism is which is
applicable for pile groups under compressive loads in clay
stratum is valid for pile groups embedded in clay and
subjected to uplift load. Accordingly, the ultimate uplift
resistance of pile group is estimated using the following
equation:
Qu = (2LL + BL) cu + Wg (3)
where Wg = Total weight of soil enclosed by group pile, L
& B = Length and width of pile group. Uplift resistance of
pile group is calculated for 22 pile group and 33 pile
group and for different S/d ratio of pile group (S is center
to center spacing between the piles in a group) embedded
in different consistencies of clay. A typical graph showing
the variation of uplift resistance of pile groups embedded
in soft clay is presented in Fig. 2.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 2: Uplift Resistance of (a) 22 Pile Group (b) 33 Pile
Group Embedded in Soft Clay
R. Ayothiraman and Rajeev Kumar Tank
It is found from Fig. 2 that the uplift resistance of pile
group significantly increases with pile length and spacing
even in soft clay. Similar trend is observed in for other
consistencies of clay (medium stiff and stiff clay).
3. GROUP EFFICIENCY FACTOR
Group efficiency factor is the ratio of uplift resistance of
group of piles to the uplift resistance of single pile. It is to
be noted here that the weight of single pile and weight of
soil enclosed by pile group are neglected in the respective
cases of uplift resistance of single pile and pile group. This
would ensure that efficiency factor represents only the uplift
resistance derived from soil. Group efficiency factors are
calculated for 22 pile group and 33 pile group and for
different S/d ratio of pile group. Figs. 3 to 5 shows the
variation of group efficiency factor with S/D ratio of pile
group for different consistencies of clay (Soft, Medium soft
and Stiff) respectively. It is found from these figures that
the group efficiency factor increases linearly with S/D ratio
of pile for both pile group configuration. However, it can
be inferred that group efficiency factor does not change
with L/D ratio of pile, thus it can be concluded that group
efficiency factor is independent of L/D ratio, though uplift
resistance of pile group is function pile length.
(a)
(b)
Fig. 3: Group Efficiency Factor for (a) 22 Pile Group (b)
33 Pile Group Embedded in Soft Dlay
Group Efficiency Factor for Pile Groups in Clay Under Uplift Loading 33

Since group efficiency factor is independent of pile

s l e n d e r n e s sL/D), group efficiency factor for 22 pile
r a t i o (

group and 33 pile group and for different S/d ratio of pile
group and different consistency of clay is shown in Fig. 6.
It is seen from the figure that there is a significant variation
of group efficiency factor with S/D ratio of pile group, but
group efficiency factor remains more or less same for
medium stiff and stiff consistencies of clay, except for very
soft clay. Also, it is found that group efficiency factor for
soft clay is higher than other consistencies of clay, which
(a)
could be due to higher adhesion factor considered as given
in Table 1. This difference is more for higher spacing (S/
D=4), but for closer spacing (S/D= 2 & 3), the difference is
less significant. This indicates that for practically used pile
spacing (S/D= 2 & 3), group efficiency factor practically
same irrespective of consistencies of clay. The group
efficiency factor is found to vary from 1 to 2 for 22 pile
group and 1 to 2.5 for and 33 pile group respectively
embedded in medium stiff/stiff clay.

(b)
Fig. 4: Group Efficiency Factor for (a) 22 Pile Group (b) 33
Pile Group Embedded in Medium Soft Clay

(a)

(a)

(b)
Fig. 6: Group Efficiency Factor for (a) 22 Pile Group (b) 33
Pile Group for Various Consistencies of Clay

(b) 4. CONCLUSIONS
Fig. 5: Group Efficiency Factor for (a) 22 Pile Group Based on the analysis and parametric studies, the following
(b) 33 Pile Group Embedded in Stiff Clay major conclusions are arrived:
34
Group efficiency factor is independent of pile
slenderness ratio (L/D) for all consistencies of clay,
although the ultimate uplift resistance increases with
L/D ratio.
Group efficiency factor remains practically same for all
consistencies of clay, except for soft clay.
For the practically used pile spacing, group efficiency
factor under uplift loading varies from 1.0 to 2.5 for
pile group embedded in clay.
It is to be noted here that the above conclusions are
based on the analysis carried out using a simplified
assumption. The results need to be verified carefully using
a data obtained from a detailed experimental program.
REFERENCES
Bowles. J. E. Foundation Analysis and Design, 4th Edition,
Mc Graw Hill, 1988.
R. Ayothiraman and Rajeev Kumar Tank
Chattopadhyay, B. C., and Pise, P. J. 1986. Uplift capacity
of pile in sand. Journal of the Geotechnical
Engineering, ASCE, 112(9), 888904.
Goel, S. and Patra, N. R. 2007. Prediction of load
displacement response of single piles under uplift load.
Geotech and Geol Engg, 25, 57-64.
Ismael, N. F. and Al-Sanad. H. A. 1986. Uplift capacity of
bored piles in calcareous soils. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, ASCE, 112(10), 928-940.
Levacher, D. R. and Sieffert, J. 1984. Tests on Model
Tension Piles. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering,
ASCE, 110(12), 1735-1748.
Poulos, H. G. and Davis, E. H. Pile Foundation Analysis
and Design. Wiley, New York, 1980.