Determination of Vertical Spring Constants of a Single Pile based on

Statistical Analysis of Pile Loading Database

Y. Honjo, K. L. T. Chung & K. Takagi

Department of Civil Engineering, Gifu University, Yanagido, Gifu, Japan
honjo@cc.gifu-u.ac.jp

Abstract: The aim of this study is to establish the relationship between vertical spring constant of a single pile kv and parameters of
soils and piles based on statistical analysis as a model for determining kv. A database of 133 vertical pile loading tests is first screened
for good quality tests including the ultimate load conditions. The load-displacement curves are then mathematically fitted to Weibull
curves from which kv0.33 (kv at the ratio of yield load to ultimate load are 0.33) are calculated. The best model of kv and the explanatory
variables is finally chosen with the uncertainties of the established model.

1 INTRODUCTION
In reliability based design method, it is particularly important to
quantitatively determine the uncertainty of the design calculation
model. An example of quantitatively determination of model un-
certainty of driven pile based on AASHTO has been done by Pai-
kowsky (2004) using a large database of driven pile. The accura-
cies are finally evaluated by comparing the estimated results to
the measured capacity. In Japan, such research was also carried
out by Okahara & Takagi (1990).
In this paper, a statistical analysis on a database of pile load-
ing test is carried out to obtain vertical spring constant for ser-
viceability limit state design. A database of 133 vertical pile
loading tests carried out in different locations in Japan is first
screened for good quality tests including the ultimate load condi-
tions. The load-displacement curves of the database after screen-
ing are then mathematically fitted to Weibull curves from which
the vertical spring constant kv0.33 is calculated (kv0.33 is kv at the
ratio of load to ultimate load of 0.33). The best model for estima-
tion of kv0.33 based on the available soil and pile parameters that
are regarded as significant explanatory variables is finally chosen
with the uncertainties of the model.
R S / D m
= 1 exp
Ru SY / D
(1)
where, R: loading at pile head; Ru: ultimate bearing capacity; S:
displacement at pile head; Sy: displacement at yield point; D: pile
diameter; and m: displacement index.
Reasons that Weibull distribution is used in this study are as
follows: (1) This curve is widely used in Japan to fit normalized
load-displacement curve of piles. (2) Once the curve is fit to
Weibull curve, the yield point can be determined automatically.
Due to the mathematical property of Weibull curve shown in Fig.
1, this curve always passes the same point at R/Ru of 0.63, which
is defined as the yield point. The shape parameter m controls
shape of the curve as shown in the figure.

2 DATABASE OF VERTICAL LOADING PILES

The raw database that includes 133 piles under vertical loading
tests, of which 116 piles are point-bearing piles and the remain-
ing 17 piles are friction piles, is screened for good quality tests
including the ultimate load conditions. The database after screen-
ing consisting of 60 piles is then statistically analyzed. Due to the
abnormal behavior, 04 piles were discarded; thus, a database of
56 piles is finally used in this study.
Fig. 1 Weibull distribution
3 DETERMINATION OF VERTICAL SPRING The authors have also tried with the hyperbolic curve to fit the
CONSTANTS OF A SINGLE PILE data. However, the fit was better for Weibull curves as far as pre-
sent data are concerned. The fitted results are presented in Table
3.1 Fitting Load Displacement Curve by Weibull Curve 1 for mean , standard deviation , and coefficient of variation
From the load and displacement curve, the curve-fitting proce- (COV) for various pile types. Once outliers were removed, the
dure is then carried out. The Weibull curve model is used in this rest of the data was used to carry out the regression analysis in
research. the next stage.
Table 1 Database Used for Regression Analysis
Support type Installation method Pile type No. of piles COV
Sy/D 0.025 0.019 0.742
Steel pipe pile 11
m 1.023 0.196 0.191
Driven pile
Sy/D 0.033 0.028 0.869
Concrete pile 4
m 1.384 0.260 0.188
End-bearing pile

Sy/D 0.015 0.013 0.876

Drill shaft 6
m 0.744 0.150 0.202
Sy/D 0.054 0.048 0.897
Steel pipe pile 22
m 0.890 0.203 0.228
Inner excavated
Sy/D 0.059 0.079 1.342
Concrete 11
m 0.945 0.216 0.228
Sy/D 0.039 0.007 0.180
Embedded pile Concrete 3
m 0.994 0.066 0.066
Sy/D 0.041 0.021 0.522
Steel pipe 4
Friction pile

m 1.110 0.260 0.234

Driven pile
Sy/D 0.020 0.014 0.704
Concrete 4
m 1.012 0.145 0.144
Sy/D 0.006 0.004 0.573
Drill shaft 2
m 0.904 0.305 0.338

3.2 Determination of kv0.33 Using Regression Analysis Slenderness ratio, i.e., pile length to pile diameter ratio L/D
Surrounding soil types, i.e., fine-grained soil, coarse-grained
Using Weibull fitting curve, the dependent variable Kv0.33 is ob-
soil, mixing soil
tained as shown in Fig. 2. Kv0.33 is the slope of the secant con-
Pile elastic modulus times pile cross section EA (MN)
necting (0,0) origin and a point on the curve that has ordinate of
Pile elastic modulus times pile cross section divided by pile
0.33. Because Kv0.33 is a dimensionless quantity, it is then multi-
length EA/L (MN/m)
plied with Ru/D to obtain the spring constant kv0.33 of the model
and this quantity is expected to represent pile stiffness in Ser-
viceability Limit State conditions. 4 RESULTS DISCUSSION

From explanatory variables declared above, numbers of multi-

R/R u regression analyses are carried out. AIC (Akaike's Information
K v0.33 Criterion) is employed to select among the models, i.e., select
more influential combinations of the explanatory variables in the
1.0 regression analysis. Finally, three models presented in Table 2
are selected.
R S / D m
= 1 exp
Ru S / D Table 2 Results of Multi-regression Analysis
Y
Model Variables R2 AIC
1 Surrounding soil, EA, L, D 0.5017 484.7
0.33 2 Surrounding soil, EA/L 0.3303 495.2
3 Surrounding soil, EA, L 0.4755 485.2

0 It can be seen from Table 2 that the first model reaches opti-
S/D
Fig. 2 Determination of Kv0.33 using Weibull curve
Regression analysis is used for estimation of spring constant
kv0.33 of pile. The parameters used as explanatory variables for
estimation of spring constants are shown below.
Average side SPT-N values and tip SPT-N values
Support types, pile types, and installation methods
Pile length L (m), pile diameter D (m), pile cross section A
(m2)
Elastic modulus of pile E (MN/m2)
mum with smallest value of AIC. However, the model has very
little physical meaning. The second model has more physical
meaning, i.e., EA/L is the spring constant of pile when it sits on
rigid base with no side friction, but the coefficient of determina-
tion, i.e., R2 and AIC, are far worse compared to the first one.
The third is the most appropriate model in a sense that it is possi-
ble to physically interpret the model, and a fit of the model to the
data is not worse compared to the first model, and is therefore
used for establishment of formula for determination of spring
constant of pile as shown in Eq. (2).
 It can be seen from Fig. 4 that the scattering of the residuals is
k v0.33 = 182.3 + 9.7*FGS + 107.9*CGS
(2) more uniform, i.e., scattering degree of residual is the same for
+ 0.04*EA - 4.9*L large and small values of kv0.33. Fig. 5 is the plot showing the
where,

{
comparison between the spring constant of a single pile proposed
1 : If surrounding soil is fine-grained soil
FGS = by Japan Highway Bridge Specifications k vHS and estimated
0 : If surrounding soil is not fine-grained soil 0.33
k vHS
{
kv0.33. The estimated kv0.33 is somehow larger than 0.33 . Thus,
1 : If surrounding soil is coarse-grained soil
CGS = foundation design using kvHS is more conservative than those
0 : If surrounding soil is not coarse-grained soil 0.33
using estimated kv0.33. The results present kvHS
0.33 contain some
Fig. 3 shows the residuals of Eq.(2), which do not uniformly safety margin in design.
scatter with the estimated kv0.33. The scatter increases as esti-
mated kv0.33 values; thus, the accuracy of the estimation model is
not uniform over estimated kv0.33 (Chatterjee & Price, 1977). k vHS
0.33

Residual

Estimated kv0.33 Estimated k v 0.33

Fig. 3 Distribution of residual of Estimation Model Fig. 5 Comparison between estimated kv0.33 and k vHS
0.33

To overcome this problem, all variables of both sides of Eq.

(2) are divided by EA to obtain the new model as shown Eq. (3) 5 CONCLUSIONS
and then regression analysis is carried out to obtain the constants
From the model of Eq. (3), reliability analysis of spring constant
a0, a1,,a4 of the model. The residual of new model is shown in
kV0.33 can be obtained using Eq. (4). Fig. 6 shows the histogram
Fig. 4, which exhibits much more uniform variance over the
of residual of kv0.33 with the coefficient of variation of the model
range.
is 0.57.
k v0.33 1 FGS CGS L
= a0 + a1 + a2 + a3 + a4 (3) k (MPa/m) = 225.6 + 15.9*FGS + 81.2*CGS (4)
v0.33
EA EA EA EA EA + 0.0357*EA - 5.24*L

Residual Frequency
20
18 Coefficient of
16 variation:

0.9 0.57
14 Average:

W 00.9
.57
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Estimated kv0.33 0 100 200 300 400 500
-400-300-200-100
Fig. 4 Distribution of residual of New Model Residual
Fig. 6 Histogram of residual of kv0.33
REFERENCES
Chatterjee, S. & Price, B. 1977. Regression Analysis by Example,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 21-57, 79-111.
Okahara, M. & Takagi 1990. Explanation of Specifications of
Highway Bridge, Part IV Substructure, Lateral Resistance of
Elastic Foundation, Civil Engineering Memorandum (Public
Work Research Institute), No. 32, 41-48
Paikowsky, S. G. 2004. Load and resistance factor design for
deep foundations: final report. NCHRP