1.

Assumptions and Considerations

1.1 Method of Pile Construction: Bored Cast-in-situ Using Bentonite Slurry Piling System
1.2 Pile Diameter, Dp (mm): 500
1.3 Pile Working Load, Pw : 711
1.4 Cut off Level: 4
1.5 Pile Length, Lp = 18
1.6 Pile Effective Length, Le = 14

2. Material Properties:
2.1 Concrete:
2.1.1 Characteristic strength (28 days), fcu = 40
2.1.2 Modulus of Elasticity, Ec = 28,800
2.1.3 Concrete unit weight, Gc = 24
2.1.4 Slump 170 - 180
2.1.5 Cement Content : 400
2.1.6 Max. aggregate size: 20
2.2 Rebars
2.2.1 Type: Bonded Epoxy Coated Steel
2.2.2 Yield strength, fy: 460
2.2.3 Modulus of Elasticity: 205x103
2.2.4 Main Bars: 16
2.2.5 Stirrups: 8

3. Bearing Resistance:
3.1 Soil Profile and Properties:
Piling System
A. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS:
The results of the soil investigation; field and laboratory testing works of the subsurface materials for the Site are dipicted by the
boreholes logs
shown in Appedix A

B. BOREHOLES SUMMARY AND IDEALIZED SOIL PROFILE

The soil profiles of 4 boreholes drilled at the site of the Hotel showed the soil strata shown in Table 01 below. Also presented thereinthe predicted
N-Valuse of the SPT test for each strata and the idealized profile combining the ovrall site subsurface data on which the pile design is based.

Table 01: Boreholes Logs and Idealized Soil Profile

Borehole #1 Borehole #2 Borehole #3 Borehole #4 IDEALIZED PROFILE
Depths
Soil Type N-values Soil Type N-values Soil Type N-values Soil Type N-values Soil Type N-values DH
0.0 -2.0 Cut-off length
2.0 - 3.0 SM 10 SC 13 SM 6 SM 4
SM 8 2.5
3.0 - 4.5 SM 10 SS 10 SM 4 SM 7
4.5 - 6.0 SM 10 SC 12 SC 18 SC 8 SC 12 1.5
6.0-10.0 SM 10 SS 11 SS 18 MS 21
MS 22 7.5
10.0-13.5 MS 31 MS 31 MS 26 MS 30
13.5-15.0 SG-m 24 SG-m 24 SG-m 28 SG-m 18 SG-m 24 1.5
15.0-20.0 MS 31 MS 31 MS 32 MS 31 MS 31 5
20.0-22.5 - MS 20 SR 50 -
22.5-24.0 - MS 50 SR >50 - SR >50 8.5
24.0-28.5 - SR >50 SR >50 -
28.5-30.0 - CR >50 CR >50 - CR >50 1.5

SM º Sandy SILT MS º Silty SAND SG-m º medium Sandy GRAVEL SC º Sandy CLAY
MS º Silty SAND SRº SANDSTONE CR º MUDSTONE

KARPLEN Consultants ARCHITECTS – PLANNERS – ENGINEERS – PROJECT MANAGERS

P. O. Box 2531, Tel: +249 83 479348, +249 83 479348 Fax: 479351, Khartoum-Sudan E-mail: info@karplen.
C. IDEALIZED PROFILE AND CORRELATED SOIL PROPERTIES
Based on the N-values for each soil strata and using the following correlation equations, the soil mechanical properties needed for the calculations
of both end bearing and skin friction for the proposed pile are deduced as shown in Table 02
Table 02: Soil layers Properties
DH Z0 qc Su c g f sov
Depths Soil Type N-values
(m) (m) kN/m 2
kN/m 2
kN/m 2
kN/m 3
Deg kN/m2
0.0 -2.0 Cut-off length
2.0 - 3.0 SM 1 2.5 8 2000 65 32.5 16.8 30 21
3.0 - 4.5 SC 1.5 3.75 12 3000 95 47.5 17.0 31 50
4.5-6.0 MS 1.5 5.25 22 5500 170 85 19.0 35 95.1
6.0-10.0 SG-m 4 8 24 6000 185 92.5 19.0 36 140.4
10.0-13.5 MS 3.5 7 31 7750 237.5 118.75 20.8 38 140.4
13.5-15.0 SR 1.5 >50 7500
15.0-20.0 CR 1.5 >50 7500
DH º the soli layer thickness, Z0 º the depth to the center of soil layer
a. Angle of internal friction (f°):
Several SPT-N-values correlation with angle of internal friction f are used in pile design.
Shioi and Fukui (1982): f = 0.36N + 27°
Meyeroff (1976) f = 27° + Öqc
A chart developed by T. J. Timlinson (1982)
b. The unit weight of the soil types shown in the idealized profiles are deduced from the geotechnical information (tri-axial and shear box tests
results) and from corelated published tables in the literature of soil mechanics texts and resaerches.
c. The undraind compresion strength (Su) is obtained for each layer as defind by the following correlated equations or directly from information
as stated in the geotechnical report.
Su = (0.1+.15N)*500 kN/m2 By: Meyerhoff (1976)
Su = (N/4) MN/m 2
By: Burland (1984)
d. The cohession strength, C (kN/m2) is deduced from the statement postulated by Bowel's as equal to Su/2 or directy obtained from available
geotechnical report for some layers or rather stimated from published texts depending on soil type.
e. s is the effective overburden pressure calculated at the mid-point of each layer (= g´Z0). Experimental data indicates that overburden
pressure does not increase with depth indefinitely, but a limiting value for depth of about 12 x pile diameter would be sufficient.

KARPLEN Consultants ARCHITECTS – PLANNERS – ENGINEERS – PROJECT MANAGERS

P. O. Box 2531, Tel: +249 83 479348, +249 83 479348 Fax: 479351, Khartoum-Sudan E-mail: info@karplen.net
Project: DEFAF MURJAN PROJECT Contractor: NANTONG Construction Group Soil Report : SI10-00120 ACES

D. PILE BEARING CAPACITY VERIFICATION

Static Pile Capacity can be calculated by the following equations:
Pu  PUP + å P Si Pu = ultimate pile capacity in compression Tu = ultimate pullout capacity
TU  å P Si + W P Pup = ultimate pile tip capacity (end bearing) åPsi = pile skin resistance
D.1 Determination of End Bearing, Pup
Computed point pile capacities varies widely because there is little agreement on what numerical values to use for the bearing capacity factors Ni.
However point capacity should be computed using different methods and a suitable (may be mininum value)
is to be considred
Equation (1): PUP  A p( cN c' d c + h q( N q  1)d q By Hansen's (1982)

Equation (2):
Lb
PUP  A p( 38 N )  380 NA p
By Meyerhoff (1976)
B
Equation (3): PUP  A p q c By Shioi and Fukui (1984)

Equation (4): PUP  N q 2 s pt API -Method (1984)

Equation (5): PUP  c 0 N( MN / m 2 ) Marti et al (1987)

Equation (6): PUP  N q 3 s pt NAVFAC (1984)

See appendix (A) for parameters appeared in the above equations.
Table 03 Below shows the calculated valuse of End Bearing capacity for 600 mm Pile shaft with embeded length of 14m
Table 03: End Bearing Capacity
Pile Diameter, Dp = 800 m Pile Total length, L0 = 18.0 m
Pile Embeded Length, Lb = 14.0 m Cut-off Length, Lc = 4.0 m
Area of pile shaft, Ap = 0.503 m2 Pile perimeter, Pr = 2.514 m
Effective stress at base, q' = 140.4 kN/m 2
N-Value for soil at pile base = 31
Equation Eq.(1) Eq.(2) Eq.(3) Eq.(4) Eq.(5) Eq.(6)
Parameter c (kN/m2) Nc' Nq1 dc dq h qc (kN/m2) Lb / B Nq2 C Nq3
Value 118.75 61.3 48.9 1.61 1.35 0.59 7750 17.5 40 0.35 43
B. C. (kN) 8587.0 3897.1 5923.7 5616.0 5456.0 6037.2
Pup min = 5456.0 kN Pup av = 5758.2 kN Excluding Eq(1) and (2)
KARPLEN Consultants ARCHITECTS – PLANNERS – ENGINEERS – PROJECT MANAGERS
P. O. Box 2531, Tel: +249 83 479348, +249 83 479348 Fax: 479351, Khartoum-Sudan E-mail: info@karplen.
Project: DEFAF MURJAN PROJECT Contractor: NANTONG Construction Group Soil Report : SI10-00120 ACES

D.2 Skin Friction Resistance:

The following methdos are used to determine the spile kin friction:
a - Method: Pus = fs x As : fs = ac + q' k tan d
a = 0.45x(q'/Su)0.45, k = (k0+ka+kp)/3, c = Su/2 q' = pressure @ mid-layer, d = 0.75f
l - Method: Pus = fs x As : fs = l( q' + 2Su) l (depend on soil grade) = 0.14 - o.40
Meyerhoff (1976): Pus = fs x As : fs = b q' b = 0.10 for f= 33°, b = 0.20 for f = 35° and b = 0.30 for f = 37°
Karti & Lyons (1974): Pus = fs x As : fs = b q' b = c1tan (f-5°), c1  0.7 for compression, c1 = 0.5 for tension pile
NAFVAC Method: Pus = fs x As : fs = k q' tan d
q' = pressure @ mid-layer, d = 0.75f k = (k0+ka+kp)/3
The above eqations are used to calculate each layer skin friction and sum up to obtain the overall skin friction of pile.
Table 04 shows the parameters of ech equation and Table 05 summarizes the skin frictions of each segment and the total skin friction.
Table 04: Determination of equation's parameters
Common parameters a - Method l-Method Meyerhoff Krati & Lyons NAVFAC
Depth (m) 2 S (kN/m2)
f° q' (kN/m ) u K d° a tan(d) l b C1 tan(d)
2.0 - 4.5 30 21 65 1.28 22.5 0.27 0.41 0.14 0.3 0.7 0.41
4.5 - 6.0 31 50 95 1.31 23.25 0.34 0.43 0.14 0.3 0.7 0.43
6.0 - 13.5 35 95.1 170 1.46 26.25 0.35 0.49 0.14 0.3 0.7 0.49
13.5 - 15.0 36 140.4 185 1.51 27 0.40 0.51 0.14 0.3 0.7 0.51
15.0-20.0 38 140.4 237.5 1.61 28.5 0.36 0.54 0.14 0.3 0.7 0.54

Table 05: Skin Friction Determination

a - Method l-Method Meyerhoff Krati & Lyons NAVFAC
Depths (m) DH fs (kN/m2) Pus (kN) fs (kN/m2) Pus (kN) fs (kN/m2) Pus (kN) fs (kN/m2) Pus (kN) fs (kN/m2) Pus (kN)
2.0-4.5 2.5 28.7 180.4 21.1 132.9 6.3 39.6 6.9 43.1 11.1 69.9
4.5-6.0 1.5 60.2 226.9 33.6 126.7 15.0 56.6 17.1 64.4 28.1 106.1
6.0-13.5 7.5 127.5 2404.2 60.9 1148.7 28.5 538.0 38.4 724.8 68.6 1293.4
13.5-15.0 1.5 181.4 684.1 71.5 269.5 42.1 158.9 59.1 222.7 107.9 406.8
15.0-20.0 5 207.0 2602.2 86.2 1083.1 42.1 529.5 63.8 802.4 122.6 1541.6
å 6097.8 2760.9 1322.5 1857.3 3417.8
Pus min = 1857.3 kN Pusav = 2678.7 kN Excluding aMethod and Meyerhoff's
KARPLEN Consultants ARCHITECTS – PLANNERS – ENGINEERS – PROJECT MANAGERS
P. O. Box 2531, Tel: +249 83 479348, +249 83 479348 Fax: 479351, Khartoum-Sudan E-mail: info@karplen.
Project: DEFAF MURJAN PROJECT Contractor: NANTONG Construction Group Soil Report : SI10-00120 ACES

E. SINGLE PILE VERTICAL CAPACITY

Using a factor of safety = FOS = 3.0
Pu = Pup + Pus
= 1818.7 + 619.1 = 2438 kN Puav = 2812 kN
(Compared to 1910 kN deduced by Geotechnical Engineer)
F- PILE SETTLEMENT:
The total settlement in pile is composed of the axial compression of the pile shaft DS and the tip point dispalcement Dp of the soil layers:
Layers
P AV D H 1 m 2
DS  å A PV E P
DP  qD
ES
mIS I F F1
i 1

Pav = average axial load in pile,DH = soil layer thickness, Ep = Modulus of Elsticity of pile, Apv = x-area of pile section
q' = average strees, m = soil Poison's ratio, mIs = 1.0 (shape factor), IF = 0.5 for Lb/D >5 (embedment factor)
Es = Soil Elasticity Modulus, F1 = 0.5 (reduction factor)
Hence Using the following parameter for the pile material; The displacement calculations are presented in Table 06 below:
fcu = 30.0 N/mm2 Ec = 24596.7 kN/mm2 fy = 460 N/mm2
Table 06: Settlement of Pile:
Depths DH N-value Pus (kN) Pav (kN) Ap(mm2) Ds (mm) Calculation for tip displacement
0.0 - 2.0 2.0 - 0.0 1910.0 502857.1 0.308845 IF = 0.50
2.0 - 4.5 2.5 8 43.1 1866.9 502857.1 0.38 q'= 2532
4.5 - 6.0 1.5 12 64.4 1802.5 502857.1 0.22 m= 0.35 Dp = 13.7
6.0-13.5 7.5 22 724.8 1077.8 502857.1 0.65 Esoil = 32500
13.5-15.0 1.5 24 222.7 855.1 502857.1 0.10 F1 = 0.5 (mm)
15.0-20.0 5.0 31 802.4 52.7 502857.1 0.02 mIs= 1.0
å 1.68 L/D = 18.5
Total Settlement = 1.68 + 13.67 = 15.36 mm
(compared to 10mm assumed by GE)
KARPLEN Consultants ARCHITECTS – PLANNERS – ENGINEERS – PROJECT MANAGERS
P. O. Box 2531, Tel: +249 83 479348, +249 83 479348 Fax: 479351, Khartoum-Sudan E-mail: info@karplen.
Project: DEFAF MURJAN PROJECT Contractor: NANTONG Construction Group Soil Report : SI10-00120 ACES

G- PILE ANALYSIS
1. Accoding to BS8004 Section 7.4.4.3.1, the working stress in compression must not exceed 25% of the characteristic concrete strength :
Working stress, sw = 4.85 N/mm2 (sw = Pu / Ap)
Allowable concrete strength = 7.50 N/mm2 \ sw < (0.25fcu) allowable stregth OK
2. Bending Moment due to eccentricity (Case I):
Considering the maximum moment on the pile Me is from the maximum permissible eccentricity from the theritical pile center:
Max. eccentricity, e = 75 mm
Max. Moment , Me = 182.8 kN-m using a factor of safety of 1.5, Me = 274.25 kN-m

3. Maximum horizontal Force (Case II):

The following calculations are based on curves of Reese and Matlock presented in "Pile Design & Construction"; by T. J. Timlinson
M f = Fm x H x T
Mf = the bending moment in the pile
Fm = bending moment coefficient
H = Horizontal load acting on the pile chead = 5% of vertical pile load
T = Stiffness factor = (E x I / nh)0.5
E = 24596.7 Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete
I = Second moment of area of pile section (m4)
nh = coefficient of subgrade modulus = 300 MN/m2 For silty medium dense sand nh =24000 to 48000 kN/m 3 (Bowels-1987)
Hence:
H= 121.9 kN I= 0.0201 m4 T= 1.11
Zmax = 12.7
KARPLEN Consultants ARCHITECTS – PLANNERS – ENGINEERS – PROJECT MANAGERS
P. O. Box 2531, Tel: +249 83 479348, +249 83 479348 Fax: 479351, Khartoum-Sudan E-mail: info@karplen.
Project: DEFAF MURJAN PROJECT Contractor: NANTONG Construction Group Soil Report : SI10-00120 ACES

Table 07: Bending Moment in Pile due to Horizontal Load:

Pile Depth Moment Bending moment diagram
T Z=X/T Fm
X (m) kN-m
0 1.11 0.00 -0.92 -76.25 40.00
1 1.11 0.90 0.00 0.00
1.11 20.00
2 1.81 0.25 20.72
3 1.11 2.71 0.12 9.95 B 0.00
4 1.11 3.62 -0.01 -0.83 M 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
5 1.11 4.52 -0.01 -0.83 Depth (m)
( -20.00
6 1.11 5.43 -0.01 -0.83 k
7 1.11 6.33 -0.01 -0.83 N -40.00
8 1.11 7.24 -0.01 -0.83 -
m
9 1.11 8.14 -0.01 -0.83 ) -60.00
10 1.11 9.05 -0.01 -0.83
1.11 -80.00
11 9.95 -0.01 -0.83
12 1.11 10.86 -0.01 -0.83
-100.00
13 1.11 11.76 -0.01 -0.83
14 1.11 12.67 -0.01 -0.83

Maximum working moment = 76.25 kN-m using a factor of safety of 1.5, Me = 114.38 kN-m
Analysis Result: M= 388.63 kN-m N= 3633 kN (Nw = 2422´1.5)
H- PILE STRUCTURAL DESIGN
H.1 Main Reinforcement:
Effective Length, Le = 0 m h= 800 mm Le / h = 0 Short Column
a= 0 m Madd = 0.0 kN-m
Design Moment = 388.6 kN-m Cover, C = 75 mm
e= 0.11 m e/R= 0.27 N / h2fcu = 0.19 Hs / H = 0.79
M / h3fcu = 0.03 rfy/fcu = min
r (%) = 0.4500 Asr = 2262 mm2 Use 14 No. Y16
KARPLEN Consultants ARCHITECTS – PLANNERS – ENGINEERS – PROJECT MANAGERS
P. O. Box 2531, Tel: +249 83 479348, +249 83 479348 Fax: 479351, Khartoum-Sudan E-mail: info@karplen.
Project: DEFAF MURJAN PROJECT Contractor: NANTONG Construction Group Soil Report : SI10-00120 ACES

H2. Check Shear Stress:

Hpu = 121.9 kN Mpu = 114.4 kN-m Nu = 2438 kN
Mpu / Nu = 46.9 < 0.6H = 480 No shear check is necessary

H.3 Check Minimum and Maximum Reinforcement in Pile

As min = 2011 mm2 As max = 30159 mm2 As = 2815 mm2
Asmin = 2,011 < Asused = 2,815 < Asmax =30,159

H.4 Containment of Reinforcement in Pile:

Minimum diameter of Links = 8 mm Maximum spacing of links = 192 mm
K- PILE DATA SUMMARY:

Vertical bearing Capacity Max

Diameter Length Cut-off length Reinforcemnt
Type Bearing Friction Total Disp.
(mm) (m) (m) (kN) (kN) (kN) mm Main Link
Non-displacemnt
Bored Pile with 800 18.0 4.0 1819 619.1 2438 15.36 14 Y 16 Y 8@150
Bintonite slurry
KARPLEN Consultants ARCHITECTS – PLANNERS – ENGINEERS – PROJECT MANAGERS
P. O. Box 2531, Tel: +249 83 479348, +249 83 479348 Fax: 479351, Khartoum-Sudan E-mail: info@karplen.
APPENDIX (B)
Parameters of equations used to calculate End Bearing:
LP LP
d c  1 + 0.4 tan 1 d q  1 + 2 tan f (1  sin f ) 2 tan 1 q  s pt  g ´ LP
B B
1 + k0 4 
h k 0  (1  sin f ) N C'  ( N q1  1) cot f for f  0  N 'C  9 N q1  ( LnI rr + 1) + + 1 I rr  75  150 for snds, Irr  50  75 for clays
3 3 2
N q2  40 for dense sand

f° 26 28 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 38 40
Nq 3 3 8 10 12 14 17 21 25 30 43 72

REFERENCES:
1 Joseph E. Bowel, "Foundations Analysis and Design"; 5th Edition, McGrawhil Inc, Singapore, 1996
2 T. J. Tomlinson, "Pile Design and Construction Practice", View Point Publication, London, 1986
3 Hans F. Winterkom, "Foundation Engineering Hand Book", Van Nostrand Reinhold Co, New York, London, 1998
4 Robert D. Cheels, "Pile Foundations", 2nd Edition, Mc Grawhill Book Co., NY, London, 1996
5 Karl Terzaghi, Ralph B. Peck, "Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice", John Wily & Sons, NY, 1985
6 Braja M. Das, "Priciples of Geotechnical Engineering", 5th Ed, Thomson, Canada, 2006
7 BSI, "British Standard Code of Practice for Foundations BS8004", 1986
8 BSI, "British Standard : Use of Concrete in Buildings BS8110", 2000
Project: DEFAF MURJAN PROJECT Contractor: NANTONG Construction Group Soil Report : SI10-00120 ACES