FOUNDATION PILE DESIGN TO

EUROCODES

Briefing cum Dialogue with industry – QPs

21 Mar 2016
By Er. Dr Yet Nai Song
Building Engineering Group
Building & Construction Authority

Presentation Outline

1 Comparison of EC7 and CP4

2 Pile Structural Design to Eurocode

3 Pile Geotechnical design to Eurocode

4 Representation of pile load in drawing

5 Calibration of load cells for pile load test

 (1) are
Hello How
Comparing EC7
you?
and CP4

Comparing CP4 with EC7

CP4 EC7
CP4 EC7

• Simple & Straightforward • Not so direct for both

for both structural &
geotechnical calculations
• Working stress approach –
comparison of allowable
values
structural & geotechnical
calculations.
• Comparison of design
values instead of
allowable values
Design of pile subject to axial compression load

CP4
• Structural design

Qa = 0.25 fcu, maximum 7.5 MPa

• Geotechnical design

Qa = ( Qs + Qb ) / 2.5

Qa = Qs / 2.0 + Qb / 3.0

Simple & straightforward !

Design of pile subject to axial compression load

EC7
• Structural & Geotechnical design
Involve multiple partial factors & design
combinations.

Not so direct !
Beware of making major errors!
 Partial factors in EC7
In EC7, there are factors on ACTION, and factors on RESISTANCE.

Action Resistance

• ƔG Partial factor for • Ɣs = Partial factor for shaft

permanent action resistance of a pile R1, R4

• ƔQ Partial factor for

• Ɣb = Partial factor for base
variable action
resistance of a pile R1, R4

• MF = Model factor

EC7 Design approach 1

2 design combinations

Combination 1 (DA1-1) Combination 2 (DA1-2)

• Partial factors are applied
to actions, but not to soil
resistance (1.35Gk+1.5Qk)
• A1 + M1 + R1
• Increasing load on pile,
Fc;d
• Normally governs
structural design
Where “+” implies “to be combined with”
• Partial factors are applied to
soil resistance, but only small
factor applied to variable
action (1.0Gk+1.3Qk)
• A2 + (M1 or M2) + R4
• Decreasing pile resistance,
Rc;d
• Normally governs
geotechnical design
Design of pile subject to axial compression load
EC7
Cl 7.6.2.1 (1)P
Both design combinations (DA1-1 & DA1-2)
shall satisfy :

Fc;d ≤ Rc;d
• Fc;d Design axial compression load on pile
• Rc;d Design compressive resistance of ground against a
pile at ultimate limit state

Partial resistance factors R4 (Ɣs ,Ɣb)

• Different factors for cases with / without SLS verification
• Different factors for shaft resistance & base resistance
• Different factors for bored piles & driven piles
Model Factor used in alternative procedure

NA to SS EN1997-1 Section A.3.3.2

Model factor should be 1.4, except may be reduced to

1.2 if resistance is verified by a maintained load test
taken to calculated, unfactored ultimate resistance

Do not be confused by various Partial factors &

design combinations in Eurocodes !

• Pile designers need to get familiar with them

through hands-on & frequent practice

• It would be prudent to check design output from

Eurocode against that from CP4, to avoid major
errors in computation.
 Hello How are
(2)
you?
Pile structural design
to Eurocode

Structural design of bored pile to Eurocode 2

• EN 1992-1-1:2004 Cl 12.3.1(1)

fcd,pile = αcc,pl fck / [ Ɣc x kf ]

fcd,pile = 0.3636 fck

• SS NA 1992-1 αcc,pl = 0.6
• EN1992-1-1 Cl 2.4.2.4 (1)
Ɣc = Partial factor for concrete = 1.5
• EN1992-1-1 Cl 2.4.2.5 (2)
kf = Factor for cast in place pile without permanent casing = 1.1
 Structural design of bored pile
Eurocode 2
• Section 12 Plain and lightly reinforced concrete
structures
EN 1992-1-1:2004 Clause 12.1(2) section applies to piles of diameter ≥
600mm and where

Ned / Ac ≤ 0.3 fck

Where Ned = design value of axial force =1.35 G + 1.5 Q
fck = Characteristic cylinder strength of concrete ≈ 0.8 fcu
Lightly reinforced concrete members – having less reinforcement than
minimum amount defined in Section 9 of EC2

Federation of Piling Specialists (FPS)

Position Paper Nov 2011

3.0 Unreinforced Pile Section in Compression Below Design

Reinforcement Cage
It is normal practice with pile design to reinforce the upper section of the pile to
below the level of any induced bending moment or shear, and curtail the
cage where the pile is in pure compression. If the requirements of Section 12 of
EC2 were imposed on this element of the pile, the effect would be quite a
significant reduction in the designed compression capacity of the pile section.
The interpretation of FPS members is that the provisions of Section 12 are
intended to eliminate the possibility of significant tensile stresses developing in
the concretegiven its reduced ductility with time. As a pile would effectively be
reinforced to a point where it is in pure compression and completely restrained
by the ground, the additional rules are not appropriate.
 One suggestion for pile designers to consider

• To take FPS’ position that additional rule is not applicable

if pile reinforcement is provided to below level of any
induced bending moment / shear.

• To use fcd,pile = 0.3636 fck, the following minimum pile

reinforcement should be provided :

1) Minimum longitudinal reinforcement as in EC2 Table 9.6N is

provided

2) Length of reinforcement to go beyond soft or loose soil as

recommended in EN1536, subject to a minimum of 10m from pile
cut-off-level

Minimum longitudinal reinforcement

SS EN 1992-1-1 Clause 9.8.5 (Eurocode 2)
• Bored pile should be provided with minimum longitudinal reinforcement
As,bpmin related to pile cross-sectional area, Ac.

Øp

≤0.798m 0.5%Ac
0.5%-0.25%Ac
>1.13m 0.25%Ac

• The minimum diameter for the longitudinal bars should not be less than 16 mm.
Piles should have at least 6 longitudinal bars. The clear distance between bars
should not exceed 200 mm measured along the periphery of the pile.
18
 Reinforcement of bored pile
EN 1536:2010

7.1.7
Soft clay

A bored pile should be

reinforced over any length
of soft or loose soil.
Competent soil
layer or
bedrock

19

Comparison between EC2 with CP4

EC2
If pile designers choose to adopt FPS’ position of Nov 2011 and provide
reinforcement to below level of any induced bending moment / shear, then:

f cd,pile = 0.3636 f ck
f cd,pile ≈ 1.35G k + 1.5Q k ≈ 1.4 Q a
f ck ≈ 0.8 f cu
0.3636 × 0.9025 × 0.8f cu
Qa ≈ ≈ 0.187 f cu
1.4
CP4
Qa = 0.25 fcu, subject to maximum of 7.5 MPa
 Comparison of EC2 and CP4
• If adopting fcd,pile = 0.3636 fck in structural design for lightly reinforced
bored pile using EC2, minimum characteristic concrete cube strength fcu of
40 MPa is required to achieve allowable stress of 7.5 MPa.

Concrete C25 C30 C37 C40 C45 C50 C55

grade,fcu

CP4 6.2 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5

# EC2 4.7 5.6 6.9 7.5 8.4 9.3 10.3

0.3636fck
EC2 3.89 4.6 5.7 7.0 7.7 8.5
0.3fck

# Federation of Piling Specialist’s position paper of Nov 2011 – where upper section of
pile is reinforced to below the level of any induced bending moment or shear.

Concrete core test

In EC7, use of higher concrete grade in design can result
in larger allowable structural capacity as compared to CP4.

• It is recommended that

– For bored piles using concrete grade fcu of

45 MPa and above in design, minimum 5%
of piles to be subject to concrete core test.

• This is to ensure that constructed bored

pile can achieve the design concrete
strength.
 Takeaway : pile structural design

• If Eurocode, lightly reinforced bored pile will

need to use minimum concrete grade of 40 MPa
to support an allowable compressive stress of
7.5 MPa.

• Eurocode requires bored pile reinforcement to

go beyond soft or loose soil.

Hello How are

(3)
you?
Pile Geotechnical
design to Eurocode
 8 possible combinations
- Alternative procedure -

1) Model factor - 1.2 or 1.4 (2 combinations)

2) R4 - Lower R4 or Higher R4 (2 combinations)
3) γs γb or γt (2 combinations)

2 x 2 x 2 = 8 combinations

8 possible designs using alternative procedure

under DA1-2
Design 1 Design 2 Design 3 Design 4
Model factor 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4
Partial resistance 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.6
factors (γs, γb) 1.7 2.0 1.7 2.0
Overall safety 2.05 2.38 2.39 2.77
factor (approx.)

Design 5 Design 6 Design 7 Design 8

Model factor 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4
Partial resistance 1.7 2.0 1.7 2.0
factors (γt)
Overall safety 2.24 2.64 2.62 3.08
factor (approx.)
• Using EC7 for bored pile design, pile designers need to exercise prudence in
choosing from 8 possible designs, under DA1-2 alternative procedure.
• If pile designers choose to use lower safety factor (eg. 2.05 in design 1), pile may
not be able to fulfil pile settlement criterion. 26
 8 possible designs using alternative procedure
under DA1-2
Design 1 Design 2 Design 3 Design 4
Model factor 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4
Partial resistance 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.5
factors (γs, γb) 1.5 1.7 1.5 1.7
Overall safety 1.85 2.11 2.16 2.46
factor (approx.)

Design 5 Design 6 Design 7 Design 8

Model factor 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4
Partial resistance 1.5 1.7 1.5 1.7
factors (γt)
Overall safety 1.98 2.24 2.31 2.62
factor (approx.)
• Using EC7 for driven pile design, pile designers need to exercise prudence in
choosing from 8 possible designs, under DA1-2 alternative procedure.
• If pile designers choose to use lower safety factor (eg. 1.85 in design 1), pile may
not be able to fulfil pile settlement criterion. 27

May I use lower model factor (MF) ?

• “may be” implies that the use of lower model factor is left
to choice and engineering judgement of pile designers.

• Model factor for a design zone may be reduced to 1.2 if a

maintained load test representative of that design zone
has been carried out to the ultimate resistance.

• Rapid load test is not a maintained load test.

 May I use lower partial resistance factors R4 ?

• “may be” implies the use of lower partial resistance factors R4

left to engineering judgement of pile designers, if serviceability
of at least 1% of piles is verified by load tests carried out to not
less than 1.5 x representative load.

For R4, when should we use Ɣt instead of Ɣs Ɣb ?

• Cl 7.6.2.2(14)P
In deriving pile design resistance, either equation 7.4 (Ɣt) or
equation 7.5 (Ɣs Ɣb) is used.

• When shaft and base resistance of pile could not be

separately determined in a pile load test, pile designer may
have to use Ɣt (equation 7.4) .
 What is magnitude of load for pile ultimate load test ?

• Cl 7.5.2.1(1)P For trial piles, loading shall

be such that conclusions can be drawn
about ultimate failure load.
• NA SSEN 1997-1:2010 A.3.3.2 …the
resistance is verified by a maintained load
test taken to calculated, unfactored
ultimate resistance
• Ultimate load test should be carried out to enable
mobilization of characteristic unit shaft resistance
(qs;i,k) and characteristic unit base resistance (qb;k)

Minimum test load for ULT = Rs;k + Rb;k

What is magnitude of load for pile working load test ?

• Cl 7.5.2.3(2)P The test load applied to working piles

shall be at least equal to design load for the foundation
• NA SSEN 1997-1:2010 A.3.3.2 …to loads not less than
1.5 times the representative load for which they are
designed
Design load is Fc;d

Representative load = Characteristic load = Characteristic dead load

(Gk) + Characteristic variable load (Qk)

Minimum test load for WLT = 1.5 x (Gk + Qk )

 Fc;d
PROBLEM
• 1 m diameter bored pile is subject to axial
compression load, with Gk=4000 kN,
Qk=1000 kN. qs,1,k
(50 kPa)
• The pile penetrates through 14m thick soil with L1
characteristic skin friction of 50 kPa, to be (14m)
founded in firm stratum with characteristic skin
friction of 200 kPa and characteristic end bearing
of 7 MPa.

L2
qs,2,k
Find required pile penetration depth using: (200 kPa)
a) CP4
b) EC7 - Alternative procedure qb,k
(7 MPa)

EC7 vs CP4
A Comparison of results
EC 7 : DA1-2 Alternative procedure CP4
Design 1 Design 2 Design 3 Design 4 FOS=2.5

Partial factors MF 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4

γs, γb R4 1.4, 1.7 1.6, 2.0 1.4, 1.7 1.6, 2.0
Overdesign 1.002 1.081 1.07 1.032
factor

Design pile 17.5m 21m 21m 23m 22m

depth

EC 7 : DA1-2 Alternative procedure CP4

Design 5 Design 6 Design 7 Design 8 FOS=2.5

Partial factors MF 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.4

γt R4 1.7 2.0 1.7 2.0
Overdesign 1.002 1.024 1.034 1.005
factor
Design pile 34
19m 22.5m 22.5m 25.5m 22m
depth
 EC7 vs CP4
A Comparison of results

• Using EC7, computed pile depths can range

from 17.5m to 25.5m for the worked
example presented.

For a foundation bored piling project with ULT and WLT, proper SI for
determination of characteristic values, it is possible to achieve more
economical design with EC7. If designers choose to use Design 4,
Design 6, Design 7 or Design 8, the pile length could be longer.

In any case, designers need to exercise sound engineering judgement to

select the partial factors and model factor and check that pile settlement is
within design allowable limits of the structure it supports.

35

Takeaway: pile geotechnical design

• Under comparable situation, EC7 could result in a

lesser pile penetration depth as compared to CP4 with
a smaller overall geotechnical safety factor.

• Pile designer has to be cautious when choosing

characteristic values and partial factors in pile design.
When lower values of model factor and lower values
partial resistance factors are to be chosen, designers
also have to consider limiting values of foundation
movements, execution conditions and workmanship.
 Hello (4)
How are
Representation
you? of pile
load on drawing

Requirement to specify allowable pile load in drawing

BC Reg 10(2)(f)
Pile Layout plans shall show –
• Allowable pile bearing capacity
before and after deduction of
negative skin friction
BC Reg 10A(5)(a)
Foundation plans for buildings of
30 or more storeys shall contain -
• Allowable foundation capacity
before and after accounting to
negative skin friction

How do you specify the allowable pile load in drawing ?

 How to represent allowable load on pile in drawing ?
When design using CP4
Working load is normally specified for each pile size.

Working load – defined as the load which the pile is designed to carry
Allowable pile load – defined as load that can be safely applied to a pile after taking
into account its ultimate bearing capacity, negative friction …, allowable settlement.

How to represent allowable load on pile in drawing ?

When design using Eurocode 7

It is no longer adequate to just
specify working load alone. Why ?

Variable load affects geotechnical

design more than permanent load.

Need to specify both Permanent

load Gk and variable load Qk on
piling plan, for each size of pile.
Pile design to consider construction
Eurocodes’ reminder:
Pile design to consider execution conditions.

BS EN 1536:2010 Clause 7.1.2

Bored pile design shall take into account …..
execution conditions as set in Clause 8.

Pile design parameters are affected by

method of construction & workmanship.

Going forward
How can pile designers keep in pace with
Eurocode 7, which requires pile design to
consider execution conditions ?
 Quality Control Tests on bored piles
• For foundation bored piles supporting highrise buildings of 10-storeys or
more, or of height 30m or more, quality control tests recommended are:
Type of Quality Control Recommended test schedule
Test
(a) Interface coring Test 2% of piles,
for piles founding in rock utilizing qb;k more than
8 MPa without base grouting

(b) Pile Profile Test 5 % of piles,

(e.g. Koden, Sonicaliper) for projects where piles verticality is of critical
importance like piles accommodating prefound
column ;
for piles formed without casing throughout soft
soil layer.

c) Concrete core test 5% of piles,

For piles designed using concrete grade fcu ≥
45 MPa

Pile Load Tests requirements

• For foundation piles supporting highrise
buildings of 10-storeys or more, or of height
30m or more, requirements on pile load test
are maintained as below:
Type of Pile Load Test Recommended test schedule
(a) Ultimate Load test (ULT) 1 number or 0.5% of piles, whichever is
greater

(b) Working Load test (WLT) 2 numbers or 1% of piles, whichever is

greater

c) Non-destructive Integrity 2 number or 2% of piles, whichever is

tests (by PDA, or preferably greater
sonic logging test)

ULT and WLT should be carried out by Static Load Test using
maintained load procedure.
 Hello (5)
How are
Calibration of
you?
equipment for pile
load test

Regulatory requirement on conduct of

construction tests (BC Reg 39(2)(b))
39.— (1) The tests to be conducted of or in connection with building
works under section 7A(1) of the Act shall be in accordance with the
objectives and performance requirements set out in the Fifth Schedule.

(2) For the purposes of section 7A(2) of the Act, construction tests to be
carried out in respect of the materials used in the building works and the
building works shall be carried out in the following manner:

(b) any test that is to be carried out in accordance with approved

standards in a laboratory shall be carried out in a laboratory approved
by the Singapore Accreditation Council under the Singapore
Laboratory Accreditation Scheme (SAC-SINGLAS);
 Circular to
industry on
1-Mar-2016

Content of circular
• Remind the industry that test equipment used in pile load
test need to be calibrated by laboratories accredited under
SAC-SINGLAS scheme
• Test equipment of key concern:
– Load cells, pressure gauges - to measure pile load
– Movement gauges – to measure pile movement
 What supervising QP should do ?

• To check that test equipment are functional and

properly calibrated before commencement of
pile load test

• To check and verify that calibration reports are

issued by laboratories approved by Singapore
Accreditation Council under Singapore
Laboratory Accreditation Scheme (SAC-
SINGLAS)

How to check and verify calibration reports ?

• Check accreditation status of laboratories and their
scopes of accreditation at SAC’s website (www.sac-
accreditation.gov.sg)
• Each accredited laboratory has a schedule indicating the services
it is accredited for

• ALWAYS look out for SAC accreditation mark

on endorsed reports and certificates
 Certificate of supervision of
pile load test (Piling Annex B)

• QP supervising pile load

test is to submit Piling
Annex B
– Declaring that you have
inspected test equipment
to be functional and
properly calibrated

Summarising remarks
Pile designers have to be proficient in Eurocodes
1 and exercise prudence and good engineering
judgement in design.

For highrise buildings where construction can affect

2 design and performance of pile, pile designers
should recommend minimum quality control tests
to be carried out.

Pile designers have to check that test equipment are

3 properly calibrated by SAC-SINGLAS laboratories
before commencement of pile load test.
THE END