Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pile Groups
- Group Settlement
- Group Bearing Capacity
- Group Uplift
- Group Efficiency
- Pile Cap Design
I.
H g (e) =
Bg
sd
H e
where ? Hg(e) is the elastic settlement of the entire pile group, Bg is the width of the pile group
section, d is the width or diameter of each pile in the group, ? He is the elastic settlement of
each pile at their service load.
B) Elastic Settlement of pile groups (after Meyerhof, 1976).
bI
H G = 2 p
N
where I = [1 (
Df
8b
)] 0.5
In granular soils the settlement increases with the pile group width Bg and the c-to-c distance d
(from Meyerhof, 1961).
The stress increase ? pi at the middle of layer i in the soil mass due to the group load Qg is,
pi =
(B
Qg
+ zi )( Lg + zi )
and the settlement at that level i can be given as a function of the voids ratio,
H i =
e(i )
(1 + e )
0 (i )
H g = H i
Example 1.
The pile group placed in a deep clay stratum is shown below. Determine the consolidation
settlement of the pile group, assuming that the clays are normally consolidated.
p3 =
Qg
( Lg + z3 )( Bg + z3 )
1335 kN
= 22.3 kN / m 2
( 5.00 + 2.75 )( 5.00 + 2.75)
p4 =
Qg
( Lg + z 4 )( Bg + z4 )
1335 kN
= 5.74 kN / m 2
(12.5 + 2.75)(12.5 + 2.75 )
p5 =
Qg
( Lg + z5 )( Bg + z5 )
1335 kN
= 3.6 kN / m 2
(12.5 + 2.75 )(12.5 + 2.75 )
H 3 =
po + p(3) 0.8(10.0)
Cc H 3
195 + 22.2
log 3
=
log
= 0.208 m
1 + e0(3)
1 + 0.8
195
p 0(3)
1 + e0 ( 4 )
1 + 1.0
263
p 0(4)
po5 + p (5) 0.26(3.0)
Cc H 5
298 + 3.60
H 5 =
log
=
log
= 0.002 m
1 + e0(5)
1 + 0.7
298
p 0(5)
Therefore, the total pile group consolidation settlement is,
? Hg = ? H3 + ? H4 + ? H5 = 0.208 + 0.007 + 0.002 = 0.217 m = 217 mm.
Consistency
Stiff Clay
Firm Clay
Soft Clay
Unconfined
compression strength Shear strength
(bearing pressure) psf
psf
2000 - 4000
1000 - 2000
1000 - 2000
500 - 1000
500 - 1000
250 - 500
1.
2.
Q
Q
u
u
= n1n2 [9 Ap cu ( p) + ( p)cu L ] or
= Lg Bg cu ( p ) N + 2( Lg + Bg )cu L
*
c
To find the ultimate bearing capacity factor Nc* and a , please refer to the next two slides.
The bearing capacity factor Nc* for a pile group in clay soils.
Example 2.
The plan view of a group pile (friction pile) is shown below, where the piles are embedded in a
saturated homogeneous clay, and are circular in cross section. Given that their c-c spacing d is
30 inches, their length is 45 feet, diameter is 12 in., and cu = 860 lb/ft2, find the allowable
bearing capacity of the pile group if a FS=3 is desired.
Solution.
a) The load capacity of the tip of each pile
Qp in a saturated homogeneous clay is,
Qp = 9cuAp = 9(0.860)(12/12)2* / 4
= 6.08 kips
Also, from the figure,
n1 = 3, n2 = 3, p = D = 12* = 37.7 in
and = 0.95.
all
Q u 1094
=
=
= 364 kips
SF
3
T =
Tg
Ti
Stress surrounding a friction pile and the summing effects of a pile group
(n1 1)n2 + ( n2 1) n1 )
= 1
90n1n2
d
s
2) Feld rule, which reduces the calculated load capacity of each pile in a group by 0.0625 for
each adjacent pile. The pile spacing s is not taken into account.
3) The contractors rule, where the calculated load capacity of each pile is reduced by a factor
I for each adjacent pile, where,
d
I=
8s
4) The sand rule, where piles carried in friction in sand can be evaluated with the equation,
2 ( n1 + n2 2) s + 4d )
=
pn1n2
= 1
D
n ( n 1) ) + n1 ( n1 1) + 2 ( n1 1)( n2 1)
d n1n 2 1 1
= 1
11d
( n + n 2)
0.3
1
2
2
n
+
n
1
7
d
1
(
) 1 2 n1 + n 2
where d is in feet
Felds method of estimating the pile group capacity of friction piles is based on,
Pile
type
A
B
C
No. of
Pile
1
4
4
No. of adjacent
piles/pile
8
5
3
( No of piles)(Qu)(reduction factor)
Qu = ultimate capacity for an isolated pile
Reduction factor
for each pile
1-8/16
1-5/16
1-3/16
Ultimate
capacity
0.5Qu
2.75Qu
3.25Qu
? 6.5Qu=
Qg(u)
Example 3.
Compare the predicted group efficiency of the piles shown below by using (1) the sand rule
versus (2) the Converse-Labarr equation.
Solution. n1 = 4, n2 = 3, d = 12 in, p = 4d = 48 in
2( n1 + n 2 2) s + 4 d 2(4 + 3 2)(30) + 48
=
=
= 0.60 = 60%
pn1 n 2
(48)(4)(3)
whereas, the Converse-Labarr equation yields,
= 0.66 = 66%
Whitaker (1957) discussed the results of model tests performed on free-standing groups,
whereas Chellis (1962) discussed the considerable variation between all the methods
discussed previously. Obviously, load testing a pile group to failure is an extremely
expensive affair, and nobody seems to have obtained funding for such an adventure.
Some of the most common types of pile caps are shown below, and on the next slide,
Example 4.
Design a pile cap for an H-pile foundation carrying a concentric column load of 1780 kips. The
designer is advised by the foundation engineer that BP14 H-piles driven to refusal on rock may
be designed for a maximum load of 400 kips per pile, with a pile spacing of 36 inches, center
to center. For the column, the designer chooses a 14WF 314 column in A36 steel.
Solution.
Step 1. Find the required number of piles.
The required number of piles is = 1780 kips / 400 kips per pile = 4.5 ~ use 5 piles.
Step 2. Dimension the pile cap.
The 5 piles and the nominal column size of 14 x 16, yields,
Pile Cap Plan Dimensions:
Length L = 4 s + 24 = 140
Width B = 2.74 s + 24= 103
Long way C = 57
Short way B= 56
Thickness, t = 7.86 (calculated).
Pile Cap:
Thickness T = 67
Volume of concrete = 29.52 cubic yards,
Step 5.
Anchorage Bond.
As = 16.50in2 is the required area of the reinforcing steel with fs = 20,000 psi. design tensile
stress in steel reinforcing.
The sum of bar perimeters , l= 20 in, embedded length of bars beyond critical section (The
critical section for bond is located midway between the edge of the column and the edge of the
base plate, ua= 16.50 x 20,000 = 202 psi; 81.7 x 20
u = (4.8 3000) (1.0) = 264 psi
Permissible bond stress, u =
264
According to ACI 318.63, Section 1301 (c), because anchorage bond stress is less than 0.8 of
the permissible bond stress, flexural bond stress does not need to be considered. Setting
anchorage bond stress equal to 0.8 of the permissible bond stress leads to the following
modification for the required number of bars
N = ua
Thus, a check of anchorage bond stress requirement has resulted in the saving of one No. 8
bar. A similar check in the short way direction would show that 26 No. 8 bars are still
required in that direction. It is important to note that in pile caps sufficient anchorage bond
is always provided if flexural bond is satisfied. Therefore, hooks are never required to provide
additional anchorage bond. The tabulated values of N are base on flexural bond.
Homework Problem.
References.
- Banerjee, P. K., and Davies, T. G., "The behavior of axially and laterally loaded single piles
embedded in non-homogeneous soils." Geotechnique, London, 28(3), 309-326, 1978.
-Bowles, Joseph E., Foundation Analysis and Design, Fifth Edition. McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1996.
- Butterfield, R., and Banerjee, P. K., The elastic analysis of compressible piles and pile
groups," Geotechnique, London, 21(1), 43-60. (1971).
- El Shamouby, B., and Novak, M., "Stiffness constants and interaction factors for vertically
response of pile groups," Canadian Geotechnique. J., 27, 813-822., 1990.
- Lee, C. Y., "Pile group settlement analysis by hybrid layer approach," J. of Geotech. Eng.,
ASCE, 119(6), 984-997, 1993.
- Zeevaret, Leonardo, Foundation Engineering for Difficult Subsoil Conditions, Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1972.