You are on page 1of 19

Academic Journal of Science,

CD-ROM. ISSN: 2165-6282 :: 06(01):257276 (2016)

PERFORMANCE OF UNREINFORCED CONCRETE BORED PILES


UNDER DIFFERENT LOADING CONDITIONS

M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi

University of Tikrit Engineering College, Iraq

This research presents results of a theoretical analysis on bored piles under different loading conditions
and soil types to estimate the necessity of reinforcement. A three-dimensional finite element model is
used to analyze a bored pile under simultaneously axial and lateral loading, different cases of pile length
and soil types. In modeling the bored pile and the surrounding soil, the finite element model was
modified for each case analyzed to account for the particular details. The Mohr Coulomb option was
considered to model the sandy soil plasticity, and the bilinear kinematic hardening option was deemed
to model clayey soil plasticity. The accuracy of the computer program checked by comparing its results
with those obtained from full-scale instrumented pile loading tests. The results indicated that the lateral
load is the major factor that affects the amount and the distribution of the stresses along the pile shaft, it
also affects the position of the maximum stress occurred along the pile shaft. The axial load seems to
have a little effect on the distribution of the stresses, but the high value of this load causes to generate a
compression stress on the cross section of the pile in spite of the existence of the lateral loads. The pile
length and the soil density of sand and the consistency of clay affect the distribution of the stresses
along the pile shaft and the position of the maximum stress. Bored piles in swelling soils are also
analyzed, the results show that the movement of these soils induces tensile stresses in the pile shaft, the
amount of these stresses depends on the value of soil movement, pile length, the undrained shear
strength of the soil and on the applied axial load. The effect of the dissipation of the heat of hydration
during concrete curing considered. The tensile stresses generated due to this effect lead to produce
cracks inside and on the surface of the shaft. According to the results presented from the finite element
approach. The bored pile must be reinforced, and this reinforcement is needed to carry both the tensile
and compressive stresses generated in the pile shaft due to applying axial and lateral loads. This is
applicable for both types of soil used i.e. sandy and clayey soils. Short piles (L 10 m) should be fully
reinforced when it is embedded in sand or clay soil. For long piles with length more than 20 m, the
extension of reinforcement can be reduced by a ratio of 25% to 50% depending on the pile length, soil
type, and the magnitude of the axial and lateral loads. Additional reinforcement should be provided to
take over the effect of heat of hydration.

Keywords: Large diameter bored pile, Pile reinforcement, Thermal stresses, Lateral loads, Length of
reinforcement.

Introduction

Pile foundations are used where the surface layers and the upper strata are in general soft or compressible
soil and to carry high loads to deeper layer or/ to a firm stratum.


257
258 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

The term bored piles refers in general to deep foundations constructed by placing concrete in an
excavation hole for the purpose of transforming structure loads to bearing strata well below the portion of
the structure.
Different Codes defined the large diameter bored piles according to their diameter. In DIN 4014
(1990), piles with 500 mm or more in diameter are commonly known as large diameter bored piles. In BS
8004 (2015) it is more than 600 mm, while, in ACI large diameter piles are from 760 mm or more.
The bored pile can be installed in sands and clays, above or below the water table, with a diameter up
to 3.5 m, (Soil Mec. Drilling and Foundation Equipment Comp, 2015). The penetrations of the shaft can
be 100 m or more, which can provide a foundation capable of taking massive column loads, up to 1000
tons or more in some soils. These piles can be installed in sands and clays, above or below the water
table.
In recent years one of the significant developments in foundation engineering has been the rapidly
growing popularity of large diameter bored piles. This development owes its origin to the employment of
new drilling machines, like large mechanical augers or the rope-suspended rotary drill. The later has a
submersible electric drive motor mounted directly over a triple cutting head, so that there is no torque to
be resisted by the rig. In this drill, the cutting heads can be expanded and contracted by remote control to
provide underreams or changes in shaft diameter at selected depth. The verticality of the pile is also under
remote control. Spoil is removed by reverse circulation, using a suction pump at the surface,
supplemented with an airlift for deep holes. Whole stabilization is maintained by a head of water or
drilling mud.

Literature Review

The design of a single pile foundation is controlled by three basic modes of failure (1) bearing capacity
failure of the pile corresponding to the soil or rock support, (2) structural failure of the pile, and (3)
unacceptable settlement.
Structurally, a pile shaft can be considered as a column supported by the surrounding soils, which
exerts somewhat confining pressure that tends to increase the compressive strength of the concrete.
Consequently, shafts are designed according to rules for concrete columns. If the shaft is large in
diameter, then column slenderness effect do not have to be considered (short column), and the shaft must
carry the design loads without exceeding the allowable concrete and steel stresses.
Since concrete is more economical than steel in compression, the plain concrete section may be used.
The Building Code Requirements for Structural Plain Concrete ACI 322, (1972), defined the plain
concrete is either unreinforced or contain less than the minimum amount specified in the ACI code 318,
2015).
There is a stipulation in the different Codes about the minimum reinforcement to be provided in
piles, DIN 4014, IS 2911 give the minimum reinforcement, BS 8004 and the recommendations of ACI
Committees (543R, 336) are relatively silent on the amount and extension of the reinforcement in piles.
The European Standards ENs 1990, 1992-1-1, and 1994-1-1 in EN 1536. Considered that bored piles may
be designed as unreinforced concrete elements provided the various actions upon them produce only
compressive stresses in the pile (and the foundation is not in a seismic area).
DIN 4014, (Part 1), (1990), recommended that bored pile normally contain both longitudinal and
transverse reinforcement extending over the entire length of the pile. Reinforcement extending over the
full length of the pile may be dispensed with if the pile is vertical and is not less than 300 mm in diameter
and not more than 7.5 m in length. Provided that be no likelihood of piles being subjected to bending by
either earth pressure, lateral pressure of soft plastic soils, eccentric loading or any cause. Otherwise, the
total cross-sectional area of the longitudinal reinforcement must not be less than 0.8% of the pile cross
section.
In IS 2911, (Part I), (2013). For large diameter bored piles (diameter between 600 mm and 1800
mm), the reinforcement steel may be equal to a minimum of 0.4% of the cross area and may be provided
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 259

to a depth of 5 m from the cut-off level when the piles are subjected to normal compression loads. For
another cast in situ piles, reinforcement in the pile may provide in the top section only or the entire length
depending upon the manner of transmission of the load from the pile to the soil, and normally does not
need to exceed 0.8% of the cross-sectional area of the pile.
BS 8006, (2015), recommended that piles may be reinforced over the whole of their length, over part
of their length or merely provided with short splices bars at the top for bonding into the pile cap. If the
pile is required to resist tensile forces, the reinforcement should be carried down for the full length of the
pile and into the enlarged base, if any. The extent of reinforcement will depend on whether the pile is
used to resist tensile or bending forces, on foundation type, and the possibility of horizontal or vertical
ground movement.
ACI Committee 543R-12, (2012), recommended that reinforcement is required in a cast-in-place
concrete pile for any unsupported section of the pile, or where the pile is subjected to uplift loads or
lateral loads. For lateral loads, the pile should be designed and reinforced to take loads and stresses
involved. In general, the amount of reinforcement required will be governed by the loads involved and
design analysis. The extent of reinforcement below the ground surface depends on the flexural and load
distribution analysis.
In researches and Texts, Winterkorn, (1975), considered that the shaft concrete might be reinforced
with bars only near the top or throughout the pile length. He suggests that a steel beam core can
sometimes be used for the high capacity pier.
On the other side, Teng, (1992), believed that a small amount of reinforcement is highly desirable in
the upper portion because of several reasons. Therefore a certain amount of vertical reinforcement equal
to 0.5% of the cross-sectional area of the shaft is commonly provided in the upper several feet of the
shaft. Where the soil in the upper layers is very soft, this reinforcement should be extended below the soft
layer
Bowles, (1996), stated that the reinforcing bar may be required only in the upper region for
moments that are carried by the shaft because these moments dissipate with depth and hence the shaft
loads is primarily axial at about L/2. At this depth temperature changes are not great, so temperature and
shrinkage reinforcement is not required.
Tomlinson, (2008), believed that reinforcement is not needed in bored piles unless uplift loads are to
be carried (uplift may occur due to the swelling and shrinkage of clays). Reinforcement may also be
necessary for the upper part of the shaft to withstand bending moments transmitted from the ground.

The Finite Element Program and Materials Modelling

The finite element approach is one of the well-known numerical methods in engineering practice. It is
now a very powerful tool for solving complicated problems in geotechnics.
In this research, a general finite element program ANSYS 12 was selected to generate the solution
for the three-dimensional analysis of piles under vertical and lateral loads, and other effects such as
swelling and temperature variation. An eight-nodes solid isoperimetric elements were chosen to represent
the pile and the soil. This element has plasticity, creep, swelling, stress stiffening, large deflection, and
significant strain capabilities, but their non-linear material properties must be isotropic. Three-
dimensional interface elements used around the pile (side and base) to represent two surfaces. These
elements are capable of supporting compression in the direction normal to the surface and shear in the
tangential direction.
The Moher Coulomb option uses for sandy soils and the bilinear kinematic hardening model,
which is recommended by ANSYS for general modeling, uses the Von Mises yield criterion used for
clayey soils.
The pile structure material, whose strength is much higher than that of the surrounding soil, is
assumed to behave linearly elastic.
260 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

To investigate the ability of the model presented in previous articles. A selected project was carefully
chosen according to geological, geotechnical, and pile geometric characteristic to account for ample range
of typical conditions. The field results of these two projects were compared with the three-dimensional
finite element model. Base on the results, it can be concluded that the finite element method gives a good
agreement with the results of the two full-scale pile tests, and it can be used to analyse the behavior of the
pile under different loads, as shown in Figure (1), (Al-Obaidi 2002).

Figure.1. Comparison between experimental and FEM prediction (Pile under axial and lateral loads).

Analysis of Pile under Axial and Lateral Loads

The major purpose of the pile is to carry the vertical loads. Also, any structure is inevitably subjected to a
certain amount of horizontal force due to the wind, earth pressure, etc.
The length of the pile model was chosen between the length that the pile is considered as a short pile
(typical boundaries for rigid piles are approximately between 2 to 10 depth to diameter ratio, Davidson
(1982) and long pile. The maximum length was 30 m for clay and 35 m for sandy soil. The pile behaviour
was considered to be linearly elastic with material modulus, Ec = 26 GPa, a unit weight, Jc = 23.3 kN/m3,
and a Poissons ratio, Q = 0.2.
The sandy soil was selected between loose dry to very dense sand. The angle of internal friction, (I),
equal to 25q to 40q and total unit weights, Js, of 15 kN/m3 to 18 kN/m3 respectively. The clayey soil was
selected between soft clay (undrained shear strength, cu equal to 25 kN/m2) and stiff clay (undrained shear
strength, cu equal to 100 kN/m2). The values of Es for sandy soils were chosen according to Bowles,
(1996). For cohesive soils, the most accurate approach consists of correlation between the undrained
modulus Eu and the undrained shear strength, Gonzalez, (1994)
In this study, the pile model was first subjected to axial load. The number of load steps depending on
the value of axial load (the first load step include the effect of gravity). Then the lateral load was applied
to the model also by using several steps depending on the amount of this load.
To study the combined effect of axial and lateral loads, the value of 50% of the allowable bearing
capacity Qa were considered. The value of lateral load adopted in each run with new axial load Q, remain
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 261

as a percentage of the allowable bearing capacity Qa. The lateral load was chosen as a percent of the axial
load. Different values of lateral load were considered for each pile length and soil property. The amount
of the lateral load was carefully chosen so that the pile will not fail by lateral load or buckling.
The relationship between the axial and lateral loads applied to the pile head, and the stress
distribution along the pile shaft induced due to these loads for different load condition, soil type, and pile
length are found. The typical relationship for bored piles in sandy and clayey soils are shown in Figure (2)
and (3). The curves in these Figures show a similar trend of behavior in sand and clay soil. At the pile
head (depth equal to zero) the vertical stress has a positive value, this stress was generated due to axial
loading which remains constant even when the lateral loading on the pile head increased, but it changed
depending on the axial load, pile length and soil type. After this point, the stress changes with depth, it
increases on the front face of the pile and decreases on the back face of the pile shaft. This behavior
continues until the stress reaches a maximum value. The amount and the position of the maximum stress
depend on the value of the axial and lateral loads applied to the pile and the soil type and pile length.
Also, it seems that the position of the maximum stress at the tension side of the pile is slightly deeper than
the position of the maximum stress on the compression side. The distribution of the vertical stress then
change sign and decreases in the front face of the pile and increases in the back face of the pile. This
variation will continue until the stresses on each side of the pile have the same value. The values of the
stress at this part indicate the deterioration effects that was caused by lateral load and the variation
depends on the axial load, soil type, and pile length, and reflect the effect of the interface element used in
the model.
In Sandy soils, the effect of lateral load on the maximum stress show a nonlinear relationship, where
the rate of the stress increment increases as the lateral load increase, also the nonlinearity of this
relationship increases with long piles and dense soil. This reflects the plastic phase of the soil deformation
and depends on the nonlinear type used to define the soil in the material modeling.

Figure 2. Stress distribution along the bored pile shaft Figure 3. Stress distribution along the bored pile shaft
(Sandy soil with L = 35m, I = 35 (clayey soil with L = 30m, cu = 35 kN/m2

At low lateral loads when the pile embedded in loose to medium sand with the angle of internal
friction equal to 25q and 30q respectively, the relationship is approximately linear. This may be explained
due to elastic deformation of the soil and due to the rotation of short pile (length equal to 10 m) rather
than flexible deformation of the upper part of the long pile, Figure (4) and (5).
262 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

Figure 4. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral Figure 5. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral
loading (Bored pile in sandy soil, I = 25 loading (Bored pile in sandy soil, I = 40

The position of the maximum stress also affected as the lateral load increased, where a drop of the
position of the maximum stress in depth as the lateral load increase. The variation of the position is
almost nonlinear for long piles embedded in the sand with a low angle of internal friction (I between 25
and 30). In dense sand (I equal to 40) with the short pile, the relationship became linear. So that the
position of this point depending on the soil and pile properties only is not entirely correct.
As the pile length increased, the stress will increase too; the pile length is an important parameter
that affects the distribution of the vertical stresses along the pile shaft. In short piles, the full depth of the
pile may be affected due to the rotation and translation of the pile under lateral loading. Table (1) presents
the ratio of the affected length to the total length of the pile shaft. The table indicates that full depth of the
pile was affected when the short pile, (length =10m), embedded in soil with a low value of internal
friction and the pile was subjected to high lateral loads. However, in all circumstances, this ratio will not
go less than 85% of the pile length.

Table 1. The length affected due to axial and lateral loads for bored piles in sand.

Pile length (m) Length affected (m) the ratio of affected length to total length (%)
10 8.5-10 85-100
20 11-14.5 55-72.5
30 13-16.5 43-55
35 13-17 37-48

When the pile became longer, the affected length will increase, but the ratio of the affected length to
the total pile length will reduce, as shown in the table. For long piles (30 m and more) it seems that the
stresses generated due to apply lateral loads affect only the upper 50% of the pile length. The stresses in
the lower part of the pile were limited and always in positive values.
The stress distributions along the bored pile shaft embedded in clayey soil show a similar trend as in
the pile embedded in sand, as the lateral load increases the stresses on the front face of the pile increases,
while the stresses on the back face of the pile were decreased. The stresses generated in bored piles
embedded in clay soils seem to be less than for piles in sand soil. This due to the low bearing capacity of
clay comparing with sand and hence low axial and lateral loads can be applied to the pile.
The effect of lateral loads on the maximum stress show nonlinear relationships, as shown in Figures
(6) and (7), where the rate of the stress increment increases as the lateral load increases. Comparing with
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 263

sand, it can be concluded that the rate of increment is higher than clay due to low applied lateral loads in
clayey soils.
The position of the maximum stress also affected as the lateral load change. The relationships reflect
a nonlinear relationship phenomenon for the location of maximum stress with lateral load increment
especially when the pile embedded in soft clay and the pile length increased. In stiff clay, the variation of
the position of the maximum stress seems to be linear.
As indicated in the sand soil, the pile length being an important parameter that affects the zone of the
distribution of the stresses along the pile shaft.
The affected lengths of the pile with the ratio of this length to the total length were presented in
Table (2). The data in this table indicate a full pile length affected in short piles (L = 10 m). This ratio
may be reducing to 60% at low lateral loads for piles embedded in stiff clay. For piles with 20 m long the
affected ratio was more than 50%, while in long piles (L = 30 m) the ratio was approximately 50% or less.

Figure 6. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral Figure 7. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral
loading (Bored pile in clayey soil, cu = 25 kN/m2 loading (Bored pile in clayey soil, cu = 100 kN/m2

Study the positions of the maximum stress according to pile length revealed that the position of the
maximum stress did not reach the upper one-third of the pile length even in short piles. In sand for the
same pile length (10 m) the position reaches the first quarter length of the pile. For a pile of 20 m long the
position of the maximum stress lies between one-third to one-fifth of the pile length in both clayey and
sandy soils, but in the sand, it was always deeper. For pile length equal to 30 m the position of the
maximum stress close to one-fifth of the pile length in both clayey and sandy soils.
The undrained shear strength of the clay has a significant effect on the amount and distribution of the
stresses along the pile shaft. The position of the maximum stress sunk farther as the undrained shear
strength decrease. The length that affected by the stresses generated due to applied axial and lateral loads
increased as the undrained shear strength decreased.

Table 2. The length affected due to axial and lateral loads for bored piles in clay.

Pile length (m) Length affected (m) the ratio of affected length to total length (%)
10 6-10 60-100
20 11-16 57-80
30 12-16 40-53
264 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

Secondary Stresses in Bored Pile

When a concrete pile is cast into the ground, it is stressed by its weight, the swelling of the clay caused by
the water from the wet concrete, or another source, and the volume change of the concrete itself. Also, a
concrete member of such size is usually subjected to secondary stresses such as thermal stresses due to
the dissipation of the heat of hydration and from periodic cycles of ambient.The stresses due to the first
factor are compression, while those caused by the others two are tensile and of an unknown magnitude,
the resultant initial stress is very probably tensile.

Analysis of Pile in Swelling Soils

The behavior of pile surrounded by swelling clay has been analyzed theoretically and observed both in the
field and in laboratory models.
Numerous methods were existing to estimate the stresses generated in the pile shaft due to the soil
movement. The Early analysis was an attempt by equating the uplift force in the active layer with
anchoring provided below this layer; the clay assumed to be either perfectly plastic or elastoplastic.
Sazhen, (1968) suggested a method based on that the work performed on the pile by the active zone is
equal to the work done by the pile against the load and anchoring force below the active layer.
Poulos and Davis, (1980) use an elastic solution, incorporating Mindlins equations for
displacements and forces in a rigid pile-swelling system. Amir and Sokolov, (1976) utilized by the finite
element method to analyze various types of piles in expansive clay.
To estimate the stresses generated in the pile shaft embedded in expansive clay, the method
presented by Poulos and Davis, (1980) was selected due to the ability of this method to examine several
parameters. Moreover, the result obtained by Amir and Sokolov, (1976) come close with this approach.
Other methods available, either limited or very complex.
To estimate the maximum stresses generated in the pile shaft due to the movement of the expansive
soil. Numerous methods exist whereby the total potential swell that can occur on a site can be calculated
from simple parameters. Most of these methods are correlative, and they relate simple soil parameters
empirically to the vertical heave. The equation proposed by Johnson and Snethen, (1979) which compared
reasonably well with measured heave was chosen to estimate the soil movement.
The clay soil properties were the same as presented above and the pile lengths were 10, 20, and 30 m
respectively. The values of the maximum stress were calculated for the case of zero axial loads and 50%
of the allowable bearing capacity.
Expansive soils tend to increase in volume when water is available, this movement of the soil can
grip and lift the pile shaft. The difference between the displacements of the pile and the soil causes shear
stresses due to appear on the interface and these, in turn, induce in the pile axial stresses that are
superposed on the initial one.
The effect of soil movement on the maximum stresses induced in the pile shaft was drawn and
shown in Figure (8), for different pile length and undrained shear strength of the clay soil. In these
figures, the vertical axis represents the maximum stresses generated in the pile shaft in MPa, (the negative
values indicated that theses stresses were tensile), while the horizontal axis represents the values of soil
movement (So) at the surface in (mm).
The curves in these figures show a similar trend of behavior in soft, and stiff clay, where an increases
in the axial tensile stress as the soil movement increase. The rate of this increment tends to decrease at
high values of soil movement, where it reached same values of stresses at soil movement between 80 and
100 mm. This represents the slipping stage between the soil and the pile.
The consistency of the clay also affected on the maximum stress, as shown in the above figures, high
tensile stresses induced in the pile shaft as the clay became stiffer with constant pile length and soil
movement. The tensile stress may reach more than 2 MPa in stiff clay, (Cu = 100 kN/m2), while it equal to
1.08 MPa and 0.54 MPa in medium to soft clay, (Cu between 50 and 25 100 kN/m2). This for pile length
equal to 30 m embedded in clay with 100 mm vertical movement, as an example.
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 265

Figure 8. Effect of movement on the maximum stress Figure 9. Dissipation of the heat of hydration from the
for zero axial laod for different pile length and pile in summer
undrained shear strength

The pile length can also be considered as a parameter affected the amount of the maximum tensile
stress, where an increase in pile length leads to increasing the maximum stress.

Thermal Analysis

The thermal stresses in concrete are developed in two ways, from the dissipation of the heat of hydration
and periodic cycles of ambient. In the conventional structure, most of the heat generated by the hydration
of cement is dissipate almost quickly, and there is little temperature difference from the inside to the
outside of the body. A structural element with large dimensions differs in its behavior with that of a
common structure. The thermal properties allow only slow movements of heat, which means that heat
trapped within a mass concrete structure can hardly be escaped. This will cause a difference in
temperature between the internal mass and the surface. As concrete gains both strength and stiffness, the
restraint of the free contraction will result and generate the tensile stresses, (ACI Committee 224, 1984).
266 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

Salih (2001) found in his experimental study that the maximum temperature recorded in the internal
part of mass concrete was 76C and remains for an extended period, (about three weeks). Large diameter
bored piles which may be considered in behavior as a massive concrete structural element can be affected
by the hydration of cement during construction and curing, which may lead to series of tension cracks in
the pile body before loading.
In this study, a non-linear, two-dimensional finite element model is described for the analysis of
concrete pile subjected to a heat of hydration release and heat transfer.
To find the distribution of the temperature due to the release of the heat of hydration and then to find
the stresses induced to this phenomenon. Thus, the method presented by the ACI Committee 207, (1973)
was used to estimate the maximum heat of hydration.
To confirm the above method, the placing temperature was chosen as 40qC in summer and 18qC in
winter. The peak temperature obtained were 68qC after 18 hrs of placing in the summer and 35qC after
one day in winter. The soil temperature was considered to be equal to 25qC, both in summer and in
winter, Al-Obaidi (1999).
The thermal conductivity of the concrete was assumed to be equal to 3 J/m2sqC/m, and the specific
heat was 950 J/kg/qC. The soil thermal properties were taken as 1.73 J/m2sqC/m for thermal conductivity
for sand and clay soils, the specific heat was chosen equal to 1150 J/kg/qC
Since the pile length to diameter ratio is high, thus it is assumed that the heat will transfer in the
radial direction only, and the problem can be considered as plane axisymmetric. A small angle T = 10q is
used for approximating the circular boundary with a straight-side element.
The temperature distribution within the pile shaft and the soil around the pile due to the dissipation
of heat of hydration were drowned and shown in Figure. (9). The curves in this figure represent the
distribution of temperature after 24 hrs, 48 hrs, 60 hrs, 5 days and 10 days after concrete placing. As
shown in the figure, the dissipation of the heat is properly high at the concrete shaft, especially within the
60 hours after placing of the concrete, where the difference in temperature between the pile center and the
surface reach 20qC after 24 hrs of concrete placing. This difference will reduce to 13qC after 60 hrs of
concrete placing.
The rate of dissipation after 10 days seems to be little, where the difference between the pile center
temperature and the surface equal to 2qC.

Figure 10. Hydration temperature time Figure 11. Stress induced due to the
versus history of pile dissipation of hydration
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 267

The soil around the pile also affects due to the heat dissipation, where it rise in temperature for more
than 20qC, put this effect only the 1-1.5 m of the soil around the pile.The changes of the temperature of
the points, in pile center, at a point far 0.25 m from the center and on the surface, were shown in Figure.
(10). The curves in this figure demonstrate that a high rate of heat dissipation happened through the first
two days after placing. This high rate leads to produce the difference in temperature between the inner
and outer points within the pile shaft. This change in temperature lead to volume change and then to
induce the stresses within the pile shaft. The values of these stresses are shown in Figure (11) in a
relationship with the time after placing for the same points represented in Figure (9). The curves show a
tensile stress equal to 1.77 MPa in inner point and 1.0 MPa at the near the surface. These stresses will
reduce and may reach 0.1 MPa after 10 days of concrete placing.

The Needs and Importance of Reinforcement

From all results obtained, it can now examine whether the pile needs to be provided with reinforcement or
not. The effect of the parameters considered in this research will also discuss to determine the
reinforcement extension in the pile shaft. These recommendations give a rational basis for the pile
reinforcement. Theoretical results certainly should be supplemented by both laboratory and field test
results.
Like all another type of foundations, and, indeed all structural elements, a bored pile shaft must be
safe structurally. The structural designs of bored pile shafts usually conform to the strength provisions of
codes using factored loads and strength reduction factors. The allowable compressive stresses for concrete
in bored piles by various codes ranges between 0.25 and 0.33 fc', The value of fc for the concrete shafts of
bored piles as stated in several codes is limited between 20 and 35 MPa. The tensile strength of concrete
is relatively low, about 7 to 15% of the compressive strength (Nilson and Winter, 1986).
In the pile foundation design and construction, it is difficult to translate the requirements into
performance criteria. Furthermore, the installation and performance of pile always involve and depend on
a separate material- the soil or rock- the properties of which are not completely known and can be
infinitely variable and change with time, also the pile may be defecting during construction. The choice of
0.25 fc for compressive strength and zero for tensile strength is considered reasonable and will be used.
The value of fc was taken equal to 27.0 MPa.
As shown in previous articles, the amount of the lateral load may be considered to be the major
parameter that causes the change in stresses in the pile shaft beside the pile length and soil type.
The relationship between the lateral load as a percentage of allowable bearing capacity, Qa and the
maximum stress in the pile shaft were drawn and shown in Figures (12) to (18).
In sandy soil, and for short pile (length = 10 m), (Figure 12) shows almost negative stresses (tensile
stresses) for different values of the lateral load. In compression zone, the reinforcement is needed
depending on the value of the angle of internal friction. Same criteria can be followed for the pile with
20m length, (as shown in Figure 13).
Figure (14) illustrates the variation of the lateral load as a percentage of Qa, for pile length equal to
30 m. The curves in the compression zone show high compressive stresses due to high axial loads applied
when the pile embedded in sand with angle of internal friction equal to 35q and 40q. Thus the pile must be
reinforced due to this situation in spite of the negative stresses which were generated when the lateral load
became more than 3-6% of Qa depending on the amount of axial load. In sand with I = 30q the critical
case was the negative stresses generated at lateral load more than 2% of Qa when the axial load equal to
50% of Qa. The case was considered in piles embedded in the sand with I = 25q, but with a lateral load
more than 1% of Qa.
268 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

Figure 12. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral Figure 13. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral
load (bored pile in sand with L = 10m. load (bored pile in sand with L = 20m.

Figure 14. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral Figure 15. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral
load (bored pile in sand with L = 30m. load (bored pile in sand with L = 35m.

Pile with length equal to 35m as shown in Figure (15) also must be reinforced due to high
compressive stresses when the surrounding soil have an angle of internal friction more than 30q.
Bored piles in clay show low stresses along the shaft, this due to low axial load (the bearing capacity
of the pile used in the study have low values due to weak clay) and lateral loads.
Figures. (16) to (18) show the variation of the lateral load as a percentage of the allowable bearing
capacity with the maximum stresses generated in the pile shaft for different lengths, the undrained shear
strength of the clay and for axial load equal to 50% of Qa.
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 269

Figure 16. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral Figure 17. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral
load (bored pile in sand with L = 30m. load (bored pile in clay with L = 20m.

As shown in these Figures pile with all lengths must be reinforced due to tensile stresses generated at
the pile shaft when these piles embedded in soft, medium or stiff clay
Pile with 30m length needs for the reinforcement in compression and tension when the pile
embedded in stiff clay with a lateral load more than 5% of Qa. Piles in medium to soft clay also became
critical case when the applied axial load equal to 50% of Qa, where the reinforcement must provide when
the lateral load exceeds 4% and 3% of Qa respectively. In compression zone, the reinforcement is needed
when the lateral load became more than 17% of Qa in medium clay and 31% of Qa in soft clay.

Figure 18. Variation of the maximum stress with lateral load (bored pile in clay with L = 30m.
270 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

Figure (8) and present the amount and the kind of the stresses generated in bored piles embedded in
clays undergoes vertical movements. The decision can be made that the pile must be reinforced when the
clay around the pile swells, no matter how much it moves. The worst case is before loading the pile. If the
swelling happens at later stages of the construction, i.e. an existing of axial load. The results indicated that
the soil movements lead to generate tensile stresses in the pile and hence the pile must be reinforced.
As the axial load increases further the effect of swelling decreases and therefore, the stresses due to
this case became less necessary. When the pile is under full load (axial load applied = 100% of Qa), short
piles (10 m long) still needs the reinforcement when the vertical soil movement due to swelling was more
than 10 mm.
According to thermal stresses, the pile should be provided with minimum reinforcement to eliminate
these tensile stresses which may lead to induce several cracks within the shaft or at the surface.

The Extent of Reinforcement

The reinforcement must be extended in the pile shaft till the tensile stresses are vanishing, and the
compressive stresses become less than the allowable compressive strength of the concrete; additional
lengths are needed to cope with Codes requirements.
The extensions of the reinforcement for bored piles embedded in sandy soil were presented in Tables
(3) to (5). In these tables, the distance of the reinforcement that should be provided from the pile head and
the percentage of the length of the extension to the total length of the pile were tabulated. These values
were shown for each lateral load applied to the pile. Each table represents a certain pile length.
The sign (*) in the tables represent the extension of the reinforcement which should be provided for
high compression stress.
A study of these tables revealed that the extent of reinforcement in the pile shaft depends on the
amount of the lateral load, mainly, whereas the lateral load increased the extension of reinforcement
increased. The extension may be reducing the angle of internal friction of the soil surrounding the pile
increased.
Piles with 10 m length (Table 3) must be provided with reinforcement of 40% to 91% of the pile
length. The difference depends on the amount of lateral load and angle of internal friction. In these piles,
the author believed that fully reinforcement must be considered due to the demand of other factors such as
length of development and so on.
In piles with 20 m length, (Table 3) the extension of reinforcement did not exceed 60% of the pile
length, as this case represent high lateral loads on piles embedded in loose sand. In the medium to dense
sand, the ratio may be equal to 50%-60%). The reinforcement in these piles can be cut at 65% of the pile
length when these piles embedded in loose to medium sand, and when the lateral load was less than 40%
of Qa. This length can be reduced to 50% of the pile length for piles embedded in dense sand, but with the
lateral load not more than 20% of Qa.
Piles with 30-m length (Table 4) the governing case where the compressive stresses (except in loose
sand). The extent of reinforcement may vary between 32.5% to 50% depending on soil type and the
applied axial and lateral loads. For piles with 35 m long. The governing case here is the positive stresses
in all cases studied. The extension varies between 22.5% to 45% depending on the soil properties and
load conditions. Thus, the extent of reinforcement for long piles (more than 30 m) must be not less than
50% of the pile length.
The extensions of the reinforcement for bored piles embedded in clayey soil were presented in Table
(5). For pile length = 10 m, it can be concluded that the bored piles embedded in clay soil must be
reinforced with an extension from 37.5% to 85%, i.e. fully reinforcement is highly recommended. This
ratio can be reduced to 75% when the pile length equal to 20 m embedded in soft to medium clay, but
with the lateral load not more than 50% of Qa. In stiff clay where the lateral load less than 25% of Qa, an
extension of 50% of pile length seems to be sufficient.
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 271

For 30 m long piles, the extent of reinforcement considered to be not less than 60% for piles
embedded in soft soil under lateral load not more than 40% of Qa. This ratio can be reduced to 45% of the
pile length in medium to stiff clay with lateral loads less than 25% of Qa.
When piles embedded in expansive soils, the movement of these soils also causes tensile stresses.
These stresses may rupture unreinforced piles.
Hydration of the cement during curing stage leads to induce high temperature within the pile shaft,
dissipation of this heat to the soil around leads to volume changes and hence tensile stresses occur in inner
zone and the surface.

Conclusions

Based on the results obtained from this study, the following conclusions can be made: -
1. The finite element model can accurately represent the three-dimensional aspect of the soil
foundation, that is (a) sliding and separation between the pile and the surrounding soil, (b)
nonlinear stress-strain behavior of the soil and soil layering, and (c) generate stress in the bored
piles subjected to axial and lateral loads and the distribution of these stresses along the pile shaft.
It can also be used to produce the load movement of the pile.
2. The Lateral load was found to be the predominant parameter, which affects the amount and the
distribution of the stresses in bored piles. The results show that the relationship between the
lateral load and the maximum stress is almost nonlinear.
3. The position of the maximum stress (depth of fixity) was found to be affected by the amount of
the lateral load, pile length and the angle of internal friction in sand or the undrained shear
strength of the clay.
4. Analysis of piles penetrating below the active zone of the expansive soils indicates that tensile
stress generates in the pile shaft when the soil undergo vertical movement. Such stresses may
rupture the unreinforced piles. Applied full axial load to the pile head may eliminate these
stresses.
5. According to the results obtained, bored piles embedded in both sand and clay soil must be
provided with a reinforcement, where the cases for unreinforced pile found to be at very low
lateral loads applied, (less than 3% of the allowable bearing capacity). The reinforcement is
needed in bored piles with more than 30 m in length embedded in the dense sand to carry the high
compressive stresses.
6. The decision for the unreinforced pile should be taken after considering that the stresses due to
the dynamic effect that may come from cyclic loading impact load, explosion, etc. were lees
important.
7. The dissipation of the heat of hydration during concrete curing causes to generate tensile stresses
in the pile shaft. Additional reinforcement should be provided to the pile shaft to resist the tensile
stresses. The full-length reinforcement was prompt to obtain an adequate crack distribution and a
reasonable limit on crack width.

Table 3. Reinforcement extension in bored piles embedded in sandy soil (L = 10 and 20m).

Pile length = 10 m
Angle of internal friction, I Reinforcement extension Lateral load
From the pile head (m) % of pile length
5.80 58.0 0.10 Qa
7.10 71.0 0.20 Qa
25
8.00 80.0 0.40 Qa
272 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

8.50 85.0 0.60 Qa


9.10 91.0 0.80 Qa
5.75 57.5 0.10 Qa
7.00 70.0 0.20 Qa
30
7.75 77.5 0.30 Qa
8.25 82.5 0.40 Qa
8.50 85.0 0.50 Qa
4.50 45.0 0.10 Qa
6.50 65.0 0.20 Qa
35
7.25 72.5 0.30 Qa
8.25 82.5 0.40 Qa
4.00 40.0 0.10 Qa
5.50 55.0 0.20 Qa
40
6.25 62.5 0.30 Qa
7.00 70.0 0.35 Qa
Pile length = 20 m
5.80 29.0 0.05 Qa
8.10 40.5 0.10 Qa
25
10.00 50.0 0.20 Qa
11.20 56.0 0.30 Qa
12.00 60.0 0.40 Qa
7.80 39.0 0.10 Qa
9.40 47.0 0.20 Qa
30
11.00 55.0 0.30 Qa
11.80 59.0 0.35 Qa
6.60 33.0 0.10 Qa
35 8.20 41.0 0.15 Qa
9.40 47.0 0.20 Qa
6.25 31.3 0.10 Qa
40 8.00 40.0 0.15 Qa
9.00 45.0 0.20 Qa

8. The extension of the reinforcement in bored piles depends on the amount of the applied lateral
load, pile length and soil type. Fully reinforcement recommended to considered in short piles
(length = 10 m), not less than 60% and 50% of the pile length, for piles embedded in the sand
with 20 m and more than 30 m respectively. 75% and 60% of the pile length embedded in clay
soil having a length equal to 20 m and 30 m respectively.
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 273

Table 4. Reinforcement extension in bored piles embedded in sandy soil (L = 30 and 35m).

Pile length = 30 m
Angle of internal friction, I Reinforcement extension Lateral load
From the pile head (m) % of pile length
10.0 33.3 0.07 Qa
12.0 40.0 0.10 Qa
25
14.0 46.7 0.15 Qa
15.0 50.0 0.20 Qa
9.0* 30.0 0.05 Qa
11.0* 36.7 0.10 Qa
30
11.9* 39.7 0.13 Qa
12.8* 42.7 0.17 Qa
11.5* 38.3 0.02 Qa
35 11.7* 39.0 0.05 Qa
12.25* 40.8 0.10 Qa
13.0* 43.3 0.13 Qa
9.75* 32.5 0.025 Qa
40 11.0* 36.7 0.05 Qa
11.75* 39.2 0.075 Qa
12.30* 41.0 0.10 Qa
Pile length = 35 m
7.80* 22.3 0.02 Qa
25 11.20* 32.0 0.05 Qa
13.60* 38.9 0.10 Qa
15.80* 45.1 0.15 Qa
10.00* 28.6 0.02 Qa
30 12.00* 34.3 0.05 Qa
12.50* 35.7 0.08 Qa
13.60* 38.9 0.13 Qa
11.00* 31.4 0.02 Qa
35 12.00* 34.3 0.05 Qa
13.00* 37.1 0.07 Qa
14.00* 40.0 0.10 Qa
15.00* 42.9 0.025 Qa
40 15.25* 43.6 0.05 Qa
15.50* 44.3 0.07 Qa
16.00* 45.7 0.08 Qa
(*) the extent of reinforcement due to compression stresses.
274 Performance of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under ...

Table 5. Reinforcement extension in bored piles embedded in clayey soil (L = 10, 20, and 30 m).
Pile length = 10 m
Undrained shear strength Reinforcement extension Lateral load
From the pile head (m) % of pile length
6.50 65.0 0.20 Qa
25 7.40 74.0 0.40 Qa
8.00 80.0 0.60 Qa
8.50 85.0 0.80 Qa
5.00 50.0 0.10 Qa
50 5.90 59.0 0.20 Qa
6.75 67.5 0.30 Qa
7.50 75.0 0.40 Qa
8.00 80.0 0.50 Qa
3.75 37.5 0.10 Qa
100 5.00 50.0 0.20 Qa
6.00 60.0 0.30 Qa
6.75 67.5 0.40 Qa
7.25 72.5 0.50 Qa
Pile length = 20 m
11.0 55.0 0.10 Qa
13.0 65.0 0.20 Qa
25 13.5 67.5 0.30 Qa
14.5 72.5 0.40 Qa
15.0 75.0 0.50 Qa
6.80 34.0 0.10 Qa
50 9.60 48.0 0.20 Qa
11.3 56.5 0.30 Qa
12.6 63.0 0.40 Qa
5.6 28.0 0.10 Qa
7.4 37.0 0.15 Qa
100 8.6 43.0 0.20 Qa
9.7 48.5 0.25 Qa
Pile length = 30 m
11.4 38.0 0.10 Qa
25 13.2 44.0 0.20 Qa
15.0 50.0 0.30 Qa
16.0 53.3 0.40 Qa
9.0 30.0 0.10 Qa
50 11.0 36.7 0.15 Qa
12.9 43.0 0.20 Qa
13.0 43.3 0.25 Qa
7.0 23.3 0.10 Qa
100 10.0 33.3 0.15 Qa
11.8 39.3 0.20 Qa
M. J. Al-Mosawe and A. A. Al-Obaidi 275

References

1. ACI Committee 207 (1970), Mass Concrete for Dams and Other Massive Structures, ACI Journal, vol. 67
No. 4 April, pp. 273-309.
2. ACI Committee 224 (1984), Causes, Evaluation, and Repair of Cracks in Concrete Structures, ACI Journal,
vol. 81 No. 3 May-June, pp. 211-230.
3. ACI Committee 318 (2015), Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, American Concrete
Institute, Detroit, p - 520
4. ACI Committee 322 (2105), Building Code Requirements for Structural Plain Concrete, American Concrete
Institute, Detroit, 7 pp.
5. ACI Committee 336 (1972), Suggested Design and Construction Procedures for Pier Foundations, ACI
Journal, vol. 69, No.8 pp.461-480
6. ACI Committee 543 (2012), Recommendations for Design, Manufacture, and Installation of Concrete Piles,
American Concrete Institute, Detroit, 34 pp.
7. Al-Obaidi A. H., (2002), Performance Of Unreinforced Concrete Bored Piles Under Different Loading
Conditions Ph.D. Thesis, University of Baghdad, Iraq
8. Al-Obaidi, A. H. (1999), Temperature Variations and its Effect on some Engineering Properties of Tikrit
Soils, Scientific Journal of Tikrit University/ Engg. Sic., vol. 6, No. 5 Suppl., pp. 13-28.
9. Amir, J. M., and Sokolov, M. M., (1976), Finite Element Analysis of Piles in Expansive Media, JGED,
ASCE, vol. 102, No. Gt7, pp. 701-719 Davis
10. ANSYS Inc. (2012), ANSYS users manual, Release 15.4.
11. Bowles, J. E. (1996), Foundation Analysis and Design, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Singapore, 1004 pp.
12. BS 8004 (2015), Code of Practice for Foundations, British Standards, London, 106pp.
13. Davidson, H. L. (1982), Laterally Loaded Drilled Pier Research, vol. 1 and 2, Report EL-2197, Electric
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA.
14. DIN 4014, (Part 1), (1990), Bored Piles of Conventional Types, Manufacture, Design and Permissible
Loading, Deutsche Institute for Norman, Berlin.
15. European Standards, EN 1536 (1999), Execution of Special Geotechnical Work Bored Piles, February,
Worldwide for CEN National Members, p -84
16. Gonzalez, L. F. (1994), Analysis of Laterally Loaded Drilled Pier Foundations, Ph.D. Thesis, University of
Pittsburgh, 200 pp.
17. IS: 2911, (2013), Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Pile Foundations, (Part
1/Sec.2) Bored cast in-situ concrete piles, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, India.
18. Johnson, L. D., and Snethen, D. R., (1979), Prediction of Potential Heave of Swelling Soil, Geotech. Testing
Journal, ASTM, vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 117-124
19. Nilson, A. H., and Winter, G. (1986), Design of Concrete Structures, 10th Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Co.
730pp.
20. Poulos, H. G., and Davis, E. H. (1980), Pile Foundation Analysis and Design, John Wiley and Sons. New
York 397 pp.
21. Salih, S. M., (2001), Shrinkage and Thermal Cracking of Internally Restrained Reinforced Concrete
Members, M. Sc. Thesis, University of Baghdad, 116pp.
22. Sazhin, V. S., (1968), Method of Rising of Piles Following Flooding of Swelling Soils, SMED, ASCE, vol.
1, pp. 49-52
23. Soil Mec. Drilling and Foundation Equipment Comp., (2015), www.soilmec.com/en/large-diameter-piles
24. Teng, W. C. (1992), Foundation Design, 7th Printing, Prentice-Hall of India, New Delhi, 466 pp.
25. Tomlinson, M. J. (2008), Pile Design and Construction Practice, A Viewpoint Publication, London, 413 pp.
26. Winterkorn, H. F. and Fang, H. Y. (1975), Foundation Engineering Handbook, Van Nostrand Reinhold
Company, New York, 751 pp.

You might also like