Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MISSOURI, UNIV OF/COLUMBIA on 06/02/15. Copyright ASCE.

For personal use only; all rights reserved.

AXIAL CAPACITY OF AUGERED DISPLACEMENT

PILES AT AUBURN UNIVERSITY

By Dan Brown t and Corbett Drew 2

Abstract: A comparative study was performed at the Auburn University's Spring

Villa NGES test site aimed at quantifying the effects of grouping and amelioration
on the axial capacity of augered displacement piles. Amelioration is defined as the
addition of sand or stone during drilling to "improve" the pile-soil interface. The
test site lies in the Piedmont geologic formation and is comprised of residual soils
best classified as silty-clay to clayey-silt The tested piles were specialized, full
displacement continuous flight auger piles. The scope of testing involved quick
load compression tests on five different pile configurations: isolated single pile;
isolated single pile ameliorated with sand; isolated single pile ameliorated with
#89 crushed stone; single pile centered in symmetric 5 pile group; single pile
centered in symmetric 5 pile group ameliorated with sand. Previous studies of this
test site indicate low variability across the site with respect to stratigraphy and soil
strength. Differences in these side by side load tests can be attributed primarily to
pile configuration. The tests quantified substantial increases in axial capacity with
both grouping and amelioration. The nature of the full displacement piles is such
that the group effect substantially increases lateral soil stresses over the depth of
the pile, resulting in higher side friction with the installation of adjacent piles.
Amelioration with either the sand or the crushed stone also resulted in an increase
in capacity, though quantitatively not as much as with the group effect. While
both grouping and amelioration provided marked increases in capacity, their
combined effects were not as substantial.

~TRODUCTION

Augered piles are becoming more prevalent in the industry today as a deep
foundation alternative. More attention and research has previously been focused on
construction quality control measures and not necessarily on augered pile performance.
1. AssociateProfessorof Civil Engineering,AuburnUniversity,AL 36849
2. ProjectEngineer, Christy-Cobb& Assoc.,Birnungham,AL

397

New Technological and Design Developments in Deep Foundations

 398 DEEPFOUNDATIONS

There are a number of different types of augered piling systems in current practice.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MISSOURI, UNIV OF/COLUMBIA on 06/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Augered pile performance is primarily a function of installation technique. Pile execution

factors, which include grout pressures, penetration / extraction rates, and concrete take,
all have significant influence on pile integrity and performance (Neate, 1989). As
construction methods develop and diverge, it then becomes necessary to evaluate the
performance distinctions of the different types.

Augered Displacement Piling

The piles tested in this program were installed by a continuous flight auger (CFA)
rig reconflgured with a displacement tool. This tool displaces soil radially outward as the
hollow stem tool is advanced. When the ton tip achieves desired grade, concrete is
pumped into the auger and the tool is withdrawn, leaving a completed pile in the ground.
These are zero spoil piles, which means that all the displaced material compresses
and densities the soil surrounding the borehole The tool is not removed until the
concrete head is sufficient to prevent decompression and or caving. By maintaining this
protocol, the tool effectively becomes a displacement pile, though installed no differently
than a traditional augured cast-in-place pile.
There have been a number of studies aimed at quantifying the effects of
displacement on surrounding soils. Though the approaches vary greatly, the conclusions
are consistent. The lateral at-rest earth pressure coefficient (Ko) in sands has been shown
to decrease as much as a third for drilled and angered piles, resembling an active lateral
pressure, while nearly doubling for large displacement piles, resembling a passive lateral
pressure (Kulhawy, 1984). Displacement effects have also been quantified by other
means. One study quantified cone penetrometer data, indicating an increase of 20 to 50
percent in cone resistance over the length of pile (Webb, et al, 1987). Another study
quantified displacement effects by way of increased SPT blow count and concluded that
increased stresses were also a function of uniformity coefficient, overconsolidation ratio,
and level of effective stress before displacement (Nataraja and Cook, 1983). It is
generally recognized that displacing soils, be it through a linear or rotational strain path,
increases lateral stresses in most non-sensitive soil conditions. The augered
displacement pile behaves categorically like neither displacement nor traditional CFA
piling systems. Though the energy dissipation differs from that of driven displacement
piling systems, there are still substantial increases in soil density that result from this pile
system. Augered displacement piles achieve this displacement while maintaining the
production benefits of conventional CFA piles.
These displacement effects have been implemented into geotechnical practice for
driven piles and drilled shafts in the form of group action factors. Many engineers accept
that a group of driven displacement piles in sand will tend to have an ultimate axial
compression capacity in excess of the sum of the individual capacities, and use a group
action factor of 1 in the interest of conservative design (FHWA, 1985). Groups of
drilled shafts in cohesionless soils may be designed using group action factors of less
than l, on the order of 2/3 for shafts spaced at 3 diameters on center (FHWA, 1988).

Amelioration
With the type of displacement CFA pile used in this study, a number of reversed
flights on the auger above the displacement tool enable the introduction of outside

New Technological and Design Developments in Deep Foundations

 DEEP FOUNDATIONS 399

material to the soil surrounding the pile. This improvement process is known as
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MISSOURI, UNIV OF/COLUMBIA on 06/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

amelioration. By introducing coarse sands or gravel to the head of the borehole as the
auger is advanced, that material is pulled into the surrounding soil. The amount of added
material varies with the soil being penetrated, but is on the order of 10% to 25% of the
theoretical volume of the pile. Though it is by no means to be considered a site-wide soil
improvement tool, there are a number of isolated benefits to amelioration. The addition
of cohesionless soils and gravels effectively increases the friction potential of the pile-soil
interface. These soils are also free draining and allow pore pressures immediately around
the pile to dissipate faster than they otherwise would. Each of these effects would have
the potential to increase pile capacity.

TESTING PROGRAM

A series of static axial load tests in general conformance with ASTM D-1143
were performed on augered displacement piles of various lengths and configurations.
The load tests were then evaluated to quantify changes in capacity attributable to the
different configurations.

Location
Auburn University's Spring Villa NGES test site is located in the Piedmont
geologic formation and is comprised primarily of residual soils best classified as silty-
clay to clayey-silts. This material is not necessarily conducive to high shaft friction
potential when remolded as it is with installation of this type of pile. Thus, this is a site
where amelioration would be a production alternative to achieve improved pile
performance. Previous research at the University has shown the site to be quite uniform
over the upper 15 m with respect to stratigraphy and soil strength. Any differences in
pile performance would then be solely attributable to pile configuration.
The strength characteristics of the soil at the site are described by Brown and
Vinson (1998) and summarized as follows. Average LL and PI were 46 and 8
respectively, with an average water content of 34% and 47% sand content. A series of 23
C1UC and C1DC triaxial compression tests performed in the immediate area suggest
effective cohesion of 17 kPa and effective qb of 31 degrees. Standard penetration tests in
the 2 m to 15 m depth ranged from 8 to 14 blows/30 cm with a mean value of 12 blows/
30 cm Cone penetration test
soundings averaged 3000 to 4000 kPa
for tip resistance with friction ratio
values consistently around 5%.
The soil conditions present at
this site are such that pile end bearing
is minimal. This generalization is
based on the nature of the soils present
and reinforced by the dramatic change
in slope of the load deflection curves.
These piles derive their capacity
almost exclusively from shaft friction. Figure 1. Pile Group Layout
This caveat will allow for the

New Technological and Design Developments in Deep Foundations

 400 DEEP FOUNDATIONS

calculation of unit shaft friction values for the objective comparison of different length
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MISSOURI, UNIV OF/COLUMBIA on 06/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

piles.

Load Testing
The quick load provisions of ASTM Dl143 were used in the static axial
compressive load testing of piles on this site. Though the testing procedures are standard,
there is little consensus in the practice with respect to interpretation of load deflection
curves. Interpretation of a failure or ultimate load can be a very subjective component of
any testing program. For the purposes of this test program, ultimate load has been
defined as either the load that creates a total butt deflection equal to 0.10 times the
diameter of the pile or that load increment which produces a slope on the load deflection
curve greater than 1.695 mm per kN. This criterion is both objective and consistent. Each
of the piles was tested to failure using this criterion.

Table 1 Pile Configurations

ID D L Description of Installation
(m) (m)
TP1 0.46 8.2 Grouped at 3D / Ameliorated with Sand
TP2 0.46 11.6 Grouped at 3D
TP3 0.46 11.0 Isolated
TP4 0.46 7.6 Isolated / Ameliorated with #89 Crushed Stone*
TP5 0.46 8.2 Isolated / Ameliorated with Sand
* #89 Crushed Stone has grain sizes between the 3/8" and #8 sieve numbers.

A summary of pile configurations is given here in Table 1 and the pile group
layout is shown in Figure 1. The pile group layout shown in Figure 1 is typical for both
TP1 and TP2, in which the
tested piles are at the center
of the 5-pile group. The test
pile was installed first,
followed by the four
surrounding piles (these were
not tested). In all cases, four
reaction piles were installed
with a clear distance between
any reaction pile and the
tested pile of at least 7
diameters. For the isolated
piles (TP-3,4,5), there was no
pile of any kind within 7 clear
diameters of the tested pile.

TEST RESULTS

The resulting load Figure 2. CompositeLoadDeflectionPlot

deflection curves are

New Technological and Design Developments in Deep Foundations

 DEEP FOUNDATIONS 401

presented in Figure 2.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MISSOURI, UNIV OF/COLUMBIA on 06/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Pile ultimate capacity is developed as a combination of end bearing and shaft

friction. The sharp drop shown in these load deflection curves can be interpreted as the
effective absence of end bearing, Measurements from a relatively few strain gauges
which were present in these piles are consistent with this interpretation, as was the case
with other pile types tested in axial compression at the site. The unit shaft friction value
and distribution are established as functions of effective overburden pressure, magnitude
of load, pile geometry, and soil type. This shaft friction distribution will typically vary a
great deal over the length of the pile. For the purposes of this study, an average unit shaft
friction value has been calculated for evaluation. This is simply the interpreted ultimate
load divided by the surface area of the pile.
A summary of calculated average unit shaft friction, f~ AVO,values is included as
Table 2.

Table 2 Summary of Results

IO D L UIt. Capacity is, AVG
~m) (m) (kN) (idea)
TPI 0.46 8,2 1250 105
TP2 0.46 11.6 1500 91
TP3 0.46 11.0 710 45
TP4 0.46 7,6 760 68
TP5 0.46 8,2 670 56

It is readily apparent that substantial increases can be seen in the amount of shaft
friction by altering installation method and pile configuration. TP3 indicated an average
unit shaft friction value of 45 kPa for an isolated pile in this material. The effects of
grouping are significant as evidenced by TP2 exhibiting a 100% increase in average unit
shaft friction. Amelioration also produced increases of 25% to 50% depending on the
material, which in this case was sand (TP4) and #89 crushed stone (TP5), respectively.
The combined effects of grouping and amelioration produced a net increase of 133%
(TP1).
Note that the beneficial effects of amelioration in terms of productivity were
somewhat offset by the increased difficulty in installation for the rig: greater torque was
required to achieve penetration, and the piles were stopped at a shallower depth as a
result. So, although the rig readily penetrated to the 11 m depth without amelioration, the
same rig had difficulty penetrating below 8 m with the ameliorated piles.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this testing program suggest the following observations and
conclusions regarding displacement CFA piles:

The increased lateral stress resulting from installation of displacement CFA piles
produces an increased side friction for piles within groups of displacement CFA
piles, at least within the silty soils of the Piedmont geology in which these tests
were performed. The traditional engineering approach of limiting the group

New Technological and Design Developments in Deep Foundations

 402 DEEP FOUNDATIONS

capacity to the sum of the capacity of individual piles is quite conservative for
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MISSOURI, UNIV OF/COLUMBIA on 06/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

these piles if the individual pile capacity is based upon a load test of an isolated
pile. This observation is quite different from traditional CFA piles in which the
soil is excavated as the pile is constructed and increases in capacity due to group
effects would not be expected. For the two piles within groups in this test
program, the displacement CFA piles exhibited increases in unit side shear of
100% (TP2 to TP3) and 90% (TP1 to TP5) compared with similar isolated piles;
i.e., the side shear was roughly doubled.

The addition of coarse sand or crushed stone to the pile during installation (a
process referred to as "amelioration") produced increases in side shear capacity in
these silty soils. Compared to similar piles without amelioration, the two piles
with sand added produced increases of 25% (TP5 to TP3) and 16% (TP1 to TP2)
respectively. The pile ameliorated with crushed stone produced and increase of
50% in side shear (TP4 to TP1). There are clear benefits in terms of increased
side shear with this technique in silty soils. Some of this benefit appears to be due
to increased lateral stress due to increased quantity of soil displaced, and some
appears related to increases sidewall roughness (since the crushed stone
outperformed the sand).

The beneficial effects of amelioration are somewhat offset by the increased

construction time and increased difficulty in drilling with the added material.
With displacement CFA piles, the available torque of the rig to advance the
augers while displacing soil is a limitation and a very powerful rig is required
compared to conventional CFA piles. The amelioration added to the torque
requirements due to the increased volume of soil displaced, with the result that the
length of pile penetration was limited and the ultimate capacity of the resulting
shorter ameliorated pile was not substantially greater than the longer conventional
displacement CFA pile. The cost benefits of reduced pile length are therefore
offset to some degree by the increased cost of handling sand or crushed stone to
achieve amelioration and the bottom line absolute pile capacity which can be
achieved may be limited by the rig torque capacity.

The observations and conclusions of this study are limited to the silty residual
soils of the Piedmont geology, but the mechanisms offered to explain these observations
suggest that similar trends would be anticipated in other granular soils. The technical
benefits of increased lateral stresses and excellent side resistance of displacement type
CFA piles is likely to lead to increased use of this type of pile in the U S This research
suggests that traditional design procedures for CFA piles and pile group behavior could
be extremely conservative for the displacement CFA piles. Engineers will need to be
open to consideration of the effects of installation on subsequent pile performance with
CFA piles in order to derive the full benefit of this new construction technique.

New Technological and Design Developments in Deep Foundations

 DEEP FOUNDATIONS 403

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MISSOURI, UNIV OF/COLUMBIA on 06/02/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of the Morris-Shea Bridge

Company of Birmingham, Alabama for their contributions in constructing the test piles
and assisting with the setup and performance of the load tests. The support of Christy-
Cobb Engineers of Birmingham, the Alabama DOT, the Auburn University Highway
Research Center, and the Auburn University National Geotechnical Experimentation Site
are gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

ASCE / USACoE (1988) "Design of Pile Foundations". Technical Engineering and

Design Guides as adopted from USACoE, No. 1, ASCE, N.Y.
Brown, D. and Vinson, J., (1998). "Comparison of Strength and Stiffness Parameters for
a Piedmont Residual Soil" Proceedings of the First Int'l Cons on Site
Characterization - ISC'98 Atlanta, Ga., pp. 1229-1234.
FHWA - Federal Highway Administration (1983) FHWA Manual for Design of Pile
Foundations Washington D.C.
FHWA - Federal Highway Administration (1988) Drilled Shafts: Construction
Procedures and Design Methods, McLean, Va.
Fleming, W.GK (1995) "The Understanding of CFA Piling, It's Monitoring and
Control". Institution of Civil Engineers: Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 113, p.
157, Thomas Telford Pub., London.
Kulhawy, F. (1984) "Limiting Tip and Side Resistance: Fact or Fallacy?". Analysis and
Design of Pile Foundations, ASCE, N.Y.
Natajara, MS. and BE. Cook (1983) "Increase in SPT-N Values Due to Displacement
Piles". ASCE Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 109 No. 1, p. 108,
ASCE, N.Y
Neate, J.J. (1989) "Augered Cast in Place Piles". Foundation Engineering: Current
Principles and Practice: Vol.2, ASCE, N.Y.
Van lmpe, W.F. (1988) "Considerations on Auger Pile Design". Deep Foundations on
Bored and Augered Piles, pp. 193-218, A. A Balkema, Rotterdam.
Webb, D., H.J. Everts, F. de Boer and KF. Brons (1987) "Bearing Capacity of Piles
Influenced by Building Stages". 13th International Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 2, p. 465, A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam.

New Technological and Design Developments in Deep Foundations