Chapter 8.ppt (Compatibility Mode) PDF

Chapter (8)
Piles Settlement
Prediction
8.1 Introduction
§ The use of piles as settlement reducers

had been discussed as early as 1977, at the
Tokyo ISSMFE Conference. Randolph
(1994) has drawn attention to the fact that
the primary reason for the choice of a piled
foundation is to reduce settlements.
§ Design calculation methods of pile
foundation concentrate on the ultimate
capacity. The settlement behaviour is given
less consideration.
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

8.1 Introduction
§ Although many buildings have failed as a result

of overstressing the underlying soil, there are
also cases in which excessive settlement may
cause partial collapse of the building.
§ The most common occurrences due to excessive
settlement are wall and floor cracks which, in
some cases, lead to more severe problems. From
this point the need to study and accurately
estimate the settlement under the effect of
different types of foundations is a must.
8.1 Introduction
§ Despite being less in value than that of other

types of foundations, there is a great need to
accurately estimate pile settlement to
determine whether the selection and the design
of the foundation is satisfactory or not.
§ However in this case the magnitude of the
total settlement is not as important as the
amount of differential settlement between
different parts of the structure. This appears
clearly if a part of the structure is subjected to
loads larger than that of other parts.

8.1 Introduction
Settlement of Deep Foundations

n Settlement of deep foundations, when designed
based on axial load capacity considerations, is
typically less than 0.5 in
n Pile groups may have larger settlements, but still
within acceptable limits
n Therefore, in practice engineers generally do not
perform settlement analysis for deep foundations
n However, settlement analysis may be necessary
in certain special situations
8.1 Introduction
Perform Settlement Analysis when ……...
n Structure is specially sensitive to settlement
n Soil is highly compressible
n Structural engineers needs a “spring constant”
to represent response of the foundation system
n Downdrag may cause extra settlement

4.1 Introduction
8.1 Introduction
Differential Settlement

8.1 Introduction
Settlement criteria (after Wahls 1994)
Δ sAB = differential settlement between A and B

βAb = angular distortion between A and B
ρmax = total settlement
L = distance between two reference points (A and E)
ω = tilt = rigid body rotation
Δ = relative deflection
= maximum displacement from a straight line
connecting two reference points (A and E)
Δ/L = deflection ratio
8.1 Introduction
Tolerable movement for buildings (after Eurocode 1).

Total settlement
• Isolated foundations 25 mm
• Raft foundations 50 mm
Differential settlement between adjacent columns

• Open frame 20 mm
• Frames with flexible cladding or finishing 10 mm
• Frames with rigid cladding or finishing 5 mm
Angular distortion 1/500

8.1 Introduction
Pisa Tower
Differential Settlement

8.1 Introduction
• Methods of estimating the settlement of single

piles fall into four groups:
1- Load transfer (t-z) methods
2- Elasticity-based methods
3- Numerical methods such as the finite element
or finite difference methods.
4- Empirical methods
• Settlement estimated from the results of load

tests are generally considered more accurate and
reliable.
8.2 Settlement of single piles
§ Although a single pile is rarely used to support

a structure, the calculation of settlement of a
single pile is required to give an approximate
estimation for that of a group of piles.
§ Settlement of single piles in the Egyptian Code:

The Egyptian Code for design and practice of
foundations divides the calculation of settlement for
single piles into two cases according to the pile type and
diameter.
1- Single bored piles of diameter smaller than 60 cm
and single driven piles
2- Single bored piles of diameter larger than 60 cm

1- Single bored piles of diameter ≤ 60 cm

and single driven piles :
For single bored piles of diameter ≤ 60 cm and single
driven piles , the Egyptian Code recommends the use of a
semi-empirical method in which the overall settlement of
a single pile is considered to be the sum of three
components :
1. The elastic compression of pile shaft (Ss)

2. The settlement caused by load transferred at the pile
tip (Spp)
3. The settlement caused by load transferred along the
pile shaft (Sps)
(Q b
+ α f .Q f )
L
A.E p
§ The total settlement is then equal to :
S = Ss + Spp + Sps
1. The elastic compression of pile shaft (Ss) :
Ss = (Qb + α f .Q f )
L
A.E p
where Qb = Tip resistance of the pile for the design load for
which the settlement is being calculated.
Qf = Shaft resistance of the pile for the design load for
which the settlement is being calculated.
Qa = Qb + Qf = Design axial load in pile
L = Pile length A = Pile cross-sectional area
Ep = Elastic modulus for pile material
αf = Skin friction distribution coefficient

§ Skin friction distribution Coefficient ( αf ):
α f = 0.33 α f = 0.67 α f = 0.5

2- The settlement caused by load transferred at the pile
tip (Spp) :
Cb Qb
S pp =
d. q
where Cb= Factor according to table 8.1
d = Pile diameter or width
q = Unit ultimate tip bearing capacity
Bearing stratum under pile tip assumed to extend at least
10 pile diameters below tip and soil below tip is of
comparable or higher stiffness.
‫ﻭﻴﺸﺘﺭﻁ ﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﻁﺒﻘﺔ ﺍﺭﺘﻜﺎﺯ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺯﻭﻕ ﻤﻤﺘﺩﺓ ﺘﺤﺕ ﻁﺭﻑ ﺍﻟﺨﺎﺯﻭﻕ ﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺔ‬
‫= ﻋﺸﺭﺓ ﺃﻤﺜﺎل ﻗﻁﺭﻩ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺍﻷﻗل ﻭﺃﻥ ﺘﻜﻭﻥ ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﺘﻰ ﺘﻠﻴﻬﺎ ﺫﺍﺕ ﻤﻘﺎﻭﻤﺔ‬
.‫ﺘﺘﺴﺎﻭﻯ ﻤﻊ ﺃﻭ ﺘﺯﻴﺩ ﻋﻥ ﻤﻘﺎﻭﻤﺔ ﺍﻟﻁﺒﻘﺎﺕ ﺍﻟﻤﻨﺸﺄﺓ ﺒﻬﺎ ﺍﻟﺨﻭﺍﺯﻴﻕ‬

§ Table 8.1 Values of Cb:
Soil Type Driven piles Bored Piles

Loose to dense sand
0.02-0.04 0.09-0.18
Soft to stiff clay

0.02-0.03 0.03-0.06
Loose to dense silt

0.03-0.05 0.09-0.12
3- The settlement caused by load transferred along the

pile shaft (Sps) :
Cs Q f
S ps =
Lo . q
where Cs : Factor from the following relation
Lo
Cs = (0.93 + 0.16 ).Cb
d
Lo : Embedded pile length

q : Unit ultimate tip bearing capacity
10

2- Single bored piles of diameter larger than 60 cm:

In the case of single piles of diameter larger than 60 cm, the
Egyptian code recommends the application of a graphical
procedure in which the following graph is constructed:
C J
Pu
B H
K
Load
P
1
A G
O
Settlement
(١-٥-٥-٧) ‫ﺷﻜﻞ رﻗﻢ‬
11

Load deformation relationship of piles
Pile Load as function of pile displacement
12

‫‪8.2 Settlement of single piles‬‬
‫ﯾﻌﺘﻤﺪ ﺗﺼﻤﯿﻢ اﻟﺨﻮازﯾﻖ اﻟﺘﻰ ﯾﺰﯾﺪ ﻗﻄﺮھﺎ ﻋﻦ ‪ ٦٠‬ﺳﻢ واﻟﻤﻨﻔﺬة ﺑﻮاﺳﻄﺔ اﻟﺘﺜﻘﯿﺐ‬
‫اﻹﻋﺘﯿﺎدي واﻟﻤﺼﺒﻮﺑﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻜﺎﻧﮭﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﻘﺪار اﻟﮭﺒﻮط ﺣﯿﺚ ﯾﺘﻢ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﺮ ﻋﻼﻗﺔ اﻟﺤﻤﻞ‬
‫ﻣﻊ اﻟﮭﺒﻮط ﻣﻦ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺗﺤﻤﯿﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ اﻟﺘﺼﻤﯿﻢ‪.‬‬
‫وﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻋﺪم ﺗﻮاﻓﺮ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺗﺤﻤﯿﻞ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ اﻟﺘﺼﻤﯿﻢ ﺗﻘﺪر اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ‬
‫اﻟﻨﺤﻮ اﻟﻮارد ﻓﻲ ﺷﻜﻞ رﻗﻢ )‪ ، (١-٥-٥-٧‬ﻓﯿﺘﻢ ﺣﺴﺎب اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ‪ OBH‬ﻟﺤﻤﻞ‬
‫اﻹرﺗﻜﺎز ﺑﺈﻋﺘﺒﺎر أن اﻟﻨﻘﻄﺔ ‪ B‬ﺗﻨﺎﻇﺮ ھﺒﻮﻃﺎً ﻣﻘﺪاره ‪١٥‬ﺳﻢ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺮﺑﺔ ﻏﯿﺮ‬
‫ﻣﺘﻤﺎﺳﻜﺔ اﻟﺤﺒﯿﺒﺎت و ‪ % ٥‬ﻣﻦ ﻗﻄﺮ اﻟﺨﺎزوق ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺮﺑﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻤﺎﺳﻜﺔ‪.‬‬
‫واﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ‪ OAG‬ﻟﻺﺣﺘﻜﺎك اﻟﺠﺎﻧﺒﻰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺟﺬع اﻟﺨﺎزوق ﺑﺎﻋﺘﺒﺎر أن اﻟﻨﻘﻄﺔ ‪A‬‬
‫ﺗﻨﺎﻇﺮ ھﺒﻮﻃﺎً ﯾﺼﻞ إﻟﻰ ﺣﻮاﻟﻰ ‪ ١٠-٥‬ﻣﻠﻠﯿﻤﺘﺮاً )ﻓﻲ ﺣﺪود ‪ %١‬ﻣﻦ ﻗﻄﺮ‬
‫اﻟﺨﺎزوق(‬
‫وﺑﺠﻤﻊ اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺘﯿﻦ ﺗﻨﺘﺞ اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ‪ OKCJ‬ﻟﻠﺤﻤﻞ اﻟﻜﻠﻰ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺨﺎزوق ﺣﯿﺚ ﯾﻜﻮن‬
‫اﻟﺤﻤﻞ اﻟﺘﺼﻤﯿﻤﻲ اﻟﻤﺴﻤﻮح ﺑﮫ ھﻮ ذﻟﻚ اﻟﺤﻤﻞ اﻟﻤﻨﺎﻇﺮ ﻟﻠﮭﺒﻮط اﻟﻤﺴﻤﻮح ﺑﮫ‬
‫ﻟﻠﺨﺎزوق اﻟﻤﻔﺮد ﺑﺈﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﻌﻼﻗﺔ ‪OKCJ‬‬
‫‪8.2 Settlement of single piles‬‬
‫‪§ Graph construction procedure:‬‬

‫‪The construction of the graph is based on the‬‬
‫‪construction of two graphs OAG for friction & OBH for‬‬
‫‪end bearing, the two graphs are then added to give the‬‬
‫‪total graph OKCJ:‬‬
‫‪Step 1: Construction of OBH:‬‬

‫‪Point B is located such that it corresponds to settlement of‬‬
‫‪15cm for cohesionless soil and (5%) d for cohesive soil and‬‬
‫‪a load from tables (8-8) for cohesionless soil and (8-9) for‬‬
‫‪cohesive soil .‬‬
‫‪13‬‬
‫‪PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com‬‬

§ Table (8-8) End bearing stress for cohesionless soil:
Settl. End Bearing Stress (MN/m2)

(cm) Piles with enlarged
Ordinary piles
base
1 0.35 0.50
2 0.65 0.80
3 0.90 1.10
15* 2.40 3.40

* Expected Settlement at ultimate end bearing load.
§ Table (8-9) End bearing stress for cohesive soil:
Settlement (cm) End bearing stress (MN/m2)
0.20 X Sg 0.50
0.30 X Sg 0.70
Sg * 1.20
* Expected Settlement at ultimate end bearing load = 5%

of end bearing diameter.
14

Step 2: Construction of OAG:

Point A is located such that it corresponds to settlement
of 5-10mm (About 1% of pile diameter) and load as from
tables (8-10) and (8-11) according to soil type.
It should be noted that when considering friction in this
case a distance of 2m from pile head and d from pile tip
is neglected.
Step 3: Construction of OKCJ:

By superposition add The values of the two curves OAG
& OBH to get the overall settlement curve OKCJ.
§ Table (8-10) Friction stress for cohesionless soil:

Depth from ground Ultimate friction
Number of blows
level stress (kN/m2)
<10 - 0
0-2.0 0
10-20 2.0-5.0 3
>5.0 50
0-2.0 0
20-30 2.0-7.5 45
>5.0 75
0-2.0 0
>30 2.0-10.0 60
>10.0 100
15

§ Table (8-11) Friction stress for cohesive soil:
Soil Cohesion Ultimate friction stress

(kN/m2) (kN/m2)
0 0
25 25
100 40
200 50
8.3 Settlement of pile groups
§ Methods of estimating the settlement of pile groups

can be divided into the following main categories :
1. Methods which employ the concept of interaction
factors and the principle of superposition (e.g.,
Poulos & Davis, 1980);
2. Methods which involve the modification of a single
pile load-settlement curve, to take account of
group interaction effects;
3. The settlement ratio method, in which the
settlement of a single pile at the average load level
is multiplied by a group settlement ratio Rs, which
reflects the effects of group interaction;
16

4. The equivalent raft method, in which the pile group

is represented by an equivalent raft acting at some
characteristic depth along the piles;
5. The equivalent pier method, in which the pile
group is represented by a pier containing the piles
and the soil between them. The pier is treated as a
single pile of equivalent stiffness in order to
compute the average settlement of the group;
6. Numerical methods such as the FEM and the finite
difference method. While earlier work employed 2-
D analyses, it is now common for full 3-D analyses
to be employed (e.g., Katzenbach et al., 1998).
§ Settlement of pile groups is generally larger in

value than that of a single pile due to overlap of
zones of influence in soil in which the soil is stressed
due to loads from the pile shaft and pile base.
§ It is well recognized that the settlement of a pile
group can differ significantly from that of a single
pile at the same average load level. However, the
settlement of piled structures must be estimated on
the basis of the group action of the piles, not on a
single pile test.
17

Figure (8-3)

* Pile group settlements can be treated in a similar
manner to those of shallow foundations.
* Settlements can be divided into two types :

1- Immediate settlements – settlements shortly
after foundation loading, especially in sands
2- Consolidation settlements – in clays, same
mechanism as with shallow foundations
* Methods :
Immediate settlements – group settlement factor
Long-term consolidation – equivalent raft method
• The Egyptian Code calculates pile settlement of pile groups

by one of two methods depending on the type of soil.
1.Settlement of pile groups in cohesionless soils:
2.Settlement of pile groups in cohesive and multi layered
soils:
18

Figure (8-4) Settlements caused by pile driving in sand
8.3.1 Settlement of pile groups in cohesionless soils

A) Method According to Egyptian Code:
For pile groups in cohesionless soil, the Egyptian code
recommends the use of the following relation:
B
Sg = So *
d
Where: B = pile group width,
d = pile diameter or width,
So = Single pile settlement estimated or determined
from load tests.
Sg = Estimated pile group total settlement.
19

B) Method Based on SPT Test Data:

Meyerhof (1976) recommended that the settlement of a pile
group in a homogeneous sand deposit not underlain by a
more compressible soil at a greater depth may be estimated
by the following expression:
0.96 Pf B If
Sg = '
N
For silty sand, use: 1.92 P f B I f
In Which:
Sg = '
N
Sg = Estimated total settlement (mm).
Pf = Design foundation pressure (kPa),
= Group design load divided by group area = n Qa/ BZ.
B = Width of pile group (m).
N‘ = Average corrected SPT N value within a depth B below pile toe level.
D = Pile embedment depth (m).
If = Influence factor for group embedment = 1- [ D / 8 B ] ≥ 0.50.
C) Method Based on CPT Test Data:

Meyerhof (1976) recommended the following relationship
to estimate maximum settlements using cone penetration
test results for saturated cohesionless soils:
42 P f B I f
Sg =
qc
In Which:
Sg , Pf , B and If are defined in the previous method, and
qc = Average static cone tip resistance (kPa) within a depth
of B below the pile toe level.
• For piles in cohesionless soils underlain by cohesive

deposits, the method presented in Sections 8.3.3 should be
used.
20

Settlement of Pile Groups in Sand (After Skempton)
Single Pile
Load Test Foundation
Ground
Prestressed
by Pile Driving
Zone of
Settlement
General Concept of Distribution of Pile Group Loads
Q Q
Q
Q L
L/3
2
2
1
1
21

Pressure Distribution for End Bearing Pile Groups
nQa
L nQa Soft Clay
BA
H1 Sand 1H:2V
H2 Soft Clay
A, B = Pile Group Dimensions
Pressure Distribution for Friction Pile Groups

nQa
2
L 1H:4V
L 3
1H:2V
nQa
( B + L )( A + L )
3 3
H
B, A = Pile Group Dimensions
22

Equivalent Footing
Concept for Pile Groups

Equivalent Raft Method (Tomlinson, 1994)
(a) Group of Piles Supporting

Predominately by Shaft Resistance
23

(b) Group of Piles Driven through Soft Clay to

Combined Shaft and End-bearing Resistance in Dense
Granular Soil

(c) Group of Piles Supported by End-bearing on

Hard Rock Stratum
24

8.3.2 Settlement of pile groups in cohesive soils :

• Terzaghi and Peck (1967) proposed that pile group
settlements could be evaluated using an equivalent footing
situated at a depth of 1/3 D above the pile toe. This concept is
illustrated in Figure 8-6. For a pile group consisting of only
vertical piles, the equivalent footing has a plan area (B) (Z)
that corresponds to the perimeter dimensions of the pile
group. The pile group load over this plan area is then the
bearing pressure transferred to the soil through the
equivalent footing. The load is assumed to spread within the
frustum of a pyramid of side slopes at 30ْ and to cause
uniform additional vertical pressure at lower levels.

•The pressure at any level is equal to the load carried by
the group divided by the plan area of the base of the
frustum at that level. Consolidation settlements are
calculated based on the pressure increase in the underlying
layers.
• Consolidation settlements of cohesive soils are usually
computed on the basis of laboratory tests. A typical plot of
consolidation test results illustrating the relationships of
the compression indices Cc and Ccr to void ratio, e, and
pressure, p are shown in Figure (8-5).
• For pressure increases less than the preconsolidation
pressure (Pc) settlement is computed using a value of the
compression index representing recompression, Ccr. For
pressure increases greater than the preconsolidation
pressure, settlement is computed using the compression
index, Cc.
25

Figure (8-5)
The following three equations are used to calculated

settlements of cohesive soils depending upon the pressure
increase and whether the soil is overconsolidated or
normally consolidated. The terms used in these equations
are as follows:
S = Total settlement, (mm).

H = Original thickness of stratum, (mm).
Ccr= Recompression index,
eo = Initial void ratio,
po = Effective overburden pressure at midpoint of compressible
stratum prior to pressure increase
pc = Estimated preconsolidation pressure
Cc = Compression index
Δp = Average change in pressure in compressible stratum considered.
26

For overconsolidated cohesive soils where the pressure
after the foundation pressure increases is greater than
the soil preconsolidation pressure, settlements may be
computed as follows:
S = H [ (Ccr / (1 + eo )) log (pc / po) +
((Cc / (1 + eo )) log ((Po + ΔP) / Pc )]
For overconsolidated cohesive soils where the pressure
after the foundation pressure increase is less than the
soil preconsolidation pressure, settlements should be
computed using the following equation:
S = H [ ((Ccr / (1 + eo )) log ((Po + ΔP) / Po )]
For normally consolidated cohesive soils, settlements
should be computed from:
S = H [ ((Cc / (1 + eo )) log ((Po + ΔP) / Po )]
• Rather than fixing the equivalent footing at a depth of

1/3 D above the pile toe for all soil conditions, the depth
of the equivalent footing should be adjusted based upon
soil stratigraphy and load transfer mechanism to the soil.
Figure (8-6) presents the recommended location of the
equivalent footing for a variety of load transfer and soil
resistance conditions.
27

8.3.3 Settlement of pile groups in layered soils:
Piles are often installed in a layered soil profile consisting

of cohesionless and cohesive soils or in soil profiles where
an underlying soil stratum of different consistency is
affected by the pile group loading. In these cases, group
settlement will be influenced by the pressure increase in
and compressibility of the affected layers.
§ It relies on the replacement of the pile group by a

raft foundation of some equivalent dimensions,
acting at some representative depth below the
surface (Tomlinson, 1986), see figure (8-6).
Spread of load at 1 in 4
Soft Clay
_2
3L
L
_2 L
3 1
L1 L1
Base of Equivalent foundation

Fig. (8-6) (a) (b) (c)
The load is spread at an angle, which varies from 1:4 for

friction piles, to zero for end bearing groups.
28

Figures 8-7 (a), 8-7 (c) and 8-7 (d) may be used to
determine the location of the equivalent raft foundation
and to evaluate the resulting pressure increase in a soil
layer. The settlement of each layer is then calculated using
the appropriate settlement equation presented in Section
8.3.2 for cohesive layers and from the following equation
for cohesionless layers:
S = H [ (1 /c’) log ((Po + ΔP) / Po )]
In which:
S = Total layer settlement, (mm).
H = Original thickness of layer, (mm).
C’ = Dimensionless bearing capacity index from Figure 8-8,
determined from average corrected SPT N’ value, N, for
layer with consideration of SPT hammer type.
P0 = Effective overburden pressure at midpoint of layer prior to
pressure increase, (kPa).
ΔP = Average change in pressure in the layer, (kPa).
Figure (8-8) Values of the Bearing Capacity Index, C’, for

Granular Soil (modified after Cheney and Chassie, 1993)
29

Figure (8-7-a)
Figure (8-7-b)
30

Figure (8-7-c)
Figure (8-7-d)
31

D
Friction Load
2/3 D
End Bearing
Load
Equivalent Footing Concept
32

Settlements below pile groups in sand
Settlement of pile group
33

Differential settlements below building

due to pile driving in sand
Imaginary Footing Method

n Replace pile group with an imaginary footing; then
use analysis methods discussed in setllement of
shallow foundation and then add δe
n Friction piles: place imaginary footing at two-thirds
depth (0.67D)
n End bearing piles: place imaginary footing at pile tip
elevation (at D)
n When both skin friction and end bearing resistance is
available, place it somewhere in between
34

8.4 Time-dependency of piles settlement
Time-dependency of settlement (under constant

loading) arises from:
1. Consolidation settlements (usually in clay or silty

soils);
2. Settlements arising from creep of soil under
constant loading.
1.Consolidation settlements: Ø For ideal elastic clay, the

solution was obtained from
20
Pile groups are in a circular an elastic boundary element
configuration with a pile spacing of 3 analysis (Poulos, 1989).
time pile diameter
For a single pile, the
Consolidation Settlement %
Ø
consolidation settlement is
about 7 % of the total
10 settlement.
25 Ø As the number of piles
increases, the proportion of
consolidation settlement
Piles are floating in a also increases.
homogeneous deep soil layer
1
0 Ø However, even for the 16-
1 4 8 16 pile group, the proportion
Number of Piles of consolidation settlement
Fig. (L-4) (after Poulos 1989). is about 15 %.
35

The pervious remarks could be attributed to the following:

Ø For single piles, settlement is attributed to shear
deformation. Time-settlement is usually insignificant
(single pile loading tests support this conclusion).
Ø For pile groups, greater proportion of load carried by
the pile bases. This results in soil volumetric
deformation.
Ø In general, the consolidation settlement is likely to
be significant only if :
1. the group is relatively large;
2. there is a relatively deep layer of compressible soil
influenced by the group.
8.5 Compressible underlying layers effects
• The presence of soft compressible layers below

the pile tips can result in increases in the
settlement of a pile group, despite the fact
that the settlement of a single pile may be
largely unaffected by the compressible layers.
• To emphasize the potential significance of

compressible underlying layers, a simple
problem has been analyzed, using the computer
program DEFPIG (Poulos, 1990). It can be seen
from the results of Fig. (L-5) that:
36

8.5 Compressible underlying layers effects
1. The larger the group (and 3.5
therefore the width of the
Settlement (with soft layer)

Settlement (no soft layer)
______________________
pile group), the greater is 3.0
the effect of the

Piles L= 15 m
underlying compressible 2.5 d= 0.5 m
layer on settlement. E= 30000 MPa
s/d = 4
2.0
14
E 1= 20 MPa
2. If the presence of such
compressible layers is 1.5 s s s E = 100 MPa
4
2
either not identified, or Compressible E 3= 20 MPa
Layer
is ignored, the pile group 1.0
settlements can be several 1 2 3 4 5

1/2
6 7 8
times that for group (No. of Piles)

bearing on a continuous Figure (L-5)
stratum.
(after Poulos, 1990)
8.6 Differential settlement within pile groups
FThere are two extreme assumptions for the analysis of

pile group settlement:
1. The pile cap is perfectly rigid (differential
settlement ΔS = 0.0);
2. The pile cap is flexible (differential settlement
ΔS ≠ 0.0).
FIn reality, the situation is usually between these two
extremes.
q For perfectly flexible pile caps, Randolph (1994a) has
related the ratio of differential settlement ΔS to the
average group settlement, Sav, to the aspect ratio R,
where:
R = (ns / L) 0.5 ( L − 6)
37

8.6 Differential settlement within pile groups
∆S / Sa v = f R / 4 for R ≤ 4 ( L − 7)
∆S / Sa v = f for R > 4 ( L − 8)
Where f = 0.3 for center-to-midside, and 0.5 for center-to-corner.
For perfectly rigid pile caps, Mayne & Poulos (1999) have
developed a closed-form approximation, from which a
rigidity correction factor, fR can be derived:
f R ≈ 1 / (1 + 2.17 K F ) ( L − 9a )
K F = ( E c / E sa v)( 2t / d ) 3 ( L − 9b)
The factor fR is then applied to the maximum differential

settlement estimated from Equation (L-7).
Questions
&
Comments
38

Chapter 8.ppt (Compatibility Mode) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 8.ppt (Compatibility Mode) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter (8)

§ The use of piles as settlement reducers

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

§ Although many buildings have failed as a result

§ Despite being less in value than that of other

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Settlement of Deep Foundations

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Settlement criteria (after Wahls 1994)

Δ sAB = differential settlement between A and B

Tolerable movement for buildings (after Eurocode 1).

Differential settlement between adjacent columns

Angular distortion 1/500

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

• Methods of estimating the settlement of single

• Settlement estimated from the results of load

8.2 Settlement of single piles

§ Although a single pile is rarely used to support

§ Settlement of single piles in the Egyptian Code:

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1- Single bored piles of diameter ≤ 60 cm

1. The elastic compression of pile shaft (Ss)

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

§ Skin friction distribution Coefficient ( αf ):

α f = 0.33 α f = 0.67 α f = 0.5

8.2 Settlement of single piles

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

§ Table 8.1 Values of Cb:

Soil Type Driven piles Bored Piles

Soft to stiff clay

Loose to dense silt

8.2 Settlement of single piles

3- The settlement caused by load transferred along the

Lo : Embedded pile length

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

2- Single bored piles of diameter larger than 60 cm:

8.2 Settlement of single piles

(١-٥-٥-٧) ‫ﺷﻜﻞ رﻗﻢ‬

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Load deformation relationship of piles

8.2 Settlement of single piles

Pile Load as function of pile displacement

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

‫‪8.2 Settlement of single piles‬‬

‫‪§ Graph construction procedure:‬‬

‫‪Step 1: Construction of OBH:‬‬

‫‪PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com‬‬

§ Table (8-8) End bearing stress for cohesionless soil:

Settl. End Bearing Stress (MN/m2)

15* 2.40 3.40

8.2 Settlement of single piles

§ Table (8-9) End bearing stress for cohesive soil:

Settlement (cm) End bearing stress (MN/m2)

* Expected Settlement at ultimate end bearing load = 5%

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Step 2: Construction of OAG:

Step 3: Construction of OKCJ:

8.2 Settlement of single piles

§ Table (8-10) Friction stress for cohesionless soil:

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

§ Table (8-11) Friction stress for cohesive soil: