Transportation Research Record 1772
Paper No. 01-2998
Laterally Loaded Drilled Shafts
Embedded in Soft Rock
Kook Hwan Cho, Shane C. Clark, Brian D. Keaney,
Mohammed A. Gabr, and Roy H. Borden
The current design criterion for laterally loaded drilled shafts embedded
in weathered Piedmont rock profiles requires a challenging effort on the
part of the engineer. A substantial cost saving could be realized, while
maintaining an acceptable and safe performance, if a rational method
were developed for the analysis and design of drilled shafts in such a pro-
file. In a current research project, the primary objective is to develop and
validate a procedure for design and analysis of laterally loaded drilled
shafts embedded in the Piedmont weathered rock profiles. A major com-
ponent of this research is a field-testing program. Presented are the
results of the first in a series of several lateral load tests performed on two
drilled shafts 0.762 m (30 in.) in diameter embedded in Piedmont weath-
ered rock. These shafts were instrumented with inclinometers and strain
gauges. Field data obtained from the instrumented shafts were used to
develop P-y curves. Field testing also encompassed the use of a bore-
hole dilatometer to establish correlations between the rock strength
and deformation parameters and potential P-y curves. A comparison
is made between backcalculated P-y curves, P-y curves predicted by
using Reeses method, and P-y curves from the rock dilatometer. Load-
deformation results are presented and discussed for all methods used.
In locations where geologic discontinuities have resulted in rela-
tively soft soils overlying massive hard rock, the geometry of the
soil-rock boundary can be reasonably defined with existing sub-
surface exploratory techniques. In areas of weathered and decom-
posed rock profiles, such as that of the Piedmont physiographic
province of the southeastern United States, definition of the soil-rock
boundary is a recurring challenge for engineers and contractors. In this
situation, the subsurface conditions typically consist of surface soils
derived from extensive weathering of the parent rock. With depth, the
soils grade into less-weathered material, and more evidence of the
parent rock features is retained. At some depth, virtually no signs of
weathering within the rock mass can be detected. Quantitative defi-
nitions of the soil-rock interface have been addressed in the literature.
Coates recommended that the rock quality designation (RQD) value
be used to estimate depth to sound rock (1). RQD values smaller than
25 percent designate very poor rock quality that could be classified as
soil for engineering purposes. Peck stated that the distinction between
rocklike and soil-like material in transition zones is usually un-
predictable (2). Figure 1, presented by Kulhawy et al. (3), shows
the depiction of different residual profiles based on the definitions
of different researchers.
In these types of transitional subsurface profile, the definition of the
soil parameters needed for the analysis and design of laterally loaded
K. H. Cho, S. C. Clark, M. A. Gabr, and R. H. Borden, Department of Civil Engi-
neering, North Carolina State University, P.O. Box 7908, Raleigh, NC 27965.
B. D. Keaney, Tierra, Inc., 2701 Rowland Road, Raleigh, NC 27615.
3
drilled shafts poses a great challenge for engineers and contractors.
The lack of an acceptable analysis procedure is compounded by the
unavailability of a means for evaluating the weathered profile prop-
erties, including the lateral rock modulus, which often leads to the
overdesign (conservative) of the shaft foundation. On the basis of
North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) construction
cost estimation, the cost of shaft construction in rock is on the order
of $1,500 per meter length for a shaft that is 1.5 m (5 ft) in diameter;
$1.5 million of savings for every 1,000 shafts can be realized if the
depth of embedment is reduced by 1 m (3.3 ft) while maintaining
acceptable and safe performance. This substantial cost saving could
be realized if a rational method for the analysis and design of shafts
in soft and weathered rock profiles were developed.
As presented by Gabr and Borden (4) and Gabr (5), a deformation-
based definition of the factor of safety for laterally loaded shafts can
lead to economic and safe design as long as variability in soil and
rock properties and applied loads is considered. The three most com-
mon deformation-based analytical models used to obtain theoretical
solutions for piles placed in deforming soils are
The subgrade reaction approach based on the assumption of the
Winkler foundation;
The linear approach based on the theory of elasticity; and
Numerical solutions that use finite element, finite difference, and
boundary element techniques with the soil modeled by using either
the subgrade or linear approach, or a combination thereof.
Previous work on the deformation-based analysis of drilled shaft
in weathered rock is scarce. Notable studies reported in the literature
include work by Reese (6) and Digioia and Rojas-Gonzalez (7). Reese
extended the P-y method and used it for the analysis of a single pile
in rock (6). The method was termed interim principally because of
the dearth of load test data with which to validate the design equa-
tions. Digioia and Rojas-Gonzalez performed seven tests on drilled
shafts supporting transmission towers and reported the applicability
of their design model (MFAD) for predicting the measured field
behavior (7). They concluded that classical methods for prediction
of the load-deflection relationship for drilled shafts in soil consis-
tently over-predict drilled shaft deflection (7). They also stated that
additional research is necessary to assist designers facing rock profiles.
One of the most challenging aspects related to drilled shafts embed-
ment in rock is the inability to properly estimate the modulus of lat-
eral subgrade reaction of the soft weathered rock. A literature review
yielded no documentation of research that was performed to develop
subsurface investigation techniques for characterizing the lateral sub-
grade modulus of soft weathered rock. In situ investigation techniques
especially are needed in this case because the profile materials are
4 Paper No. 01-2998
FIGURE 1 Residual soil profile: various definitions (4).
transitional between easily excavatable, adhesionless soils and mas-
sive hard rock that is without weakened discontinuities. Because the
rock in this transitional zone is decomposed, retrieving representative
samples is challenging. Even when samples are retrieved, conven-
tional tests performed on cores do not provide representative charac-
teristics of the lateral behavior of the rock layers because of the size
effect. A relationship between in situ and laboratory rock modulus
was presented in ASTM STP 477 for higher-RQD rocks (typically
RQD > 70 percent). No such relationship exists for the highly weath-
ered lower-RQD rocks. Unfortunately, the weathering conditions
and the inability to retrieve representative samples from the field
necessitate the performance of in situ testing to obtain representative
modulus values.
Two methods of in situ testing possibly can be used to measure lat-
eral in situ modulus values. The first method is commonly referred
to as the plate jacking test. The plate jacking test requires excavation
of a trench from grade to desired testing depth. A hydraulic ram and
deformation measuring instruments are placed in the trench. The ram
is used to provide a measurable force from which deformation is
induced and measured. Obviously, performing such a test at a depth
greater than perhaps 1 m is challenging and cost prohibitive because
of the magnitude of required shoring and excavation.
The second emerging method is based on use of a borehole dilatom-
eter (referred to as a rock dilatometer, model Probex 1). The borehole
dilatometer (manufactured by ROCTEST, Plattsburgh, New York) is
a specialized probe that uses an expandable bladder to apply force to
the walls of an N-size borehole. Volume change of the probe is mea-
sured at the probe level under stress increments. Lateral rock moduli
can be derived on the basis of the pressure-volume measurements in a
manner similar to that employed for the pressuremeter test. P-y curves
derived from the rock dilatometer results will have to be adjusted for
Transportation Research Record 1772
scale effects. The scale effects of the rock dilatometer are related to the
size of the instrument when compared to the actual drilled shaft and
the mode of loading for the instrument (being in the form of cavity
expansion) versus the actual shaft loading. The rock dilatometer can
be used at the time the subsurface investigation is performed at a given
site to estimate the in situ lateral modulus of the rock as a function of
depth. Maximum working pressures that can be applied, according to
the manufacturer literature, is 30 000 kPa (4,351 lbf/in2).
As part of a larger research project on the load-deformation
response of drilled shafts in soft weathered rock, two lateral load tests
were performed in drilled shafts installed at a bridge construction in
Nash County, North Carolina. The tests were performed on drilled
shafts 0.762 m (30 in.) in diameter that were instrumented with vibrat-
ing wire strain gauges. In addition, the deflection profile was mea-
sured with continuous inclinometer probes. These data were collected
to discern backcalculated P-y curves with depth. The results of the
field test were used to verify the P-y design model and for the demon-
stration of the analysis procedure for laterally loaded drilled shaft in
soft weathered rock. The field P-y curves were compared to P-y
curves obtained from rock by using the dilatometer data as input to
the method published in the literature. Results are discussed in view
of backcalculated and predicted responses.
TEST SITE
The test site was located at a bridge-replacement project where Bridge
153 crosses Fishing Creek at the NashHalifax County line, on NC-
43. This area is in the northeastern part of North Carolina near the
town of Rocky Mount, which lies 30 km (18.6 mi) to the southeast of
the site. The location is in gently rolling terrain along the eastern edge
Cho et al.
of the Piedmont physiographic province. Woodlands surround most
of the site. Metamorphosed mudstone, siltstone, and sandstone of the
eastern slate belt underlie the area. The residual soils are derived
from the in-place weathering of the parent rock and are mostly sandy
silt (SM) and silty clay (ML). These soils are stiff to hard. Residual
soils grade with depth into soft and then into hard weathered rock.
Weathered rock is derived from the underlying meta-argillite.
The parent rock, which underlies the site, is metamorphosed sed-
imentary rock of the eastern slate belt. Foliation is poorly developed.
The rock is mostly sound, but some natural fractures are present.
These fractures predominately dip from 45 to 55 and show no
appreciable separation. Machine breaks from collected core sample
have a tendency to break horizontally. Core recoveries for the hard
rock exceeded 95 percent, and RQD for the lower 4.5 m (14.8 ft)
exceeded 75 percent.
Soil Conditions
Two borings with standard penetration tests (SPTs) at variable inter-
vals were performed near the test area. Alluvial soils consist of stiff
silty sandy clay and soft to very stiff sandy silt. Just below the alluvial
layers is a thin residual stiff to hard silty clay. The groundwater is pres-
FIGURE 2 Soil layer profile at Nash test site (8).
Paper No. 01-2998 5
ent at the interface of the alluvial soil and residual layers at approxi-
mately a depth of 2 m (6.6 ft) (Figure 2). Beneath the residual clay is
the soft weathered meta-argillite rock, which grades into a hard weath-
ered rock and finally into a competent high-RQD-quality rock around
a depth of 6 m (19.7 ft) below the ground surface.
The weathered rocks were cored from a depth of 2.5 m (8.2 ft) to
approximately 7 m (23 ft) below the surface. Core size H was used to
increase chances of better recovery. A 94 percent recovery from just
over 13 m (42.6 ft) of core was obtained. Most of the core was poor
RQD rock, which is classified as soft weathered rock, and was the
material for which the lateral properties were desired. All weathered
rock core samples were inspected, and specific samples were chosen
for lab testing. Eight samples were chosen for testing at the North
Carolina DOT Materials and Test Unit laboratory.
In Situ Measurements
Field dilatometer tests were conducted at the NashHalifax County
bridge test site. The dilatometer was inserted into the borehole and
performed as a function of depth to obtain pressure-volume relation-
ship with the soil, transition zone, and rock profile. The expanded vol-
ume of the membrane was measured by the digital readout box, and
6 Paper No. 01-2998
the applied pressure was measured through dial gauges attached to the
hand pump. Figure 3 shows the results from the rock dilatometer.
As shown in Figure 3, the stiffness of the weathered rock increases
with depth, and the rock dilatometer is a useful device with which
to measure stiffness of weathered rock from the surface.
TEST SETUP
Two drilled shafts, 0.762 m in diameter, were constructed 7.62 m
(25 ft) apart. Before construction of these shafts, the test area roughly,
11 by 3 m (35 by 10 ft), was excavated approximately 0.6 to 0.9 m
(2 to 3 ft) deep. This excavation eliminated some of the overburden
pressure and enabled the applied loads from the frame to be closer to
the weathered rock.
The shaft referred to as the short shaft was 4 m (13 ft) long and had
a 3-m (10-ft) embedment into the weathered rock; the shaft referred
to as the long shaft was 4.9 m (16 ft) long and was embedded 4 m
into the same material. Figure 4 shows the layout of these shafts.
These drilled shafts were drilled by using conventional earth augers,
preceded by the insertion (screwed-in) permanent casing to the tip.
The permanent casings were used to make these shafts stiffer. Fol-
lowing excavation, previously assembled rebar cages, with vibrat-
ing wire strain gauges mounted on sister bars, were inserted into
the augered holes. Concrete was placed by a tremie pipe. The test
area was enclosed for protection from the weather.
Loading Frame
As shown in Figure 4, a lateral-load test frame was used to apply the
loads to both shafts simultaneously. This frame was built for the North
Carolina DOT for use on a coastal test project that included concrete
pilings. The frame was modified to accommodate drilled shafts by
using collars. The frame was attached to the circular constructed test
shafts at a vertical distance of 0.3 m (1 ft) above the excavated ground
line. A jack of 1780-kN (400-kip) capacity with a 0.33-m (13-in.)
FIGURE 3 Dilatometer test results at Nash test site.
Transportation Research Record 1772
stroke and a load cell 0.14 m (6 in.) in diameter were placed in the
middle of the frame. The load cell had a 1780-kN capacity and was
calibrated to the jack.
Instrumentation Plan
Each shaft was instrumented above the ground surface with dial
gauges to measure surface deformation. A separate fixed reference
beam was designed in accordance with Section 5.1.1 of ASTM
D3966-90. Dial gauges measured top lateral movements along with
out-of-plane movement, as shown in Figure 4. In addition, geokon
vibrating wire strain gauges were attached to each shaft by a sister bar
tied to the vertical and spiral rebar. The gauges were placed at depth
intervals of either 0.4 m or 0.8 m (1.3 ft or 2.6 ft), as shown in Fig-
ure 4, to measure the strain induced by the lateral loading. The closer
spacing was used in the zones, near the soil-rock interface, where the
shaft was expected to show the greatest curvature. This strain was then
used to determine the moment and soil reaction as a function of depth.
Seventeen strain gauges were used for the two shaftseight for the
short shaft and nine for the long shaft. A data logger was used to
digitally take readings of strain and temperature.
Slope inclinometers were the second form of deformation measur-
ing and were used to measure deflection versus depth. Electrolytic
vertical in-place continuous inclinometers were inserted into a plastic
inclinometer casing. This plastic inclinometer casing was tied to the
rebar cage before construction of the shafts. This inclinometer probe
consisted of individual sensors 0.5 m (1.6 ft) long that were attached
to each other at pivot points. A signal cable extended up through the
casing for each sensor, which connected to a data-acquisition system.
Seventeen sensors were used for this project. The data-acquisition
system consisted of an electronic measurement and control system run
by a computer program.
The loading sequence consisted of applying the lateral load in
increments of 89 kN (20 kips), followed by an unloading. Each
load was held until the deflection at the tops of the shafts was less
than 1.27 mm/min (0.05 in./min). The maximum load depended on
FIGURE 4 Shaft layout and test setup (NCDOT = North Carolina Department of Transportation).
8 Paper No. 01-2998
the working load capacity of the test frame, which was 979 kN
(220 kips).
LOAD TEST RESULTS
The test results from the two load tests included load-deflection mea-
surements at the top of the shafts, deflection versus depth profiles
determined from the inclinometer data, and the backcalculated analy-
ses using P-y curves obtained from the measurements of the vibrating
wire strain gauges.
During testing, the short shaft experienced more than 0.13 m (5 in.)
of lateral deformation at a load of 589 kN (132 kips). After the failure
of the short shaft, it was braced with concrete blocks, and backfill was
placed behind it. Then the loading of the long shaft continued to a
maximum load of 979 kN. At this load, the long shaft experienced
35 mm (1.38 in.) of top lateral deflection.
Top Deflections and Inclinometer Readings
The load-deflection response was obtained at the top of each shaft
during incremental lateral loading. The lateral loads were measured
from a load cell installed in the frame that had been calibrated with
pressure gauges on the hydraulic jack. The top displacements of the
short and long shafts are shown in Figure 5 and indicate that the short
shaft was approaching its ultimate lateral resistance under the load of
589 kN; however, the long shaft did not reach its ultimate resistance
under the applied load of 979 kN (load frame capacity).
Figure 6 shows the calculated deflections from strain gauges for
the long and the short shaft, respectively, which are compared to the
inclinometer measurement data under the maximum loading. The
results show that the inclinometer can be used to verify the calculated
P-y curves from strain gauges. On the basis of the inclinometers
backcalculated deflection profile, shown in Figure 6, the short shaft
behaved like a rigid body with linear displacement variations along
the shafts full length. The long shaft displayed greater fixity in the
lower portion of the shaft under the applied lateral loads, as indi-
FIGURE 5 Top deflection from dial gauges.
Transportation Research Record 1772
cated by the nonlinear displacements along its length, at a depth of
approximately 3 m (10 ft).
Developed P-y Curves
Strain measurements were recorded by a readout box by using the
vibrating wire strain gauges that were attached to vertical reinforce-
ment with a sister bar. From these strains, moments were calculated
along the depth of the shafts by piecewise numerical integration. The
soil reaction (P in kN/m or lb/in.) at each gauge location was deter-
mined by using the calculated moment, the modulus of elasticity, and
moment of inertia of the pile. The deflection, y (measured in millime-
ters or inches), was calculated for the curvature profile developed by
using the strain gauge data.
Rock dilatometer tests were conducted at this test site. The lateral
rock modulus was derived on the basis of the pressure-volume mea-
surements in a manner similar to that employed for the pressure-
meter test. By using the method by Briaud (9), a typical P-y curve was
interpreted from the rock dilatometer. Figures 7 and 8 show the P-y
curves calculated from the strain gauges for the long and short shafts,
respectively.
P-y Curve Comparison
One of the few pieces of work on the P-y analysis in weathered rock
is the method proposed by Reese (6). Because of a lack of load test
data with which to validate this method, the work is considered interim
(6). The P-y curve estimated by using Reeses method shown in Fig-
ure 9 was obtained by using the unconfined compressive strength of
19 305 kPa (2,800 lbf/in2) and the modulus of elasticity of 1 537 534
kPa (223,000 lbf/in2). These values are the lab-measured values
reduced by a factor of 10 to account for the weathering effects. As
shown in this figure, Reeses method significantly overestimates the
resistance of the weathered rock at this site. Further comparisons are
made to the P-y curves as discerned from the rock dilatometer data.
The backcalculated P-y curves from the rock dilatometer indicate the
presence of size-effect influences. A correlation for the size differ-
Cho et al. Paper No. 01-2998 9

FIGURE 6 Deflection comparison (strain gauge versus inclinometer).

ences between the test shaft and the rock dilatometer needs to be BMCOL 76 and the fact that they must be of equal length. The pro-
developed. gram allows for a maximum input of 20 P-y curves and therefore does
not allow for an increased density of curves near the soil-rock inter-
face. Because of this limitation, accurately modeling the shaft for
Prediction Analysis P-y curves between the soil and weathered rock is very difficult.

By using the P-y curves backcalculated from the strain gauge data and
the program BMCOL 76 by Matlock et al. (10), analyses were per-
formed and compared with the dial gauge measurement data. As
shown in Figure 10, the calculated deflection at the top from BMCOL
76 shows good agreement with measured data, although the calculated
results yield somewhat smaller deflections. A possible reason for the
difference may be the limitation of the number of elements allowed in
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A full-scale lateral load test was completed on two 0.762-m-diameter
drilled shafts embedded in Piedmont soft weathered rock. A site char-
acterization was performed, and fully instrumented drilled shafts
were constructed to obtain data and develop backcalculated field P-y

FIGURE 7 Backcalculated P-y curves for long shaft in soft weathered rock.
10 Paper No. 01-2998 Transportation Research Record 1772

FIGURE 8 Backcalculated P-y curves for short shaft in soft weathered rock.

curves. In situ testing was performed as a part of the site charac-
terization. The calculated data from rock dilatometer tests were pre-
sented, and the P-y curves were discerned from the data. Comparisons
of backcalculated field P-y curves, P-y curves predicted by using
Reeses method, and P-y curves developed from the rock dilatometer
data were made.
On the basis of the results obtained in this study, the following
conclusions can be drawn:
There is an obvious need to establish a design procedure for lat-
erally loaded drilled shafts embedded in the Piedmont weathered
rock. Such design procedures are explicitly missing in the literature.
The backcalculated P-y curves appear to behave with a softer
response compared with those obtained by using Reeses method (6).
The rock dilatometer yielded deformation data comparable to
those backfigured from the load test. However, a correlation for size
effect must be established.

FIGURE 9 P-y curve comparison (long shaft at depth = 3.8 m).

Cho et al.
FIGURE 10 Top deflection comparison of data calculated from BMCOL 76 with
data measured from dial gauges.
The inclinometer data can be used to verify the calculated deflec-
tions. Having the inclinometer data adds a degree of certainty to the
deflection values backfigured from strain measurements.
The need for further full-scale load testing and laboratory testing
for comparative analysis is essential and emphasized.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The load test program was funded in part by the North Carolina
DOT and FHWA. The load test was performed with support from
John Ledbetter and Nariman Abar, formerly of the North Carolina
DOT. The actual data collection was performed by Mohammed
Mulla, Nilesh Surti, John Fargher, Eric Williams, and John Pilipchuk
of the Soils and Foundation Design Section and the Geotechnical
Unit of the North Carolina DOT. The rock dilatometer data were col-
lected by David Parish of the Department of Civil Engineering, North
Carolina State University. The contractors for this project were San-
ford Contractors and Long Foundation Drilling Company. Appreci-
ation is extended to Dennis Jernigan and Ken Cates of the North
Carolina DOT.
REFERENCES
1. Coates, D. F. Rock Mechanics Principles, 3rd ed. Mines Branch Mono-
graph 874. Information Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 1970.
Paper No. 01-2998 11
2. Peck, R. B. Rock Foundations for Structures. Proc., Specialty Conference
on Rock Engineering, Boulder, Colo., Vol. II, ASCE, 1976, pp. 121.
3. Kulhawy, F. H., C. H. Trautmann, and T. D. ORourke. Soil Rock Bound-
ary: What Is It and Where Is It? In Geotechnical Special Publication 28,
ASCE, Reston, Va., 1991, pp. 115.
4. Gabr, M., and R. H. Borden. Lateral Analysis of Piers on Sloping Profiles,
Closure. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 118, No. 6, 1992,
pp. 969972.
5. Gabr, M. Analysis of Laterally Loaded Shafts in Rock, Discussion of
Paper by Carter and Kulhawy. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
Vol. 119, No. 12, 1993, pp. 20152018.
6. Reese, L. C. Analysis of Laterally Loaded Piles in Weak Rock. Journal
of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 123, No. 11,
1997, pp. 10101017.
7. Digioia, A. M., Jr., and L. F. Rojas-Gonzalez. Laterally Loaded Rock-
Socketed Foundation. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. 9,
No. 3, 1994, pp. 15701576.
8. Report on the Subsurface Investigation Bridge Foundation Investigation
for Bridge No. 152 on -L- (NC 43) over Fishing Creek. State Project
8.1321301 (B-2594). North Carolina Department of Transportation,
Raleigh, 1998.
9. Briaud, J.-L. The Pressuremeter. Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands,
1992.
10. Matlock, H., D. Bogard, and I. P. Lam. A Computer Program for the
Analysis of Beam-Columns Under Static Axial and Lateral Loading.
University of Texas, Austin, 1981.
Publication of this paper sponsored by Committee on Soils and Rock Instru-
mentation.