Critical Depth of Pile

In most piling problems in sand, critical depth will vary between 10-20 times the pile diameter. It means
that the effective overburden pressure and both skin friction and end bearing will increase almost
linearly up to a depth of 10-20 times diameter of pile and thereafter remain constant. According to
Vesic, when the pile depth is large, full overburden pressure in the soil does not become effective
because of arching action. The ultimate skin friction should therefore be obtained from the trapezoidal
distribution of skin friction with depth, while the ultimate end bearing should be determined for the
maximum overburden pressure mobilized, corresponding to the critical depth. (Ref. "Theory and
Practice of Foundation Design" by Dr. N.N.Som and Dr. S.C.Das). In the pile capacity analysis, we need to
know the limiting values of unit end bearing and unit skin frictional resistance for different types of
granular soils. As per Tomlinson, the end bearing should be restricted 11000 KN/m2 and skin friction
should be 100-110 KN/m2. This is valid for clean sand (fines<5%). What will be the values for others such
as SM, SP-SM and ML type soils? There is no mention in our codes like IS: 2911, Part1, Sec-2 - 2010 &
IRC: 78-2014. This is referred to Table 20.3 of Geo-technical Engineering Book by Prof. Shashi K Gulhati
and Prof. Manoj Datta.

Even K value suggested as 2-3 and 2 for bored piles in the code is absurd. It has to be linked with the
density. In my designs, for driven piles when I heading design group of SIMPLEX, I restricted the N value
to 1.5 and for bored piles for 1 after great reluctance from the management and I had to put my foot
down. Similar is the case with Nq value. I generally restrict to 50 and on rare cases as 70 when SI data is
really of high standards.

This is where specialists like you have to come in picture for selection of parameters. In design projects
where I get involved, I make sure that one proof borehole is done by a reputed agency like Cengers, IGS,
etc. or ask the agency to get the results certified by IIT.

IS:2911 states that "the maximum effective overburden at the pile tip should correspond to the critical
depth". Hence it is clear that for calculation of tip resistance, critical depth is to be considered. However,
regarding overburden stress for skin friction, code does not explicitly say anything.

In IRC:78 also it says "effective overburden pressure at pile tip limited to 20 times diameter of pile......"
In the paragraph on side resistance, there is no mention about critical depth.

Now, if we don't consider critical depth for skin friction, overburden stresses above the pile tip could be
higher than those at pile tip, which seems awkward.

K values are very high. k tan(delta) becomes extremely high.

In Golden rule through experience, which is the beta method, which people have forgotten

Beta = k Tan (delta) = 0.22 to 0.25 for silts and fine sand ; = 0.3 for medium to coarse sand;

= 0.4 for extreme case dense gravelly material

These work very well. this eliminates the use of k and phi

For end bearing:

In dense silty soil = safe end bearing stress 200 t/m2

In dense sands = Safe end bearing stress = 250 to 300 t/m2

in dense gravelly material = 350 t/m2

Nothing more than this. All piles have behaved extremely well during pile load tests with these design
parameters.

In the case of BCIS piles, one should restrict the end bearing resistance up to critical depth. This is due to
the disturbance occurring during boring process at pile base in sandy strata and also the extent of base
cleaning of bore hole is always questionable. Challenges manifold as the pile length increases for
cleaning of borehole base in BCIS piles. If we restrict overburden pressure for both skin friction and end
bearing, this leads to very conservative design. On the other hand, if we consider linear increase for skin
friction and end bearing, one may get considerably high pile capacity and proving this through pile load
test is challenging. For BCIS piles, balance approach is to limit over burden for end bearing and liner
increase for skin friction.

However, for DCIS piles, even one considers liner increase in overburden for skin friction and end
bearing for calculating pile capacity, this is justifiable because of densification of ground during piles
production.

In the enclosed paper Dr. Fellenius discusses why critical depth is no more exist. Finally, whatever one
may assume based on his/her experience, pile load is the ultimate shelter to validate one’s assumptions.

Now a days, consultants are using higher grade concrete in piles. M35 concrete is quite common for
piles. In fact, this is the minimum grade prescribed in IRC:78 for bridges. Higher grades can be provided
at much lesser cost in case higher load carrying capacity of piles are required. Moreover, the concept of
permissible stress = 0.25 x fck (as given in IS:456) is I think for buildings and not followed in IRC for
infrastructure projects. Higher stresses (upto 0.36 x fck) is permitted as per IRC:112. Therefore, in reality,
pile capacity is generally governed by its geotechnical capacity rather than structural. Exception may be
in situation where pile is resting on rock.

What do the codes intend? By saying that overburden pressure at pile tip should be limited to critical
depth, is it implied that stresses above tip also should be limited to critical depth? Or is it that critical
depth is only to be considered for tip resistance and not skin friction?

There are many experts like Fellenius who argue that critical depth is a myth. So, was the engineer who
wrote the report, of the opinion that critical depth makes the design too conservative, and was smartly
trying to make the design more efficient by not considering critical depth for skin friction, since the
codes did not explicitly require this?
The reason for limiting overburden is due to arching action in horizontal plane. If you go through Vesic,
the critical depth varies with phi and starts from 10d onwards. At this point the curve starts moving
upwards and later at 15d becomes asymptotic. Unfortunately, in our code it 15 to 20d. For shaft
resistance also it has to be taken. As geotechnical engineers we are supposed to refer to other books.
Paulos and Davis is an excellent book on piles. Vesic publication is by Highway Board No43.

Normally, it does not exceed this value if we take effective stress consideration for small diameter piles.
However, for large diameter piles, yes it does. Please note that all our theories are for saturated soil
mass and not for partially saturated soils. I have observed during testing on monopile of 2.5 m dia, the
critical depth worked out to be around 12 d for Ahmedabad type of soil. I used Osterberg Cell for
testing. I will go with 10d. However, it will be soil specific. Besides, we cannot exceed the structural
capacity of pile. This becomes a limiting factor. Under normal circumstances, the max capacities of pile
for M25 grade concrete would be as under for reference purpose because installation methodology is
the key which also has to be considered.

1. 500 mm dia about 20cm basic length limit 110 t

2. 600 mm dia about 20cm basic length limit 135 t

3. 800 mm dia about 20cm basic length limit 200 t

4.900 mm dia about 20cm basic length limit 240 t

5.1000 mm dia about 20cm basic length limit 365 t

6.1200 mm dia about 20cm basic length limit 450 t

7. 1500 mm dia about 20cm basic length limit 550 t

Dr K K Moza

Sr. Professional Engineer (Regd) and Fellow IOV; +919810197110

Consider 500 mm dia pile. Grade of concrete as M25 (say)

Cross sectional area of pile = 0.195 say 0.2 m 2. Strength of concrete of M25= 2500 t/m 2

25 percent of with cross sectional area = 0.25×0.2× 2500= 125 t

The practice is to allow 10% variation so the limit is 125-12.5=112.5 say 110 to 115 subjects to
confirmation by testing.
Let me elucidate my experiences through a simple example, Consider Dr Moza's case of 1 m dia pile and
20 m length.

d= 1.0 L = 20 m, say dense saturated sand with SPT at tip is 70.

Overburden pressure = 20 x 8 (submerged) = 160 KN/m 2

Nq corresponding to dense sand will be around 60 to 70 (say phi = 36 or 37 deg).

Ultimate End bearing stress = 160 * 70 = 11200 KN/m 2

Safe end bearing stress = 11200/2.5 = 4480 KN/m 2

This end bearing stress is very high. If we add the skin friction the total capacity of the pile will be very
high. I would never take such high values. I have seen pile load tests where 1 m dia piles in dense sands
will take a around 350 to 400 t which matches with Dr Moza's table. In fact, IRC 78 restricts the safe end
bearing in hard rock as 5 MPa. The above dense sand case gives safe end bearing close to that of hard
rock. So, there is a great mismatch.

Hence irrespective of what guidelines IS 2911 or IRC 78 gives, one has to base the capacity on
experience and restrict the end bearing stress.