0 Voturi pozitive0 Voturi negative

1.9K (de) vizualizări73 paginiFeb 11, 2011

© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

1.9K (de) vizualizări

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Neuromancer
- Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race
- Fault Lines
- Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
- The Path Between the Seas: The Creation of the Panama Canal, 1870-1914
- The Wright Brothers
- The Wright Brothers
- The Lean Startup: How Today's Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses
- A Jazzi Zanders Mystery
- Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap...And Others Don't
- The 6th Extinction
- The Great Bridge: The Epic Story of the Building of the Brooklyn Bridge
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The Right Stuff
- Zero to One: Notes on Start-ups, or How to Build the Future
- A Short History of Nearly Everything
- Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone
- Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die
- The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution

Sunteți pe pagina 1din 73

by

Peter J. Bosscher

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Topic Outline

● Overview

● Axial Load Capacity

● Group Effects

● Settlement

5

Overview

● Shallow vs Deep

Foundations

– A deep foundation is one

where the depth of

embedment is larger than

2X the foundation width.

6

Historic Perspective

• one of the oldest methods of overcoming the

difficulties of founding on soft soils

• Alexander the Great, 332BC in Tyre

• “Amsterdam, die oude Stadt, is gebouwed op

palen, Als die stad eens emmevelt, wie zal dat

betalen?” an old Dutch nursery rhyme

• “If in doubt about the foundation, drive piles.”

1930-1940 practice methodology

7

Contrast in Performance

● Example

– deep clay

» cu = 500 psf

– Load = 340 kips

– Factor of Safety = 2

Settlements at working load Pad Single Pile Pile & Pad 4-Pile Grp.

Immediate 4.1 0.9 2.3 0.8

Consolidation 1.2 0.1 0.4 0.2

Total 5.3 1.0 2.7 1.0

8

Modern Uses

● weak upper soils

– shallow (a)

– deep (b)

● large lateral loads (c)

● expansive &

collapsible soils (d)

● uplift forces (e)

● bridge abutments &

piers (f)

9

Foundation

Design

Process

(FHWA)

Foundation

Design

Process

Continued

(FHWA)

Foundation

Classification

10

Pile Types

• Timber Piles • Composite Piles

• Steel H-Piles • Drilled Shafts

• Steel Pipe Piles • Augered, Pressure

• Precast Concrete Injected Concrete

Piles Piles

• Mandrel-Driven Piles • Micropiles

• Cast-in-Place • Pressure Injected

Concrete Piles Footings

11

Timber Piles

12

Steel H-Piles

13

Steel Pipe Piles

14

Precast Concrete Piles

15

Mandrel-Driven Piles

16

Cast-in-place Concrete Piles

17

Composite Piles

Drilled Shafts

Augered, Pressure Injected

Concrete Piles

Micropiles

Pressure Injected Footings

Evaluation of Pile Types

• Load Capacity & Pile Spacing

• Constructability

• soil stratigraphy

• need for splicing or cutting

• driving vibrations

• driving speed (see next slide)

• Performance

• environmental suitability (corrosion)

• Availability

• Cost

18

Soil Properties for

Static Pile Capacity

● Proper subsurface investigations yield critical

information regarding stratigraphy and also

provide quality soil samples.

● Boring depths minimally should extend 20 feet

beyond the longest pile. Looking for critical

information such as soft, settlement prone layers,

or other problem soils such as cobbles. Want

additional information from in-situ field tests (SPT

and CPT). Location of groundwater table is

critical.

21

Soil Properties for

Static Pile Capacity, cont.

● From soil samples, determine shear strength and

consolidation properties. For clays, both quick

and long term strengths (from UU and CU/CD)

should be determined. For sands, only CD tests

are used.

● For clays, the pile capacities in the short and long

terms should be compared and the lower of the

two cases selected for use. If the design is verified

by pile load tests, these results will usually

dominate the final design.

22

Factor of Safety

● Depends on many factors, including:

– type and importance of the structure

– spatial variability of the soil

– thoroughness of the subsurface investigation

– type and number of soil tests

– availability of on-site or nearby full-scale load

tests

– anticipated level of construction monitoring

– probability of design loads being exceeded

during life of structure

23

Classification of Structure &

Level of Control

● Structure:

– monumental: design life > 100 years

– permanent: design life >25 yrs and < 100 yrs

– temporary: design life < 25 yrs

● Control:

Subsurface Subsurface Load Construction

Control Conditions Exploration Tests Monitoring

Good Uniform Thorough Available Good

Somewhat

Normal variable Good None Average

Poor Erratic Good None Variable

Very Poor V. Erratic Limited None Limited

24

Factors of Safety for Deep

Foundations for Downward Loads

Acceptable

Classification Probability of Good Normal Poor Very Poor

of Structure Failure Control Control Control Control

Monumental 1E-05 2.3 3.0 3.5 4.0

Permanent 1E-04 2.0 2.5 2.8 3.4

Temporary 1E-03 1.4 2.0 2.3 2.8

Expanded from Reese and O’Neill, 1989.

25

Methods for Computing Static

Pile Capacity

● Allowable Stresses in Structural Members

● Pile Capacity

– Many different methods (α, β, λ, Meyerhof, Vesic,

Coyle & Castello, etc).

– Soil Type (Cohesionless, Cohesive, Silt, Layered Soils)

– Point Bearing

– Skin Resistance

» Normal (Positive) Skin Friction

» Negative Skin Friction

● Settlement of Piles

26

Allowable Stresses in Structural

Members

• Any driven pile has to remain structurally intact and not be

stressed to its structural limit during its service life under static

loading conditions as well as under dynamic driving induced

loads. Therefore, material stress limits are placed on:

• The maximum allowable design stress during the service life.

• The maximum allowable driving stresses.

• Additional material stress limits, beyond the design and

driving stress limits, may apply to prevent buckling of piles

when a portion of the pile is in air, water, or soil not capable of

adequate lateral support. In these cases, the structural design

of the pile should also be in accordance with the requirements

of Sections 8, 9, 10, and 13 of AASHTO code (1994) for

compression members.

• See excerpt from FHWA’s Design and Construction of Driven

Pile Foundations

27

Axial Pile Capacity

● In general:

Pe′ + Ps qe′ Ae + ∑ f s As

Pa = =

F F

● Three general cases shown (from Das)

30

Methods of Evaluating Axial

Load Capacity of Piles

31

Full-Scale Load Tests

● Most precise way to determine axial load

capacity. All other methods are indirect.

● Quite expensive thus use judiciously.

● Two types: controlled stress or controlled

strain, also quick and slow versions.

● Results are open to interpretation:

– 9 methods to analyze results

32

When to use Full-scale Load Tests

● many piles to drive

● erratic or unusual soil conditions

● friction piles in soft/medium clay

● settlement is critical

● engineer is inexperienced

● uplift loads on piles

33

How many load tests?

● From Engel (1988):

Length of Length of Number of

Piling (ft) Piling (m) Load Tests

0-6000 0-1800 0

6000-10000 1800-3000 1

10000-20000 3000-6000 2

20000-30000 6000-9000 3

30000-40000 9000-12000 4

34

Static Methods

(Based on Soil Tests or In-situ Tests)

● More difficult to interpret than load tests:

– pile driving changes soil properties

– soil-structure interaction is complex

● Less expensive than load tests

● Used for:

– preliminary analysis to plan pile load testing

– extend results of pile load testing

– design purposes on small projects

35

Cohesionless Soil

● no excess pore pressure

● End Bearing:

– many use shallow bearing

capacity formulas

– use q ' = σ ′ ( N − 1) + 0.5γBN

e D q γ

like shallow foundations

where capacity increases

linearly with depth.

36

Max Limit on End Bearing?

● Some suggest a limit on end

bearing to match experience.

● Problems with that approach:

– more complex than that; need to

consider both strength and

compressibility of the soil

– friction angle varies with

effective stress

– overconsolidation causes

changes in bearing capacity

37

Vesic/Kulhawy Method

● Based on Vesic’s work, Kulhawy gives the

two bearing capacity factors:

E

Ir =

2(1 + ν s )σ D′ tan φ

E

Ir =

2(1 + ν s )σ D′ tan φ

38

Coyle & Castello’s Method

● Based on 16 pile

load tests

● Based on φ and

D/B.

● CAUTION: No effect

of pile material,

installation effects, and

initial insitu stresses

39

Cohesionless Soil

● Skin (Side) Friction

– use a simple sliding model: f s = σ h′ tan φs

» where σ h′ = horizontal effective stress

tanφs = coef. of friction between soil and pile

» often rewrite using σ h′ = Kσ v′

» K varies with:

● amount of soil displacement

● soil consistency

● construction techniques

40

General Method (Kulhawy)

K φs

● rewrite equation: f s = σ v′K0 tan φ

K0 φ

Sand/Rough concrete 1.0 Construction Method

Sand/Smooth concrete 0.8-1.0 Jetted pile ½ -2/3

Sand/Rough steel 0.7-0.9 Drilled shaft 2/3 - 1

Sand/Smooth steel 0.5-0.7 Pile-small displacemnt ¾-1¼

Sand/timber 0.8-0.9 Pile-large displacement 1 – 1.2

41

Simplistic β Method

● lumps K and tanφ into one term: β=Ktanφs

● can develop site-specific β or use empirical

formulas in literature.

● Eg: for large displacement piles in sand,

Bhushan (1982)suggests:

β = 0.18 + 0.65 Dr

where Dr is the relative density in decimal form

42

Coyle & Castello’s Method

● empirical correlation

of fs to φ and z/B.

● z is depth to midpoint

of strata.

● CAUTION: No effect of

pile material, installation

effects, and initial insitu

stresses

43

Cohesive Soil

● excess pore pressures produced by soil

displacement during driving takes time to

dissipate. This means capacity increases with

time. Usually assume full capacity is achieved by

the time the full dead load is applied.

● but usually need to consider live load too.

– end bearing affected by live load (soil compression)

» use undrained strength if significant live load

– side friction not affected

» use drained strength always

44

End Bearing

● most engineers use: qe′ = 9 su

where su = undrained shear strength

Skin Friction

● not adhesion but rather frictional behavior

● could use cohesionless equation but

problems again with K0 therefore use β

method.

45

β Method for Clay

● use Randolph

and Wroth

(1982):

● upper limit:

φ

β ≤ tan 45 +

2

2

46

Traditional Methods

● a large number of engineers still use

“adhesion” concepts.

● The α and λ methods are based on

undrained strength. See Sladen (1992) for

an analysis of these methods.

● These methods have wide scatter,

sometimes being as low as 1/3 or as high as

3 times the actual capacity.

47

In-Situ Soil Test Methods

● can determine φ or su and then use previous

methods or can use direct correlation

methods.

● direct in-situ methods especially important

for sand as sampling and testing is difficult.

● In-situ tests:

– SPT & CPT

48

Standard Penetration Test

● SPT is inconsistent thus correlation is less

reliable than CPT.

● Two methods (for sand only): Meyerhof &

Briaud

● SPT does not seem reliable for clays

49

Meyerhof Method

● End Bearing: ● Skin Friction:

For sands and gravels: For large displacement piles:

D σr

qe′ = 0.40 N 60′ σ r ≤ 4.0 N 60

′ σr fs = N 60

B 50

For nonplastic silts: For small displacement piles:

D σr

qe′ = 0.40 N 60′ σ r ≤ 3.0 N 60′ σ r fs = N 60

B 100

NOTE :σ r = 1 tsf; N 60 = SPT N corrected for field procedures;

N 60′ = SPT N corrected for field procedures and overburden stress

50

Briaud Method

● based on regression analyses:

qe′ = 19.7σ r ( N 60 )

0.36

f s = 0.224σ r ( N 60 )

0.29

51

CPT Correlations

● the CPT is very similar to driving piles

therefore this test is a good predictor of

capacity.

● unfortunately, the test is rarely run in the

U.S. because of the inertia of the

engineering community.

● for correlations based on CPT see Coduto

(1994)

52

From Karl Terzaghi, 1943

“The problems of soil mechanics may be

divided into two principal groups - the

stability problems and the elasticity

problems.”

settlement is an elastic problem.

53

Pile Settlement

● Isolated piles designed using the previously

mentioned methods usually settle less than 0.5

inches at their working loads. Pile groups may

settle somewhat more but generally within

acceptable limits. Most engineers do not conduct

a settlement analysis unless:

– the structure is especially sensitive to settlement,

– highly compressible strata are present,

– sophisticated structural analyses are also being used.

54

Why put piles in groups?

● Single pile capacity is insufficient

● Single pile location may not be sufficiently

accurate to match column location

● To build in redundancy

● Increased efficiency gained by multiple

piles driven in close proximity

55

Group characteristics

● Common C-C spacing: 2.5 to 3.0 diameters

● Efficiency: η = Group Capacity Pag F

=

Sum of Individual Piles N ( Pe′+ Ps )

where:

η = group efficiency factor

Pag = net allowable capacity of pile group

F = factor of safety

N = number of piles in group

Pe′ = net end bearing capacity of single pile

Ps = skin friction capacity of single pile

56

Individual vs Block Failure Mode

s

57

Group characteristics

● Do not use Converse-Labarre formula for

group efficiency (not accurate)

● From O’Neill (1983):

– in loose cohesionless soils, η > 1 and is highest

at s/B = 2. Increases with N.

– in dense cohesionless soils at normal spacings

(2 < s/B < 4), η is slightly greater than 1 if the

pile is driven.

– in cohesive soils, η < 1. Cap in contact w/

ground increases efficiency but large settlement

is required. 58

Design Guidelines

● Use engineering judgment - no good recipes

● Block failure not likely unless s/B<2

● In most cohesive soil, if s/B>2, eventual η ≅

1.0 but early values range from 0.4 to 0.8.

● In cohesionless soils, design for η between 1.0

and 1.25 if driven piling w/o predrilling. If

predrilling or jetting used, efficiency may drop

below 1.0.

59

Negative skin friction

● Occurs when upper

soils consolidate,

perhaps due to

weight of fill.

60

Negative skin friction

● The downward drag due to negative skin friction

may occur in the following situations:

– consolidation of surrounding soil

– placement of a fill over compressible soil

– lowering of the groundwater table

– underconsolidated soils

– compaction of soils

● This load can be quite large and must be added to

the structural load when determining stresses in

the pile. Negative skin friction generally

increases pile settlement but does not change pile

capacity.

61

Methods to reduce downdrag

● Coat piles w/ bitumen, reducing φs

● Use a large diameter predrill hole, reducing

lateral earth pressure (K)

● Use a pile tip larger than diameter of pile,

reducing K

● Preload site with fill prior to driving piling

62

Laterally Loaded Deep Fnds

● Deep foundations must also commonly

support lateral loads in addition to axial

loads.

● Sources include:

– Wind loads

– Impacts of waves & ships on marine structures

– Lateral pressure of earth or water on walls

– Cable forces on electrical transmission towers

From Karl Terzaghi, 1943

“The problems of soil mechanics may be

divided into two principal groups - the

stability problems and the elasticity

problems.”

problem, load-deformation analysis is

similar to an elasticity problem.

Ultimate Lateral Load

● Dependent on the diameter and length of the

shaft, the strength of the soil, and other

factors.

● Use Broms method (1964, 1965)

● Divide world into:

– cohesive & cohesionless

– free & fixed head

– 0, 1, or 2 plastic hinges

Cohesive Soil Diagrams

Lateral

Resistance

Free-Head

Distributions Fixed-Head

Distributions

Cohesionless Soil

Diagrams

Free-Head Distributions

Fixed-Head Distributions

Summary Instructions

for

Laterally Loaded Piles

by

B. Broms

Cohesive Soil:

2.25dg 2 cu

Short-Free: H u =

(e + 15. d + 0.5 f )

or Fig (a)

Hu

where f = and L = 15

. d+ f +g

9 cu d

If M yield ≤ 2.25dg 2 cu then pile has one plastic

hinge and is “long”.

M yield

Long-Free: H u =

(e + 15. d + 0.5 f )

or Fig (b)

short, else pile is intermediate or long.

Then if M yield > 2.25cu dg 2 then pile is

intermediate, else pile is long.

Short-Fixed: H u = 9cu d ( L − 15

. d ) or Fig (a)

2.25cu dg 2 + M yield

Intermediate-Fixed: H u =

. d + 0.5 f

15

2 M yield

Long-Fixed: Hu = or Fig (b)

. d + 0.5 f

15

Cohesionless Soil:

0.5γdK p L3

Short-free: Hu = or Fig (a)

e+ L

M yield

Long-free: Hu = or Fig (b)

e + 0.67 f

Hu

where f = 0.82

γdK p

else pile is intermediate or long.

Then if M yield > the moment at depth f, then

pile is intermediate, else pile is long.

Short-fixed: Hu = 15

M yield

Interm.-fixed: H u = 0.5γL2 dK p +

L

2 M yield

Long-fixed: H u = or Fig (b)

e + 0.67 f (b)

Load-Deformation Method

● Due to the large lateral deflection required to

mobilize full lateral capacity, typical design

requires a load-deformation analysis to determine

the lateral load that corresponds to a certain

allowable deflection.

● Considers both the flexural stiffness of the

foundation and the lateral resistance from the soil.

● Main difficulty is accurate modeling of soil

resistance.

p-y Method

● Can handle:

– any nonlinear load-deflection curve

– variations of the load-deflection curve w/ depth

– variations of the foundation stiffness (EI) w/ depth

– elastic-plastic flexural behavior of the foundation

– any defined head constraint

● Calibrated from full-scale load tests

● Reese (1984, 1986) are good references.

● Requires computer program

COM624P

● COM624P -- Laterally Loaded Pile Analysis Program for

the Microcomputer, Version 2.0. Publication No. FHWA-

SA-91-048.

● Computer program C0M624P has been developed for

analyzing stresses and deflection of piles or drilled shafts

under lateral loads. The technology on which the program

is based is the widely used p-y curve method. The program

solves the equations giving pile deflection, rotation,

bending moment, and shear by using iterative procedures

because of the nonlinear response of the soil.

p-y Method: Chart solutions

● Evans & Duncan (1982) developed chart

solutions from p-y computer runs.

● Advantages:

– no computer required

– can be used to check computer output

– can get load vs max moment and deflection

directly

Group Effects

● Complexities arise:

– load distribution amongst piles in group

– differences between group effect and single pile

● O’Neill (1983) has identified an important

characteristic: pile-soil-pile interaction (PSPI).

Larger interaction in closely spaced piles.

● Lateral deflection of pile group is greater than

single isolated pile subjected to proportional share

of load.

- 000.215.1231 - Drilled Pier Foundations.pdfÎncărcat deslabsandfootings
- Tower foundation designÎncărcat deunikmyquestar
- Broms MethodÎncărcat devzaia86
- Design of Bridge PierÎncărcat deSunita Chaurasia
- Pile Cap DesignÎncărcat deUtaya Kumar Veelmurugan
- DRILLED PIERS.pdfÎncărcat deMohamed Farag
- Bridge Foundation pptÎncărcat deVenkata Mayur
- Pile Foundation DesignÎncărcat decuongnguyen
- Pile Foundation Design ExampleÎncărcat dethanzawtun1981
- FoundationÎncărcat deJiraphong Songsri
- PierÎncărcat deDeepak Kr Gupta
- laterally loaded piles.pdfÎncărcat deAnonymous Re62LKaAC
- Guyded Mast TowerÎncărcat deadnan
- Bore Pile DesignÎncărcat deraju_mantripragada
- Design of Pile FoundationsÎncărcat deroborocks
- Theoretical Manual for Pile FoundationsÎncărcat derqamprasat
- Pier Design Example - US Units - Design Step 8Încărcat de00152
- Abutment Design Modified 2003Încărcat deGovardhan Bhat
- BS8110 2 1985Încărcat deEwen Munowenyu
- Pile Foundation Design Example - US Units - Design Step 9Încărcat deGere Lu
- Design of Pile FoundationÎncărcat dezejuan
- Behaviour of Laterally Loaded PilesÎncărcat deunbezonking
- Drilled PiersÎncărcat deAuriga Zayyan Aljawwad
- TTS-2019-DN-105,R0, D, Pier and Foundation Design, 001Încărcat deSandeep Pattiwar
- PileÎncărcat deSothea Born
- Drilled ShaftsÎncărcat dePHUDNV
- Spread FootingÎncărcat deMary Marasigan
- 2005_RCBridge_Piers_IRCÎncărcat decharmiond
- Piled FoundationsÎncărcat dedaygoro_259232
- Transmission Tower With Connection Slip ModelingÎncărcat deMahendra Abeywickrama

- River EngineeringÎncărcat deRin Tis
- Steel Structures Design Based on Eurocode 3Încărcat deOentoeng Kartono
- Steel Structures Design Based on Eurocode 3 (2018, Springer Singapore).pdfÎncărcat deMini Rambo
- CraneGuide2E3PWebRevÎncărcat dekichito
- Footing.xlsÎncărcat deMohammad Tawfiq Wara
- Guide 05Încărcat deradovanovich_ns
- Land Drainage and Flood Defence Responsibilities 4th EditionÎncărcat deOentoeng Kartono
- SMS_GenCade.pdfÎncărcat deOentoeng Kartono
- SMS_RMA2.pdfÎncărcat deOentoeng Kartono
- SMS_BOUSS2D.pdfÎncărcat deOentoeng Kartono
- Numerical_Modeling_of_Coastal_Erosion_using_Mike21.pdfÎncărcat deOentoeng Kartono
- Earth DamsÎncărcat deTheodore Teddy Kahi
- Hydraulic Design of Small Hydro PlantsÎncărcat demassi99
- tr55Încărcat dehowiecrit6
- Fortran CourseNotesÎncărcat deShip Stability

- Micro Jet Engine FinalÎncărcat dekrishna
- Mohammed Jaffer Nizami [C.V.]Încărcat desonofara
- MongoDB Full Text Search With SphinxÎncărcat depierrefar
- Mappings Between ISO 12207, IsO 15504, Software CMMÎncărcat deEstañiz VN
- MSE_146_1_012052Încărcat deabbas6063
- 175-012401Încărcat deAbu Anas M.Salaheldin
- Clarifier Tank CalcÎncărcat deBUDAPES
- PCI DSSÎncărcat denerz8830
- Automatic Quantitative Analysis of Healing Skin Wounds Using Colour Digital Image ProcessingÎncărcat deanasunisla
- How Tcp Backlog Works in LinuxÎncărcat deIrene Bacon
- Usability Testing of Medical Device.pdfÎncărcat deNeeraj Jasmathiya
- Build a Basic Crud App With Vue Js Node and MongodbÎncărcat deAntonio Carlos Barsumian
- BUSBARÎncărcat desjancypriya
- Online Film Ticket BookingÎncărcat deletter2lal
- National Seismic Network of Thailand-5Încărcat dekullachai
- br.pdfÎncărcat deCarlos Eduardo Zelidon
- Penguard Express ZPÎncărcat deMustafa Al-Yasseri
- Electrical Engineer or Software Engineer or Systems EngineerÎncărcat deapi-77530125
- Lab Manual of Ac MachinesÎncărcat deArdalan Khoshnaw
- STVi All UPS Quotation NewÎncărcat deSenghy Mao
- Power Arc 4000 ManualÎncărcat deRASDEBOL
- Hspc-HandoutÎncărcat dedasoundofreason1065
- ac308Încărcat deLeonichev
- Ermias GebrekidanÎncărcat deTibebu Meride
- Damping Performance Ipfc & UpfcÎncărcat deNaraykln
- 20628549 Linux CommandsÎncărcat degajasam
- FSW in Bangladesh 110410Încărcat deemonje
- Modelling Expansion Joint - Intergraph CADWorx & AnalysisÎncărcat demans1987
- 0739DB9901Încărcat demahmoud
- 30kW Cross linear solar concentration pilot project at RGPV BhopalÎncărcat deInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD

## Mult mai mult decât documente.

Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.

Anulați oricând.