Information Paper On Frictional Piles

Information Paper
Shaft Friction Capacity of Mini-Pile: A Case-Study in Infrastructure Exhibition Gallery at City Hall Annex
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING BRANCH ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT September 2011
Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Information Paper - Shaft Friction Capacity of Mini-Piles Issue No./Revision No. : Draft 1 (September 2011)
Page 1 of 14
File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011
1. 1.1
Introduction In Hong Kong, piled foundation is widely used to support building structures if the structure is located on a site where surface sub-soil strata are not sufficiently strong enough to support the loads from the building structures. Piles are either end-bearing on hard stratum, or friction piles/floating piles relying on the shaft friction between the soil and the pile shaft, or a combination of both. Engineers, however, have uncertainties on the shaft friction between the soil and the pile shaft, especially for cast-in-situ construction using augered or Odex methods which may have caused disturbance to the soil along the pile shaft. Furthermore, if the rock end bearing stratum is available at a reasonable depth, the proportion of shaft frictional capacity will be small when compared with the end bearing capacity. Hence, for end bearing piles (e.g. rock-socketted steel H-piles and large diameter bored piles), the shaft friction component is usually neglected. However, shaft friction is developed after small relative displacements between the soil and the pile shaft, and hence shaft friction often contributes the bearing capacity in practical situations; this contribution is important for floating piles where the bedrock is at great depth. For percussive piles, engineers in Hong Kong may rely on the Hiley Formula in predicting the load carrying capacity of piles. For non-percussion cast in-situ concrete pile, the design shaft friction (in kPa) varies from a maximum of 1.6SPT-N values for continuous flight auger piles to 0.7SPT-N values for piles formed by boring with an auger and temporary casing, and the design values have to be further verified by trial piles before construction. This paper presents the field measurements carried out to measure the shaft friction in an instrumented frictional mini-pile in a project in a project of our Department at City Hall Annex for the development of a permanent planning and infrastructure exhibition gallery, and will present the findings for the shaft friction correlated against the SPT-N values of the sub-soil. The ultimate shaft friction has also been estimated based on the results of the proof load test and with the help of the commercially available finite element program - Plaxis 3D Foundation. Theory and Literature Review Figure 1 shows the forces acting upon an axially loaded pile. In theory, the unit shaft friction, fmax, is a function of depth, and by integrating that resistance over the surface of pile can give the total shaft resistance Rs.
1.2
1.3
2. 2.1
Page 2 of 14
Figure 1 Stresses and forces on an axially loaded pile (Source: ONeill 2001) Because relatively large displacements are required in floating/friction piles to mobilize the end bearing capacity, the ultimate bearing capacity of a friction pile may develop up to 80 90% of its capacity through shaft friction. The unit shaft friction (fs) along the pile shaft is theoretically determined by the sum of pile to soil cohesion and friction components in the following equation: fs = ca + h tans where ca and s are respectively the adhesion and friction parameters between the soil and the pile shaft, and h is the effective horizontal stress due to overburden. Numerous theoretical methods (e.g. Nordlund method (1963), method (Tomlinson 1971), Burland -method (1973), Nottingham and Schmertmann CPT method (1975, 1978), Meyerhof method (1976)) have then been developed to compute the shaft resistance along a pile shaft. 2.2 The (total stress) method suggests that the ultimate capacity of the pile is be determined from the undrained shear strength (cu) of the cohesive soil (Tomlinson 1971). This method further assumes that the shaft resistance is independent of the effective overburden pressure, and the unit shaft resistance fs, is therefore given by the following equation: fs = ca = cu where is an empirical adhesion factor to reduce the average undrained shear strength along the pile length. The coefficient depends on the nature and strength of the cohesive soil, pile dimensions, method of installation, and time effects. The -method is, however, applicable to cohesive soil with s=0, and is not applicable to the typical soil in Hong Kong, where both cu and s are present. Burland (effective stress) method (Burland 1973), which is applicable to both cohesive and cohesionless soil, models the long-term drained shear strength
Page 3 of 14 File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011
conditions of piles using the effective stress, and the unit shaft resistance fs is calculated using the following equation: fs = v where (Bjerrum-Burland beta coefficient) = Kstan, v = average effective overburden pressure along the pile shaft, Ks = earth pressure coefficient, and = friction angle between the soil and the pile shaft. 2.3 In Hong Kong, Foundation Design and Construction (GEO 2006) published by the Geotechnical Engineering Office recommends the use of either Burland method or Meyerhof method, with latter being more commonly adopted to calculate the unit shaft friction and base resistance of friction piles. Meyerhof method (Meyerhof 1976) estimates pile capacity based on semi-empirical correlation between standard penetration test blowcount (SPT-N values) results and static pile load tests. The advantages of this method are that it is very easy to use and that SPT-N values data is typically available for a project. Meyerhof (1976) provides the correlation factor of the average mobilized shaft friction fmax (in kPa) with the SPT-N values to be 2 for driven pile and 1 for bored piles. GEO (1996, 2006) summarizes the work of various researchers and in-situ tests, and provides the correlation factor of the average mobilized shaft friction fmax in (kPa) with the SPT-N values for different types of piles and methods of construction. GEO (1996, 2006) further recommends the base resistance to be ignored in calculating the load carrying capacity of the pile. Based on the insitu measurements, GEO (2006) suggests that the average mobilized shaft friction fmax (in kPa) in Table 1 for different types of pile can be used. Table 1 Suggested correlation between mobilized (maximum) shaft friction and SPT-N values for saprolites of Hong Kong Types of pile Bored pile Driven steel H-pile Suggested fmax /N Limiting N-values 0.8 1.4 200 1.5 2.0 80 (Source: GEO 2006)
2.4
GEO (2006) cautions that [t]he design method involving correlations with SPT results is empirical in nature, and the level of confidence is not particularly where the scatter in SPT N values is large. For shaft-grouted mini-piles, in-situ measurements have been carried out locally to correlate the shaft friction between the soil and the pile shaft. Chan et al (2004) used a correlation factor of 2.85 for a frictional mini-pile with post-grouting construction method in a project for the former Kowloon-Canton Railway Corporation (the KCRC) in Tuen Mun, Hong Kong, and found satisfactory performance in the subsequent loading test to twice the design working load. Littlechild et al (2000), based from a number of loading test results on the foundations in a KCRC project, reported that the correlation factors range from 1.3 to 3.6. Similarly, GEO (2006) summarized that the correlation factor can range from 1.4 to 5.5. However, in-situ measurements on the shaft friction have not frequently been carried out for frictional mini-piles without shaft grouting. Because of limited data in Hong Kong, this paper recommends that the average mobilized shaft friction fmax (in kPa) for mini-piles without shaft-grouting can be taken as 0.8 to 1.4N for design, and that the limiting value for SPT-N values can be taken to be
80. An instrumented pile had been installed with strain gauges in a project in Central, Hong Kong in order to validate the recommended correlation factor between the shaft friction and the SPT-N values. 3. 3.1 Project Details The project is to provide a new exhibition gallery at the existing City Hall Annex for the Planning Department. In order to facilitate the public to access to the new gallery, a new 5-storey block comprising a lift and staircase is added adjacent to the main entrance of the City Hall Annex. The location of the proposed new block is shown in Figure 2. Photo 1 shows the architectural impression of the completed project.
Proposed 5-storey Lift and Stairs Block
Figure 2 Location of the proposed 5-storey block
Photo 1 Architectural impression of the completed project

Structural Engineering Branch, ArchSD Information Paper - Shaft Friction Capacity of Mini-Piles Issue No./Revision No. : Draft 1 (September 2011) Page 5 of 14 File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011
3.2
Ground investigation shows that the area is underlain by 15 metres deep of fill/marine deposit/alluvium overlaying 33 metres of completely decomposed granite. Bedrock of Grade III granite can only be found at about 48 metres below ground. The ground water level is governed by the tidal effect of the nearby sea and the highest is at about +2.5 mPD in accordance with the data obtained from the Hong Kong Observatory. Table 2 summarizes the soil profile from the ground investigation together with the range of SPT-N values. As Grade III granitic bedrock can only be found at about 48 metres below ground, end-bearing piles (in the form of large diameter bored, or pre-bored rocksocketted steel H-piles, or mini-piles) with pile length of approximately 53 metres will be required, and this was considered not to be an economical option, especially that a lightweight structural steel superstructure scheme will be adopted. Table 2 Summary of sub-soil strata Soil Type Depth interval (m) Fill/ Marine Deposit/ Alluvium 0 15m Completely Decomposed Granite 15 48m Grade III Bedrock > 48m
SPT-N values 6 18 43 200 -
Having considered various factors (including subsoil profile, limited site access, limited working space and the concern on noise and vibration problems affecting the nearby City Hall), the piling option with 14 nos. of frictional minipiles (whose loading capacity would be provided by the shaft friction between the soil and the pile shaft) was adopted. If the present design method is not followed, the mini-piles will be installed at a depth of 7 or 8m more. Moreover, the congested site also permits the use of small drilling equipment for mini-piles rather than the heavy machineries for large diameter bored or pre-bored rocksocketted steel H-piles. 4. 4.1 Design and Construction of Mini-Piles The frictional mini-pile for this project consists of a 15215237 kg/m UC installed in a prebored hole formed into soil with a temporary steel casing with minimum internal diameter of 305 mm and then grouted with cement grout followed by extraction of temporary steel casing before the setting of grout. Shear bars are provided to the steel sections. The maximum theoretical safe loading capacity of the frictional mini-pile was 580kN. In the design, the average mobilized shaft friction fmax (in kPa) for the mini-piles was taken as 1.4N and the SPT-N value was limited to 80. With a factor of safety of 3, the design shaft friction fs (in kPa) was therefore taken as 0.467N. The shaft friction of the pile section in the soil strata of fill and marine deposit have not been included in the design, and the end-bearing capacity of the pile has also been ignored. Typical details of the frictional mini-pile are shown in Figure 3. During the construction, the casing of the upper portion of the instrumented mini-pile was accidentally left in to a depth of 27m below the ground level, due to the early setting of the grout before extraction. The founding depth of the instrumented pile was at 45m below the ground level. The construction of the 14 nos. of frictional mini-piles commenced in May 2010 and was completed in July 2010.
Figure 3 Typical details of pile 4.2 Instrumentation One of the 14 nos. of frictional mini-piles was designated as the instrumented pile in order to verify the actual loading behaviour and to validate the shaft friction values adopted in the design. A total of 20 nos. of Geokon vibrating wire strain gauges were installed at ten levels along the pile length with 2 numbers of strain gauges at each level. The set-up of the instrumented pile is shown diagrammatically in Figure 4.
Figure 4 Diagrammatical representation of the instrumented pile

4.3
Field Measurements and Analysis The shaft friction along the instrumented pile was calculated by measuring the pile head movement and strains along the pile during a static loading test to twice the theoretical load carrying capacity (i.e. 1160 kN). The load applied to the pile head through four loading cycles, and readings of the strain gauges and pile head movements were taken at each load increment throughout the loading test. The load settlement curve of the pile is shown in Figure 5. The maximum pile head settlement at a load of 1160 kN was found to be 11.132mm and the residual pile head settlement was 2.515mm which are far below the limiting values of 28.065mm and 6.542mm respectively in the contract.
Figure 5
Load-Settlement Curve of the Instrumented Pile
Figure 6 plots the variation of the strains along the pile length, and shows that the strain along the pile decreases with the depth of pile in general. This observation is in line with the expectation as the pile load was transmitted from the steel sections to the cement grout and then to the surrounding soil by shaft friction along the pile shaft. From the distribution of strain distribution, the axial load distribution along the pile length can be deduced from the elastic modulus of the pile section.
Page 8 of 14
Figure 6
Distribution of Average Strain Distribution along Pile Length
Figure 7 shows the axial load distribution along pile length, and also shows the SPT-N values along the pile shaft. The relationship between the shaft friction and the SPT-N values can then be deduced accordingly. Table 3 shows the calculation of the axial load distribution and the shaft friction to the SPT-N values along the pile length. The ratio of the shaft friction to the SPT-N values for the pile section in the CDG layer of the soil stratum is found to range from 0.44 to 0.50 for the load tested. The test results well proved the construction method and performance of the frictional mini-piles in this project. However, the static loading test revealed that there could be much more reserve capacity for this pile type due to the relatively small maximum and residual pile head settlement obtained, and either a shorter pile length or a higher capacity for the same pile length is feasible.
Page 9 of 14
Page 10 of 14
Figure 7
Distribution of axial load distribution along pile length
Page 11 of 14
Table 3
Calculation of Shaft Friction along Instrumented Pile
4.4
Finite Element Analysis With the data of the instrumented pile obtained from the static loading test, the stress distribution along the pile shaft was further analysed by the commercially available finite element program Plaxis 3D Foundation. By adjusting the soil parameters in the model in the program, the load-settlement curve from the computer analysis matches with that of the loading tests. Figure 8 compares the load settlement curve for the pile from Plaxis 3D Foundation and that from the static loading test.
Figure 8
Validation of the Finite Element Model
With the soil model/parameters established, the finite element model can then be used to simulate the load-settlement curve of the pile for an applied load beyond the maximum test load of the loading test until its failure. The loadsettlement curve of the pile in the finite element model is shown in Figure 9. By plotting the commonly adopted Davidsons off-set criterion for loading test (i.e. PL/AE + D/120 + 4mm), it can be found that the ultimate load carrying capacity of the pile is about 2600 kN.
Figure 9 Load-Settlement Curve of the Pile by Finite Element Analysis The relationship between the maximum mobilized shaft friction and the SPT-N values can therefore be deduced, and the mobilized shaft friction fmax to the
SPT-N values for the pile section in the CDG layer of the soil stratum ranges is found to be about 1.1. The result is in line with the in-situ measurements summarized in GEO (2006), where the average mobilized shaft friction fmax to the SPT-N values ratio ranges from 0.8 to 1.4 for the bored piles without shaftgrouting in Hong Kong.
5.
Concluding Remark Shaft friction along a pile is hard to be estimated accurately especially for castin-situ construction using augered or Odex methods which may have caused disturbance to soil along the pile shaft. This paper presents the use of the frictional mini-piles founding on soil in a project of our Department at City Hall Annex for the development of a permanent planning and infrastructure exhibition gallery. The relationship between the design shaft friction fs to SPTN values is obtained from the analysis of the results from the instrumented pile. The ratio of shaft friction fs to the SPT-N values is found to range from 0.44 to 0.50 for the load tested. Finite element analysis with the use of the data from the pile load test is used to estimate the maximum mobilized shaft friction of the pile, and the result shows that the correlation factor between the maximum mobilized shaft friction fmax to the SPT-N values is about 1.1, which is in line with GEO (2006) that the ratio ranges from 0.8 to 1.4 for the bored piles without shaft-grouting in Hong Kong. The test results in this project further well proved the construction method and performance of frictional mini-piles. It also demonstrates the benefit and option of using this pile type against the conventional pile types which have to be founded on or socketted into the rock where the rockhead level may be very deep.
References
Burland, J B (1973), Shaft Friction of Piles in Clay, Ground Engineering, 6(3), pp. 30-42 Chan, C K, Tsang, A H K, Chow, R N, and Tam, J Y C (2004), Prebored Friction Mini-pile Foundation for Light Rail Grade Separation, The Structural Engineer, 82(20), pp. 24-7. GEO (1996), GEO Publication No. 1/96: Pile Design and Construction (Hong Kong: GEO). GEO (2006), GEO Publication No. 1/2006: Foundation Design and Construction (Hong Kong: GEO). Littlechild, B D, Plumbridge, G D, Hill, S J, and Lee, S C (2000), Shaft Grouting of Deep Foundations in Hong Kong, in N D Dennis, Jr et al (eds), New Technological and Design Developments in Deep Foundations (Houston: University of Houston), pp.33-45. Meyerhof, G G (1976), Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 102(3), pp. 195-228. Nordlund, R L (1963), Bearing Capacity of Piles in Cohesionless Soils, Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations, ASCE, 89(SM3), pp. 135. Nottingham, L C (1975), Use of Quasi-Static Penetrometer Data to Predict Load Capacity of Piles (Gainesville: University of Florida).
ONeill, M W (2001), Side Resistance in Piles and Drilled Shafts, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 127(1), pp. 316. Poulos, H G and Davis, E H (1974), Elastic Solutions for Soil and Rock Mechanics (New York: John Wiley & Sons). Schmertmann, J H (1978), FHWA-TS-78-209 Report: Guidelines for Cone Penetration Test, Performance and Deign (Washington, DC: Departments of Transportation). Tomlinson, M J (1971), Some Effects of Pile Driving on Skin Friction, Proceedings of Conference on Behavior of Piles, ICE, London, pp 10714. Tomlinson, M J (1994), Pile Design and Construction Practice (London: E & FN Spon, 4th ed).
Page 14 of 14

Information Paper On Frictional Piles

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Information Paper On Frictional Piles

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Information Paper

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING BRANCH ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT September 2011

File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011

File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011

Proposed 5-storey Lift and Stairs Block

Figure 2 Location of the proposed 5-storey block

Photo 1 Architectural impression of the completed project

SPT-N values 6 18 43 200 -

Figure 4 Diagrammatical representation of the instrumented pile

Load-Settlement Curve of the Instrumented Pile

File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011

Distribution of Average Strain Distribution along Pile Length

File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011

File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011

Distribution of axial load distribution along pile length

File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011

Calculation of Shaft Friction along Instrumented Pile

Validation of the Finite Element Model

File Code: Frictional Piles.doc CTW/MKL/CYK Issue/Revision Date :September 2011

S-ar putea să vă placă și