Search Documents

By George G. Goble

In the middle of the nineteenth century, the dynamic formula appeared as a description of pile penetration during impact driving. The simplicity of use of the formula combined with the power of the energy concepts behind the formula caused it to be quickly accepted and integrated into practice. Dynamic formula had been in use for 100 years when the Wave Equation computer programs first appeared. With that long experience it is not surprising that the formula continued to be used and were only slowly abandoned. The Wave Equation offers many advantages over the various formula but it does not offer a clear sense of physical understanding of pile driving that is available with the formula. Large amounts of numbers are generated but often it is difficult or impossible to gain a physical understanding of the results or a feeling for the importance of the various parameters. The question that the Wave Equation user has is, "What will happen if I use a larger drive cap (or change any other item of equipment)?" In this paper, I will attempt to explain pile driving using elementary wave propagation theory. However, the presentation will not depend on any higher mathematics. With the use of wave mechanics, it is possible to explain driving characteristics that cannot be handled with the energy formula.

Jan 1, 1995

By Pierre Gouvin

"This paper discusses real time monitoring of utility vaults during the reconstruction of the Elliot Bay Seawall in Seattle. The project, undertaken because deterioration of the old wall posed increasing risks to property and lives, impacts businesses, ferry terminals, a rail line, and electrical utilities that distribute power to much of the downtown area. The project, which has been fast tracked to minimize risk and commercial impacts, involves multiple contractors with heavy machinery working in an area one mile long and only a few hundred feet wide. This presented challenges to monitoring of the utilities, as will be discussed in the paper.INTRODUCTIONThe Elliot Bay Seawall (EBSW) was built in over a period of 18 years, starting in 1916. It consisted of a vertical concrete wall placed on a timber pilings and timber relieving platform. The seawall also retained fill that served as the foundation for a road known as the Alaskan Way. The seawall has performed well over the years, but now cracks in the concrete have allowed loss of fill, and the timber piles and support structures have been weakened by marine boring insects.The project to replace the seawall was undertaken because deterioration of the old wall posed increasing risks to property and lives. Because the project impacts businesses, tourism, ferry terminals, and a rail line, it was given a compressed timeline - 36 months from start to finish. In addition, construction activities have been staged carefully to minimize disruption of Salmon and other wildlife living in Puget Sound. In fact, will incorporate several habitat improvements to promote sea life, such as a nature-imitating textures in the surface of the wall and a glass deck structure that allows sunlight to reach the water. (Fig. 1) shows a schematic of the planned new wall.The sheet piling, concrete piles, jet grouting, drilled shafts, ground freezing, and demolition activities are all taking place in the narrow corridor that holds the subsurface ducts and vaults protecting Seattle’s electrical power distribution. If the network of duct bank and vaults were to experience differential settlement during work here, then most of downtown Seattle would be in the dark. Thus it was important to provide real-time displacement monitoring of these utility structures."

Jan 1, 2017

Jan 1, 2003

By W. G. K. Fleming

The general history of piling is traced up to the present time with regard to the evolution of methods and materials. The processes have been strongly influenced by developments in basic equipment and industrial change. It is noticeable that in the twentieth century more progress has taken place than in the many previous centuries. It has been strongly influenced by the general development of Soil Mechanics. Test loading is probably the most effective way to assess the success of designs and many empirical relationships have been challenged through it. As we approach a new century it appears that it will be an age of rapid equipment development, with much enhancement of understanding of what has been done. Processes of automatic construction and testing will becoming commonplace. These changes will narrow the limits of conventional scatter that have come to be accepted and to a large extent will be driven by political efforts to curtail energy consumption, to raise standards of quality and reliability, and to conserve the environment. 1. Ancient history. Piling is an ancient art. Its first mention in history is from Herodotus, the first person to commit an account of his times to the written word in the years 557 to 479 BC. He evidently had a strong interest in engineering matters because he wrote of building, brick making, reinforced brickwork, river training, canal building, bridge construction, tunnelling and its acoustic detection and piling. The piling reference comes from Book 5 at paragraph 16.

Jan 1, 1999

By Sara Anderson, Rachel Nicholls, Tim Chapman, Janice Windle

"In city center sites around the world, and in particular in London, foundation reuse is becoming increasingly widespread as the ground is filled with detritus from previous developments. This paper sets out a systematic framework to consider the need for and benefits of foundation reuse and key issues to be resolved for foundation reuse to be successfully adopted on redevelopment projects. Once foundation reuse has been identified as a potential foundation solution there are several key stages in the design and construction process where the decision to reuse foundations needs to be assessed. The paper concludes by emphasising the importance of ensuring that the foundations being installed now can more easily be reused in the future.INTRODUCTIONThe concept of re-using foundations is not new, and has been adopted on an isolated project-byproject basis for many years. However, over the past decade, interest in the potential of reusing existing piles and caissons within Europe has increased significantly, with a growing interest in the United States of America and Japan. The need has been driven by necessity: on many urban sites the space available for new foundations diminishes with each new set of piles, and these problems can only grow in the future.Initiatives such as the European Union's RuFUS (Re-use of Foundations for Urban Sites) research project have resulted in identification of the key issues for technical viability and risk that have previously hampered potential foundation reuse projects.There is a need to define a systematic approach to the reuse of foundations so that the risks associated with reuse can be identified, managed and mitigated. This requires improvements in knowledge to provide confidence in the long term behaviour of the foundation support and address the risks involved in reusing existing foundations to overcome perceived obstacles in making foundation reuse a realistic option for many sites."

Jan 1, 2005

By Michael D. Justason

This paper details the static and Statnamic load testing on a 600 mm square pre-stressed concrete pile. The pile was located at Pier 15 on the 20 million-dollar Bayou Chico Bridge Project in Pensacola, Florida. The pile was 10.5 meters long and had a design load of 1.3 MN. Three static load test cycles were performed in November, 1996. The Statnamic load test was performed in January, 1997. The Davisson Failure load of the first cycle of the static test was 3.7 MN, and the Davisson Failure load of the Statnamic test was 3.2 MN. The load-displacement curves for the two types of tests were very similar, indicating that the Statnamic load test performed well in the sandy soils. Strain gauges embedded in the pile showed 35% skin friction and 65% end bearing for both test methods. Strain gauges were located at equal spacing at five elevations in the pile. A toe accelerometer verified the rigid body assumption of the Unloading Point Method currently used in the analysis of Statnamic load tests. The data collected from the pile instrumentation was of excellent quality and represents some of the best research to date comparing static and Statnamic load tests.

Jan 1, 1997

"1.0 INTRODUCTIONThese Guidelines reflect the state-of-the-practice of the Deep Mixing Method (DMM) in North America. DMM is an in situ mixing process that breaks down the soil structure; injects binders, fillers and reagents into the soil; and blends them with the soil. DMM is also commonly referred to as Soil Mixing. The final properties of the treated soil in situ are a function of the composition of the native soils and groundwater, the binders introduced, the mixing methods and energy, and the conditions and time of curing. Treated soils generally have increased strength and stiffness and/or reduced permeability relative to the native soils.This document addresses DMM performed by rotating single and multiple axis mixing tools, rotating cutter wheels at the end of a rigid kelly bar, or trench mixing using a rotating cutting/mixing chain around the perimeter of a rigid bar. Binder may be injected through low or high energy (velocity) jets.The treated soils created through wet DMM are heterogeneous mixtures of binder, water, soil, and groundwater. Treated soils produced by dry DMM techniques are a mixture of binder, soil, and the water already present in the native soil.DMM applications described in this document include•,Earth retention•,Liquefaction mitigation•,Groundwater seepage control and containment isolation•,Bearing capacity improvement•,Deep foundations•,Mass stabilization and contamination containment•,Embankment, levee and dam strengthening, and stabilization•,Casing replacementThis document was developed to address deep foundations applications. Use of deep mixing for seepage control is not specifically addressed. The reader is referred to documents prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for additional information. Shallow soil mixing and the use of DMM for stabilization/solidification of contaminated soils performed at depths less than 10 feet (3 m) are mentioned briefly. Jet grouting is not covered by these guidelines."

Jan 1, 2016

By Patrick J. Hannigan

The pile foundation designer typically performs a subsurface exploration program and static pile capacity calculations before selecting a pile foundation type, length, and capacity. During construction, a pile installation criterion must be established to meet these design requirements. This installation criterion usually consists of a minimum penetration resistance or blow count to confirm pile capacity and may also include a minimum embedment requirement. This text will focus on use of wave equation analysis and dynamic measurements to meet design requirements. BEFORE THE WAVE EQUATION Since the mid-1800s, over 450 dynamic formulas for pile driving control have proliferated. In their simplest form, these formulas relate hammer energy to the work of soil resistance, or simply: W ? h = R ? s (1) Where W = ram weight h = ram drop height or stroke R = pile capacity s = pile penetration per blow

Jan 1, 1990

Jan 1, 2001

By Steve Davidow, Ashely E. Evans, Peter M. Kandaris

"Annually thousands of deep foundations are constructed across North America supporting high voltage transmission line structures. However, a recent state of the practice survey by the Deep Foundation Institutes’ Electric Power Systems Foundation Working Group discovered that the electric power utility industry lacks consistent foundation design guidelines. The survey identified a wide variability in design assumptions, a minimal understanding of risk based analysis, and a need to standardize design methodologies. This paper summarizes the state of practice in electric system foundation design and proposes a framework for risk-based foundation design by accounting for uncertainty from both loads and resistances. Loads derived from electric system codes do not necessarily provide a compatible level of reliability for the design of foundations, as they are a mixture of probabilistic and deterministic values. Load uncertainty is derived from variability in weather conditions, structural models and material properties, typically accounted for by code derived overload factors. Resistance uncertainty arises from variability in natural soil properties, resistance models, subsurface construction techniques, material sampling methods, and limited observations. A consistent methodology is offered relating nominal resistance capacity (strength) to structure loads and service state criteria. Discussion also includes the need for risk-based assessments to account for non-structure load influences (fluvial loads, scour ground loss, liquefaction, etc.).INTRODUCTIONNearly 40 years ago the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) embarked on a major research effort to optimize reliability and economics of transmission line foundation design. Strategies focused on improvements in design models, site characterization, exploration strategies and testing to reduce uncertainty and variance in analysis. Transmission line engineers realized that safety and reliability advancements in design based on probabilistic approaches, with a focus on the unique nature of transmission line, could better control risk and cost.Some transmission line professionals took full advantage of these advancements, particularly where research led to improved software and models. Yet, even after two decades of extensive research, by 1995 the industry still had made little progress in changing design habits. The majority of designers were still characterizing sites via deterministic methods, using loads that may or may not relate to a consistent probability of occurrence, and applying a traditional global factor of safety approach (Phoon, et al. 1995). The following two decades have seen even greater developments in software and reliability-based analysis methods, but old habits seem to die hard as recent surveys show less than half of design professional quantitatively assess risk in their design process."

Jan 1, 2017

By Lois G. Schwarz

I did a project (Sungai Piah) as a consultant to your firm in Malaysia, where we were faced with a similar situation as sketched out in your question. The following is what we did for the grouting of the primary holes, which were both located upstream of the plug as well as downstream: We used a hydrophobic MDI based semi-rigid polyurethane prepolymer in the first phase of the grouting operation when grouting under water flow conditions. Then in the second phase and also for the contact grouting we used a two component water compatible polyurethane elastomer. And then for deeper formation grouting, when all the water flow had been stemmed in the vicinity of the plug, we used a regular (balanced stable) cement based grout. So it may not exactly answer your question, but we first used hydrophobic grout because it is very efficient to grout a formation through which water flows. We didn't stop all the leaks day-lighting downstream of the plug or all water running through the formation near the plug, but the flow of water through the rock formation adjacent to the plug was reduced by 99.9%, after completing the urethane grouting. This facilitated the placement of cement based suspension grouts without wash-out.

Feb 10, 2003

By Wojciech Szczepiński, Dominik Gächter

In early 2020, the construction phase began for the new complex of buildings for Radium Hospital in Oslo – the leading facility for cancer treatment in Norway. Settlements in the surrounding area, caused by pore pressure changes, allowed for the introduction of an alternative solution for the construction of the excavation pit. The presence of solid bedrock and sensitive clay – the same material that causes major landslides in the Scandinavia – in the excavation pit, lead to a combination of techniques, which were never applied in Norway before. For the stabilization of the clay Dry Deep Soil Mixing was applied to allow safe execution of the geotechnical works. Interlocking Bored Piles with footbolts and Jet Grouting columns, in combination with anchors, provided the retaining structure for the excavation pit. Rock injections were performed to avoid any ground water ingress into the pit. Underpinning of fully operational, adjacent buildings was carried out with jet grouting columns. These works were performed from the basement of the hospital and the ‘ACI – Acoustic Column Inspector’ was used to ensure proper installation of 2 m diameter columns to a maximum depth of 25 m. The buildings were later founded on Steel Core Piles, the most common pile type in Scandinavia.

Oct 1, 2021

By Dominik Gächter, Wojciech Szczepiñski

In early 2020, the construction phase began for the new complex of buildings for Radium Hospital in Oslo – the leading facility for cancer treatment in Norway. Settlements in the surrounding area, caused by pore pressure changes, allowed for the introduction of an alternative solution for the construction of the excavation pit. The presence of solid bedrock and sensitive clay – the same material that causes major landslides in the Scandinavia – in the excavation pit, lead to a combination of techniques, which were never applied in Norway before. For the stabilization of the clay Dry Deep Soil Mixing was applied to allow safe execution of the geotechnical works. Interlocking Bored Piles with footbolts and Jet Grouting columns, in combination with anchors, provided the retaining structure for the excavation pit. Rock injections were performed to avoid any ground water ingress into the pit. Underpinning of fully operational, adjacent buildings was carried out with jet grouting columns. These works were performed from the basement of the hospital and the ‘ACI – Acoustic Column Inspector’ was used to ensure proper installation of 2 m diameter columns to a maximum depth of 25 m. The buildings were later founded on Steel Core Piles, the most common pile type in Scandinavia.

Sep 8, 2021

By Rick Ellman, Ian Chaney

"The Hampton Roads area encompassing the Norfolk, Virginia Beach and Newport News metropolitan region experiences some of the worst traffic congestion in Virginia. With continued growth of the ports and increasing demand, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) initiated the Downtown Tunnel/Midtown Tunnel/MLK Expressway Project, a complex undertaking critical to addressing the Hampton Roads area’s transportation needs. The project is a $2.1 billion Design/Build/Finance/Operate (DBFO) endeavor most notably involving the construction of a new two-lane vehicular tunnel utilizing the Immersed Tube Tunnel (ITT) method. The tunnel will pass under the Elizabeth River parallel to the existing Midtown Tunnel between Norfolk and Portsmouth, Va. It will be the largest design-build project constructed in the history of the Hampton Roads District.The New Midtown Tunnel will extend approximately 6,450 ft (1,966 m) along the north side of the existing tunnel where it ties into the existing Midtown Tunnel approaches in Norfolk and Portsmouth. It is being installed in a pre-excavated trench of which approximately 2,250 ft (686 m) required bracing on the Portsmouth side and approximately 1,000 ft (305 m) required bracing on the Norfolk side. The remaining 3,200 ft (975 m) of trench excavation was open cut dredging with laid back side slopes, optimized to reduce dredging, disposal and backfill quantities while also reducing the risk to the existing tunnel. The braced excavation portions of the tunnel alignment were divided into distinct segments which include: Portsmouth Approach Boat Section, Portsmouth Approach Cut-and-Cover Section, Portsmouth Dredge Section, Norfolk Dredge Section, Norfolk Approach Cut-and- Cover Section and the Norfolk Approach Boat Section. All “approach” excavations were performed in the dry and all “dredge” excavations were performed in the wet. Eleven ITT segments are being fabricated in the Sparrows Point Dry Dock facility in Baltimore, Md., and each 14,000 ton (12,700 tonne) segment is being towed approximately 220 mi (354 km) to the site. The ITT segments will extend under the Elizabeth River, with the deepest crossing 90 ft (27 m) at the Federal Navigation Channel. Once beyond the channel limits the ITT rises at an approximate 4.5% slope. Controlled screeding and element lowering operations will be performed primarily from floating barges."

Jan 1, 2014

By Willie M. NeSmith, W. Morgan NeSmith, Alan Roach

"In 2013, Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles are a mature foundation technology throughout the United States. General guidelines for the design and construction of ACIP piles are available along with numerous references for design in specific North American geologies. In fact, the current generation of contractors and geotechnical practitioners might view ACIP piles as just another deep foundation option to be considered, along with driven piles, drilled shafts and others. This acceptance has developed, however, over a 60-plus year period.The term, Augered Pressure-Grouted (APG) pile is often used when referring to ACIP piles because the piles emerged out of construction processes at the Intrusion-Prepakt firm in the late 1940s. The company’s specialty was pressure grouting and preplaced aggregate concrete. The grouting was typically accomplished by driving a pipe to a target level and then injecting grout under pressure. In some soil conditions, it was necessary to use an auger to reach the desired grouting depth. In these circumstances, the grout pipe was driven beside the auger and grout was pumped as the auger was withdrawn. The grout pipe was then withdrawn as well. This was the genesis of the APG, or ACIP pile, and many piles were installed using this technique. The patent application, “Method for Forming Piles” was filed by Raymond Patterson of Intrusion-Prepakt in 1951, and the patent was granted in 1956. The process was eventually modified when a suitable hollow-stem auger was developed. Licenses were granted to the Lee Turzillo Contracting Company and Berkel & Company Contractors, Inc. in the late 1950s. Each of the three companies Patent, LicensesThe patent application, “Method for Forming Piles” was filed by Raymond Patterson of Intrusion-Prepakt in 1951, and the patent was granted in 1956. The process was eventually modified when a suitable hollow-stem auger was developed. Licenses were granted to the Lee Turzillo Contracting Company and Berkel & Company Contractors, Inc. in the late 1950s. Each of the three companies coined their own terms for the piling process: “Pakt-In-Place” for Intrusion-Prepakt, “Auger Pressure-Grouted” for Berkel and “Augercast” for Turzillo. Over time, “Augercast” was frequently used as a generic term for the system. The installation of these piles was, and still is, a highly nuanced process; “contractor dependent” is a term often seen today. Intrusion-Prepakt, Berkel and Turzillo all had personnel who were part of the original group that developed the system and who appreciated the craftsmanship involved in forming sound piles."

Jan 1, 2013

By Eric S. Lindquist, Charles A. Luxford

The State of Texas recently adopted a master plan to expand the existing Capitol Complex in Austin. Phase 1 of this expansion will add two new State office buildings and five levels of underground parking to the existing Complex. Additionally, a landscaped pedestrian mall will be built atop a portion of the underground parking to enhance the area as a cultural destination. Capitol Complex website: https://www.tfc-ccp.org/ Brierley Associates was selected to provide detailed design of the entire Phase 1 earth retention system for an approximately 40-65 ft (12-20 m) deep, 500,000+ yd3 (380,000+ m3) excavation through overburden soils and limestone bedrock. To facilitate overall project coordination, all design packages were required to develop Revit models, including the retention system package. With the project located in an urban setting, this 3D model also facilitated coordination of the retention system with adjacent major structures and utilities. The retention system is a combination of soil nails, soldier piling with tiebacks and rock anchors with a shotcrete facing as a substrate for the below-grade blindside waterproofing system. Due to the substantial scope of excavation, a significant number of utilities had to be routed on a temporary span over the excavation. Brierley Associates designed this utility support structure, which required extensive coordination with the excavation support and existing utilities located directly underneath the structure’s foundations. Preconstruction geotechnical work identified a fault zone that might be encountered within the excavation; however, the fault feature was found to have a more adverse location and orientation than originally anticipated. This observation required that a portion of the temporary anchors be converted to higher-capacity, corrosion-protected permanent anchors.

By James P. Hambleton, Sam A. Stanier

A perceived advantage of screw-type foundations is the ability infer aspects of foundation performance from quantities measured or observed during installation, especially the installation torque. A particular concept widely used in practice is to correlate installation torque to ultimate capacity. This notion has proven useful as a field verification technique despite the absence of validated models that relate key variables of interest, such as installation torque, axial (crowd) force, geometrical parameters, and soil strength. This paper considers previous work by the co-authors and collaborators on analytical, numerical, and physical modelling of screw piles to relate the quantities measured or controlled during installation (e.g., installation torque) to the ultimate capacity and soil strength. Attention is given to saturated clay as a particular soil type amenable to simplified analysis. An analytical model for a single-helix pile is considered as a means of directly relating the ultimate capacity and undrained shear strength to the installation torque, crowd force, plate pitch, plate diameter, shaft diameter, installation depth, and surface roughness. The connection between the installation variables and ultimate capacity—and the sensitivity to crowd force in particular, a quantity that is typically not measured during field installations—is also discussed. The theoretical predictions are compared against data obtained from small-scale laboratory experiments that suggest the installation torque relates to the remolded strength of the soil. INTRODUCTION Screw piles are deep foundations that are twisted into the ground through an applied torque. Advantages over driven piles or drilled foundations include the relative silence of the installation, with low ground vibrations, and the possibility of being easily decommissioned by reversing the direction of twisting. Screw piles are now routinely encountered as a flexible, low-cost solution for numerous applications (Figs. 1 and 2), and they are also being considered for applications in offshore energy production due to limitations being imposed with respect to decommissioning and underwater noise. Also known as “screw anchors,” “helical piles”, or “helical anchors,” screw piles consist of helices or helical plate elements attached to a central shaft. Figure 3a shows the components of a single-helix pile and key variables. The diameters of the shaft and helix are denoted by d and D, respectively, and p is the pitch of the helix. Variable H denotes depth of the helical plate, and T and N denote the torque and axial (crowd) force applied during installation. In typical applications, the pile includes multiple helical plates, and the shaft is composed of segments that allow for it to extend to large depths into the soil.

Jan 1, 2019

By Helen D. Robinson

Traditional practice to resist large lateral loads on foundations is the use of large diameter caissons, battered driven piles, or battered micropiles. Dense urban construction environments, however, limit the usefulness of these systems due to the close proximity of below- and above-grade obstructions. This paper presents two micropile construction projects in the United States where a complex scheme of battered micropiles and grade beams was developed to counteract large lateral loads at the foundation level. The paper also presents a procedure used to design vertical micropiles for large lateral loads, which can greatly simplify the design of foundations subject to significant lateral loads in urban environments. A design example shows a case where vertical micropiles were used to support allowable design lateral loads greater than 80 kip per micropile.

Jan 1, 2010

By George Filz, Peter R. Cali

"Unnecessarily restrictive specifications could be limiting the cost effectiveness of deep mixing (DM) applications and therefore limiting use of DM on projects where there are other options. Excessively restrictive standards demanded for strength and permeability certainly increase contractors’ bid prices, and costing the owners and, in the case of Government projects, the taxpayers more than necessary. Yet, lax or ineffective specifications often exist for some vital components of the quality assurance and quality control. In this paper, specifications for key elements of DM design and construction are examined. Recommendations are made to improve and streamline DM specifications to better serve the common objective of constructing a safe and cost effective ground improvement project.INTRODUCTIONSpecifications should, at their best, convey the project design requirements and provide clear direction to the contractor regarding requirements for submittals, materials, execution, measurement, schedule, and other aspects as necessary. The specifications should not be overly conservative, restrictive or ambiguous, and they absolutely should not be deficient in measurement of quality. Guide specifications or recycled sections from previous projects often form the template for new project specifications. But standards that appear in guide specifications or from former successful construction should be critically scrutinized by the designer for relevance before using the copy/paste functions of the specifications writer’s keyboard. Because work does not always go as smoothly as planned, specifications for remediation of non-compliant construction should be clearly stated and enforced. Often, non-compliancy is reviewed after-the-fact and deemed to have met the design intent, indicating that either the specifications were too restrictive or the enforcement too weak.The Federal Highway Administration Design Manual: Deep Mixing for Embankment and Foundation Support, October 2013, was written by a panel of DM expert design practitioners and contractors. Guide specifications are included as Appendix C of the FHWA manual. Those guide specifications have been updated in the deep mixing section of the www.GeoTechTools.org website, and the updated specifications represent the most complete and authoritative compilation published to date. Although the specifications for DM at www.GeoTechTools.org are current and complete, and they portray the state-ofthe- practice, they too must be modified to fit specific DM applications, project needs, and site conditions. The keys to a good set of specifications are to prescribe construction only to the level that is required to meet the design intent, to require appropriate quality control and quality assurance (QC/ QA) activities, and to clearly address remedial measures required for non-compliant work."

Jan 1, 2015

By Srijit Bandyopadhyay, Aniruddha Sengupta, G. R. Reddy, Raj Banerjee

The objective of the present endeavor is to compare the performance of a pile raft system in foundation sand subjected to lateral loads. To study the behavior of pile raft system in sand a laboratory test was conducted on small scale model foundation system. The raft and pile was modeled by square concrete foundation of 250 mm x 250 mm x 15 mm in length, breadth and thickness and 25mm diameter and 250mm long circular pile located at the center of the raft. The system was tested under static lateral loads of 6.25N, 12.5N, 18.75N and 25 N respectively resting on dry Kasai River sand. A vertical surcharge pressure of 1.5kPa (10 kg) was applied on top of the model raft for each case. The results of the model tests have been simulated by a general purpose 3-D finite element software and the model has been validated with experimental results. The moments of the pile obtained from the model tests and those predicted by the numerical analyses for all the lateral loads matches reasonably well. For matching the trend of bending moments obtained from experiments, validation with theoretical results have been done with the help of Matlock and Reese (1960) approach for a single value of lateral loading. Moreover, a parametric study has been conducted with 5mX5mX0.3m raft size with 0.5m diameter and 5 meter long pile with increasing number of piles namely 2, 5 and 9 respectively to study the response in terms of moment and lateral deformation under available earthquake loadings, like Loma Prieta (1989) and Darfield Christchurch (2010). Bending moments of piles and load deformation curves for lateral loading have been studied for each case in which it is observed that the bending moments of pile significantly reduces (around 4 times) as the number of pile is increased to two, but it decreases to a nearly constant value (it saturates) as the number of pile is increased to five and nine. Moreover, the lateral deformation of piled raft system drastically reduces (around 2.4 times) for two pile system, and it saturates to a constant value with five and nine pile system. All these results indicate the constancy of stiffness irrespective of the number of piles in the piled raft.

Jan 1, 2015