WHEN TO USE DEEP FOUNDATIONS (PILE)

Upper soils are weak, structural loads are

high; Required spread footings are too large
Upper Soils are subject to scour or
undermining
Foundation must penetrate through water
Need large uplift capacity
Need large lateral load capacity

Types of Piling

Concrete

Steel
Pipe

Timber

Steel H

Pre-cast
Concrete

Composite

CLASSIFICATION OF PILE
y Function
y Method of installation
y Material
y Load Transfer mechanism
y As a Retaining Structures

TYPES OF DISPLACEMENT PILES

Displacement
Large
Preformed

Solid
Concrete,
or Timber

Hollow tube
Closed end
Steel or Concrete

Small
Formed in-situ

Hollow tube, or
H-section
Steel

Screw

Tube former
withdrawn
void filled with
concrete

TYPES OF BORED PILES

Bored Piles

Unsupported
during
Construction

Supported
during
Construction

Steel Casing

Drilling Mud

Void filled with

Reinforced Concrete

TYPES OF PILE FOUNDATIONS

y Compression Axial loaded pile

y Tension Pile
y Lateral Loaded Pile
y Void reduction/compaction purpose
y Root pile system for slope stabilization
y Friction Pile
y End Bearing and Friction

DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATIONS

Mini Piles
Micro piles
Bored Piles
Caissons

Bridge Supported on Drilled Shafts

Drilled Shaft Foundations

DRILLED SHAFTS VERSUS DRIVEN PILES

Drilled Shafts/Advantages
cost of mobilizing/demobilizing a drill rig much lower

than that for pile driving equipment (for hand dug

caisson)

generates much less noise and vibration

opportunity to observe and verify soil conditions

DRILLED SHAFTS VERSUS DRIVEN PILES

Drilled Shafts/Advantages (Continued)

Diameter/length can be changed easily to account for

unanticipated conditions

Not hampered by presence of rock boulders

eliminates the need for a pile cap (for pile diameter
larger than the column i.e., hand dug caisson)

DRILLED SHAFTS VERSUS DRIVEN PILES

Drilled Shafts/Disadvantages
Successful construction dependent on contractors
experience and skills
No soil displacement, therefore, lower skin friction
Does not densify soil near the tip
Full-scale load testing too expensive

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION

Construction Procedure (Non-caving soil):

Excavate the shaft using a drill rig

Fill the lower portion with concrete
Place the prefabricated reinforcing cage
Fill the shaft with concrete

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION USING CASING

Construction in Caving soils (using casing)

Drill the hole as before until the caving soil stratum is

encountered
Insert casing through the caving soil stratum
Drill through the caving soil stratus (inside the casing)
into non-caving soil
Place reinforcement and concrete and then extract
casing

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION USING CASING

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION USING CASING

10

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION USING SLURRY

Construction in Caving soils (using slurry)
Drill a starter hole (approx 10 ft deep)
Fill with slurry (bentonite+water)
Continue to drill through the slurry; keep adding slurry
Place reinforcing cage
Place concrete using a tremie pipe; slurry will get
displaced
Messy
M
Operation!
O
ti !

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION USING SLURRY

11

DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION USING SLURRY

23

TREMIE CONCRETING

12

Tremie concreting

13

CAISSONS

14

15

16

RETAINING STRUCTURES
y Contiguous Bored Pile Wall
y Secant Bored Pile Wall
y Contiguous Hand Hug Caisson Wall

17

18

Load Transfer

19

20

SAFETY FACTOR AND PILE DESIGN

y In general FOS = 2 ~ 3
y Subjected to:to:
y Information
y Ground condition

FACTOR OF SAFETY (PILES)

21

FACTOR OF SAFETY (DRILLED SHAFTS)

Ultimate Bearing Capacity - Static Formula Method (Qu = Qp + Qs)

Qu = Ultimate Bearing Capacity

Qs = fAs

Embedded
Length

=D

f = Unit Frictional
Resistance
AS = Shaft Area
qP = Unit Bearing
Capacity
AP = Area of Point

QP = qPAP

22

SINGLE PILE
y Allowable
y Qa=
Qa Qp/ FOS + Qs/FOS
y Qa = (Qp +Qs) / FOS

END BEARING
y Qp = fpAp = (CNc + L Nq + 0.5BN) Ap
y Where
y fp = max unit resistance of base
y Ap = Base Area
y L = Pile length
y In general,
general End Bearing is ignored bored pile,
pile but full

end bearing in Hand Dug Caisson

23

SHAFT RESISTANCE

y Ps = fs as dL
0

Where
fs = Max unit shaft eresistance
= Ca
C + h
h tan a
As = perimeter area of pile
h = normal stress against Pile
a = friction angle along pile shaft

PILE IN CLAY (UNDRAINED)

y = 0, Nq=1, N = 0, c= Cu
y Qu = Qp + Qs
= fpAp + fs As = Cu Nc Ap + ca As
y

From Skempton Chart Nc=9

24

 METHOD
y Fs = ca = Cu
y Depending on type of piles,
piles ground,
ground pile length,
length

method of installation.
y High plasticity pile: O.Cons. And Nor. Cons. = 1

y Medium to low plasticity

Cu ksf

<0.5

0 5 1.5
0.5
15

1 0.5
05

> 1.5

0.5

25

y reduces with increase of Over consolidation ratio

because
y A) Over consol.
consol Give less confining preesure to pile
y B) contraction cause less/improper contact of soil
and pile

-Method (fs= su)

y API Function

For su <25 kPa (500 psf)

= 1 .0

For 25 kPa (500 psf) < su <75kPa (1500psf)

su 500 psf
1000 psff

= 1.0 0.5

For su > 75 kPa (1500 psf)

= 0 .5

26

-Method (fs= su); Drilled Shafts

ESTIMATING UNIT-SIDE FRICTION RESISTANCE, FS

y Effective Stress Analysis (-Method)
y Sands
y Gravels
y Silts and Clays

f s = z

27

-METHOD (SANDS)

For large displacement piles

piles, Bhushan(1982)

= 0.18 + 0.65 Dr

-METHOD (SANDS)
For drilled shafts with N6015, ONeill & Reese
(
(1999)
)

= 1.5 0.135 z
= 1.5 0.245 z

0.25 1.20
0.25 1.20

(English)
( SI )

Subject to maximum value of fs of 4000 psf

(190 kPa)
If N60<15 then multiply above by N60/15

28

-METHOD (SANDS)
For Auger-Cast Piles,
Neely (1991)
Do not divide into
layers

f s = 140 kPa (2800 psf )

-METHOD (GRAVELS)
Rollins, Clayton, and Mitchell (1997)
For 50% or more gravel size particles

= 3.4 e 0.026 z

0.25 3.00

(English)

= 3.4 e 0.085 z

0.25 3.00

(SI )

For 25-50% gravel size particles

= 2.0 0.061z 0.75 0.25 1.80

= 2.0 0.15 z 0.75 0.25 1.80

(English)
(SI )

29

SPT METHOD (MEYERHOF)

Unit end bearing qp = 40N (Db/B) <= 400N
Unit friction fs = s Nave
= 2 Nave
For Mayerhof method s= 2

example

30

SUB SURFACE INVESTIGATION

y Based on the following criterion:y Soil Type
y Method of Analysis

DATA REQUIRED FROM SI

y SPT Meyerhof Method
y Vane shear test, UU Method
y CPT (mainly for soft soil)

31

SEC 14.6 GROUP EFFECTS

y Piles/Auger-cast piles may be installed in
groups
y Why?
Wh ?
y Single pile does not give sufficient capacity
y Low degree of precision in spotting
y Multiple piles provide redundancy
y Lateral soil compression produced by pile groups is

greater-therefore
t th f
total
t t l capacity
it higher
hi h

SEC 14.6 GROUP EFFICIENCY

Load Capacity of Pile Group (Pag)

= x N x Capacity of single pile (Pa)

depends on:
y soil type (sands or clays)
y pile diameter/pile spacing ratio
y construction procedures (pre-drilling, jetting etc.)
y elapsed time since pile driving
y mode of failure
y Pile slenderness (l/d)

32

Group Efficiency,
y Converse-Labarre Formula

(n 1)m + (m 1)n

90 m n

= 1

m=4

n= 6
B

INDIVIDUAL VS. BLOCK FAILURE

33

WHEN BLOCK FAILURE GOVERNS

2 s ( m + n) + 4 B
1
mnB

y Note that the above equations have been widely

used but are not based on any hard data

y Qp = BL (CbNc +LNq +0.5BN)

y Ps = 2D (B+L) (c* + htana)
y Where;
y Cb = cohesion at base
y C* = average cohesion along pile shaft.

34

y =(Block resistance)/ Sum of Single pile resistance)

NEGATIVE SKIN FRICTION

y Due to consolidation of recent filled material or any

original soil that subjected to consolidation process.

35

y Distribution depending on: y A) relative movement between soil and pile.

y Relative movement of compressible soil below pile

foundation
y Elastic compression of pile
y Degree of consolidation of soil stratum
y N.S.F take place when soil downward movement
> pile
p

36

y Neutral point point where relative movement

=0
y Ration of neutral points depth of pile in
compressible
ibl soilil ~ 0
0.75.
75
y N.K.F will cause pile to be overloaded and may
cause distress to structures above the foundation.

BJERRUM METHOD
y Fsn= Kv tan +Pe
y Where
y Fsn= unit N.S.F
y v = effective filled pressure
y = effective friction angle
y K = coeeficient of lateral earth pressure
y = factor depending on rate of loading
y Normally Pe is small and ignored.

37

Tyep of
soil

Unit N.K.F

Silty

30o

0.45

0.25 v

Low
plasticity

20o

0.5

0.2 v

High
Hi
h
plasticity

15o

0 55
0.55

0 15 v
0.15

SETTLEMENT OF DEEP FOUNDATIONS

y Settlement of deep foundations, when
designed based on axial load capacity
considerations, is typically less than 0.5 in
y Pile groups may have larger settlements, but
still within acceptable limits
y Therefore, in practice engineers generally do
not perform settlement analysis for deep
foundations
y However, settlement analysis may be
necessary in certain special situations

38

FULL SCALE STATIC LOAD TESTS

FULL SCALE STATIC LOAD TESTS

39

FULL SCALE STATIC LOAD TESTS

FULL SCALE STATIC LOAD TESTS

40

FULL SCALE STATIC LOAD TESTS

FULL SCALE STATIC LOAD TESTS

41

FULL SCALE STATIC LOAD TESTS

FULL SCALE LOAD TESTS

y Controlled Stress Tests
y Maintained Load Tests (ML Tests)
y
y

Slow ML Tests (hold load for 1

1-2
2 hours)
Quick ML Tests (hold load for 2.5-15 minutes)

y Controlled Strain Tests

y Constant Rate of Penetration Test
y Constant Settlement Increment Test

42

INTERPRETATION OF TEST RESULTS

85

DAVISSONS METHOD

43

Use of Strain
Gauges

Osterberg
Load Tests

44

Osterberg cell (jack)

Advantage: separate tip resistance from side resistance
Disadvantage: expensive

Reed et al

45

Reed et al

Reed et al

46

47

Reed et al

48

CalTran

49

CalTran

50

PILE DRIVING AND WAVE PROPAGATION THEORY

PILE DRIVING FORMULAS

Method
Gates
Pacific coast
Uniform
Building Code

Danish
Engineering
News Record

Equation for Pu (kips)

27 Eh Er (1 log10 S )

12 Eh Er C p1
S + C p2

C p2 =

Wr + C pW p
Wr + W p

, C p2

P
= u
AE p

Cp = 0.25 for steel piles or 0.10 for other piles

Initially assume Cp2 = 0 and compute Pu; reduce
Pu by 25%, compute Cp2, then recompute Pu;
Compute a new Cp2, compute Pu until Pu used = Pu
computed 144 E E L
12 Eh Er
h r
inches
,
S + Cd

FS

2 AE p

3-6

Drop Hammers

12Wr h
S + 1.0

Other Hammers

24Wr h
S + 1.0

A=area of pile cross section (ft2), Eh=hammer efficiency; Ep=pile modulus of elasticity (ksf)
Er=manufacturers hammer-energy rating (or wrh) (kips-ft); h=height of hammer fall (ft);
L=pile length (inches); S=average penetration in inches/blow for last 5 to 10 blows for drop
Hammers and 10 to 20 blows for other hammers; Wr=weight of striking parts of ram (kips);
Wp=weight of pile including pile cap, driving shoe, capblock and anvil for double-acting
Steam hammers (kips)

51

PILE INTEGRITY TEST LOW STRAIN(PIT)

y It detects potentially dangerous defects such as

major cracks, necking, soil inclusions or voids

y PIT Testing is performed with a hand held hammer,
hammer
a sensitive accelerometer and the PIT Tester
y A compressive wave is generated by tapping the
pile head with a hammer.
y When the downward compression wave encounters
a change in cross section or in concrete quality, it
generates an upward tension wave that is obtained
at the pile top

PIT
y The velocity recorded along with the subsequent

reflections from the pile top or pile discontinuities

are graphically displayed
y The effectiveness of the system is limited to pile
length not exceeding 30 to 60 pile diameters

52

PIT
y BENEFITS:

* No advance planning
* Quick and Economical
* Can verify every pile on site

PIT

53

STANAMIC TEST (STATIC + DYNAMIC)

y Using the action and reaction concept
y Is an electronic explosive method used to measure

pile capacity, combining Static and dynamic loading

y The explosion is contained so that it pushed the
reaction mass up and the pile downward.

y Developed tp allow cost effective load test of high

capacity piles
y Required mobilisation of a reaction mass typically
5% of the required test load

54

55

COMMON DEFECTS IN BORED PILE

56

57

58

59

INTRODUCTION
y The proposed development is located at Lot 1381,

Mukim Batu, Daerah Gombak, Selangor Darul Ehsan

g MTD Capital
p
site office.
which consists of an existing
The existing site office will be removed/relocated prior
to the construction of the proposed project. It is
bounded by Batu Caves Centrepoint on the east, Rezab
Pusat Silat Batu Caves on the north, Aerofoam factory
on the west and Giant Hypermarket on the south.
y 14 storey's
storey s high rise.

60

GEOLOGICAL FORMATION
y Kuala Lumpur Limestone Formation

FOUNDATION PROBLEMS IN LIMESTONE FORMATION

61

SITE INVESTIGATION
y 10 nos of boreholes were sunk
y Provision for Rock Probing during construction

SI LAYOUT

62

TYPICAL BORELOGS

PROPOSED FOUNDATION
y Initial Proposal:- Micropile
y Change
g to Bored Pile foundation
y Pile Sizes:y 600mm dia.
y 750mmdia
y 900mm dia
y 1200mm dia
y 1350mm dia
y 1500mm dia
y 1800mm dia

63

LAYOUT PLAN

64

ROCK AND CAVITY PROBING

y Large diameter 2 nos.

BORED PILE DETAILING

65

TEST CARRIED OUT

y 2 nos of Instrumented test pile were carried out
y Strain Gauges were installed at various locations to

determine the skin friction and rock socket of the

pile.
y Tests were carried out using reaction anchors

66

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 9 UNIT BUNGALOW AT

PHASE 2C, TEMPLER PARK, MUKIM RAWANG, DAERAH
GOMBAK, SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN UNTUK TETUAN
KUMPULAN HARTANAH SELANGOR BERHAD

67

INTRODUCTION
y Mohd Asbi & Associates were invited to provide

geotechnical assessment and foundation design

for the bungalows.
y Bungalows were designed seated on slope.

68

GEOLOGICAL FORMATION
y Granite formation

THE
SITE

LEGEND
KUALALUMPURLIMESTONE
KENNYHILLFORMATION
GRANITE

y During the preliminary assessment, slopes in the

development were found unstable due to high

ground water table.
y Water seepages were found at the toe of these
slopes and the slopes were found wet.

69

70

SLOPE REMEDIAL
y Deep trench drain was proposed at the toe to

stabilized the slope.

y After the slope remedial works, MAA was again
requested to study on the foundation system of
these bungalows
y A total of two (2) boreholes, thirty six (36)
Mackintosh probes and four (4) trial pits were carried
out

71

FOUNDATION SELECTION
y In order to withstand any lateral load by soil creep,

which may potentially cause distress to the

bungalow hand dug Caissons are proposed to be
bungalow,
adopted as the foundation system for this
development
y 1m hand dug caisson was proposed with various
length (to cater for different capacity

FOUNDATION
y 1m hand dug caisson was proposed with various

length (to cater for different capacity

y The designed lengths were also taking into
consideration of potential slip and the termination
depth.
y The caisson piles were designed as full end bearing
pile (deep footing)

72

TYPICAL FOUNDATION LAYOUT

73

74

75