Design and testing of bored pile foundation to the 2nd Penang Bridge, Malaysia

By Sing-lok CHIU, AECOM Zheng-ru Fang, CHEC Construction (M) Sdn Bhd (CHEC)

Kang HUANG, China Highway Planning and Design Institute (HPDI)

Presented by Dr SL Chiu Technical Director, Geotechnical Hong Kong AECOM

November 16 2011

Page 1

Contents
Overview of bored pile design approaches Design of bored piles for the 2nd Penang Bridge Site characteristics Design and instrumentation of the trial bored pile Static load test on the trial bored pile Test results Conclusion

16 November 2011

Page 2

2nd Penang Bridge under construction

Cable-stayed section of the 2nd Penang Bridge over the main navigation channel
16 November 2011
Page 3

Pier P25
240 m

Pier P26

150m x 30m

batu kawa

21 bored piles of 2.0 ~ 2.3 m in diameter and socketted in to sound granite bedrock at about 110m deep below sea bed
16 November 2011

Page 4

Overview of bored pile design approaches

The load resistance capacity of a bored pile is mainly derived from the pile shaft and base resistances (Whitaker, 1976):

Q ultimate = Q shaft + Q base

16 November 2011

Page 5

Given that:
There are different resistance and settlement relationships of the shaft and base

It is advisable that different load factors be applied to the calculated ultimate resistance of the shaft and the base (BS8004, 1985).

16 November 2011

Page 6

Partial factors or global factor of safety are applied to give allowable capacity of the bored pile

Q allowable = Q shaft /FS+ Q base /Fb

Or

Q allowable = (Q shaft + Q base )/F

16 November 2011

Page 7

Partial factors and global factor for bored pile design

Skempton (1966) suggested Fs= 1.5 and Fb= 3 BS 8004 (1985) suggested that the global factor of safety for a single pile is often required to be between 2 and 3

16 November 2011

Page 8

Burland and Cook (1974) suggest for bored pile in stiff clay
-an overall load factor of 2 , and - a minimum factor of safety 3 on the base resistance be adequate. Q allowable = Q shaft + Q base /3
Or

Q allowable = (Q shaft + Q base )/2, whichever is less

16 November 2011

Page 9

Estimate of shaft and base resistance For piles in soils (Poulos, H. G.

Empirical approaches based on:
In-situ tests results e.g., SPT N-value (no. of blows) fs = + N kN/m2 (e.g., = 0, and = 1 to 5 for BP in cohesionless soil)

1989)

Laboratory strength test results, e.g., undrained strength, Cu (- method) and friction angle, (method ): fs = cu and fs =v
16 November 2011
Page 10

Clay

fs = cu

fs = K tan v

Silica sand

fs =v

fs =v Loose to medium sand

=0.45 (London clay) =0.7 times value for driven displacement pile K is lesser of K0 or 0.5(1 + K0) K/K0 = 2/3 to 1; K0 is function of OCR; depends on interface materials =0.1 for = 33 0.2 for =35 0.35 for =37 = F tan (-5) where F = 0.7 (compression) & 0.5 (tension) =0.2 to 0.6

Skempton(1959 ) Fleming et al.(1985) Fleming et al.(1985) Stas and Kulhawy (1984) Meyerhof (1976) Kraft & Lyons (1974)

*Hong Kong (Geo 2006)

16 November 2011

Page 11

Estimate of shaft and base resistance For piles in soils (contd)

Chinese Standard (JGJ 94-2008) and German Code (DIN 1054:2005) suggest use of presumed values based on site specific factors including soil types, physical and mechanical properties of the soils and rocks as well as pile length

16 November 2011

Page 12

DIN 1054:2005
CPT , qc in MPa Cohesionless soil, fs in kPa Undrained strength, Cu in kPa 25 100 200 Cohesive soil, fs in kPa

5 10 15

40 60 120

0 40 60

Note: Intermediate values are obtained by linear interpolation (after Vrettos, 2007)
16 November 2011

Page 13

DIN 1054:2005
Settlement to base diameter ratio, S/Dbase Pile base resistance, fb, in MPa for bored piles in cohesionless soils At an average tip cone resistance, qc of the CPT in MPa

10

0.02 (40mm 0.7 (or 700 if D= 2.0m) kPa) 0.03 0.1* 0.9 2.0

15 1.05 1.35 3.0

20 1.4 1.8 3.5

25 1.75 2.25 4.0

Note: * limiting settlement Intermediate values are obtained by linear interpolation (after Vrettos, 2007)

16 November 2011

Page 14

DIN 1054:2005
Settlement to Pile base resistance, fb, in MPa for bored piles in base cohesive soils diameter ratio, At an average shear strength, Cu of the undrained soil S/Dbase

in MPa

0.1
0.02 0.03 0.1* 0.35 0.45 0.8

0.2 0.9 1.1 1.5

Note: * limiting settlement; Intermediate values are obtained by linear interpolation; for bored piles with widened base, values shall be reduced to 75% (after Vrettos, 2007)
16 November 2011

Page 15

Chinese foundation code, JGJ94-2008

Soil Type Soil properties Presumed values of fs in kPa

Clay

IL>1 0.75<IL<1 05<IL<0.75

10<N15 15<N30 N>30 15<N30 N>30

2138 3853 5368

2246 4664 6486 7495 95116

Silty fine sand

Coarse sand

Note: Intermediate values are obtained by linear interpolation an abridged version of the original Table in JGJ94-2008

16 November 2011

Page 16

Chinese foundation code, JGJ94-2008

Soil Type Soil properties Presumed values of fb in kPa for different pile length in m
5 L<10 10 L<15 15 L <30 30 L

Clay

0.75<IL<1 05<IL<0.75
10<N15 N> 15 N>15

150 ~250 350 ~450

350~500 600~750 1500~1800

250 ~300 450 ~600

450~600 750~900 2100~2400

300 ~450 600 ~750

600~700 900~1100 2400~2600

300 ~450 750 ~800

650~750 1100~1200 2600~2800

Silty fine sand Coarse sand

Note: an abridged version of the original Table in JGJ94-2008

16 November 2011

Page 17

Estimate of shaft and base resistance

For bored pile founded on or socketted in sound rock

Because of the great difference in stiffness of soil and the sound rock, the load carrying capacity is mainly derived from the end bearing capacity of pile on/in rock.

16 November 2011

Page 18

For bored pile founded on or socketted in sound rock (contd)

The estimation of end bearing is mainly based on empirical methods. Presumed values for safe working stress are recommended, being a function of the uniaxial compression strength, qc, of the rock:

16 November 2011

Page 19

DIN 1054:2005
Uniaxial compression Pile base resistance, Pile shaft resistance, strengthen of rock in fb, in MPa fs, in MPa Mpa
0.5 5 20 1.5 5.0 10.0 0.08 0.5 0.5

Note: Intermediate values are obtained by linear interpolation.

16 November 2011

Page 20

For bored piles socketted in bed rock, JGJ 94-2008

h/d
Soft rock

0.5

1.0
0.95

2.0
1.18

3.0
1.35

4.0
1.48

r = 0.6 0.8

Hard rock

0.45

0.65

0.81

0.9

1.0

1.04

Where h/d- socket depth (h) to pile diameter (d) Soft rock- UCS, frk < 15MPa Hard rock- UCS, frk >30MPa
16 November 2011
Page 21

Qrk = r frk Ap
Where ,

Qrk, is the combined shaft and base resistance of the rock socket
Ap, pile base area; frk the uniaxial compression strength (UCS) of the bedrock, and

r a factor taking into account of the combined effect of base and shaft resistance of pile in the socket, depending on the ratio of h/d

16 November 2011

Page 22

Design of bored pile foundation for the 2nd Penang Bridge

Design Brief
For compressive loads: Q= (Qs/2) + (Qb/3); or

Q= (Qs + Qb)/2.5, whichever yields the lowest working capacity; For tensile loads (uplifts):
Q=Qs/3

Where Q is the allowable pile capacity (kN), Qs is the ultimate shaft friction (kN), Qb is the ultimate end bearing (kN).
16 November 2011

Page 23

To evaluate the shaft resistance (Qs) and end bearing (Qb),

the following relationships with SPT-N value as suggested by Meyerhof (1976) are used:

Qs = Ks* N*As, or = fs *As (Ks= 2.0 for cohesionless soils)

Qb= Kb*Nb*Ab, or = fb * Ab (Kb= 250 for silty soil and 400 for sandy soil)

SPT-N value is limited to 75

16 November 2011

Page 24

For end-bearing bored piles on sound bed rock Qb= quc * (RQD)2*Ab Where Qb = the ultimate load bearing capacity at pile base, quc = unconfined compressive strength RQD= Rock Quality Designation For bored piles socketted in sound bed rock, Qs= fs,*As, where Qs = the ultimate load bearing capacity of the socket be limited to: fs= 75 kPa for RQD between 0 to 25% = 150 kPa for RQD between 25 to 50% =350 kPa for RQD> 50%
16 November 2011
Page 25

The determination of design parameters for the bored pile foundation

An instrumented trial bored pile of diameter of 2.0~2.3 m and
about 125m in length was installed and tested with an Osterberg Cell (O-cell) planted in the test bored pile during

construction.

16 November 2011

Page 26

 2.3m
Pier 25 (ABH1)

Site Characteristics
A water depth of about 12m- sea bed @ level -9.95m (reduced level)
Soft to very soft marine mud, 18 m in thickness with SPT-N value<1 medium dense to very dense , Alluvial fine to coarse sand with SPT-N values increasing with depth to about 100 m Completely weathered granite Slightly weathered granite bedrock, Grade II
Depth in m

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 100 110 120

-10

Average SPT-N value profile

Soft mud

-20

loose to medium dense medium to coarse sand Nave= 10 medium dense medium to coarse sand Nave= 22

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80

medium dense to dense medium to coarse sand Nave= 41

-90

-100

CDG

-110

slightly weathered granite

2.0m
-120 N-Value Depth zero = seabed level (reduced level -9.95 m)

16 November 2011

Page 27

Construction of the test bored pile

pile head

-8.50m -9.95m bed sea

2.3m

-38.50m
115.07m

Reinforcement details: Main bars:T32 @ 150mm c/c Binder: T16 binder @ 150 to 300 mm c/c Concrete cover: 75mm Concrete Grade: G40/20

2.0m

Upper plate of load cell

0.44m

Load cell lower plate of load cell

1.88m

112.75m

-121.69m

-123.57m level of pile toe

16 November 2011

Page 28

Instrumentation of the test bored pile

data displacement transducers acquisition reference beam system hydraulic pump with pressure gauge

oil pipe shaft side shear

steel telltale rods telltale casings load cell

shaft end bearing

16 November 2011

Page 29

Instrumentation of the test bored pile

5 hydraulic jacks of a maximum stroke of 200mm Access of tell-tale rods to bottom plate

Type

Outer Diameter of Upper plate Lower plate diameter Cylinder thickness thickness (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) 1800 500 40 40

Height (mm)

max. stroke (mm)

YG56510025

440

220

16 November 2011

Page 30

Instrumentation of the test bored pile

TGCL-1 Vibrating wire type strain gauge Operational range: 2500 Resolution: 0.4 ~ 1 Waterproof 150m under water Temperature: -20 to 80
16 November 2011
Page 31

WDL-50TZ Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT) displacement transducers

19
refrence pile 1

20

21

Layout of testing platform

refrence beam

P25 test pile

Reference pile 2

Unitmm

16 November 2011

Page 32

Instrumentation of the test bored pile

6 LVDT displacement transducers were installed, namely 2 for upward movements of the top plate of load cell 2 for downward movements of the bottom plate of load cell 2 for upward movements of the pile head.
16 November 2011

Page 33

Vibrating wire type strain gauges

Tell tale access

O-Cell

16 November 2011

Page 34

Static load test of the trial bored pile

NO. Design strength of concrete G40/20 Location in Chainage CH+980. 96 Socket depth (m) 4.0 Pile Diameter m 2.0~2.3 Anticipat ed Level of Pile Toem -123.250 Level of pile top

m
-3.245

Bottom Level of Load Cell Boxm -121.690

Working Load kN 25500

P25

Note: The diameter is 2.3 meters from level -3.245 to -38.500; and the diameter is 2 meters from level 38.500 to -123.25 reduced level referred to NGVD Filter cake thickness mm 2.2

NO.

Type of drilling rig

Verticality

Concrete filling rate

Density of slurry

Level of pile top m -8.50

Level of pile toe m

Socket depth (m)

P25

ZJD-300

1/1000

1.07

1.03 1.10

-123.57

4.32

16 November 2011

Page 35

Static load test of the trial bored pile (contd)

Load increment No. 1 to 11 12 12 to 15

Percentage of Working Load (%)

17 to 183 200 -50

Test load, in kN, Q 4250 to 46750 51000 12750

Applied load at load cell in kN, Qup 5046 to 21473 23115 8332

Minimum Maintained Time (hour) 2 48 1

16

Note: design working load= 25500 kN; maximum design testing load = 51000 kN

16 November 2011

Page 36

Test Results
When loaded from 18187 kN to 19830 kN, the pile moved upward for more than 46mm (i.e., from 13.10 mm to 59.75 mm while the lower part moved downward for 0.6mm (i.e., from 4.21mm to 4.81mm).

As the test load was released to zero, the residual settlements measured at the top and bottom plates of the Ocell were 24.33mm and 0.06mm respectively.
The residual movement remained at the pile head was 19.84mm

16 November 2011

Page 37

Test results (contd)

38101 kN

32.24 mm

Equivalent load settlement curve for the test pile subjected to equivalent head down loading
16 November 2011
Page 38

Test results (contd)

Axial forcekN 0 0 10000 20000 30000

Shaft friction of P25

0 0 50 100 150

estimated
20

-20

measured

40 6689 8332 9974 11617 13260 14902 16545 18187 19830

-40

60

Depth in m

depthm

-60

80

-80

100

-100

120

-120

Max shaft resistance, fs in kPa

16 November 2011

Page 39

Conclusion
1. The Design Brief for bored pile foundation to the 2 nd Penang Bridge was based on Malaysian practice which is an empirical approach on the basis of the British Standard BS8004 (1985). 2. The geotechnical parameters for bored pile foundation design were verified by in-situ loading test on an instrumented trial pile. 3. The test was carried out by O-cell method on the trial pile, 2~ 2.3 m in diameter, 115 m in length including a socketted depth of 4.3m in sound granite (Grade III/II) bed rock.

16 November 2011

Page 40

4. The measured shaft friction was less than the estimated probably because of the influence of direction of loading (uplift) which worked against the overburden thus leading to a reduction of shaft friction; and the long construction time that might have led to softening of the soil around the pile shaft The slurry cake might not be completely removed by the concreting 5. The ultimate rock socket friction is 798 kPa under uplift conditions whereas the maximum rock socket friction in compression is 941 kPa.

16 November 2011

Page 41

6.

It is noted from the test result that the ending bearing capacity was only slightly mobilised. The load carrying capacity of the test bored pile can be significantly increased if the end bearing capacity of the pile is considered.

16 November 2011

Page 42

Thank You

16 November 2011

Page 43