Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
By
Richard E. Bartoskewitz
Engineering Research Associate
and
Harry M. Coyle
Associate Research Engineer
Sponsored by
The Texas Highway Department
In Cooperation with the
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
December 1970
ii
ABSTRACT
compared with field data from static load tests. The results ob-
parameter study indicate that the ratio of point load to total load
three different locations show that a single value for the friction
for all clay soils. Data are presented which show an apparent
iii
SUMMARY
presented which show that the friction damping parameter J' can be
clay soil.
iv
/
IMPLEMENTATION STATEMENT
dominately clay soil. The soil parameters are intended for use
pile foundations.
has been obtained from additional field tests. Future field tests
and the 10-clay static load test should be performed concurrently with re-
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION • 1
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Static Soil Resistance versus Dynamic Driving
Resistance • • • • • • • • • • 9
Parameter Study of Beaumont Field Test Data • 14
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Ratio of Point Load to Total Load 26
Soil Set-up Factors • . . • • • • • . 28
Prediction of Pile Capacities . • 28
Oetermination of Friction Damping 32
Estimating Soil Set-up • • • • • 35
General . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Beaumont Test Pile .
.. 40
Belleville Test Pile No. 1 42
Friction Oamping Related to Plasticity Index 44
vi
Page
Conclusions 49
Recommendations 51
APPENDIX I.--REFERENCES . • • . • . • • . . • . . • • • • . 53
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
viii
LIST OF FlGURES
Figure Page
ix
Figure Page
15 Soil Resistance Versus Driving Resistance for
Port Arthur Pile No. 2 Eleven Days After Driving 38
X
INTRODUCTION
For many years engineers have relied upon "static" and/or "dynamic"
neglecting the loss of energy which occurs during impact and as-
analysis.
1
Present Status of the Question
acteristics of the soil. The soil parameters used with his soil
model were considered adequate for practical use until more ac-
and Samson (8) published a computer program for solving the wave
time no work had been done to determine more accurate values for
pared soil samples and model pile tests both in the laboratory
2
predict the soil response when driving a full-scale pile under
field conditions.
Objectives
analysis.
the field.
3
WAVE EQUATION IDEALIZATION OF SOIL BEHAVIOR
\
Smith's Soil Model
R
u = dynamic or static soil resistance in pounds;
Q = maximum elastic soil deformation, or quake, in inches;
J = a damping constant for the soil at the point of the
pile, in seconds per foot;
R =R (1 + JV) (1)
ud ynam1.c
. ustatic
4
..
0CJ RAM
ANVIL
--
f1Zlll'4A CAP BLOCK
R
~
PILE CAP
CUSHION
-
SIDE
FRICTIONAL
RESISTANCE
POINT
RESISTANCE-
5
,----------- -------
Q- L-f _ . N 4
JV Rt.Jttatic
l
0
c(
0
..J
I
I
I
1,------,-----------,..----,1-- I
I
/ --
-
Rudynamic
I - I
I I .-
1 / Ru,tatic
I'
I I
I 1
I I
~ I
I
I
o~-----------~~~---------~~------------L--------~- ,
I DEFORMATION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
__________ _, I I
6
Modification of Smith's Soil Parameters
friction and void ratio in the case of sands and liquidity index
Raba (11) and Korb (6) performed tests on model piles driven
7
based primarily on the work of Korb because they were obtained
8
PREDICTION OF BEARING CAPACITY BY WAVE EQUATION ANALYSIS
General
computer program. The program was run on the IBM 360/65, FORTRAN
9
this work. The units most often used are blows per inch or blows
considered to have the most prominent effect are: (1) the type
geometry, and material of the pile; (3) the type, energy rating,
and efficiency of the pile driving hammer; and (4) the accessories
first of these factors, i.e., the parameters which are used with
et al. (7, 8), and by Hirsch and Edwards (5). Although these
vestigation is not within the scope of this study and will not be
discussed.
one blow of the hammer. The reciprocal of the permanent set gives
10
the driving resistance in blows per unit of net pile movement. In
the pile which would be measured if the pile could be load tested
dict the static bearing capacity of the pile if the actual driving
resistance in the field is known for the last few blows of the
soil system, and the blow count recorded in the field during the
last several feet of driving was 20 blows per foot, the indicated
the pile is driven into the ground the soil beneath the point and
11
80~----------~----------~------------~----------~----------~
(I)
z 40
0
1-
ILl
.
(.)
z
30 - - -- - ------ ------- --- - ---- -·--
t!
-
(I)
( I)
1&1
a:
t-o
N ..J
0 20 I
I
(I) I
1.
(.)
...
"'
1-
(1) 10
0 10 20 30 40 so
DYNAMIC DRIVING RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER FOOT
within the voids of the soil skeleton. With the passage of time
this excess pore pressure gradually dissipates and the soil con-
static bearing capacityof the pile some time in the future can be
course of the Port Arthur, Texas, pile tests (which are described
ups of 2.16 and 2.43 had occurred. On the other hand, data re-
ported in the Michigan Study (9) show that the set-up was 1.91 at
the Belleville test site and only 1.45 at the Detroit site.
eering judgement.
13
Parameter Study of Beaumont Field Test Data
made utilizing field data from a full scale pi.le test. The pre-
relating to the size and type of pile and hammer, the res~lts of
pile load test conducted in Beaumont, TeJ{as. The pile tested was
3
a 16-in. OD, -in. wall, 53-ft long steel pipe pile driven into
8
predominantly clay soils by a Delamg D-12 hammer. Smith's para-
meters and the mod~fied parameters were used to develop the curves
of RUT, i.e., RUT minus RUP, acts as skin friction along the side
of the pile. The ratio RUP /RUT can be chosen anywhere within the
14
range of 0.0 (skin friction piles) to 1.0 (point bearing piles).
tri.bu tion in the other. The resulting curves are shown in Fig. 4.
the remarkable influence which the ratio of RUP to RUT has on the
the static soil resistance increases from 130 to 138 tons. How-
15
~00
I I I I
. /-
,., I I I
(,) 7 a a ~
z
~ 250
-
U)
U)
~ ~----------
.....
1&1
a: 2ooL I - - -----
~
-0
..J
U) ....... I J! ~-
-----·------
(.)
-
1-
c 100
1-
U)
I I /~ - Trlan9ulor D'letrlbution
Uniform Dietribution
.
../
/
ILl ,/
(J ,/
z 2~0
//,
c
....
0
I
/
0
ILl 200
0::
~
--.1
..J
~
0 --c --------
0
....
-- -----.:::>------- ------5-..,----------- -----
c 100
....
0 v . . ~. .....:...... -~ Smith's Parameters
;""'
"'" ....... ...,... Modified Parameters
~0
crease of RUP/RUT from 50% to 95%, RUT increases from 186 to 386
modified equation [Eq. (2)] was used to obtain the upper curve.
is dominant and Eq. (2) with N = 0.35 yields a much greater dy-
increases, the skin friction becomes less dominant and the dif-
and Eq. (2) decreases. Thus, the curves tend to move in opposition
18
6,---------.r~-------,----------,----------,----------~----------
&
4
0
;
0
••
a:
' 0
a
..... e
1.0 0
c
>.
~
a:
2
0 5 10 1!5 20 2!5 30
VELOCITY 1 FEET PER SECOND
meters were used and Q was varied from 0.01 in. to 0.10 in. The
viously, the data obtained by Korb from model pile tests in clay
yielded a value of 0.03 in. for Q. Coyle (3) has developed curves
which relate load transfer and skin friction to pile movement for
in. Because of the fact that Coyle's work involved full scale
(I)
z
0
~
I&J
.
(.)
z
C(
~
(I)
(I)
I&J
a:
N .J
..... 0
(I)
0
~
;!
(I)
apparent that the point damping parameter J·does not have as much
RUP /RUT ratio. One of Korb 's conclusions (6) was that "The tip
damping constant (J) as determined from field test data was relatively
J was 0.18 seconds per foot." Based on this evidence, the use of
evident from the curves of Fig. 9 that J' has a significant effect.
0.8 to 1.2 seconds per foot if the blow count is 25 blows per foot.
Therefore, this final phase of the parameter study of' the Beaumont
22
150r------.------~-------r------~r------,-------.-------.-----~
125
U)
z
0
1-
..
1&1 100
u
z
~
~
U)
1&1
g:
N
w
0-
.J
U)
(J
1-
~
U)
125
(I)
z
0
....
1&1
..
0
z
cr
t-
!!
(I)
1&1
75
N li:
~
-
~
0
(I)
2
....
~
(I)
General
The parameter study which was made using field test data
from the Beaumont pile test program has shown that the ratio of
25
evaluate J' by an indirect method.
piles were driven and load tested in the vicinity of Port Arthur,
Texas, during November, 1969. Both piles were 16-in. OD, ~-in.
wall thickness, steel pipe piles. The length of test pile No. 1
load test data can be found in the report by Perdue (10). Both
ratios, obtained by static load testing the piles, have been tab-
data obtained for test pile No. 1. The static loads required at
the head of the pile to cause a plunging failure were 46.2 tons
1 21 hours after driving and 100 tons eleven days later. The cor-
responding point bearing loads at the tip of the pile were 9 tons
evaluate the amount of soil set-up which has occured. The soil
set-up factors for each pile are shown in Table 2. Again taking
pile increased from 46.2 tons 1 ~ hours after driving to 100 tons
eleven days later. Thus, the soil set-up factor for that partie-
ular time interval was 100/46.2 = 2.16. If the pile had been
100 tons. Hence, the soil set-up factor after 30 days may have
Driving records taken during the last few feet of driving on the
(blow count) for test pile No. 1 was 14 ~ blows per foot, and 16
blows per foot for test pile No. 2. Using the procedure outlined
was 60 tons and 72 • S. tons (from Fig. 10) for tes t piles 1 and 2
28
IOOr---------------.---------------11---------------r--------------~
U)
z
0 75
t-
.. ------ -.-- -- ..... --... --- ... -·-- . -- ... -- - -- ---- ... -- ----- ---- -- .. --- -- ------- ---- ---- --
I&J
u
z
~ ----------------------------------------------- Pile No.2
!!!
(I)
I&J 50
0::
N
\0
.J
0
U)
(J
t-
~ 25
U)
0
5 10 15 20
DYNAMIC DRIVING RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER FOOT
test pile No. 1 and 2.43 x 72.5 = 176 tons for test pile No. 2.
by the load tests after eleven days shows that Smith's soil para-
Table 1 are shown in Fig. 11. The pile capacities obtained after
allowing for set-up are 2.16 x 31.5 = 68 tons for test pile No. 1,
these values with the eleven-day static load test capacities shows
that, for these particular piles and soil conditions, the modified
the error in the predicted value is - 32%. For test pile No. 2
of each pile were recorded·for the last several blows of the ham-
high load cell between the pile and the hammer. The dynamic
as input data for the wave equation computer program. The use of
30
80~----------~----------~------------.------------.----~-----,
70
(I)
z
...
0
60 '----· Pile No. I
1&.1
.
(,)
z 50
;!
-
(I)
( I)
I&J 40
E
w
.....
-
~
0
(I) 30
.-..
(,)
20
i!
(I)
10
'I
I
I
I
I
0 10 20 30 40 !50
DYNAMIC DRIVING RESISTANCE, BLOWS PE.R · FOOT
certain variables which are used to simulate the pile driving ham-
the ram and the operating efficiency of the hammer), and the
driving. J' was then varied from 0.1 to 1.25 seconds per foot to
curves obtained for the two piles are shown in Fig. 12. Thus,
J' can be obtained which will cause agreement between the measured
J' = 0.535 seconds per foot for test pile No. 1 and J' = 0.67
seconds per foot for test pile No. 2. These values were then
32.
1.2 ----~----~----~~--~--~
...
IL
II:
1&J
~
1.0
(,)
1&J
en Pile No. I
.,
~
-
-
II:
0.8
...
I&J
I&J
~ 0.6
c(
w a:: -------- ----------- ------- ............. "!"·--- . ----------------- -·--- --·- ··---
w c(
~
(!)
z 0.4
~
2
c
0
z 0.2
2
...
-a:
(,)
IL
0 5 10 15 20 25
DYNAMIC DRIVING RESISTAN.CE, BLOWS PER FOOT
70
U)
z
0 I Pile No. I
~
.
1&1'
p
- 60
I ~ "-- Pile No. 2
z
c 50
~
!!
U)
1&1
a: 40
w
~ _.
0
(I) 30
0
...c
...
(I)
20
10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
DYNAMIC DRIVING RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER FOOT
1
-FIGURE 13 - SOIL RESISTANCE VERSUS DRIVING RESISTANCE USING J
REQUIRED FOR EXACT AGREEMENT
entering these curves with the appropriate blow count it is
shown that the static soil resistance thus obtained is indeed the
illustrate, entering the curve for test pile No. 1 with a blow
count of 14.5 blows per foot yields the correct value of 46 tons
of the time and expense required to conduct this test. If, how-:-
feet after sufficient time has been allowed for soil set-up to
method are that it can reduce the amount of time required to test
35
With this concept in mind, the Port Arthur test piles were
eleven day test. These curves are shown in Figs. 14 and 15.
and 13 because RUP/RUT was different at the time the piles were
are shown in Column (5) of Table 3. Column (6) of the table shows
36
250 -
en 200___________ -------------------
z
0
....
ILl
.
0
z
~
(I)
en I I / .I
I 3
1&.1
w a::
-....!
..J
100
0
en
-....0 I I I / i
I CURVE No . J' N
~
(I)
5or-- II /
.
I
I 0.05 1.0
2 0.535 0.35
3 1.25 0.35
•z 200
...
0
.
Ill
0
z
~ 150
••-
Ill
~
w
co _,
0 100
•
.-c..
0
CURVE No.
.,. ~
...
• soL/// I
2
5
0.05
0.67
1.25
1.0
0.!5
0.!5
39
ADDITIONAL CASE STUDIES
General
The wave equation analyses of the Port Arthur test data have
shown that neither Smith's parameters nor the modified soil para-
capacity of the piles. A study of the Port Arthur data was made
data. Consequently, two other piles were analyzed with the inten-
The Beaumont pile test data which were used for the parameter
ment between the predicted and the measured static load capacity
the Port Arthur data. The curve relating the friction damping
shown in Fig. 16. The blow count just prior to the termination
40
0
• (!)
->z
0::
0
t-
0
0 CJ)
1&. ::::>
, 0
0::
I&J
CJ)
0::
Q.
w
---------------------------------- >
•_.
(I)
0 0:: w
m w ...J
.
t- Q..
I&J w
-
0
z :i
4( < t-
0
t- 0:: CJ)
U)
N
U) <
Q..
l.IJ
t-
I&J
0::
(!)
z t-
(!)
z z
> Q.. 0
0::
0 :E :E
< ::::>
0 0 <
2 LIJ
0· 4(
z z m
>
0
0
t- Q:
(.) 0
LL
0::
LL
l.IJ
(.)
U) z
<(
l.IJ
t-
N 0 0 CJ)
- 0 0::
·=> CJ)
(!)
l.IJ
.L.:J ~:id ~3~ '(,r) ~3.L:iWY~Yd 9NidWYO NOI.L~I ~.:J LL Q:
41
of driving was 28 blows per foot. Fig. 16 shows that the required
value for J' is 0.7 seconds per foot. The corresponding relation-
the day it was driven was 61 tons; (2) the soil set-up factor
after 13 days was 2.0; and (3) RUP/RUT on the day of driving was
15%. The Beaumont pile was not load tested on the day it was
driven, hence, RUP /RUT and the soil set-up factor could not be
The Michigan Report (9) contains load test data which can be
used to calculate the set-up factor for one of the piles driven
at the Belleville test site. Belleville load test pile No. 1 was a
61.1-ft long, 12-in. OD, 0.25-in. wall thickness, steel pipe pile,
Maximum static test loads applied on the pile were 55 tons 4 hours
42
~..
150~--------------~--------------.----------------.------~-------,
125
f/)
z
0
~·
. 100
1&.1
0
z I ..
~
U)
a; 75
1&.1
~
a::
w
-
..J
0
f/)
so, / i NOTE:
.-..
u
Curve obtained by using J' =
/
I
0.7 second·•
= I
I
I
I
U)
I
I per foot to yield exact agreement
25
0 25 50 75 100
DYNAMIC DRIVING RESISTANCE, BLOWS PER FOOT
blows per foot. The curve relating the friction damping para-
For a blow count of 132 blows per foot, the J' value required to
indeed not a constant for all clay soils. For each pile which
was analyzed by the wave equa~ion, a different value for J' was
average plasticity index of the soil for each pile test location
44
2.0~------------~--------------.---~----------~-------------,
....I&.
cr:
Ill
CL
(.)
I. 6 ...._-- ------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------
Ill
(I)
--.,.
cr:
Ill 1.2
....
Ill
:1
c
cr:
~
\JI
cCL
0.8
C)
z
-
CL
2
c
0
z 0.4
0
....
(.)
cr:
I&.
{I)
z
0 60
~
I&J
.
0
Z·
:!
{I)
u; 40
I&J
.!:'- a:
0'\
..J
0
{I)
NOTE:
0
~ 20 Curve obtained by using l = 1.6 seconds per
~
{I) foot to yield exact agreement
noted that the J' values shown in Table 4 were obtained by using
exist. For soils which have a high plasticity index, the friction
apparently increases.
Friction damping
Pile test location Average plasticity index parameter, J',
seconds per foot
Beaumont 33 0.7
Belleville 18 1.6
47
soil which has a high plasticity index, the permeability will be
On the other hand, a soil having a low plasticity index will have
will not develop and an adhesive bond can be formed at the inter-
face. The bond thus formed could be the cause for a higher
for future research and it was with this idea in mind that the
48
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
scale piles. The results are limited in scope because they were
can be made which are appropriate for the type of piles and
From the results of the parameter study that was made with
can be made:
49
2. The ratio of point load to total load is a critical
acceptable accuracy for piles which are driven into clay soils.
meter J' which can be used for all types of clay. The complex
50
Reconnnendations
driving records and load test data obtained from tests on piles
need for field test data obtained from fully instrumented piles
It has been shown that the load being carried by point bear-
ever possible.
51
Soil set-up is an important aspect of the total problem in
after initial driving, with two weeks or more being the preferred
types.
52
APPEND!~ I.--REFERENCES
53
10. Perdue, G. W., and Coyle, H. M., "In-situ Measurements of
Friction and Bearing and Correlated with Instrumented Pile
Tests," Texas Transportation Institute Research Report 125-4,
Texas A&M University, June, 1970.
11. Raba, C. F., and Coyle, H. M., "The Static and Dynamic
Response of a Miniature Friction Pile in Remolded Clay,"
Paper presented at the Texas Section meeting, ASCE, San
Antonio, Texas, October, 1968. ,
54