Number 1
Architectunl Science Review
The most common melhod used involves the insertion of a
plastic coated cardboanl sleeve and is normally used in lhe
case of augered piles. Billlmastic coatings are used in the case
of driven piles and a bentonite annulus may be used on either
driven or bored piles. A slip membrane is constructed at the
upper sections of a pile within grOlmd wilh a potential for
heave. This reduces or eliminateS the uplift forces on the pile.
The alternati ve to providing a slip mem brane is the installation
of tension reinforcement which is often more costly as this
involves additional costs ofpile depth and steel reinforcement.
In the case of bored piles tension reinforcement may be used
in conjunction wilh partial sleeving. On the other hand in the
case of driven piles a slip membrane is the only technically
accepted solution.
When mini-piles are installed vertically beneath load bearing
walls they are subject to compression and if they have high
slenderness ratios, then their capacities may be limited. It is
possible to employ steel casings to provide additional strength
to mini-piles which carry high loads.
The strength of the welds should be considered when site
welding piles, especially in situations where the water table
fluctuates. Furthermore failure due to buckling should be
considered when mini-piles have high slenderness ratios,
eccentric loadings, deviations from alignment or lack of
straightness. In order to reduce the possibility of buckling it
has been suggested that the length of mi ni-piles should be
limited to approximately 75 times lheir diamcter (Anon,
1986). This is very m uch a general guide as circumstances
may dictate a reduced ratio in cases of high loads and unstable
ground extending to the depth o f an end-bearing pile, or
conversely increased ratio in the case of a well supported
friction pile. Because mini-piles generally have high slender­
ness ratios good quality control is essential. Hence a high level
of engineering supervision is al ways necessary.
Some common misllikes in design include ­
I. Unforeseen eccentric loadings placed on small diameler
piles.
2. Realistic slenderness ratios proving unsatisfactory. In
some circumstances the 1 :75 ratio may not be appropri­
ate. An extreme example would be the case of a 100 mm
diameter pile driven through 7 m of soft fill to bear on
hard rock. In such a situation the pile, which may
typically carry 40 tN, may be offered little lateral
support by lhe soft fill. In addition, it may be subject to
aggressive chemical attack, thereby weakening a steel
cased pile still further.
3. The assumption that a particular dynamic driven pile
formula is appropriate for all ground conditions. The
performance of a driven mini-pile (with relatively light­
weight driving system) in fll1ll clay is less than that for
the same pile driven into dense gravel, or soft or weath­
ered rocks. Energy is absorbed by the clay during lhe
driving process and the pore water pressure increases.
Thc time taken for the pore water pressure to dissipate is
normally measured in days. In such situations piles
should be redriven to check their sets.
4. Inclusion ofend-bearing capacity in an auger-bored pile
in clay. End-bearing capacity usually is taken into ac­
count in the design of tradi tionally bored piles whereas
in reality spoil falls off the bottom of the augers and
provides a soft base. This can be particularly dangerous
26
Mardi 1993
Volume 36
when relying on an end-bearing socket in rock. Hence it
is essential to employ a drilling system which avoids
spoil falling to the base of the hole, or alternatively a
system that ensures a clean base.
5. Failure to take full accountoftheeffects of made ground,
particularly in the cases of driven piles. The load carry­
ing capacity of a driven pile is calculated on lhe basis of
a set which, in tum. is influenced by both the end and
shaft resistance of the pile during the driving process. It
is possible for a pile to appear to meet its ultimate
resistance within made-ground which may be undergo­
ing long-term consolidation. If the toe of the pile pen­
etrates below the made ground the effect of the shaft
resistance brings about an artificially low set value
which correlates wilh a higher pile load. In fact lhe
reverse silllation may be true if negative skin friction is
brought to bear on the piles in the longer term.
6. Misallocation of loadings in partial underpinning
schemes.
Mini-Piled Underpinning Schemes
Mini-piled underpinning schemes may be convenientl y
grouped into three types. First, there is the type which relies
upon a direct connection or bond between the mini-pileand the
structure itself. Secondly, lhere is the type where load transfer
to lhe structure is achieved by another medium, usually a
reinforced concrete construction such as a ground beam.
Thirdly, there is the type where the piles are used to stabilize
the ground as opposed to the structure.
The fIrst type is used for stabilizing walls and concrete slabs.
Walls normally are stabilized by stitch piling melhods which
usually invol ve the construction o f raking piles installed at 0.7
m to I m centres and are raked alternately in opposite direc­
tions to minimize theeffect ofbending moments (Fig. 2). With
most foundations a rake angle of 10" to 20" to the vertical is
required to allow the mini-pile to pass beyond the centre-line
at the base of the footing. If the depth of footing varies around
the building, then the rake angle should also be varied but it
Fl00f' finIsh and screed
\ the piles are poured.
\ adjacent to the wall with a tension pile positioned typically at
Fill -- _
Figure 2. Raked mini-piles installed through
existing foundations
should not exceed 20". An important consideration in such
stitch piling schemes is the size and quality of the walls and
footings. These factors determine the bond or load transfer
achieved between the pile and the structure, as well as the
ability of the footing to span between the piles. The materials
and quality of the footings must be consistent throughout, and
free from cracks which are often present in the case of a settled
structure. Ifinconsistencies are found, then the bond of the pile
to the structure, together with the ability of the footing to span
bctween pile positions, may be questionable.
Riling piles should not be installed in clay soils which are
liable to shrink or swell as such volumetric changes may
impose bending forces on the piles. Again steel casings can be
used to provide additional tensile strength in mini-piles which
are likely to be subject to bending. However, a small rein­
forced cage or tubularreinforcernent within the concrete of the
pile itself is preferable.
Driven mini-pile casings must terminate benealh a footing or
alternatively should be cut off to the correct level in order to
allow an adequate bond with the struclllre. Concrete should
have high workability, using 10 mm aggregate in the smaller
sizes of mini-pile, with cementcontent greater lhan 300 kg/m'.
Mini-piles used to reinforce domestic or light industrial floor
slabs are normally 75 to 150 mm in diameter and spaced at
bctween I and 1.5 m centres. The spacing of the piles is
determined by the quality and thickness of the existing slab
and a spacing of I to 1.2 m is normall y used in the case ofa 100
mm slab of good quality concrete. Piles are positioned to
within 300 mm from the edge o f the slab. If a floor slab has
cracked, for example, as a result of excessive settlement, then
replacement of the slab normally is preferred. However, mini­
piles can be used to 'stitch' the slab by positioning them up to
300 mm from the crack along its length. When lhe thickness
of a slab is less than 100 mm or is constructed of poor quality
concrete, it is not practical to rely on the tensile stresses
generated in the concrete and in such situations it us ually is
recommended that the slab is replaced. Additional support to
the slab may be provided by forming inverted conical cavities
beneath the slab at each pile position prior to the pile being
placed (Fig. 3). These subsequently are filled with grout when
New membrane
after piles formed
------------------------
u _. .1 -- _ ..........i
o-~Floor stab
~~~~
Invened conical seating
Grouting
/ formed in fill and grout
Clearance hole
/ ', - Casing cut off level
through floor slab ' ­ Pile formed to top of
for pile casing floor slab in one pow
Figure 3. Mini-piling of/oar slab which is settling.
The second type of underpinning system involves the trans­
fer of load via some form of concrete construction such as
ground beams. This technique is often tailor designed to suit
individual site requirements. The most common form of this
type of underpinning involves the construction of pile pairs
each side of the wall supporting a needle beam which, in 1lIm,
27
supports that section of the wall (Fig. 4). The spacing of the
pile pairs is determined by the load on the structure, capacity
of the piles and the ability of lhe struclllre to span between
needle beams. Needle beams are typically spaced between 0.7
and 1.5 m and are generally 300 to 600 mm square. They may
be installed either above or below an existing footing, con­
struction below the footing being more costly but allowing a
greater span between needle beams.
Dry mortar packing Needle beam
[>'D~
I ' ,~>-.:I
~ ,-J~~
Sleel stool on temporary
packing
Figure 4. Underpinning with vertical miru-piles
and needle beams.
A natural development from the above involves the installa­
tion of higher capacity pile pairs and needle beams supporting
a wall beam which, in tum , supports the struCIllre. The wall
beam normally is constructed wilhin the wall by systemati­
cally removing brickwork and installing sacrificial mechani­
cal "props." Reinforcement then is fIxed and concrete poured
in the normal way. Needle and wall beam design is generally
in accordance with BS 8 110: 1985, however, special limiting
considerations to deflection are required for longer spans.
In si tuations where access is restricted to one side of the wall,
then piles supporting a cantilever beam,larger diameter piles
supporting a hammer-head construction or vertical and raking
pile pairs may be used. The cantilever system is more easily
analysed and designed from a technical point of view. The
system involves a compression pile constructed immediately
between 0.5 and 1.5 m in from the wall. This system is mainly
suited to a bored type of pile as it is diffIC ult to predict tensile
forces generated by driven piles.
The hammer-head type of underpinning requires special
consideration ofdeflection, indeed it is the denection brought
about by the bending moment which limits the minimum pile
size to 200 mm in the most lightly loaded struCIllreS, although
a 300 mm diamctcr pile is preferred. In silllations where solid
ground bearing slabs are available to accommodate the lateral
forces, then lh is type of system becomes more attractive.
Systems inVOlving vertical and raking piles again bring
technical complications ofdeflection although the direction of
the deflection is reversed. Similar conditions to the above
apply, provided that the lateral forces can be accommodated.
The third type of system employs root piles to stabilize the
soil. It is designed to form a three-dimensional soil structure
and is used when excavation is not possible. Small diameter
(75-250 mm) root piles are installed in cased boreholes.
Reinforcement, usually a single steel bar, is placed in the

,,,,. 1' 0, " .,. ,; j.(,. ~ or ....
loundations should only be made when
Itr 11.lIl l (' .!l1 C,\I"lllIg
,I.· ',,1."' ) I .•: I""conccmed are known
to be high. In fact there
.",. "., y kw ca= when the foundations of domestic dwell­
"'f:' <all lx' relied upon to fonn a structural member of an
IJIIlk.:rpinning system.
As the suuctural integrity of any building which is to be
underpinned must be preserved during the underpinning proc­
ess, any existing damage, such as cracks, should be docu­
mented and their cause investigated. Cracks should be kept
under surveillance by the use oftell-tale or measuring devices.
Other factors such as suuctwalloadings, partial underpinning
considerations, geometry of the slrUCture, access to the walls,
access to the working area and environmental considerations
influence the design of an underpinning scheme, and as such
require investigation.
The scope of investigation worlcs may need to be revised
during the course of the investigation as further information is
revealed which allows a better prediction of the form of
underpinning required. A re-design of the underpinning sys­
tem may be necessary in the light ofnew information revealed.
Assumptions made during the design o f an underpinning
scheme should be confirmed on site during the course of the
works.
In remedial underpinning it is essential to diagnose correctl y
the reason why ground movement has occurred. Causes of
suc h movement include:­
I. Volumetric changes in clay soils. In this respect the
presence of large tree and/or leaking drainage can accen­
tuate these changes.
2, Long-term vo lume increases of e xpansive clay soils. for
example, heave on the site of previously wooded areas.
3. Over-stressing of marginal ground.
4. Consolidation of flUed siteS, for example, backfilled
quarries.
5. Biological decay 01organic material in and consolidation
of domestic landfill.
6. Particle removal of granular soils by groundwater. lbis
may be due to c hanges in the groundwater regime or
leaking services.
7. Mass removal of soils by rain wash.
8. Local landslip, for example, slippage into local excava­
tions which have been inadequately backflUed, or mobi­
lization of local ground by load increases or percolating
water.
soft clays and 0.45 for stiff clays), c. being the undrained
adhesion between the pile shaft and clay;
9. Vibrations causing loose granular soils to settle.
10. Migrating underground cavities such as abandoned
mineworkings.
11. Subsidence ofsolution holes,forexample,swallow holes
in chalk.
When ground movements are the result of subsidence due to
subsurface mining, then underpinning will prove ineffective
as long as subsidence continues unless a form of jacking
system is employed.
Underpinning by Mini-Piling
There are numerous methods of underpinning which are
used to provide additional support to a structure but here
attention is focused on the use of mini-piling. It is generally
accepted that mini-piles have a diameter of 300 mm or less.
24
Volume 36
Piles with diameters less than 150 mm are increasingly used in
remedial work in connection with underpinning walls and
repair of floor slabs.
The use of mini-piling as a method of underpinning is
becoming increasingly popular, According to Bruce (1988)
this reflects the increasing amount of redevelopment which is
going on in urban areas. In particular, upgrading of existing
structures frequently requires underpinning of foundations,
and problems ofaccess, complex soil conditions and environ­
mental considerations often combine to limit construction
operations so thal mini-piling represents the best solution.
Mini-piles can be inslaUed in virtually aIllypes of soil condi­
tions and can be installed in situations where either access or
head room are limited.
One of the major advantages of using mini-piles as an
underpinning system, especially when compared with tradi­
tionally excavated underpinning methods, is the reduction in
contract time and therefore in cost. Traditionally excavated
underpinning methods are labour intensive, as well as time
consuming, mainly because they involve high volumes of
material transfer (excavated spoil out, concrete and other
materials in). An approximate indication of present-day cost
comparisons o f underpinning for domestic and light industrial
buildings is given in Fig. I. Furthermore it is generally easier
to define contract costs in relation to piled methods because if
unsuitable ground conditions are discove red at a greater depth
than was anticipated at the time of the investigation, then the
relative increase in costs of a piled system in dealing with this
situation is much less than those of a traditional scheme. Yet
another advantage is that mini-piled systems, as remarked
above. can be installed in a variety of ground conditions
including unstable soils, soils contai ning boulders and soils
wi th a high water table.
Cost per linear metre(C)
300 400 500 600
1.0
§ c.
1!
e 2.0
"
~
15
~ a
~ 3.0
underpinning depends on the nature ofthe ground movements.
2
If they were caused by subsidence, then the piles are designed
" As : shaft area of pile; and
! .. 0
5.0
Figure 1. Cost comparison between mini-piled and
excavated underpinning.
The main considerations which have to be laken into account
wilh a piled underpinning solutio n are the ground conditions,
access to lhe areas requiring underpinning, and the configura­
tion of walls w hich are to be underpinned, along with their
"'"mh... I
',lnK:lural integrity. For example, ifsuit..~blc bearing ground is
11fI'scnt ata relatively shallow de\Jth. then small diameter piles
, ·111 be installed at close cenues at relatively short depths_ By
".nrast, where piles have to extend to an appreciable depth,
Ihen it is normaUy more economical to utilize more highly
Inad~~l, larger diameter mini-piles which are spaced more
,,,(Iely. In theeaseofclosely spaced piles, the foundations and
walls, if in good condition, may be able to span the piles or
needle beams without suffering damage. When piles are
Widely spaced a wall beam is required to support the load
Ix'~ween the piles, The existing suuctural integrity influences
lhe spacing of piles and beam construction. Restricted access
10 one side of a wall limits the type of scheme to vertical and
raking pairs of piles, pairs of tension and compression piles
supporting cantilever beams, or hammer-head connections to
larger diameter vertical mini-piles. All of these solutions bring
with them technical complications, the simplest form being
the cantilevered method of support.
Ground conditions tend to lend themselves to either a bored
or a driven steel cased pile method. However. wall configura­
tion and access may dictate a particular method. Structural
integrity of the building may limit the solution to a bored type
of pile in w hat normally would be driven-pile ground, a
hollow-stem continuous flight auger or other rolary drilling
techniques being used. In the case of a cantilevered scheme
utilizing tension piles, a bored pile normally is preferred to
generate the necessary tensile capacity.
Some Design Considerations
A mini-pile derives support from its base (Q.) and the friction
on the shaft (QJ. Hence the ultimate load carrying capacity
(Q...,) of a mini-pile can be obtained from:
Q....: Q. + Q, (1)
In the case of augered piles in clay Q. cannot be relied on as
cuttings often fall to the bottom of the hole when withdrawing
the augers. However, if other techniques are used to ensure a
clean base, then in clay:
Q... : c.N,Ab + ac.As (2)
where:
: undrained shear strength of the clay;
N, : bearing capacity factor, normally laken as 9 for
piles in clay;
: adhesion factor given by cjc. (between 0.95 for
Ab : base area of pile.
In the case of firm to stiff clays (shear suength greater than
40 lcPa) the maximum resistance to sliding developed on the
shaft is normally the larger component of the ultimate bearing
capacity. On the other hand when mini-piles are installed in
soft clays, loose sands or poorly compacted tills, then no
contribution from the shaft friction should be included. In fact,
if soft clays or poorly compacted fills are for one reason or
another undergoing consolidation, then they can impose nega­
tive skin friction on the shaft of the pile. In such cases it may
be necessary to assign a separate value of skin friction for the
shaft affected by down-drag. When piles are arranged in
closely spaced groups they act as a single unit and conse­
25
Mardll993
quently the ultimate load ofthe group ofpiles is not necessarily
the same as thatofa single pile times the number ofpiles in the
group, Various empirical formula have been proposed for the
efficient design of piled groups (Poulos, 1987).
As far as granular soils are concerned the ultimate end
bearing capacity (Q,) of a pile can be obtained from:
Q.: yzN.Ab (3)
where yz is the effective overburden pressure atlhe depth of
the pile and N is a bearing capacity factor. Meyerhof ''''''
suggested that lhe ultimate skin friction (Q.) may be derived
from:
Q,: fsAs (4)
where fs = Kyz tan Ii (K is the coefficient of effective earth
pressure, 0.5 for loose sands to 1.0 for dense sands; y z is the
average effective overburden pressure over the pile length, 1)
is the angle of friction between the pile and the soil, and is
generally laken as 0.75 for driven concrete piles and 0.9 for
cast-in-place concrete piles).
Driven piles are normally used in cases where soft unstable
ground overlies granular materials or rocks. Load bearing
characteristics either are calculated in accordance with a
recognized form of the Hiley formula or other empirical
formulae appropriate for the more recently developed pile
driving systems. The Hiley formula is used for the conven­
tional system involving a weight acting on either the top or
bottom of the pile, dropped over a given height while the more
recent formulae developed by contractors are normally used
for either hydraulic or pneumatically powered hammers. A
generally accepted version of the Hiley formula for a bottom
driven cased pile is:­
R : 270w (J + h) (5)
• 12.7 + s
where: R. = ul timate pile capacity (IOnnes);
w ; weight of hammer;
h = height of drop (maximum of 2.0 m); and
s = set per blow (mm).
In the case of vibrated driven piles, adequate resistance is
generally regarded as having been mobilized if pile penetra­
tion is IO mm or less during IO s of vibration. This is normally
checked over a penetration of 100 mm.
The suuctura1 load which a pile carries when used for
to carry the total suuctural loading, includi ng both the live and
dead loads" . When settlement is responsible for ground move­
ment, then the piles can be designed to carry that part of the
load which is necessary to cause the seule ment to cease. lbis
is the policy of Abbey Underpinning and Foundations Ltd.
Estimation of the vertical and horiwntal movements of piles
can be done by a number of theoretical methods. Often,
however, accurate calculations for underpinning of domestic
dwellings are not required as the systems employed tend to be
slandardized.On the other hand calculationsarecarriedout for
a non-standard underpinning system.
In soils with a potential for swelling, the soil can be kepi
separate from the main body of the pile by several method ,
"This is the policy of Abbey UnderpiJUling and Foundations Ltd