Goh EC7 Pile CPG July2013 PDF

CPG In-House Course on
Pile design (EC7 and SS EN 1997-1:2010

Singapore National Annex to Eurocode 7)
- July 2013
A/P Anthony Goh

Nanyang Technological University
E il ctcgoh@ntu.edu.sg
Email:
t
h@ t d
CPGEC7course(Goh)
References
Bauduin, C.M. (2001). Design procedure according to Eurocode 7 and
analysis of the test results. Proc. Symposium on Screw Piles Installation
and design in stiff clay, Brussels, Balkema, pp.275-303.
Bond, A. and Harris, A. (2008). Decoding Eurocode 7. Taylor & Francis.
Dept off Communities
C
and Local Government,
G
UK (2006).
(
) A designers
simple guide to BS EN 1997.
Driscoll R., Scott, P. and Powell J. (2008). EC7 implications for UK
practice. Eurocode 7 Geotechnical design. CIRIA C641.
Frank, R., Bauduin C., Driscoll, R., Kawadas, M., Krebs Ovesen, N., Orr, T.
and
d Schuppener,
S h
B (2004).
B.
(2004) Designers
D i
Guide
G id to
t EN 1997-1
1997 1 Eurocode
E
d 7:
7
Geotechnical design General rules. Thomas Telford.
p
B. and Driscoll,, R. ((1998)) Eurocode 7 a commentary.
y BRE.
Simpson
Tomlinson M. and Woodward, J. (2008). Pile design and construction
practice. 5th edition. Taylor & Francis.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
SINGAPORENATIONALANNEX
NAtoSSEN19971:2010
CPGEC7course(Goh)
SSINGAPORENATIONALANNEX
G O
O
NAtoSSEN19971:2010
SingaporeNationalAnnextoEurocode7:Geotechnical
design
P t1 G
Part1:Generalrules
l l
NA.2
NA 2 Nationally Determined Parameters
As indicated in Table NA.1, only Design Approach 1 is to
b used
be
d iin Si
Singapore.
The values given in the Tables in Annex A of this
National Annex replace the recommended values in
Annex A of SS EN 1997-1 : 2010.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
For example, Table A.NA.7 replaces Table A.7

Table A.NA.7 Partial resistance factors (R) for bored piles for the
STR and GEO limit states
Resistance
Base
Shaft
(compression)
T t l/C bi d
Total/Combined
(compression)
Shaft in tension
Symbol
R1
Set
R4 without explicit
verification of SLSA)
R4 with explicit
b
s
1.0
1.0
2.0
1.6
1.7
1.4
10
1.0
20
2.0
17
1.7
s;t
1.0
2.0
1.7
A) The lower values in R4 may be adopted (a) if serviceability is verified by load tests (preliminary and/or working)
carried out on more than 1% of the constructed piles to loads not less than 1.5 times the representative load for
which they are designed, or (b) if settlement is explicitly predicted by a means no less reliable than in (a), or (c)
if settlement at the serviceability limit state is of no concern.
SS NA permits the use of different R4 values depending

on the verification of SLS
CPGEC7course(Goh)
For example, Table A.NA.7 replaces Table A.7

Table A.7 Partial resistance factors (R) for bored piles
Resistance
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
Shaft in tension
Symbol
Set
R1
R4
b
s
1.25
1.0
1.6
1.3
1.15
1.5
s;t
1.25
1.6
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Definitions
Actions on the foundations (Clause 2.4.2(4))
Earth and g
groundwater p
pressures
Weight of soil, rock and water
Dead and imposed loading from structure
Imposed loading from ground movements (eg. swelling,
g , down-drag)
g)
shrinkage,
Ground properties (Clause 2.4.3)
from field or laboratory tests (directly or by correlation
correlation,
theory or empiricism)
Takes into account effects of time, stress level and
deformation etc
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Definitions
Geometrical data (Clause 2.4.4(1)P)
p of the g
ground surface,, g
groundwater
Include slope
levels and structural dimensions
Characteristic values of Geotechnical parameters
(Clause 2.4.5.2)
Selected from the available
a ailable information (eg
(eg. SI report)
Based on a cautious estimate of the data made within
the zone influenced by stresses transmitted to the
ground
Less than most probable values (most situations)
Higher than most probable where higher values have an
unfavourable effect on the foundation behaviour (eg.
down drag)
down-drag)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Definitions
Ultimate Limit States (Clause 2.4.7.1) for foundations
STR: internal failure or excessive deformation of the
structure
GEO:
GEO failure
f il
or excessive
i d
deformation
f
ti off th
the ground
d
Model Factors (Clause 2.4.7.1(6))

Model
M
d l factors
f t
may be
b applied
li d to
t the
th design
d i
value
l
off a
resistance or the effect of an action to ensure that the
results of the design calculation model are either accurate
or err on the safe side.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Design Approach 1 (Clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(1)P)

STR limit state failure or excessive deformation of the
structure
GEO limit state failure or excessive ground deformation
Ensure that:
Design effects of actions Ed design resistance Rd
Design Approach 1
Combination
C
bi ti 1:
1 A1 + M1 + R1
Combination 2: A2 + M2 + R1
A = action; M = material properties; R = ground resistance
CPGEC7course(Goh)
10
Design Approach 1 (Clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(1)P)

Clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(2)P Note 2 If it is obvious that

one combination governs the design, it is not
necessary to perform full calculations for the other
combination.
Often Combination 2 will govern the geotechnical
sizing and Combination 1 will govern the structural
design
design.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
11
GEO and STR ULS calculations (Design Approach 1)

Clause 2.4.7.3.2 and 2.4.7.3.3
Ed Rd
Ed = design value of the effects of all the actions

Ed = E{FFrep ; Xk / M; ad }
Rd = design value
al e of the corresponding gro
ground
nd and/or str
structure
ct re
R d = R{FFrep ; Xk / M; ad }
For piles and anchorages
Frep
R d = R{FFrep ; Xk ; ad }/ R
Representativevalueofanaction
p
Partialfactorforanaction
Xk
Characteristicvalueofamaterial (ground)property
Partialfactorforthematerialproperty
ad
Designvalueofageometricalproperty
Partialfactorforthe
a t a acto o t e resistanceoftheground
es sta ce o t e g ou d
CPGEC7course(Goh)
12
Serviceability
y Limit State ((Clause 2.4.8))
Partial factors normally taken as 1.0 (Clause
2.4.8(2))
( ))
Verification for serviceability
y limit states shall
require that
Ed Cd
where Cd = the limiting
g design
g value of the relevant
serviceability criterion (Clause 2.4.8(1)P)
or be done through the method given in 2.4.8(4).
CPGEC7course(Goh)
13
2.4.8(4).
2
4 8(4) It may be verified that a sufficiently low
fraction of the ground strength is mobilised to keep
deformations within the required serviceability limits,
limits
provided this simplified approach is restricted to
design situations where:
a value of the deformation is not required to check
th serviceability
the
i
bilit limit
li it state;
t t
established comparable experience exists with
similar ground, structures and application method.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
14
Limiting values of movements of foundations

(Clause 2.4.9(4)P Note)
In the absence of specified limiting values, Annex H
(informative) may be used.
Annex H For normal structures with isolated foundations,
total settlements of up
p to 50 mm are often acceptable.
p
Also provides guidelines for Maximum relative rotation.
Annex F Sample methods for settlement evaluation (based
on elasticity theory)
7.6.4. Vertical displacements of pile foundations
(serviceability of supported structures)
7 6 4 1 NOTE For piles bearing in medium-to-dense
7.6.4.1
medium to dense soils and for
tension piles, the safety requirements for the ultimate limit state
design are normally sufficient to prevent a serviceability limit state
in the supported structure.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
15
Pile Foundation Design (Design Approach 1)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
16
7.2 Limit states

(1)P The following limit states shall be considered ..... :
loss of overall stability;
bearing resistance failure of the pile foundation;

uplift or insufficient tensile resistance of the pile foundation;
failure in the ground due to transverse loading of the pile foundation;
structural failure of the pile in compression, tension, bending, buckling
or shear;
combined failure in the ground and in the pile foundation;
combined failure in the ground and in the structure;
excessive settlement;
excessive heave;
excessive lateral movement;
unacceptable vibrations
vibrations.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
17
7.3.1 Actions and design situations

Axial loading
g
Transverse ((horizontal)) loading
7.3.2 Actions due to ground displacement
consolidation
lid ti ((negative
ti skin
ki ffriction)
i ti )
swelling or heave (tension pile)
lateral loading from adjacent surcharge or embankment
Analysis
y of Geotechnical action ((Clause 7.3.2.1(3)P):
( ) )
pile-soil interaction analysis (t-z or p-y analysis); or
upper-bound force exerted on the pile by the ground
movementt iis calculated
l l t d and
d ttreated
t d as an action
ti
CPGEC7course(Goh)
18
Clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(2)P
Combination 2: A2 + (M1 or M2) + R4
In combination 2, set M1 is used for calculating resistances
of piles (or anchors) and set M2 for calculating
unfavourable
nfa o rable actions on piles eg.
eg owing
o ing to negative
negati e skin
friction
Clause 2.4.7.3.4.2 (2) Note 2 If it is obvious that one
combination governs the design, it is not necessary to
perform
f
f ll calculations
full
l l ti
f the
for
th other
th combination.
bi ti
A = action; M = material properties; R = ground resistance
CPGEC7course(Goh)
19
7.4.1 Design
g methods
(1)P The design shall be based on one of the following approaches:
the results of static load tests, which have been demonstrated, by
means of calculations or otherwise, to be consistent with other relevant
experience;
empirical or analytical calculation methods whose validity has been
demonstrated by static load tests in comparable situations;
the results of dynamic load tests whose validity has been
demonstrated by static load tests in comparable situations;
the observed performance of a comparable pile foundation, provided
that
h this
hi approach
h is
i supported
d by
b the
h results
l off site
i investigation
i
i i
and
d
ground testing.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
20
Design methods for pile foundations (Clause 7.4.1(P))

Method
Comments
Staticloadtests#
Validity mustbedemonstratedbycalculations orother

meanstobeconsistentwithotherrelevantexperiences.
Empiricaloranalytical
calculations
Validity mustbedemonstratedbystaticloadtestsin
comparable situations
comparablesituations.
Dynamic impact tests#
Validitymustbedemonstratedbystaticloadtestsin
p
comparablesituations.
Piledrivingformulaeor
waveequationanalysis#
Validity mustbedemonstratedbystaticloadtestsin
comparablesituations, andgroundstratificationhasbeen
determined.
determined
Observation
Observedperformanceofcomparablepilefoundation;
mustbesupportedbyresultsofSI andgroundtesting.
Usually applies to trial (preliminary) piles and the

results of tests on these piles are used to design the
working piles.
#
CPGEC7course(Goh)
21
7.4.1(3)
7
4 1(3) Static load tests may be carried out on trial piles
piles, installed for
test purposes only, before the design is finalised, or on working piles,
which form part of the foundation.
Trial piles (installed for test purposes only, before the

design is finalised); preliminary
preliminary pile.
pile
Working piles (which form part of the permanent
); Test load must be at least equal
q
foundation works);
to the design load (Clause 7.5.2.3(2)P).
UK experience Most contracts tests on trial piles are impractical as
there is insufficient lead time between the main piling works and the test
programmes.
p
g
Preliminaryy tests are seldom carried out on p
piles with
similar widths and lengths, which makes it difficult to derive a sensible
mean test result. In many tests, the ultimate load is obtained from
extrapolation of the load
load-displacement
displacement curve, adding further to the
uncertainty in any calculated mean (Bond and Harris, 2008).
CPGEC7course(Goh)
22
7.5 Pile load tests

7.5.1(1)P Pile load tests shall be carried out in the following situations:
when using a type of pile or installation method for which there is no
comparable experience;
when the piles have not been tested under comparable soil and
loading conditions;
when the piles will be subject to loading for which theory and
experience do not provide sufficient confidence in the design. The pile
testing procedure shall then provide loading similar to the anticipated
loading;
g;
when observations during the process of installation indicate pile
behaviour that deviates strongly and unfavourably from the behaviour
anticipated
i i
d on the
h basis
b i off the
h site
i investigation
i
i i or experience,
i
and
d when
h
additional ground investigations do not clarify the reasons for this
deviation.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
23
(2) Pile load tests may be used to:

assess the suitability of the construction method;
determine the response of a representative pile and the
surrounding ground to load,
load both in terms of settlement and limit load;
to allow judgement of the overall pile foundation.
Clause 7.5.1(4)P and (5)P)

If one pile load test is carried out located where the
most ad
adverse
erse ground
gro nd conditions are belie
believed
ed to
occur. If this is not possible, an allowance shall be
made when deriving the characteristic value of the
compressive resistance.
If more than one pile load test is carried out locations
must be representative of the site of the pile
foundation and one of the test piles shall be located
where the most adverse ground conditions are
believed to occur. CPGEC7course(Goh)
24
7.5.2 Static load tests

7.5.2.1 Loading procedure
(1)P Measurements during static load tests must allow
conclusions about deformation, creep and rebound of
the piled foundation. ...
Trial piles measurements must be able to draw
conclusions# about the ultimate failure load.
(4)Tensile pile test should be carried out to failure
(as brittle failure can occur).
However, it should be understood that it is not always
necessary to bring trial piles to failure: the common practice
of deriving the ultimate failure load by extrapolating the
load-displacement
load
displacement curve can be used.
used. (Frank et al. 2004)
#
CPGEC7course(Goh)
25
7.5.2.2 Trial piles

(1)P The number of trial piles required to verify the design shall depend on the
following:
the ground conditions and their variability across the site;
the Geotechnical Category of the structure, if appropriate;
previous documented evidence of the performance of the same type of pile in
similar ground conditions;
the total number and types of pile in the foundation design.
(2)P The ground conditions at the test site shall be investigated thoroughly. The
d th off borings
depth
b i
or field
fi ld tests
t t shall
h ll be
b sufficient
ffi i t to
t ascertain
t i the
th nature
t
off the
th ground
d
both around and beneath the pile tip. All strata likely to contribute significantly to pile
behaviour shall be investigated.
(3)P The method used for the installation of the trial piles shall be fully documented
in accordance with 7.9.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
26
7.5.2.3 Working Pile

(2)P Test load must be at least equal to the design load for the foundation.
foundation
7.5.3 Dynamic load tests

(1) Dynamic load tests may be used to estimate the compressive
resistance provided an adequate site investigation has been carried out
and the method has been calibrated against static load tests on the same
t
type
off pile,
il off similar
i il length
l
th and
d cross-section,
ti
and
d in
i comparable
bl soilil
conditions, (see 7.6.2.4 to 7.6.2.6).
(2)P If more than one type of dynamic test is used, the results of different
types of dynamic test shall always be considered in relation to each other.
(3) Dynamic load tests may also be used as an indicator of the
consistency of the piles and to detect weak piles.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
27
7.5.4 Load test report

(1)P It shall be specified that a factual report shall be written for all load
tests. Where appropriate, this report shall include:
a description of the site;
the ground conditions with reference to ground investigations;
the pile type;
description
d
i ti off the
th pile
il installation
i t ll ti and
d off any problems
bl
encountered
t d
during the works;
a description of the loading and measuring apparatus and the reaction
system;
calibration documents for the load cells, the jacks and the gauges;
the installation records of the test piles;
p
;
photographic records of the pile and the test site;
test results in numerical form;
time
time-displacement
displacement plots for each applied load when a step loading
procedure is used;
the measured load-displacement behaviour;
reasons for any departures from the above requirements .
CPGEC7course(Goh)
28
Limit states ((axially

y loaded p
piles)) Clause 7.6.1.1(1)P
( )
ULS of compressive or tensile failure of a single pile
ULS of compressive or tensile failure of the pile
foundation as a whole
ULS of collapse or severe damage to a supported
structure caused by excessive displacement or
differential displacements of the pile foundation
SLS in the supported structure caused by displacement
of the piles
p
CPGEC7course(Goh)
29
Ultimate compression limit state (Clause 7.6.1.1(3))

It is often difficult to define an ultimate limit state from a
load settlement plot. Settlement of the pile head = 10% of
pile base diameter is used as the failure
failure criterion.
criterion
Serviceability Limit State (Clause 2.4.8(2))

Partial factors normally taken as 1.0
Serviceability of supported structure
- Clause 7
7.6.4.1
6 4 1 (2) Note
For piles bearing in medium-to-dense soils and for tension
piles, the safety requirements for the ultimate limit state
design are normally sufficient to prevent a serviceability limit
state in the supported structure.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
30
7.6.2 Compressive ground resistance

7.6.2.1 General
(1)P To demonstrate that the pile foundation will support the design load
with
i h adequate
d
safety
f
against
i
compressive
i ffailure,
il
the
h ffollowing
ll i iinequality
li
shall be satisfied for all ultimate limit state load cases and load
combinations:
Fc;d Rc;d
Fc;d = design axial compression load on a pile
or a group of piles
Rc;d = compressive resistance
CPGEC7course(Goh)
31
(3)P For piles in groups, two failure mechanisms shall be

taken into account:
compressive resistance failure of the piles individually;
compressive resistance failure of the piles and the soil
contained between them acting as a block.
The design resistance shall be taken as the lower value
caused by these two mechanisms.
(4) The compressive resistance of the pile group acting as
a block may be calculated by treating the block as a single
pile of large diameter.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
32
(5)P The stiffness and strength of the structure connecting

the piles in the group shall be considered when deriving the
design resistance of the foundation.
(6) If the piles support a stiff structure, advantage may be
taken of the ability of the structure to redistribute load
between the piles. A limit state will occur only if a significant
number of piles fail together; therefore a failure mode
involving only one pile need not be considered.
considered
(7) If the piles support a flexible structure, it should be
assumed that the compressive resistance of the weakest
pile governs the occurrence of a limit state.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
33
(8) Special attention should be given to possible failure of

edge piles caused by inclined or eccentric loads from the
supported structure.
(9)P If the layer in which the piles bear overlies a layer of
weak soil, the effect of the weak layer on the compressive
resistance of the foundation shall be considered.
(10)P The strength of a zone of ground above and below
the pile base shall be taken into account when calculating
the pile base resistance.
NOTE This zone may extend several diameters above and
below the pile base. Any weak ground in this zone has a
relatively large influence on the base resistance.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
34
(11) Punching failure should be considered if weak ground is

present at a depth of less than 4 times the base diameter
below the base of the pile.
(12)P Where the pile base diameter exceeds the shaft
diameter, the possible adverse effect shall be considered.
(13) For open-ended driven tube or box-section piles with
openings of more than 500 mm in any direction,
direction and without
special devices inside the pile to induce plugging, the base
resistance should be limited to the smaller of:
the shearing resistance between the soil plug and the
inside face of the pile;
the base resistance derived using the cross-sectional area
of the base.
base
CPGEC7course(Goh)
35
Compressive Ground Resistance (Clause 7.6.2)
Fc;d Rc;d
Fc;d = design axial compression load on a pile
group
p of p
piles
or a g
Fc;d should include the weight of the pile.

Weight of piles is considered as permanent action.
Rc;d should include the overburden pressure of the soil at the
foundation base
base.
However, these two items may be disregarded if they
pp
y
cancel approximately.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
36
They
y mayy not cancel if: ((a)) downdrag
g is significant,
g
((b)) the
soil is very light, or (c) the pile extends above the ground
surface. (Clause 7.6.2.1(2))
For structures having sufficient stiffness and strength to
transfer loads from weak
weak to strong
strong piles,
piles a reduction
factor of 1.1 may be introduced. Clauses 7.6.2.2(9) and
( ) See Tables A.NA.9 and A.NA.10.
7.6.2.3(7).
Pile base resistance shall take into account the strength
above and below the pile base. Clauses 7.6.2.1(9) to (11).
See Clause 7
7.8
8 for Structural design of piles
CPGEC7course(Goh)
37
Rc;d = compressive resistance, shall be derived either from:
R c;d
R s;k Rb;k
=
+
s
b
or
R c;d
R t;k R s;k + Rb;k

=
=
t
t
Clause 7.6.2.2(14)
Refer to Tables A.NA.6, 7 and 8
Rb
Rs
s
b
t
Partialfactoronshaftresistance
Partial
factor on shaft resistance
Partial factoronbaseresistance
Partial factor on total characteristic
Partialfactorontotalcharacteristic
resistanceRt;k
The left
Th
l f equation
i
i normally
is
ll used
d when
h designing
d i i
by calculation. The right equation is used when
the shaft and base components cannot be
determined separately.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
38
R c;d
R s;k Rb;k
=
+
s
b
R c;d
or
R t;k R s;k + Rb;k

=
=
t
t
Rs
Rb
The differences of the partial factor values

between driven,, bored and CFA p
piles is mainly
y
related to the increasing probability of unexpected
effects during pile installation adversely affecting
the pile bearing capacity (Bauduin 2001).
2001)
SS NA permits the use of different R4

values
l
d
depending
di
on the
th verification
ifi ti
off
SLS (Tables A.NA.6 to 8)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
39
Table A.NA.6 Partial resistance factors (R) for driven piles for the
STR and GEO limit states
Resistance
Symbol
R1
Set
R4 without
explicit
verification
ifi ti
off
SLS A)
R4 with explicit
verification of
SLS A)
Base
Shaft (compression)
b
s
1.0
10
1.0
1.7
15
1.5
1.5
13
1.3
Total/Combined
(compression)
Shaft in tension
1.0
1.7
1.5
s;t
1.0
2.0
1.7
A) The lower values in R4 may be adopted (a) if serviceability is verified by load tests (preliminary
and/or working) carried out on more than 1% of the constructed piles to loads not less than 1.5
ti
times
th representative
the
t ti
l d for
load
f which
hi h they
th
are designed,
d i
d or (b) if settlement
ttl
t is
i explicitly
li itl
predicted by a means no less reliable than in (a), or (c) if settlement at the serviceability limit
state is of no concern.
SS NA permits the use of different R4 values depending on the verification of SLS

With no testing (relying solely on calculation), a higher level of reliability
s needed
eeded in the
t e calculations.
ca cu at o s
is
CPGEC7course(Goh)
40
Table A.NA.7
A NA 7 Partial resistance factors (R) for bored piles for the STR
and GEO limit states
Resistance
Symbol
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
Shaft in tension
R1
Set
R4 without explicit
R4 with explicit
b
s
1.0
1.0
2.0
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.0
2.0
1.7
s;t
1.0
2.0
1.7
A) The lower values in R4 may be adopted (a) if serviceability is verified by load tests (preliminary and/or working)
carried out on more than 1% of the constructed piles to loads not less than 1.5 times the representative load for
which they are designed, or (b) if settlement is explicitly predicted by a means no less reliable than in (a), or (c)
if settlement at the serviceabilityy limit state is of no concern.
SS NA permits the use of different R4 values depending on the verification

of SLS
CPGEC7course(Goh)
41
Table A.NA.8 Partial resistance factors (R) for continuous flight auger
piles for the STR and GEO limit states
CFA p
Resistance
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
Shaft in tension
A)
Symbol
R1
Set
R4 without explicit
p
verification of SLS A)
R4 with explicit
p
b
s
1.0
10
1.0
2.0
16
1.6
1.7
14
1.4
1.0
2.0
1.7
s,t
1.0
2.0
1.7
The lower values in R4 may be adopted (a) if serviceability is verified by load tests
(preliminary and/or working) carried out on more than 1% of the constructed piles to loads not
less than 1.5 times the representative load for which they are designed, or (b) if settlement is
explicitly predicted by a means no less reliable than in (a), or (c) if settlement at the
serviceability limit state is of no concern.
SS NA permits the use of different R4 values depending on the verification

of SLS
CPGEC7course(Goh)
42
Draft Malaysian
(
)
Standard (2011)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
43
Summary of partial factors (NA to SS EN 1997-1:2010)

Combination 1
Combination 2
With explicit
Without explicit
verification of SLS A) verification of SLS A)
A1
Action
Permanent
Variable
Soil
Driven Piles
Bored Piles
& CFA
M1
R1
A2
M1
R4
A2
Unfav
1.35
1.00
1.00
Fav
1.00
1.00
1.00
Unfav
1.50
1.30
1.30
M1
Tan
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
cu
1.00
1.00
1.00
Unit wt.
1.00
1.00
1.00
R4
Base
1.00
1.70
1.50
Shaft (comp)
1.00
1.50
1.30
Total
1.00
1.70
1.50
Base
1.00
2.00
1.70
Shaft (comp)
1.00
1.60
1.40
Total (comp)
1.00
2.00
1.70
The lower values in R4 may be adopted (a) if serviceability is verified by load tests (preliminary and/or working) carried out on
more than 1% of the constructed piles to loads not less than 1.5 times the representative load for which they are designed, or (b) if
settlement is explicitly predicted by a means no less reliable than in (a), or (c) if settlement at the serviceability limit state is of no
concern.
A)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
44
Ultimate compressive resistance by calculation

from Ground Test results
Clause 7.6.2.3.
Two calculation methods:

Model
Model pile
pile:: procedure (Clause 7
7.6.2.3(5)P)
6 2 3(5)P)
Alternative procedure (Clause 7.6.2.3(8))
CPGEC7course(Goh)
45
Ultimate compressive resistance by calculation from

Ground Test results (Clause7.6.2.3(5)P)
Model
Model Pile
Pile method assumes a fictitious pile of the
same cross-section and length as proposed for the project
is installed at the location of each borehole or in-situ test.
The shaft resistance and the base resistance are
calculated for the mean and minimum soil parameters for
each
h borehole
b h l or test
t t profile.
fil The
Th two
t
components
t off the
th
resistance are then divided by a correlation factor
which depends on the number of ground test profiles on
the site.
correlation factor 3 and 4 from Table A.NA.10
CPGEC7course(Goh)
46
Clause 7.6.2.3(5)
R c;k = (Rb;k + R s;k ) =
Model pile method

Rb;cal + R s;cal
)
(R
)
(R
= R c;cal = Min c;cal mean ; c;cal min
3
4
correlation factor 3 and 4 from

depending on number of profiles n
Table
(7.8)
A.NA.10
(Rc;cal )mean = (Rb;cal + R s;cal )mean = (Rb;cal )mean + (R s;cal )mean

(Rc;cal )min = (Rb;cal + R s;cal )min
Table A.NA.10 Correlation factors () to derive characteristic values of the resistance of axially
loaded piles from ground test results (n - number of profiles of tests)
for n =
3
4
1
1.55
1.55
2
1.47
1.39
3
1.42
1.33
4
1.38
1.29
5
1.36
1.26
7
1.33
1.20
10
1.30
1.15
NOTE For structures having sufficient stiffness and strength to transfer loads from ''weak'' to "strong piles,
values of 3 and 4 may be divided by 1.1, provided that 3 is never less than 1.0, see EN 1997-1 7.6.2.3(7).
CPGEC7course(Goh)
47
Ultimate compressive resistance from Ground Test results

Alternative method Ground test results (shear strength,
cone resistance etc) for all test locations are first combined
(assessed) to derive the characteristic values of the base
resistance and shaft resistance in the various strata based on
a cautious assessment of the test results and without
applying the factors . (Clause 7.6.2.3(8))
A model factor is introduced to account for uncertainty of the

calculation results.
results
Model factor = R;d
The value of the model factor should be 1.4, except that it may
be reduced to 1.2 if the resistance is verified by a maintained
load test taken to the calculated,
calculated unfactored ultimate
resistance.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
48
Alternative method
Clause 7
7.6.2.3(8)
6 2 3(8)
The characteristic values may be obtained by calculating:

Rb;k = Ab qb;k and
Rs;k = As;i qs;i;k
(7.9)
where qb;k and qs;i;k are characteristic values of base resistance and shaft
friction in the various strata i, obtained from values of ground parameters.
NOTE If this alternative procedure is applied, the values of the partial
factors b and s recommended in Annex A may need to be corrected by a
model factor larger than 1.0.
1 0 The value of the model factor may be set by
the National annex.
This is the most common method for pile design in UK.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
49
NA to SS EN 1997-1:2010
A.3.3.2
Partial resistance factors for pile foundations
For verifications of the structural (STR) and geotechnical (GEO) limit states of pile foundations, the
values of the partial factors on resistance (R) should be those given in Table A.NA.6, Table A.NA.7 and
Table A.NA.8. These values are used to convert characteristic resistances to design values for ultimate
li it state
limit
t t calculations.
l l ti
Th apply
They
l irrespective
i
ti off the
th process by
b which
hi h the
th characteristic
h
t i ti resistances
i t
are derived.
Characteristic resistances mayy be derived from static load tests using

g EN 1997-1
7.6.2.2 (7.6.3.2 for tensile loading), or from ground test results using EN 1997-1
Equations 7.8 or 7.9 (7.17 or 7.18 for tensile loading). When the approach of
Equations 7.9 or 7.18 is used to derive the characteristic resistances, a model
factor should be applied to the shaft and base resistance calculated using
characteristic values of soil properties by a method complying with EN 1997 -1,
2.4.1(6). The value of the model factor should be 1.4, except that it may be
reduced to 1.2 if the resistance is verified by a maintained load test taken to the
calculated, unfactored ultimate resistance.
Model factor = R;d
Rb;k = Ab qb;k and
Rs;k = As;i qs;i;k

CPGEC7course(Goh)
(7.9)
50
More than one

profile of g
p
ground
test data?
Yes
Number of profiles = n
Calculate characteristic pile

resistance from this single
profile of ground properties.
Apply model factor R;d
R d.
Apply partial factors b and
s to determine design
resistance Rc,d
c d.
correlation
l ti factor
f t 3 and
d 4
from Table A.NA.10
depending on n
Calculate characteristic pile

resistance for the different
profiles;
Determine minimum to be
characteristic resistance
Rc;cal.
Apply partial factors b and
s to
t determine
d t
i design
d i
resistance Rc;d.
No
Rb;k =
A bqb;k
A s;iqs;k;i
; R s;k =
R;d
R;d
R c;d
Rb;k R s;k
=
+
b
s
CPGEC7course(Goh)
51
Ultimate compressive resistance from static

load tests (Clause 7.6.2.2(8)P)
(R )
(R )
Rc;k = Min c;m mean ; c;m min
1
2
Table A.NA.9 Correlation factors () to derive characteristic values of the resistance of

axially loaded piles from static pile load tests (n - number of tested piles)
for n =
1.55
1.47
1.42
1.38
1.35
1.55
1.35
1.23
1.15
1.08
values 1 and 2 may be divided by 1.1, provided that 1 is never less than 1.0, see EN 1997-1 7.6.2.2(9).
Usually applies to trial (preliminary) piles and the results

of tests on these piles are used to design the working
piles
piles.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
52
7.6.2.2 Compressive ground resistance from static load

tests
(2)P Trial piles to be tested in advance shall be installed in

the same manner as the piles that will form the foundation
and shall be founded in the same stratum.
(3) If the diameter of the trial pile differs from that of the
working
ki piles,
il
th possible
the
ibl difference
diff
i performance
in
f
off piles
il
of different diameters should be considered in assessing the
compressive resistance to be adopted.
adopted
CPGEC7course(Goh)
53
(4) In the case of a very large diameter pile, it is often

impractical to carry out a load test on a full size trial pile.
Load tests on smaller diameter trial piles may be considered
provided that:
the ratio of the trial pile diameter/working pile diameter is
not less than 0.5;;
the smaller diameter trial pile is fabricated and installed in
the same way as the piles used for the foundation;
the trial pile is instrumented in such a manner that the
base and shaft resistance can be derived separately
f
from
the
h measurements.
This approach should be used with caution for open-ended
open ended driven piles
because of the influence of the diameter on the mobilisation of the
compressive resistance of a soil plug in the pile.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
54
(5)P In the case of a pile foundation subjected to downdrag,

the pile resistance at failure,
failure or at a displacement that equals
the criterion for the verification of the ultimate limit state
determined from the load test results, shall be corrected. The
correction shall be achieved by subtracting the measured, or
the most unfavourable, positive shaft resistance in the
compressible stratum and in the strata above, where
negative skin friction develops, from the loads measured at
the pile head.
head
(6) During the load test of a pile subject to downdrag, positive
shaft friction will develop along the total length of the pile and
should be considered in accordance with 7.3.2.2(6). The
maximum test load applied to the working pile should be in
excess of the sum of the design external load plus twice the
downdrag force.
force
CPGEC7course(Goh)
55
(10)P The systematic and random components of the

variations in the ground shall be recognised in the
interpretation of pile load tests.
(11)P The
Th records
d off the
th installation
i t ll ti
off the
th test
t t pile(s)
il ( ) shall
h ll
be checked and any deviation from the normal execution
conditions shall be accounted for.
for
CPGEC7course(Goh)
56
An important requirement stated in Eurocode 7 is

that the interpretation of the results of the pile load
tests must take into account the variability of the
ground over the site and the variability due to
deviation from the normal method of pile installation.
In other words, there must be a careful examination
of the results of the ground investigation and of the
pile load tests results. The results of the pile load
tests might lead, for example, to different
homogeneous parts of the site being identified,
each with its own particular characteristic pile
compressive resistance. (Frank et al. 2004)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
57
Ultimate compressive resistance from dynamic impact tests/pile

driving formulae/wave equation analysis (Clause 7.6.2.4 to 7.6.2.6)
(R )
(R )
5
6
Table A.NA.11 Correlation factors ( ) to derive characteristic values of the

resistance of axially loaded piles from dynamic impact tests (n - number of tested
piles)
for n =
5
6
2
1.94
1.90
5
1.85
1.76
10
1.83
1.70
15
1.82
1.67
20
1.81
1.66
NOTE 1 The - values may be multiplied with a model factor of 0.85 when using dynamic impact tests with
signal
i
l matching.
t hi
NOTE 2 The - values should be multiplied with a model factor of 1.10 when using a pile driving formula with
measurement of the quasi-elastic pile head displacement during the impact.
NOTE 3 The - values should be multiplied with a model factor of 1.20 when using a pile driving formula
without measurement of the quasi-elastic pile head displacement during the impact.
NOTE 4 If different piles exist in the foundation
foundation, groups of similar piles should be considered separately when
selecting the number n of test piles.
The blow counts used in pile driving should be obtained from driving
records of at least five piles (Clause 7.6.2.5(4)).
CPGEC7course(Goh)
58
Pile Load test method

PileLoadtestmethod
staticloadtests
Rc;m andn
profiles
fil 1,2
Applyb,s ort
Rc;d
TableA.NA.9and
T bl A NA 6
TableA.NA.6
dynamic impact Rc;m andn

tests,piledriving
,p
g p
profiles5,,6
formulae, wave
equation
Applyb,s ort
Rc;d
TableA.NA.11
andTableA.NA.6
G
Groundtestmethod
dt t
th d
alternative
method (single
method(single
profile)
Applymodel
factor R;d
factor
to
R d,to
obtainRc;k
Applyb,s
Rc;dd
TableA.NA.6
modelpile
method
(nprofiles)
Rc;cal andn
profiles3,4
Applyb,s
Rc;d
TableA.NA.10
andTableA.NA.6
CPGEC7course(Goh)
59
Summary of correlation factors (NA to SS EN 1997-1:2010)
No.of
tests
staticloadtests
groundtests
mean
min.
mean
min
1.55
1.55
1.55
1.55
1 47
1.47
1 35
1.35
1 47
1.47
1 39
1.39
1.42
1.23
1.42
1.33
1.38
1.15
1.38
1.29
1.35
1.08
1.36
1.26
1 33
1.33
1 20
1.20
10
1.30
1.15
CPGEC7course(Goh)
dynamictests
No.of
tests
mean
min.
---
---
---
2-4
2
4
1 94
1.94
1 90
1.90
5-9
1.85
1.76
10-14
1.83
1.70
15-19
1.82
1.67
20
1.81
1.66
60
The SS NA (and BS NA) provide larger correlation factors to

those given in Annex A of SS EN 1997-1 : 2010.
According to Bauduin (2001), the correlation factors are
based on a reference value of about 10% for the COV of the
pile compressive resistance. For the COV less than 10%,
the mean of the resistance should govern the design,
whereas for COV greater than 10%, the lowest resistance
should govern. See Example 2.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
61
Example 1A (Axially loaded pile in clay single profile of

P
ground test data)
Piletype
Boredpile
Pilelength(m)
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
cu;k (kPa)characteristicvalue
( )
100
Skinfriction
0.5
Soil unitweight(kN/m
unit weight (kN/m3)
20
Permanentverticalload(kN)
1000
Variableverticalload(kN)
200
Rs
Rb
Alternative method
Note: For simplicity, Self Weight of pile is omitted in the

calculations
CPGEC7course(Goh)
62
Example 1A
Pil t
Piletype
Pilelength(m)
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
(kPa) characteristic value
100
Skinfriction
0.5
unitweight(kN/m3)
20
Permanent vertical load (kN)

1000
200
Soil
B d il
Boredpile
Rs
Rb
Design Action (A1)
A1
Design
g vertical action
Fc;d = 1000 x 1.35 + 200 x 1.5 = 1650 kN
G;dst
1.35
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.5
cu
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Material Factors (M1)

Pil t
Piletype
63
Example 1A
cu = 1.0, cu = cu;k
B d il
Boredpile
A1
Pilelength(m)
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
G;dst
1.35
100
G;stb
G
1.0
Skinfriction
1.5
0.5
Q;dst
unitweight(kN/m3)
20
cu

1000
200
Soil
M1
M1
Rs
1.0
Rb
Design Resistance (R1)

Pile base resistance = 9cu
Pile shaft friction = cu = 0.5cu
From Table A.NA.7 (Bored piles)
Base resistance Rb = 9cuAb = 9(100)( x 0.62/4)

= 254 kN
Shaft resistanc Rs = 0.5cuAs = 0.5(100)(0.6 x 30)
= 2827 kN
Compressive Resistance Rc;d = Rb;d + Rs;d
CPGEC7course(Goh)
R1
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.0
10
1.0
1.0
64
Example 1A
Base resistance Rb = 9cuAb = 9(100)( x 0.62/4) = 254 kN

Shaft resistanc Rs = 0.5c
0 5cuAs = 0.5(100)(0.6
0 5(100)(0 6 x 30) = 2827 kN
(A.3.3.2) For pile design from ground parameters, partial factors have to
be corrected by a Model Factor R;d = 1.4
14

= (254/1.4
(254/1 4 x 1
1.0)
0) + (2827/1.4
(2827/1 4 x 1
1.0)
0) = 2201 kN
Over design factor = Rc;dd / Fc;dd = 2201 / 1650 = 1.33 > 1
Over-design
OK
Rb;k =
A bqb;k
;
R;d
R c;d =
R s;k =
A s;iqs;k;i
R;d
Rb;k R s;k
+
b
s
R1
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(
(compression)
i )
b
s
1.0
1.0
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
65
Example 1A
Pil t
Piletype
Pilelength(m)
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
cu;k (kPa)
100
Skinfriction
0.5
unitweight(kN/m3)
20

1000
200
Soil
B d il
Boredpile
Rs
Rb
Design Action (A2)
A2
Design
g vertical action
Fc;d = 1000 x 1.0 + 200 x 1.3 = 1260 kN
CPGEC7course(Goh)
G;dst
1.0
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.3
cu
M1
1.0
66
A2
cu = 1.0, cu = cu;k
G;dst
1.0
B d il
Boredpile
G;stb
1.0
Pilelength(m)
30
Q;dst
1.3
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
cu;k (kPa)
100
cu
Skinfriction
0.5
Pil t
Piletype
unitweight(kN/m3)
20

1000
200
Soil
1.0

R4 with explicit

A)
Example 1A
M1
Base
Shaft
((compression)
p
)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.7
1.4
1.7
The lower values in R4 may be adopted (a) if serviceability

is verified by load tests (preliminary and/or working) carried
out on more than 1% of the constructed piles to loads not less
than 1.5 times the representative load for which they are
designed, or (b) if settlement is explicitly predicted by a means
no less reliable than in (a),
(a) or (c) if settlement at the
serviceability limit state is of no concern.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
67
Example 1A

Shaft resistanc Rs = 0.5cuAs = 0.5(100)(0.6 x 20) = 2827 kN
Compressive Resistance with SLS verification
Compressive Resistance Rc;dd = Rb;d

b d + Rs;d
d
= 254/(1.7 x 1.4) + 2827/( 1.4 x 1.4)
= 254/(2.38) + 2827/(1.96) = 1549 kN
Over-design factor = Rc;d / Fc;d = 1549 / 1260 = 1.23 > 1
OK
Rb;k =
A bqb;k
;
R;d
R c;d
R s;k =
A s;iqs;k;i
R;d
R
R
= b;k + s;k
b
s
R4 with explicit
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
b
s
1.7
1
7
1.4
1.7
68
Example 1A

Shaft resistanc Rs = 0.5c
0 5cuAs = 0.5(100)(0.6
0 5(100)(0 6 x 20) = 2827 kN
be corrected byy a Model Factor R;d = 1.4
Compressive Resistance without SLS verification

= 254/(2.0 x 1.4) + 2827/( 1.6 x 1.4)
= 254/(2.8) + 2827/(2.24) = 1353 kN
OK
R4 without explicit
Base
B
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(
(compression)
i )
b
s
2.0
2
0
1.6
2.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Comparison with conventional FS
69
Example 1A

Applied vertical load = 1000 + 200 = 1200 kN
FS =
or
254 + 2827
= 2.57
1200
Qallowable =
254 2827
+
= 1969 > 1200 kN
3
1.5
Qallowable =
254 2827
+
= 1498 > 1200 kN
3
2.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
70
Comparison with conventional FS (Bored piles)
Qb
Qs
+
Qallowable =
3 1 .5 ~ 2 .0
Combination 2: A2 + M1 + R4 (with model factor = 1.4)
Rc;d = Qb/(1.7 x 1.4) + Qs/(1.4 x 1.4) = Qb/(2.38) + Qs/(1.96)
Rc;d = Qb/(2.0.x 1.4) + Qs/(1.6 x 1.4) = Qb/(2.8) + Qs/(2.24)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
71
Example 1B (Axially loaded pile in clay single profile

P
of ground test data)
Piletype
Boredpile
Pilelength(m)
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
cu;k; (kPa)characteristicvalue
100
Skinfriction
0.5
Soil unitweight(kN/m3)
20

800
400
Rs
Rb
Note: Self Weight of pile is omitted in the calculations
Effects of Load Combinations (Only Combination

2 is considered in this example)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
72
Example 1B
Pil t
Piletype
Pilelength(m)
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
cu;k (kPa)
100
Skinfriction
0.5
unitweight(kN/m3)
20

800
400
Soil
B d il
Boredpile
Rs
Rb
Design Action (A2)
A2
Design
g vertical action
Fc;d = 800 x 1.0 + 400 x 1.3 = 1320 kN
G;dst
1.0
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.3
cu
M1
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
73
A2
cu = 1.0, cu = cu;k
G;dst
1.0
B d il
Boredpile
G;stb
1.0
Pilelength(m)
30
Q;dst
1.3
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
cu;k (kPa)
100
cu
Skinfriction
0.5
Pil t
Piletype
unitweight(kN/m3)
20

800
400
Soil
M1
1.0

R4 with explicit

A)
Base
Shaft
((compression)
p
)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.7
1.4
1.7
The lower values in R4 may be adopted (a) if serviceability is verified

by load tests (preliminary and/or working) carried out on more than 1%
of the constructed piles to loads not less than 1.5
1 5 times the
representative load for which they are designed, or (b) if settlement is
explicitly predicted by a means no less reliable than in (a), or (c) if
settlement at the serviceability limit state is of no concern.
Example 1B
CPGEC7course(Goh)
74
Example 1B

Compressive Resistance Rc;dd = Rb;d

b d + Rs;d
d
= 254/(1.7 x 1.4) + 2827/( 1.4 x 1.4)
= 254/(2.38) + 2827/(1.96) = 1549 kN
OK
Rb;k =
A bqb;k
;
R;d
R c;d =
R s;k
A s;iqs;k;i
=
R;d
Rb;k R s;k
+
b
s
R4 with explicit
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.7
1
7
1.4
1.7
CPGEC7course(Goh)
75
Comparison of Example 1A and 1B (Combination 2)

Effects of Load Combinations (Only Combination 2 is
considered in this example)
Example 1A
Example 1B
Permanent vertical
load (kN)
Variable vertical load
(kN)
Over-design
Over
design factor
1000
800
200
400
1.23
1.17
Design Length (m) for

=1.0
23.98
25.23
CPGEC7course(Goh)
76
Example 1C (Axially loaded pile in sand single profile

P
of ground test data)
Piletype
1m
Boredpile
Pilelength(m)
18
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
k characteristicvalue
BearingcapacityfactorNq
35o
49
Pileinterfacefriction
35o
Soil unitweight(kN/m
unit weight (kN/m3)
20
1000
200
Rs
18 m
Rb
Note: Self
Weight of pile is
omitted in the
calculations
A1
Design Action (A1)
Design
g vertical action
Fc;d = 1000 x 1.35 + 200 x 1.5 = 1650 kN
G;dst
1.35
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
Qdt
1.5
cu
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Piletype
Boredpile
Pilelength(m)
18
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
k characteristicvalue
BearingcapacityfactorNq
35o
49
Pileinterfacefriction
il i
f
fi i
35o
20
M1
77
K0 = (1 sin)
Example 1C
1m
Rs
18 m
D i R
Design
Resistance
i t
(R1)
R
b
Pile base resistance = qb = Nqvb(Ab)
piles))
Pile shaft friction = qs =
h,averagetan(As) From Table A.NA.7 ((Bored p
R1
vb = 20x1 + 17(20 w) = 190 kPa

h,average= 0.5vb(1 sin)
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.0
10
1.0
1.0
Base resistance Rb = 49(vb)( x 0.62/4)

Shaft resistance Rs = 0.5
0 5vbb(1 sin
sin)tan(0
)tan(0.6
6 x 18)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
78
Example 1C
Base resistance Rb = 49(vb)( x 0.62/4) = 2632 kN

)
(
x 18)) = 962 kN
Shaft resistanc Rs = 0.5vb((1 sin)tan(0.6
be corrected by a Model Factor R;d
R d = 1.4

= (2632/1.4
(2632/1 4 x 1
1.0)
0) + (962/1.4
(962/1 4 x 1
1.0)
0) = 2567 kN
Over design factor = Rc;dd / Fc;dd = 2567 / 1650 = 1.56 > 1
Over-design
OK
Rb;k
A q
= b b;k ;
R;d
R s;k
A s;iqs;k;i
=
R;d
R c;d =
Rb;k R s;k
+
b
s
R1
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(
(compression)
i )
b
s
1.0
1.0
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
79
Example 1C
Pil t
Piletype
B d il
Boredpile
1000
200
A2
Design Action (A2)
G;dst
1.0
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.3
cu
M1
1.0
Design vertical action

Fc;d = 1000 x 1.0 + 200 x 1.3 = 1260 kN
CPGEC7course(Goh)
80

Shaft resistanc Rs = 0.5vb(1 sin)tan(0.6 x 18) = 962 kN
Example 1C

Compressive
p
Resistance Rc;d = Rb;d + Rs;d
= 2632/(1.7 x 1.4) + 962/( 1.4 x 1.4)
= 2632/(2.38) + 962/(1.96) = 1597 kN
OK
Rb;k =
A bqb;k
;
R;d
R c;d
R s;k
A s;iqs;k;i
=
R;d
R
R
= b;k + s;k
b
s
R4 with explicit
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.7
1
7
1.4
1.7
CPGEC7course(Goh)
81

Example 1C

= 2632/(2.0 x 1.4) + 962/( 1.6 x 1.4)
= 2632/(2.8) + 962/(2.24) = 1369 kN
OK
R4 without explicit
Base
B
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(
(compression)
i )
CPGEC7course(Goh)
b
s
2.0
2
0
1.6
2.0
82
Example 1C
Comparison with conventional FS

Applied vertical load = 1000 + 200 = 1200 kN
FS =
or
2632 + 962
= 3.00
1200
Qallowable =
2632 962
+
= 1519 > 1200
3
1 .5
kN
Qallowable =
2632 962
+
= 1358 > 1200
3
2 .0
kN
CPGEC7course(Goh)
83
Example 2 (Axially loaded pile in clay data from 3

P
boreholes)
Piletype
Boredpile
Pilelength(m)
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
cu (kPa)BH1
(kPa) BH1
100
cu (kPa)BH2
110
cu (kPa)BH3
(kPa) BH3
130
Skinfriction
0.5
g
Soil unitweight
3
(kN/m )
20
Permanentvertical
l d (kN)
load(kN)
1000
Variablevertical
load(kN)
( )
200
Rs
Rb
Note: Self Weight of pile is
omitted in the calculations
M d l pile
Model
il method
th d
CPGEC7course(Goh)
84
Example 2
P
Design Action (A1)
Rs
Design
g vertical action
Fc;d = 1000 x 1.35 + 200 x 1.5
= 1650 kN
Rb
A1
cu = 1.0, cu = cu;k
G;dst
1.35
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.5
cu
M1
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Clause 7.6.2.3(5)
Rc;k = (Rb;k + R s;k ) =
85
Example 2
Model pile method

Rb;cal + R s;cal
)
(R
)
(R
= Rc;cal = Min c;cal mean ; c;cal min
3
4
(7.8)
correlation factor 3 and 4 from Table A.NA.10 depending on number of profiles n
(Rc;cal )mean = (Rb;cal + R s;cal )mean = (Rb;cal )mean + (R s;cal )mean

(Rc;cal )min = (Rb;cal + R s;cal )min
Table A.NA.10 Correlation factors () to derive characteristic values of the resistance of axially
loaded piles from ground test results(n - number of profiles of tests)
for n =
3
4
1
1.55
1.55
2
1.47
1.39
3
1.42
1.33
4
1.38
1.29
5
1.36
1.26
7
1.33
1.20
10
1.30
1.15
values of 3 and 4 may be divided by 1.1, provided that 3 is never less than 1.0, see EN 1997-1 7.6.2.3(7).
CPGEC7course(Goh)
86

cu (kPa)BH1
100
cu (kPa)BH2
110
cu (kPa)BH3
130
Skinfriction
0.5
Base resistance Rb = 9cuAb = 9(cu)( x 0.62/4)

Shaft resistanc Rs = 0.5cuAs = 0.5(cu)(0.6 x 30)
Rc;cal = Rb;d + Rs;d

BH cu (kPa)
BH1
100
BH2
BH3
Rb (kN)
254
110
130
280
331
Rs (kN)
2827
Example 2
R1
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.0
1.0
1.0
Rc;cal (kN)
3081
3110
3676
3390
4007
CPGEC7course(Goh)

BH
cu (kPa)
Rb (kN)

Rs (kN)
Rc;cal (kN)
BH1
100
254
2827
3081
BH2
110
280
3110
3390
BH3
130
331
3676
4007
87
Example 2
(Rc;cal)mean = (3081+3390+4007)/3 = 3483 kN

(Rc;cal)min = 3081 kN
Rc;k = (Rb;k + R s;k ) =
Rb;cal + R s;cal
)
(R
)
(R
= Rc;call = Min c;cal mean ; c;cal min
3
4
CPGEC7course(Goh)
88
Example 2
Table A.NA.10
(Rc;cal)mean = 3483 kN
Rc;k = (Rb;k + R s;k ) =
Rb;cal + R s;cal
)
(R
)
(R
3
4
= Min {(3483/1.42) ; (3081/1.33)} = Min {2436; 2317} = 2317 kN

BH
cu (kPa)
Rb (kN)
Rs (kN)
Rc;cal (kN)
BH1
100
254
2827
3081
BH2
110
280
3110
3390
BH3
130
331
3676
4007
BH1 gives minimum
R1
Rs;k = 2827/1.33 kN
Rb;k = 254/1.33 kN
Rc;d = Rb;k/b + Rs;k/s = 2317 kN

CPGEC7course(Goh)
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.0
1.0
1.0
89
Example 2
Note: The lowest value is the lowest of the total compressive

p
resistance, and not a combination of the lowest base
compressive resistance and the lowest shaft friction
d d
deduced
d from
f
another
th test.
t t
Rc;k = (Rb;k + R s;k ) =
Rb;cal + R s;cal
)
(R
)
(R
3
4
Rc;dd = Rb;k
b k/b + Rs;k
k/s = 2317 kN
Fc;d = 1000 x 1.35 + 200 x 1.5 = 1650 kN
Over-design factor = 2317 / 1650 = 1.40
1 40 > 1
OK
CPGEC7course(Goh)
90
Example 2
P
Design Action (A2)
Rs

Fc;dd = 1000 x 1.0 + 200 x 1.3
= 1260 kN
Rb
A2
cu = 1.0, cu = cu;k
G;dst
1.0
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.3
cu
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
91
Example 2
A2
Pil t
Piletype
cu = 1.0, cu = cu;k
B d il
Boredpile
Pilelength(m)
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
cu;k (kPa)
100
Skinfriction
0.5
20

1000
200
M1
G;dst
1.0
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.3
cu
M1
1.0

R4 with
ith explicit
li it

A)
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.7
14
1.4
1.7
The lower values in R4 may be adopted (a) if serviceability is verified

by load tests (preliminary and/or working) carried out on more than 1%
of the constructed piles to loads not less than 1.5
1 5 times the
representative load for which they are designed, or (b) if settlement is
explicitly predicted by a means no less reliable than in (a), or (c) if
settlement at the serviceability limit state is of no concern.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
92
Example 2
Rc;cal = Rb + Rs
BH
cu
(kPa)
Rb
(kN)
Rs
(kN)
Rc;cal (kN)
BH1
100
254
2827
3081
BH2
110
280
3110
3390
BH3
130
331
3676
4007
(Rc;cal)mean = (3081+3390+4007)/3 = 3493 kN

Rc;k = (Rb;k + R s;k ) =
Rb;cal + R s;cal
)
(R
)
(R
3
4
CPGEC7course(Goh)
93
Example 2
Table A.NA.10
(Rc;cal)mean = 3493 kN
Rc;k = (Rb;k + R s;k ) =
Rb;cal + R s;cal
)
(R
)
(R
3
4
= Min
Mi {(3493/1.42
1 42) ; (3081/1.33
1 33)} = Min
Mi {2443
{2443; 2317} = 2317 kN
BH
cu (kPa)
Rb (kN)
Rs (kN)
BH1
100
254
2827
3081
BH2
110
280
3110
3390
BH3
130
331
3676
4007
Rs;k = 2827/1.33 kN
Rc;cal (kN)
BH1 gives minimum
R4 with explicit
Rb;k = 254/1.33 kN
Rc;d = Rs;k/b + Rb;k/s

= 2827/(1.33 x 1.4) + 254/(1.33 x 1.7)
= 1631 kN
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
b
s
1.7
1.4
17
1.7
94
Example 2

Rc;d = Rs;k/b + Rb;k/s = 2827/(1.33x1.4) + 254/(1.33x1.7)

= 2827/(1.86) + 254/(2.26) = 1631 kN
Fc;d = 1000 x 1.0
1 0 + 200 x 1.3
1 3 = 1260 kN
Over-design factor = 1631 / 1260 = 1.29 > 1
OK
R4 with explicit
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.7
1.4
17
1.7
CPGEC7course(Goh)
95
Example 2
Rc;d = Rs;k/b + Rb;k/s = 2827/(1.33x1.6) + 254/(1.33x2.0)

= 2827/(2.13) + 254/(2.66) = 1423 kN
Fc;d = 1000 x 1.0
1 0 + 200 x 1.3
1 3 = 1260 kN
OK
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
R4 without explicit
b
s
2.0
1.6
1.7
96
According to Bauduin (2001), the correlation factors are

based on a reference value of about 10% for the COV of the
pile compressive resistance. For the COV less than 10%,
the mean of the resistance should govern the design,
whereas for COV greater than 10%,
10% the lowest resistance
should govern.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Example 3 (Axially loaded pile in

clay data from 4 static pile load
tests, tested to failure)
Piletype
30
Pilewidth(m)
0.6
PileTest #1Rm (kN)
4000
PileTest #2Rm (kN)
4200
PileTest #3Rm (kN)
4500
PileTest #4Rm (kN)
5000
Permanentvertical
l d (kN)
load(kN)
1000
Variablevertical
load(kN)
( )
200
Rs
Boredpile
Pile length (m)

Pilelength(m)
97
Rb
Note: Self Weight of pile is omitted in
the calculations
CPGEC7course(Goh)
98
Example 3
P
Design Action (A1)

Fc;d = 1000 x 1.35 + 200 x 1.5
= 1650 kN
Rs
Rb
A1
G;dst
1.35
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.5
cu
M1
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
99
Example 3
Ultimate compressive resistance from static load tests

(Clause 7.6.2.2)
(R )
(R )
1
2
Table A.NA.9 Correlation factors () to derive characteristic values of the resistance of

axially loaded piles from static pile load tests (n - number of tested piles)
for n =
1.55
1.47
1.42
1.38
1.35
1.55
1.35
1.23
1.15
1.08
CPGEC7course(Goh)
100
PileTest #1Rm (kN)
4000
Pil T t #2R
PileTest
#2 Rm (kN)
4200
PileTest #3Rm (kN)
4500
Pile Test #4R

PileTest
#4 Rm (kN)
5000
Example 3
(Rc;m)mean = (4000+4200+4500+5000)/4 = 4425 kN

(Rc;m)min = 4000 kN
(R )
(R )
= Min {(4425/1.38)
{(4425/1 38) ; (4000/1.15)}
(4000/1 15)} = Min {3207; 3478}
= 3207 kN
Table A.NA.9
for n =
1.55
1.47
1.42
1.38
1.35
1.55
1.35
1.23
1.15
1.08
CPGEC7course(Goh)
101
Example 3
Rc;d = 3207 kN
Fc;d = 1000 x 1.35 + 200 x 1.5 = 1650 kN
OK
R1
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
b
s
1.0
1.0
1.0
102
Example 3
P
Design Action (A2)

Fc;d = 1000 x 1.0 + 200 x 1.3
= 1260 kN
Rs
Rb
A2
G;dst
1.0
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.3
cu
1.0
CPGEC7course(Goh)
M1
103
PileTest #1Rm (kN)
4000
Pil T t #2R
PileTest
#2 Rm (kN)
4200
PileTest #3Rm (kN)
4500
Pile Test #4R

PileTest
#4 Rm (kN)
5000
Example 3
(Rc;m)mean = (4000+4200+4500+5000)/4 = 4425 kN

(Rc;m)min = 4000 kN
= Min {(
{(4425/1.38)) ; (4000/1.15)}
(
)} = Min {{3207; 3478}}
= 3207 kN
Table A.NA.9
for n =
1.55
1.47
1.42
1.38
1.35
1.55
1.35
1.23
1.15
1.08
CPGEC7course(Goh)
104
Example 3
Rc;k = 3207 kN
Compressive Resistance Rc;d = 3207/(1.7) = 1886 kN

Fc;d = 1000 x 1.0 + 200 x 1.3 = 1260 kN
Over-design
O
d i factor
f t = 1886 / 1260 = 1.50
1 50 > 1
OK
R4 with explicit
Base
B
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(
(compression)
i )
b
s
1.7
1
7
1.4
1.7
CPGEC7course(Goh)
105
Example 3
Rc;k = 3207 kN
Compressive Resistance Rc;d = 3207/(2.0) = 1604 kN

Fc;d = 1000 x 1.0 + 200 x 1.3 = 1260 kN
Over-design
O
d i factor
f t = 1604 / 1260 = 1.27
1 27 > 1
OK
R4 without explicit
Base
B
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(
(compression)
i )
CPGEC7course(Goh)
b
s
2.0
2
0
1.6
2.0
106
Pile subjected to Downdrag (Negative skin friction)

Clause 7.3.2.1(3)P
Two
o app
approaches:
oac es
(a) the ground displacement is treated as an action. An
interaction analysis (e.g., t-z method) is then carried out to
determine the forces, displacements and strains in the pile;
(b) an upper bound to the force, which the ground could
pile shall be introduced as the design
g action.
transmit to the p
Downdrag is considered a permanent action
CPGEC7course(Goh)
107
Example 4
Example 4 (Pile subjected to Downdrag)

P
Piletype
surcharge
Boredpile
Pilewidth(m)
0.3
downdrag skinfrictionqD;k
(kPa)characteristicvalue
20
stiffclayskinfrictionqs;k
50
300
FD
5 m soft clay
Rs
18 m stiff clay
y
Rb
A surcharge is placed at ground level after pile installation, causing settlement of
the soft clay and downdrag FD (negative skin friction) on the pile. The base
resistance Rb is assumed to be negligible.
Note: For simplicity, Self Weight of pile is omitted in the calculations
Any
y variable action may
y usually
y be ignored
g
((Clause 7.3.2.2(7))
( ))
In most cases, downdrag is only relevant for SLS
E
Example
l M
Modified
difi d ffrom Simpson
Si
&D
Driscoll
i
ll (1998) E
Eurocode
d 7 a commentary
t
CPGEC7course(Goh)
108
Example 4
Piletype
il
Boredpile
d il
Pilewidth(m)
0.3
(kP ) h
i i
l
20
50
surcharge
FD
5 m soft clay
18 m stiff clay
y
Rs
300
Rb
The interaction between the pile shaft and the soft clay should take into
account the relative movement of the pile and the soil eg. using t-z
method. This may result in negative skin friction that varies with depth
and the location of the neutral point above the bottom of the layer.
This approach is more complicated that assuming a maximum (limiting)
downdrag load along the entire length of the pile in the settling layer.
In this example, for simplicity the maximum downdrag load is assumed.
CPGEC7course(Goh)
109
Example 4
Piletype
Boredpile
Pile width (m)

Pilewidth(m)
03
0.3
20
stiffclayskinfrictionq
stiff
clay skin friction qs;kk
50
300
FD
surcharge
5 m soft clay
18 m stiff clay
y
Rs
Rb 0
Design Action (A1)
A1
Total downdrag load = FD;k

; = (0.3)(5)qD;k
;
= (0.3)(5)(20) = 94.2 kN
Design
g value of downdrag
g load FD;d = GFD;k
= 1.35 x 94.2
G;dst
1.35
G;stb
1.0
Q;dst
1.5
cu
M1
1.0

Fc;d = 300 x 1.35 + 94.2 x 1.35 = 532 kN
CPGEC7course(Goh)
110
Piletype
Example 4
Boredpile
Pilewidth(m)
( )
0.3
50
FD
surcharge
5 m soft clay
Rs
A.3.3.2 Model Factor R;d = 1.4
Compressive
C
i R
Resistance
i t
Rc;d = Rs;d
= (0.3)(18)50/( 1.0 x 1.4) = 606 kN
Over-design factor = Rc;d / Fc;d
= 606 / 532 = 1.13 > 1
OK
18 m stiff clay
y
Rb 0
R1
Base
Shaft
(
(compression)
i )
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.0
1.0
1.0
Design
D
i vertical
ti l action
ti
Fc;d = 300 x 1.35 + 94.2 x 1.35 = 532 kN
CPGEC7course(Goh)
Piletype
Example 4
Boredpile
Pilewidth(m)
( )
0.3
20
50
300
111
FD
surcharge
5 m soft clay
Rs
18 m stiff clay
y
Rb 0
Design
g Action (A2) and M2
Total downdrag load = FD;k = (0.3)(5)qD;k= (0.3)(5)(20) = 94.2 kN

Design value of downdrag load FD;d = ()FD;k
= 1.25 x 94.2 = 118 kN
Fc;d = 300 x 1.0 + FD;d = 418 kN
M2 = 1.25
1 25 is considered an action factor because downdrag is
usually calculated by effective stress analysis (eg. method)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
A2
G;dst
1.0
G;stb
10
1.0
Q;dst
1.3
M2
1.25
112
Example 4

P
surcharge
FD
5 m soft clay
Model Factor R;d = 1.4
Rs
Compressive Resistance Rc;d = Rs;d

= (0.3)(18)50/(
(0 3)(18)50/( 1.4
1 4 x 1.4)
1 4) = 433 kN
Rb 0
A.3.3.2
Over design factor = Rc;d / Fc;d

Over-design
= 433 / 418 = 1.04 > 1
OK
18 m stiff clay
y
From Table A.NA.7

A NA 7 (Bored piles)
R4 with explicit
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
b
s
1.7
1.4
17
1.7
CPGEC7course(Goh)
113

P
Example 4
surcharge
FD
5 m soft clay
Model Factor R;d = 1.4
Rs
Compressive Resistance Rc;d = Rs;d

= (0.3)(18)50/(
(0 3)(18)50/( 1.4
1 4 x 1.6)
1 6) = 379 kN
Rb 0
A.3.3.2
Over-design factor = Rc;d / Fc;d

= 379 / 418 = 0.91 < 1
Not OK
From Table A.NA.7

A NA 7 (Bored piles)
Base
Shaft
(compression)
Total/Combined
(compression)
CPGEC7course(Goh)
18 m stiff clay
y
R4 without explicit
b
s
2.0
1.6
20
2.0
114
Thank You
CPGEC7course(Goh)
115

Goh EC7 Pile CPG July2013 PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Goh EC7 Pile CPG July2013 PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

CPG In-House Course on

Pile design (EC7 and SS EN 1997-1:2010

A/P Anthony Goh

For example, Table A.NA.7 replaces Table A.7

SS NA permits the use of different R4 values depending

For example, Table A.NA.7 replaces Table A.7

Model Factors (Clause 2.4.7.1(6))

Design Approach 1 (Clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(1)P)

Design Approach 1 (Clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(1)P)

Clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(2)P Note 2 If it is obvious that

GEO and STR ULS calculations (Design Approach 1)

Ed = design value of the effects of all the actions

Limiting values of movements of foundations

Pile Foundation Design (Design Approach 1)

7.2 Limit states

bearing resistance failure of the pile foundation;

7.3.1 Actions and design situations

Design methods for pile foundations (Clause 7.4.1(P))

Validity mustbedemonstratedbycalculations orother

Dynamic impact tests#

Usually applies to trial (preliminary) piles and the

Trial piles (installed for test purposes only, before the

7.5 Pile load tests

(2) Pile load tests may be used to:

Clause 7.5.1(4)P and (5)P)

7.5.2 Static load tests

7.5.2.2 Trial piles

7.5.2.3 Working Pile

7.5.3 Dynamic load tests

7.5.4 Load test report

Limit states ((axially

Ultimate compression limit state (Clause 7.6.1.1(3))

Serviceability Limit State (Clause 2.4.8(2))

7.6.2 Compressive ground resistance

(3)P For piles in groups, two failure mechanisms shall be

(5)P The stiffness and strength of the structure connecting

(8) Special attention should be given to possible failure of

(11) Punching failure should be considered if weak ground is

Compressive Ground Resistance (Clause 7.6.2)

Fc;d should include the weight of the pile.

Rc;d = compressive resistance, shall be derived either from:

R t;k R s;k + Rb;k

Rc;d = compressive resistance

R t;k R s;k + Rb;k

The differences of the partial factor values

SS NA permits the use of different R4

SS NA permits the use of different R4 values depending on the verification of SLS

SS NA permits the use of different R4 values depending on the verification

SS NA permits the use of different R4 values depending on the verification

Summary of partial factors (NA to SS EN 1997-1:2010)

Ultimate compressive resistance by calculation

Two calculation methods:

Ultimate compressive resistance by calculation from

Model pile method

correlation factor 3 and 4 from

(Rc;cal )mean = (Rb;cal + R s;cal )mean = (Rb;cal )mean + (R s;cal )mean

Ultimate compressive resistance from Ground Test results

A model factor is introduced to account for uncertainty of the

The characteristic values may be obtained by calculating:

Rs;k = As;i qs;i;k

This is the most common method for pile design in UK.

Characteristic resistances mayy be derived from static load tests using