The Eurocode 7 Geotechnical Design is based on Limit State Design, tackling the
uncertainties as much as possible at their source through:
- selection of characteristic values of variables (loads, soil properties, pile resistance, );
- partial factors applied on the characteristic values;
- model factors to account explicitly for uncertainties of the calculation rule if necessary.
Eurocode 7 will propose three design approaches. The selection of one of them will be by
National Determination. For pile design, the approaches are:
- approach 1 is a material factoring approach at load side and a resistance factoring
approach at resistance side. The structural and geotechnical design are checked for both
of two separate sets of partial factors.
- approach 2 is a load and resistance factoring approach and is in several aspects close to
a deterministic approach. The design is checked for one set of partial factors.
- approach 3 is a material factoring approach, at load as well as at resistance side. The
design is checked for one set of factors.
The aim of this paper is to introduce to the design of pile foundations based on pile load tests
and on ground test results (semi-empirical and analytical methods) in the frame-work of the
three design approaches.
Detailed attention is devoted to:
- the selection of the characteristic value of the pile resistance, accounting for spatial
variability and stiffness of the structure;
- the reliability of the prediction of the pile resistance using analytical or semi-empirical
methods which may be accounted for through a model factor.
The results of a large test campaign on screw piles in OC Clay and a calculation example
illustrate the proposed procedure when calculation rules using CPT results are used.
In some cases the effects of uncertainties in the models Table 4: Overview of main sources of uncertainty in
used in the calculations should be considered explicitly. ultimate limit state design of pile foundations and
This may lead to the application of a coefficient of model corresponding partial factors
uncertainty which modifies the results from the Source of Aspect to consider partial factor
calculation model to ensure that the design calculation is uncertainty
Loads and effects - Unfavourable deviation Load factors F Q
-
either accurate or errs on the side of safety: of loads from representative values - Partial factors m on soil
- at the load side: Sd applied either to the actions or to of load shear strength parameters
- Simplifications in models for (when relevant)
the actions effects; effect of loads
- at the resistance side: Rd applied to the resistance. Geometrical data Base and shaft diameter Small deviations to be
included in calculation rule
through cal
The characteristic value of material properties is the
Base level Small and unexpected
value having a prescribed probability of not being deviations through b and s
attained. For geotechnical design, prEN1997 defines
Large deviations: a
the characteristic value of a ground property or of a Spatial variability Soil investigation: the more Characteristic value of pile
resistance as a cautious estimate of the value affecting of pile resistance extensive, the better the resistance depending
over the site due variability is known amongst other of the number
the occurrence of a limit state and recommends: If to variability of soil of tests (number of static
statistical methods are used, the characteristic value tests, in situ tested profiles,
should be derived such that the calculated probability of dynamic tests) (through
factor)
a worse value governing the occurrence of a limit state Reliability of the - Pile load test: effect may be
is not greater than 5% A nominal value may be used as predicted bearing neglected
capacity - Semi-empirical rule: Calibration factor cal
the characteristic value in some circumstances. calibration of the rule by
static tests
- Dynamic test Calibration of the results
Larger deviations - Effect of installation is Partial factor on base determination (values in prEN 1997 are slightly different
than expected in different than expected resistance and on shaft
previous steps - Deviations of calculation resistance b, s or t from the values quoted in ENV 1997).
model and of real value of
characteristic value of
bearing capacity from Table 5: values of 1 and 2 for pile load test, piles under
calculated value
structure allowing no load transfer.
Number of pile load tests 1 2 3 4 5
1 applied to the mean of the 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0
measured compressive resistances
2, applied to the lowest of the 1.4 1.2 1.05 1.0 1.0
ULTIMATE COMPRESSIVE RESISTANCE FROM measured compressive resistances
STATIC PILE LOAD TESTS
Design of pile foundations based on static load tests The favourable effect of the stiffness of the structure
may be unusual in some countries. However, the (which is independent of the variability of the pile
procedure according to prEN1997 (2001) is explained in resistance over the site considered, but allows to a
this section as design procedures based on calculations certain extent to transfer loads from weaker piles to
always need to be related to the results of pile load stronger piles) is introduced by dividing the values 1
tests. The procedure for design of piles from the results and 2 by a factor 1.1.
of static pile load tests is according to following scheme:
Some more theoretical considerations on the values of
are given in section Ultimate compressive resistance
from ground test results.
Values of 3 and 4 are proposed by prEN 1997- Care should be taken if taking advantage of the
1:2001(E) in the table below; they may be modified by reduction the values by 1.1 for stiff structures in
national determination. following situations:
- Brittle soil, tensile piles: failure of the pile may be
followed by a drastic (post peak) reduction of the
compressive resistance; in such cases, it is doubtful if
there is enough strength left in the non failed piles to of the bearing capacities of the piles over the site:
allow redistribution of loads, even for stiff structures weak spots in terms of bearing capacity may be not
- When the possibility of redistribution of loads have discovered: this may lead to an overestimate of the
been considered explicitely in an earlier stage of the characteristic value of the pile resistance;
design, eg by performing a soil-structure interaction - On the other hand, reduction of variance (i.e. the
analysis, specially modelling non-linear (e.g. elasto- variability of the pile resistance may be much
plastic) pile behaviour smaller than the variability of the shear strength
parameters) is difficult to treat: this may lead to an
Note: alternative procedure overestimate of the variability of the pile resistance
- There is no or a poor relationship between the
As an alternative to the model pile procedure above, statistical confidence which can be gained from the
prEN 1997-1 allows to assess the characteristic values number of tests and the way it affects the
by: Rb,k = Ab . qb,k and Rs,k = As;j . qs,k;j characteristic value of the pile resistance: having
Where qb,k and qs,k;j are characteristic values of base twelve triaxial test on samples from one single
resistance and shaft friction in the various strata derived boring gives poor information about the variability of
from values of ground parameters. These characteristic the pile resistance over a site; Four borings with
are derived for the whole layer considered, according to three triaxial test delivers much more information,
the principles for the selection of characteristic values of although from standard statistical methods, both
ground parameters: this method abandons the idea of samples will give the same characteristic value.
model pile. The alternative procedure may be - It is much more complicated to treat local variability
appropriate when: of the pile resistance over the site considered when
- Using tables or charts indicating qb,k and qs,k values using charts or tables established from a data-bank
as a function of any measured soil parameter for having a regional character.
determining the characteristic resistance from any
given soil parameter; Design value of the pile compressive resistance
- Using (analytical) formulas to calculate the pile The design value of the pile compressive resistance is
bearing capacity using characteristic values of soil deduced from the characteristic value using the
shear strength parameters (ck and k or cu;k) valid following equation:
over the site considered. Rc,d = Rbk/b + Rsk/s
Variability, # of tests Tables;
Stiffness of structure charts
The values of the partial factors are given in the table
Measured "characteristic below (same values as for static load tests); these
soil
parameter
value" of
parameter Rck = Rb,k + Rs,k Calibrated value Design value
values may be modified by national determination.
= Ab * qb,k + of the Rc,d = Rb,k/b +
characteristic
As;j . qs,k;j Rs,k/s
Shear strength
parameters ,
Characteristic pile resistance
Table 7: Partial factors for approaches 1 and 2 for
value k, ck; cu;k
c;cu
different types of piles according to prEN 1997-
Variability, # of tests
Stiffness of structure
Calculation
rule
Reliability of
prediction; model
Uncertainties:
partial factors
1:2001(E)
( l ti l) f t b d Approach 1, set 2 Appr. 1, set 1 Approach 2
Figure 4: Design procedure using semi-empirical Type of pile b s t b s t b =s=t
Driven piles 1.3 1.30 1.30 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.10
methods alternative to the model pile procedure. Bored piles 1.3 1.60 1.45 1.25 1.0 1.15 1.10
Continuous flight 1.3 1.45 1.35 1.10 1.0 1.10 1.10
auger
The value of qb,k and qs,k;j (tabulated or chart values or
derived from characteristic values of the shear strength
Combining the equation for characteristic value and the
parameters ck and k or cu;k) should readily account for
equation above delivers (model pile procedure):
the variability of the ground parameters, the volume of
- When the mean value governs the characteristic
soil involved in the failure mechanism considered, the
value:
spatial variability of the pile resistance and the stiffness
Rc,d = Rbk/b + Rsk/s =
of the structure. As a consequence of this, the factor
should not be used explicitly in this alternative method. (Rb;cal) mean /(3. b) + (Rs;cal)mean/(3. s)
When charts or tabulated values are established, they - When the lowest value governs the characteristic
should be at the side of safety as they directly provide value:
characteristic values of resistances which should include Rc,d = Rbk/b + Rsk/s = (Rb;cal /b + Rs;cal/s) min /4
the effects of variability of the resistance, of the
installation effects etcSome hints for the selection of where (Rb;cal + Rs;cal)min is the lowest of the
characteristic shear strength parameters are given in the calculated compressive resistances.
section dealing with approach 3.
The Eurocode proposal is to determine a single value of
It is the authors opinion that this alternative method is the calibration factor for all piles in all soil and to deal
less appropriate than the model pile approach, with probable larger variation coefficient of the ratio
because it does not allow for proper consideration of Rmeasured/ Rcalculated for CFA and bored piles trough the
spatial variability of the pile compression resistance and higher value of their partial safety factor (see third
the stiffness of the structure: philosophy for assessing the value of the calibration
- On one hand, the characteristic value of qb,k and factor). However, if different values of calibration factors
qs,k;j is selected for the soil layer as a homogeneous are introduced for different main types of piles (all based
volume, and do not necessarily reflect the variability on the same reliability criterion of the prediction and
taking into account its variability), it seems more
appropriate to apply the same value of the partial factors
to all types of piles. Such a system is allowed to be Calculation rule
(analytical)
applied by national determination.
N tested profiles Design values of
Characteristic Design value Rcd =
giving values of Step 1 shear strength Step 3
The margin between the predicted compressive shear strength
value k, ck; Step 2
parameters d, cd
Rb (d, cd; cud)/cal +
cu;k Rs(d,cd;cud)/cal
resistance and the design value is (for a given -value) parameters or cu;d
complication and that a single factor should be given. Figure 5: Design procedure for approach 3.
The advantage of the distinction between a calibration
factor and a safety factor, is that for different Step 1: Selection of characteristic value
calculation rules, the same level of reliability of the pile In a first step, the characteristic values of the soil
compressive resistance (in a probabilistic sense) can be strength parameters have to be selected from the test
obtained when the same reliability criterion is required results and other relevant information accounting for the
for the calibration factor. So, different calculation rules X, variability of the ground parameters, the volume of soil
Y or Z (when calibrated on the same requirements) will involved in the failure mechanism considered, the spatial
have their own value of the calibration factor and, when variability of the pile resistance and the stiffness of the
these will be combined with the same values of the structure:
partial safety factors, will lead to almost equal reliability As usually the length of the pile is large compared to the
of the design resistance. autocorrelation length of the variation parameter value,
the characteristic value of the shear strength parameters
PrEN 1997-1:2001 stresses that when the alternative to be used to assess the shaft resistance will be a
method is used, the values of the partial factors b and s cautious estimate of the mean value. Not only the global
as proposed in annex A may need to be corrected by mean and standard deviation should be considered, but
model factors as they were primarily established for the also the variation of the mean values in the different
design from static load test and from the model pile verticals tested: is the mean of the test results along a
procedure using both the values to deal with variability vertical (e.g. the samples of a given boring) significantly
of pile resistance. In this respect, consideration should different of the others, then this boring indicates a weak
be given to the following: area which should be considered when assessing the
- When standard tables or charts are used, the value characteristic value. In fact, the variation of the mean
of the model factor depends (amongst other) on the values of each tested vertical yields very valuable
way the characteristic value of charts and tables information about the variability of the pile resistance
have been derived from the underlying data-base: over the site.
do they deliver a cautious mean value or a low Usually the soil volume involved in the failure
value ?The reliability of the prediction using the mechanism around the base is rather small (especially
chart or tables should be known and, if necessary, for small diameter piles), so that the characteristic value
corrected by a calibration factor assessed similarly of the shear strength parameters to be used for the
as above assessment of the base resistance should be a cautious
- When analytical methods are used starting from estimate of the low (point) values or of the local mean
characteristic values of the shear strength values of the shear strength parameters around the tip
parameters, the value of the model factor depends level.
on the reliability of the analytical calculation rule and
correction factors for installation used. Usually, Step 2: Design value of the shear resistance
analytical methods have large standard deviations parameters
of the ratio Rc, measured/Rc, predicted (Jardine et al 1997). Once the characteristic value of the shear strength
- The values treat the variability of the pile parameters has been selected, the design value is
resistance in a slightly different way compared to readily assessed by dividing them by the partial factors
methods for the assessment of characteristic values indicated in table 3:
of soil parameters. cd= ck/c = c/1.25 and tand = tank / tan =
tank / 1.25; cud = cuk/ cu = cu,k/1.4
ULTIMATE COMPRESSIVE RESISTANCE
FROM GROUND TEST RESULTS, APPROACH 3 Step 3: Design value of the pile resistance
The design value of the shear strength parameters are
Approach 3 is fully in a material factoring approach: the entered into the analytical formulae to assess the design
characteristic values of the strength parameters are value of shaft and base resistance:
divided by the material factor tan c or cu before Rc,d = Rb,d + Rs,d
entering the calculation rule. This provides design values Where: Rbd = Rb(cd, d; cud) and Rsd = Rs(cd, d or cud)
of the base and shaft resistance. The figure 5 illustrates
different steps of the procedure. If model (calibration) factors are needed, they should be
applied on the design value of the pile resistance.
EXAMPLE OF ASSESSMENT OF CALIBRATION Analysis of the tests at Sint Katelijne Waver on screw
FACTOR FOR COMPRESSIVE PILES IN OC CLAY piles in OC Boom clay
USING CONE PENETRATION TEST RESULTS
This section illustrates the assessment of a calibration The calculation rule is applied to the CPT performed at
factor for a semi-empirical calculation rule and the location of each pile tested to be tested. The
corresponding installation factors based on the results of predicted base and shaft resistances and total pile
cone penetration tests when using the model pile compressive resistances for each pile are summarised
method. The required reliability (95 %) fits in an in the table below. The value of the measured ultimate
approach 1 framework. Of course, the calibration of any compressive resistance at a relative settlement of 10%
other calculation rule (semi-empirical, analytical or of the nominal pile base diameter Db and the ratio of the
charted values) for any other required reliability could be measured resistance to the calculated resistance are
done on a fully similar way. also indicated.
The results of a large test campaign performed on screw
piles in O.C. Boom clay at Sint Katelijne Waver, reported Table 8: summary of predicted and measured ultimate
by Huybrechts (2001), complemented by other test on compressive resistances for screw piles at Sint Katelijne
similar piles in OC clay in Belgium will be used. The Waver
calculation rule based on E1 CPT results as used in Pile Db Ds b Ab . qb b.b.Ab sDsHi piqciHi Rc;predicted Rc; Ratio
Belgium (Holeyman et al, (1997) is applied: .qb qci = b.b.qb.Ab measured
- Base resistance: Rb = b . .b .Ab .qb + piqciHi
qb ultimate unit bearing resistance derived from the [m] [m] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN] [kN] (measured/
E1 cone resistance according to the calculation predicted)
method of De Beer (1971-1972), which has been A2 0.450 0.380 0.88 363.2 255.7 12038 397.3 653 786 1.204
established for cylindrical driven piles;
A3 0.450 0.380 0.88 457.7 322.2 28442 938.6 1261 1216 0.964
Ab nominal cross section of the base of the pile
B1 0.410 0.410 0.90 295.1 212.5 14923 492.5 705 743 1.054
deduced from the largest nominal diameter of the
base screw; B2 0.410 0.410 0.90 305.0 219.6 30547 1008.1 1228 1258 1.024
b installation factor, taking into account the B3 0.510 0.510 0.87 536.7 373.5 37485 1237.0 1611 1722 1.069
difference between the pile as executed and the B4 0.510 0.510 0.87 482.5 335.8 19258 635.5 971 1134 1.168
cylindrical driven pile; proposed value for screw C1 0.410 0.410 0.90 306.5 220.7 16683 550.5 771 719 0.933
piles in OC clay: 0.8, as proposed by Maertens et C2 0.410 0.410 0.90 286.2 206.1 30423 1004.0 1210 1263 1.044
al (2001); C3 0.510 0.510 0.87 527.0 366.8 39983 1319.4 1686 1637 0.971
shape factor for non-circular or non square pile C4 0.510 0.510 0.87 503.1 350.2 21776 718.6 1069 917 0.858
base cross section; = 1.0 as the pile is Mean 1.0289
cylindrical;
Std. 0.104
b parameter referring to the scale dependency of
deviation
soil shear strength, taking into account the
different effect of fissures in the OC clay on the
The mean value of the ratio Rc,measured / Rc;predicted is
cone resistance and the pile base resistance; b =
equal to 1.03 and the standard deviation is 0.10. This
1- 0.01(Db/dc 1) where Db/dc is the ratio of the
allows to calculated the 5% fractile (n = 10) of the ratio
largest pile base diameter to the diameter of the
Rc,measured / Rc;predicted:(Rc,measured / Rc;predicted )5% =
CPT cone.
1.03 . (1- 1.833 . 0.10 1 + 1 )
1.03 10
- Shaft resistance: Rs = s .Hi pi. qci The value of the calibration factor is than equal to
s nominal pile shaft perimeter, deduced from the 1 / 0.83 = 1.20
nominal shaft diameter: s = Ds
Hi thickness of layer i Extension to other tests of screw piles and precast piles
in OC clay
qci mean cone resistance in layer i
pi global empirical factor allowing to transform the To verify if the values of the installation factors and
cone resistance to local shaft friction qsu; the calibration can be extended to other OC clays in
factor depends on the soil type, the pile Belgium, a review of published data of static load tests in
installation method and the roughness of the OC clay has been performed. The same calculation rule
shaft;: pi = 0.033 ( for qc between 1.5 and 3 as applied to the results of Sint Katelijne Waver has
MPa) been applied. A much as possible, similar interpretation
as in Sint Katelijne Waver has been pursued: failure
Remarks: defined as a relative settlement of 10% of nominal base
calculation rules which account explicitly for each qc diameter, elimination of friction in soil layers which are
value, e.g. every 0.2 m, have to be used in a model not the considered OC layers etc Some
pile procedure and cannot reasonably be used in the approximations have been needed to make all tests
alternative method or in approach 3. comparable on the same base. They may have
all consideration given in this section could easily be introduced some error, which are however considered
translated to the calculation rule indicated in as acceptable in the margins of the analyses. More
prEN1997 annex B.4. refined analyses may be appropriate. Two static tests in
on precast piles in Sint Katelijne Waver have also been
included. The values of their installation coefficients
were taken equal to: b = 1.0 and pi = 0.036. All the
results are gathered in figure 6 below. Equivalent deterministic safety factor
Within a deterministic framework, the factors of safety
Summary of predicted and measured ultimate compressive resistance
are globally applied to the components of the resistance:
2000
F Ri/si
1800 Where:
F : effect of the actions (representative values)
1600
1400 Precast pile
1200 Ri : representative value of component i to the
measured
Screw pile
resistance
1000
800 Screw pile, steel
shaft
600 Screw pile, St.
Katelijne Waver
si : global safety factor applied to component i of
400
200
Measurement =
prediction the resistance
0 Calibration
In approaches 1 and 2 one can define an equivalent
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
predicted
deterministic safety factor seq as: