Anda di halaman 1dari 199

© AFNOR 2012 - All Rights Reserved

FA152485ISSN 0335-3931

© AFNOR 2012 - All Rights Reserved FA152485ISSN 0335-3931 NF P 94-262 July 2012 Classification index:- www.afnor.org © AFNORAFNOR 20121 drawing 2012-07-P " id="pdf-obj-0-6" src="pdf-obj-0-6.jpg">

NF P 94-262

July 2012

Classification index: P 94-262

ICS: 91.010.30; 93.020

Justification of geotechnical structures

National Enforcement Standards Eurocode 7

deep foundations

E: Justification of geotechnical work - National standards applied for the implementation of Eurocode 7 - Deep Foundations D: Rechtfertigung von geotechnischen Bauwerken - Normen für die Anwendung von national Eurocode 7 - Tiefgründungen

French standard approved

by decision of the Director General of AFNOR June 20, 2012 to take effect on 20 July 2012.

CorrespondenceAt the date of publication of this document, there is no European work International or on the same subject.

© AFNOR 2012 - All Rights Reserved FA152485ISSN 0335-3931 NF P 94-262 July 2012 Classification index:- www.afnor.org © AFNORAFNOR 20121 drawing 2012-07-P " id="pdf-obj-0-32" src="pdf-obj-0-32.jpg">

This document defines the terminology and notations used. It describes the behavior of deep foundations and provides the justification rules for the calculation of deep foundation ultimate limit state and serviceability limit states.

Analysi

s

descriptors Technical International Thesaurus: geotechnical, foundation depth, soil foundation pile, definition, property, ground, material calculation, material strength, compressive stress, allowable stress, limit, maximum load, tensile strength, stability, movement, deformation verification.

modifications

corrections

Published and distributed by the French Association of Normalization (AFNOR) - 11, St. Francis Pressensé - 93571 La Plaine Saint-Denis Cedex Such. : + 33 (0) 1 41 62 80 00 - Fax: + 33 (0) 1 49 17 90 00 -www.afnor.org

© AFNORAFNOR 20121

st drawing 2012-07-P

Jusitifcations Geotechnical Works

Members of the Standards Committee

Chairman: Mr Vezole

Secretariat: M BURLON - IFSTTAR

BNSR CNJOG

M

BAGUELIN

Fondasol

M

Berthelot

BUREAU VERITAS / COPREC

M

BUSTAMANTE

MB FOUNDATIONS

M

Carpinteiro

SOCOTEC / COPREC

M

DAUBILLY

FNTP

M

DELAHOUSSE

ARCELOR

M

Delmas

CNAM

M

DURAND

FUGRO / CNREG

M

FRANK

IFSTTAR ENPC CERMES / TC 250

M

GAUTHEY

SPIE FOUNDATIONS

M

Glandy

Soletanche-Bachy-PILES

M

GRATIER

THYSSENKRUPP

M

GUERPILLON

SCETAUROUTE

MRS

GUIZIOU

CETMEF

M

HABERT

CETE NORD-PICARDIE - AML Lille

MRS

GREAT

CETE NORD-PICARDIE - AML Lille

M

THE Delliou

Ischebeck FRANCE

M

Legendre

Soletanche Bachy / CNETG

M

MAGNAN

IFSTTAR / NSCC

MRS

MAUREL

CETEs Ile de France

M

MIRAILLET

EDF TEGG

M

MOUSSARD

SNCF

MRS

OSMANI

Eiffage

M

PILLARD

UMGO

M

PINÇON

BNTEC

MRS

Pineau

AFNOR

M

Plumelle

CONSULTANT

M

RAYNAUD

PARIS AIRPORTS

M

ROCK-LACOSTE

IFSTTAR

M

Saliba

SETRA

M

SCHMITT

Soletanche Bachy

M

SIMON

TERRASOL / USG

M

THONIER

EGF-BTP

M

VALEM

FFB

M

VETROFF

FRANKI FOUNDATION

M

VOLCKE

FRANKI FOUNDATION / SOFFONS

Participants as experts:

The list of persons who participated in the various working groups to establish the V1 version of the document is indicated in the foreword.

NF P 94-262

Summary

Page

Preliminary propos7 ........................................................................................................................

  • 1 Field of application9 ..............................................................................................................

  • 2 normatives15 references ......................................................................................................

  • 3 Terms, definitions and symboles17 ....................................................................................

    • 3.1 Terms and définitions17 .......................................................................................................

    • 3.2 Symbols and indices18 .........................................................................................................

      • 4 Behavior profondes24 foundations .....................................................................................

        • 4.1 Généralités24 .........................................................................................................................

        • 4.2 Behavior under load axiale24 ...............................................................................................

        • 4.3 Transversales26 behavior under stress .............................................................................

        • 4.4 Mechanisms ruin or disorders inacceptables27 ................................................................

          • 5 Actions and data géométriques30 .......................................................................................

            • 5.1 Actions30 ...............................................................................................................................

            • 5.2 geometric data 35 ..................................................................................................................

              • 6 Properties land and matériaux38 .........................................................................................

                • 6.1 General principles 38 ............................................................................................................

                • 6.2 up land 38 ...............................................................................................................................

                • 6.3 Materials reported 39 ............................................................................................................

                • 6.4 Constituent materials of profondes40 foundations ...........................................................

                  • 7 Situations of calculation, loads and combinations of actions44 .....................................

                    • 7.1 Situations calcul44 ................................................................................................................

                    • 7.2 Combination of actions45 ....................................................................................................

                    • 7.3 Provisions for determining deep foundations 47 ..............................................................

                      • 8 General rules for justification of profondes52 foundations..............................................

                        • 8.1 Généralités52 .........................................................................................................................

                        • 8.2 ultimes54 limit states ............................................................................................................

                        • 8.3 States limits service55 ..........................................................................................................

                        • 8.4 Models calcul56 .....................................................................................................................

                        • 8.5 Deep foundation isolated subjected to stress axial57 ......................................................

                        • 8.6 Deep foundation isolated in an attempt transversal60 .....................................................

                        • 8.7 Behavior of a group of foundations profondes61 ..............................................................

                        • 8.8 Consideration of overall displacements of the ground 63 ................................................

                        • 8.9 stakes tests réaliser65 ..........................................................................................................

                          • 9 State-limit portance68 ...........................................................................................................

                            • 9.1 General principle 68 ..............................................................................................................

                            • 9.2 Bearing a deep foundation isolée68 ....................................................................................

                            • 9.3 Bearing a group of profondes72 foundations ....................................................................

                              • 10 State-limit traction74 .............................................................................................................

                                • 10.1 General principle 74 ..............................................................................................................

                                • 10.2 tensile strength of a deep foundation isolated 74 .............................................................

                                • 10.3 tensile strength of a group of deep foundations 77 ..........................................................

                                  • 11 Resistance to transverse loads 82 ......................................................................................

                                    • 11.1 General principles 82 ............................................................................................................

                                    • 11.2 isolated deep foundation 82 .................................................................................................

                                    • 11.3 deep foundations Group 83 ..................................................................................................

                                      • 12 Structural Strength 85 ...........................................................................................................

                                        • 12.1 General principles 85 ............................................................................................................

  • 12.2 Piles or concrete foundation elements armé85 ..................................................................

  • 12.3 Metal piles in construction88 steel.......................................................................................

    • 13 stability générale90 ................................................................................................................

      • 13.1 Généralités90 ..........................................................................................................................

      • 13.2 Principle calcul91 ...................................................................................................................

      • 13.3 Models calcul91 ......................................................................................................................

      • 13.4 Mechanisms rupture92 ..........................................................................................................

      • 13.5 Partial factor yR model d

...................................................................................................

92

  • 14 Justifications to limit state service93 ..................................................................................

NF P 94-262

  • 14.1 Généralités93 ..........................................................................................................................

  • 14.2 Land Mobilization by a deep foundation subjected to an axial load

....

93

  • 14.3 Displacement and deformation of a fondationprofonde94 ................................................

    • 15 Supporting documents of calculs96 ....................................................................................

Annex A (informative) The different types of piles and special provisions

conception99..........................................................................................................................

  • A. 1The different types of pieux99 ............................................................................................

  • A. 2Pieux drilled (Class 1) 100 ...................................................................................................

A.3Pieux drilled auger (Class 2) 100 .................................................................................................

A.4Les screw piles (Class 3) 101 ......................................................................................................

A.5Pieux beaten closed (Class 4) 103 ..............................................................................................

A.6Pieux open beaten steel (Class 5 [BAO, No. 13]) 103 ...............................................................

A.7Profilés beaten H (Class 6) 103....................................................................................................

A.8Palplanches battered (Class 7 [PP, No. 16]) 104........................................................................

A.9Micropieu (Classes 1a and 8) 104 ...............................................................................................

  • A. 10Surfaces and perimeters fondation107 elements ................................................................

Annex B (informative) Determination of the conventional categories of terrain108 ............

  • B. Conventional 1Catégories of terrain108 ...................................................................................

  • B. 2Eléments ranking of sols108 ....................................................................................................

Annex C (normative) Partial factors for ultimes114 limit states .............................................

  • C. 1Préambule114 ............................................................................................................................

  • C. 2 partial factors for verification of limit states for structures (STR) and geotechnical (GEO) 114 ........................................................................................................

  • C. Partial 3Facteurs for verification of the ultimate limit state global uprising (UPL) 119 ................................................................................................................................

Annex D (informative) Determination lahauteur equivalent embedding D

............................

e

121

  • D. 1Préambule121 ............................................................................................................................

  • D. 2Détermination the height of encastrementéquivalente D ...................................................... e

121

Annex E (informative) Calculation of the bearing value and / or the tensile strength a deep foundation - Overview etexemples122 ..................................................................

  • E. 1Synoptique - Diagram of calculating the valeurde lift and / or resistance of towing a foundation profonde122 ........................................................................................

  • E. 2Calcul coefficients 122% ...........................................................................................................

Annex E (normative) Lift limit and tensile yield strength from the method pressiométrique127 .................................................................................................................................................

  • F. 1Préambule127 .............................................................................................................................

  • F. 2Coefficients of modèle127 ...................................................................................................

  • F. 3Résistance

limite128 ............................................................................................................

  • F. 4Résistance of pointe129 ......................................................................................................

  • F. axial131 friction 5Résistance ......................................................................................................

NF P 94-262

Annex G (normative) Lift limit and tensile yield strength from the method pénétrométrique137 .................................................................................................................................................

  • G. 1Préambule137 ............................................................................................................................

  • G. 2Coefficient of modèle137 .....................................................................................................

  • G. 3Résistance

limite138 ............................................................................................................

  • G. 4Résistance of pointe139 ......................................................................................................

    • G. 5Résistancede axial141 friction .................................................................................................

Appendix H (Informative) negative friction rating on profonde147 foundation .....................

  • H. 1Domaine of application147 .......................................................................................................

  • H. Maximum 2Frottementnégatif on deep isolée147 unefondation .......................................

  • H. 3Frottementnégatif on fondationprofonde withinthe a groupe151 ...................................

  • H. 4Cas personal culées155 ............................................................................................................

Appendix I (Informative) Modeling the transverse behavior of a deep foundation from pressuremeter tests and pénétromètre156 .................................................................

  • I. 1Pieu isolé156 ..............................................................................................................................

    • 1.2 Groups profondes164 foundations ......................................................................................

    • 1.3 laws of interaction vis-a-vis loads sismiques166 ...............................................................

    • 1.4 Other model calcul166 ...........................................................................................................

Appendix J (Informative) Group effects vis-à-vis a axial168 loading .............................................

  • J. 1Domaine application - Définition168 ..................................................................................

group linked J.2Effet the approximation piles - Efficiency Coefficient C

e 168

.............................. group J.3Effet related behavior bloc169 ..........................................................................................

J.4Estimation the compaction group profondes169 foundations .................................................

J.5Interaction tip between two deep foundations voisines170 .....................................................

Appendix K (Informative) horizontal displacement of a layer terrain171 ................................

  • K. 1Domaine of application171 .......................................................................................................

K.2Principe of méthode171 ...............................................................................................................

K.3Détermination of G (Z) 172 ...........................................................................................................

K.4Détermination of gmax (t) 172 .....................................................................................................

K.5Détermination of g (z) in the layer compressible175 ................................................................

K.6Détermination of g (z) in the remblai175 ....................................................................................

Appendix L (Informative) axial stiffness of a foundation profonde177 ...................................

  • L. 1Domaine of application177 .......................................................................................................

  • L. 2Évaluation from charge177 parameters .............................................................................

  • L. 3Évaluation from mobilization laws of axial friction and advanced effort ...........................................................................................................................................

178

Annex M (Informative) geotechnical characteristics and values properties terrains180 ...........................................................................................................

  • M. 1Reconnaissance of terrains180 ...............................................................................................

NF P 94-262

M.2Terrains in place184 .....................................................................................................................

M.3Matériaux rapportés188 ...............................................................................................................

Appendix N (informative) Deformations of the structures and movements fondations189 .

  • N. 1Préambule189 ............................................................................................................................

N.2Déformation structures and movements fondations189 ..........................................................

N.3Flèches in concrete buildings armé189......................................................................................

Appendix O (Informative) Checklist for construction supervision and monitoring behavior ouvrages191...........................................................................................................

  • O. 1Généralités191 ...........................................................................................................................

    • 0. 2Surveillance of exécution191 ..............................................................................................

    • 0. 3Suivi of comportement192 ..................................................................................................

O.4Mise implement the method observationnelle192 ....................................................................

Appendix P (Informative) Geotechnical categories and duration of use of projet194 ..........

  • P. 1Généralités194 ...........................................................................................................................

P.2Classes of conséquence194 ........................................................................................................

P.3Catégorie géotechnique194 .........................................................................................................

P.4Durée usage projet195..................................................................................................................

Appendix Q (Informative) design Dispositionsgénérales for ponts196 .........................................

  • Q. 1Matériaux constituent of pieux196 ..........................................................................................

structural Q.2Résistance of pieux196 ..............................................................................................

Q.3Dispositions constructives197 ....................................................................................................

Appendix R (Informative) Consideration of geometric imperfections related tolerances of exécution201 ..............................................................................................................

  • R. 1Préambule201 .......................................................................................................................

R.2Règles to specify in the draft conception201 ............................................................................

particular R.3Cas isolated piles subjected Aune "compression centered" 202 ..........................

Appendix S (Informative) Items related to static load tests in compression 203 ...................

  • S. 1Préambule 203 ............................................................................................................................

    • 5.2 Site Recognition 203 ..............................................................................................................

    • 5.3 Location of essai203 ..............................................................................................................

    • 5.4 Piles of essai204 ....................................................................................................................

    • 5.5 Maximum load essai204 ........................................................................................................

    • 5.6 Interpretation of results of essai205 ....................................................................................

NF P 94-262

Foreword

This document is for the geotechnical design of deep foundations. It has been developed to complement Eurocode 7 (EN 1997-1) which he is the national application standard for these types of structures.

This document is consistent with the principles of limit states with partial factors defined in the standard EN 1990 and its National Annex EN 1990 / NA. It meets the requirements of DIN EN 1997-1 and its national annex NF EN 1997-1 / NA applicable to the calculation of geotechnical structures.

The provisions of this document are based on the assumptions listed in section 1.3 of the standard EN 1997-1, which assume in particular a good knowledge of field conditions, the quality control of the execution of works and the choice of a plausible model for the foundation of conduct to the limit state considered.

It is important to remember the following:

  • a) The knowledge of ground conditions depends on the size and quality of the geotechnical

investigations. This knowledge and the quality control of the execution of works are more important to meet the basic requirements that the accuracy of calculation models and partial factors.

  • b) ruin mechanisms must be plausible to consider and be identified based on actual books or failing

behavior data on the results of appropriate modeling.

  • c) Verification of ultimate limit state assumes the study of the critical failure mechanism vis-à-vis the latter

with a reliable calculation model used properly.

  • d) Where there is no reliable calculation model for a particular limit state, it may be preferable to the

analysis of another limit state, using factors that make it unlikely exceeding the limit state considered .

Otherwise, and as appropriate, it is possible to justify the design:

either by prescriptive measures, when a similar experiment makes unnecessary sizing calculations;

or on the basis of load test results or tests on models;

either by the observational method, which allows to see the construction design.

Warning

This document contains the common procedures used in France for the calculation of deep foundations (those contained in the repositories as Issue 62 - Title V of the GTCC and the NF P 11-212-2 - ex DTU 13.2) as well as those recommended in NF EN 1997-1.

NF P 94-262

List of people associated with the development of the document Editors

M BAGUELIN

  • M BERTHELOT

  • M BUSTAMANTE

  • M BURLON

M CANEPA

FRANK M

  • M Glandy

M Durand

  • M Vezole

Fondasol

BUREAU VERITAS / COPREC

MB FOUNDATIONS

IFSTTAR / Secretary CNJOG

DREIF-LREP

IFSTTAR ENPC CERMES / TC

250

Soletanche-Bachy-PILES

FUGRO / CNREG

Eiffage / President CNJOG

Experts representing the players in the profession

MMe MAURELCETE IDF / SETRA

  • M Legendre

M Magnan

  • M SIMON

  • M VOLCKE

Associate experts

Soletanche Bachy / CNETG

IFSTTAR / NSCC

TERRASOL / USG

FRANKI FOUNDATION / SOFFONS

  • M CARPINTERO

SOCOTEC

  • M GAUTHEY

SPIE FOUNDATIONS

M-ROCK LACOSTE

IFSTTAR

M. MIRAILLET

EDF

  • M Plumelle

CONSULTANT

  • M SCHMITT

Soletanche Bachy

  • M VETROFF

FRANKI FOUNDATION

Members of the secretariat of the CNJOG

  • M HABERT

MS LEGRAND

  • 1 Application domain

CETE Nord-Picardie / AML Lille CETE Nord-Picardie / AML Lille

(1) This paper discusses the design and calculation of deep foundations, rigid inclusions and composite foundations (Section 1 Clauses (3), (7) and (8)) the right of buildings, bridges, towers, masts and chimneys, silos and tanks as well as structures carrying cranes and machinery (NF EN 1990).

(2) One can define several types of foundations by their slenderness (shallow foundations, deep or deep

NF P 94-262

semi-), their embodiment and mode of operation (shallow foundations on existing soil or ground improved or reinforced by rigid or flexible inclusions, mixed, deep foundations foundations) (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - So deep foundation within the meaning of the slenderness can perfectly be used as part of a project providing an intermediate mode between that of a shallow foundation, where all the load is taken up by the soil in place under the sole, and that of a deep foundation in the traditional sense, which repeats itself the entire load.

(3) The different types of foundations typically are subject to the following definitions:

Deep foundation (NF P 94-262 - this document): The term "deep foundation" refers to pile foundations, micro-piles, barrettes or wells whose slenderness is high (typically foundations whose length is more than 5 times the diameter or width).

Shallow foundation or semi-deep (NF P 94-261): The term "shallow foundation" "or" semi-deep foundation "means the foundation whose slenderness is low (typically less than 5.0). The distinction between a foundation surface and a semi-deep foundation is usually based on the value of the equivalent embedding / B (Appendix D): if the value of this ratio is less than 1.5, it is a shallow foundation; if the value of this ratio is between 1.5 and 5.0 there is a semi-deep foundation.

Composite Foundation: type of foundation system mixed foundation or foundation rigid or flexible inclusions:

Mixed Foundation: the term "joint foundation" applies to the entire sole and pious designed and calculated with direct contact between the two and taking into account the real possibilities of simultaneous mobilization reactions in the soil by the pious and the sole .

Foundations rigid inclusions: the term "foundations on rigid inclusions" refers to a soil-building process instead of performing a regular pattern of deep foundations (piles, rigid inclusions) with the primary aim to reduce compaction and optionally d increase lift. Direct contact between the surface foundation and inclusions is avoided by the implementation of a distribution of mattresses (which can be granular material treated or not, ballast, etc.) to maintain a stress distribution Contact compatible with the resistance of the shallow foundation, the slabs or the slab.

Foundations soft inclusions: The term "flexible foundations inclusions" refers to a method of reinforcing and soil conditioners in place of providing a regular grid of soft inclusions (stone columns, dynamic replacement, etc.) with the primary aim reduce settlement and if necessary increase lift. Direct contact between the surface foundation and stone columns, in case of incompatibility between contact stresses and the strength of the shallow foundation, the slabs or the slab can be avoided through the implementation of a mattress-up distribution (which may be of the granular material treated or not, ballast, etc.).

(4) Herein applies to the calculation of deep foundations biased axially in compression or in traction or loaded transversely, these geotechnical structures are installed by driving, by vibrating, by jacking, by screwing or drilling with or without injection. The detailed list of these foundations, as their specific implementing rules are specified in Annex A. The main types of deep foundations are:

bored piles cast in situ (Figures 1.1 a and b) of concrete or reinforced concrete;

Concrete or reinforced concrete bars of different forms cast in place (Figure 1.1 c);

refoulants piles cast in situ (Figure 1.2 a) or prefabricated (Figure 1.2 b) of concrete or reinforced concrete;

metal piles of different shapes (sheet piles, tubes, profiles H, piling boxes) implemented by threshing, jacking or vibratory driving (Figures 1.2 c and d);

micropiles (Figure 1.3);

screw piles of concrete or reinforced concrete (Figure 1.4).

(5) The verification of the structural strength of deep foundations falls computing standards for the material that constitutes the (eg NF EN 1992-1-1 with the national annex NF EN 1992-1-1 / NA for deep foundations

NF P 94-262

reinforced concrete or EN 1993-1-1 and EN 1993-5 standards with their national annex NF EN 1993-1-1 / NA and NF EN 1993-5 / NA for metal pipe piles, sheet piles, etc. ).

(6) This document should be used in conjunction with the NF P 94-282 standard when deep foundations are used to build a retaining wall.

(7) When deep foundations are used as part of a project of composite foundation necessary to distinguish two cases (Note 1):

one where deep foundations (piles, rigid inclusions) make a significant contribution to the justification GEO

type of ultimate limit states (lift of the work vis-à-vis the axial stresses and / or transverse, general stability,

...

). This type of use fully covered by the provisions laid down in this document.

one where deep foundations (piles, rigid inclusions) make only a small or negligible contribution to the justification of the ultimate limit states. These are projects for which the realization of deep foundations is essentially justified by the state of compaction barring service limit. This type of use is not part of this document.

NOTE 1 - The foundation on soft inclusions (stone columns) are not the subject of this document whether the justification for the ultimate limit state or serviceability limit states. The justification of such structures relies now on professional recommendations or calculation methods available in the literature.

(8) Regarding the application areas of deep foundations defined in Clause 7 of this Section, the provisions of this document still apply in full, on one hand, as regards the determination of the characteristic values of the properties and resistances materials constituting the deep foundation and the soil in place, and secondly, to the characteristic values of the properties and friction resistance and the tip.

(9) deep foundations of processes not described in this document or in terms of performance, in terms of constituent materials, may be used provided they have been the subject of a particular specification including specifications 'specific performance and the appropriate parameter values of bearing capacity and strength of materials. These values should be based on experimental justification. In particular, with regard to the bearing capacity, the parameter values must be derived from a set of pile load tests in comparable geotechnical contexts covering those prevailing for the project. (10) This document is fully applicable to projects under the Geotechnical Category 2 (Notes 1 to 3, Appendix P, NF EN 1997-1), that is to say to the current structures that do not show exceptional risk and are not exposed to exceptionally difficult ground or loading conditions.

NOTE 1 - In general, the geotechnical category of a work is fixed by the owner or his representative before the start of the study of the project, and, if necessary, specified in the As of progress of studies.

NOTE 2 - deep foundations established in lands whose behavior falls rock mechanics are classified mostly in geotechnical category 3. It is the same for deep foundations made on slopes or hillsides whose stability initial does not meet the minimum safety conditions normally required for deep foundations and supporting structures whose geometry is complex or with displacement criteria and / or severe rotation.

NOTE 3 - The specifications of this document can be applied to works of Geotechnical Category 3, but it is important in this case to verify their relevance and if necessary to adapt or supplement, taking into account, where appropriate, indications of this document.

(11) This document applies fully as deep foundations subject to static loads or can be considered as such in the supporting calculations. In particular, the calculation of deep foundation subjected to seismic loading responsibility of NF EN 1998-1 and EN 1998-5. In the absence of partial coefficient values related to the lift and the tensile strength of deep foundations for combinations with seismic ELU in EN 1998-1 and EN 1998-5 standards, should be considered a yt partial factor equal to 1.1 for AN relating to the bearing capacity and equal to 1.15 for AN relative to the tensile strength. Guidance on the transverse behavior of deep foundations under seismic load are provided in Annex I (Article I.3).

NF P 94-262

NF P 94-262 (A) and (b) Legend: 1 - precast concrete element; 2 - Injection; 3
NF P 94-262 (A) and (b) Legend: 1 - precast concrete element; 2 - Injection; 3

(A) and (b) Legend: 1 - precast concrete element; 2 - Injection; 3 - Provisional Tubing (Extraction); 4 - uncased drilling; 5 - reinforced concrete or unreinforced or grout; B: Diameter of the barrel

NF P 94-262

(C) Legend: W: Thickness; L: Length

Figure 1.1 - Examples of piles drilled circular and concrete bars

NF P 94-262 (C) Legend: W: Thickness; L: Length Figure 1.1 - Examples of piles

Legend: a - Stake beaten concrete executed in place; b - Stake beat precast concrete; c - pile beaten metal profile; d - Sample piles beaten steel sections

Figure 1.2 - Examples of piles beaten concrete and steel

NF P 94-262

Legend: a - Gravity Filling a drill with grout; b - Injection in a single pass by a temporary casing; c - Injection in a single pass by a carrier member; d - Injection in a single pass by a tube with sleeves; d - repeating Injection by a tube with sleeves

Figure 1.3 - Examples of micro piles drilled with injection of a sealing grout

NF P 94-262 Legend: a - Gravity Filling a drill with grout; b - Injection in

Figure 1.4 - Pile technical examples made by screwing

NF P 94-262

2

references

The documents referenced below are indispensable for the application of this standard. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references the latest edition of the publication to which it is referred to applies (including amendments). This list is not exhaustive and should refer as appropriate to all standards issued by AFNOR.

NF P 94-270, Geotechnical design - Retaining structures - Remblais strengthened and nailed in solid ground.

AC P 94-281, Justification of geotechnical structures - supporting Screens - Retaining Walls 1 .

NF P 94-282, Geotechnical design - Retaining structures - Screens.

NF P 94-500, Missions geotechnical engineering - Classifications and specifications.

NF EN 1990 Structural Eurocode - Basis of structures with its national annex (EN 1990 / NA).

NF EN 1538 Execution of special geotechnical works - Diaphragm walls.

NF EN 1991 Eurocode 1: Actions on structures with its National Annex (NF EN 1991 / NA).

EN 1992-2, Eurocode 2 - Design of concrete structures - Part 2: Concrete bridges - Design of constructive arrangements with its National Annex (NF EN 1992-2 / NA).

EN 1992-1-1 Eurocode 2 - Design of concrete structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings) with its National Annex (NF EN 1992-1-1 / NA).

EN 1993-1-1, Eurocode 3 - Design of steel structures - Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings with its National Annex (NF EN 1993-1-1 / NA).

EN 1993-5, Eurocode 3 - Design of steel structures - Part 5: Piles and piles with its National Annex (NF EN 1993-1-5 / NA).

EN 1997-1, Eurocode 7 - Geotechnical design - Part 1: General requirements with its National Annex (NF EN 1997-1 / NA).

EN 1997-2, Eurocode 7 - Geotechnical design - Part 2: Recognition of courses and tests.

EN 1998-1, Eurocode 8 - Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules, seismic actions and rules for buildings with its National Annex (NF EN 1998 / NA).

EN 1 998-5, Eurocode 8 - Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 5: Foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical aspects with its National Annex (NF EN 1998-5 / NA).

NF EN 1536, Execution of special geotechnical works - drilled Piles.

NF EN 12699, Execution of special geotechnical works - Piles with discharge from the ground.

NF EN 14199, Execution of special geotechnical works - Micropiles.

NF EN 12501-1, Protection of metallic materials against corrosion - Contact corrosion in soil - Part 1:

General.

NF EN 12501-2, Protection of metallic materials against corrosion - Contact corrosion in soil - Part 2: Low alloyed ferrous materials or non-alloy.

EN ISO 14688-1, Geotechnical investigation and testing - Identification and classification of soil - Part 1:

Identification and description.

EN ISO 14688-2, Geotechnical investigation and testing - Identification and classification of soil - Part 2:

1 In preparation for.

NF P 94-262

pri ncipes for classification.

EN ISO 22476-3, Geotechnical investigation and testing - up testing - Part 3 - penetration test sampler.

EN ISO 22476-12, Geotechnical investigation and testing - up testing - Part 1 - Test the static penetrometer mechanical edge.

ISO 4356, Bases for design of buildings. Deformations of buildings to limit states.

NF P 94-262

  • 3 Terms, definitions and symbols

(1) The main terms used herein are defined in this section and shown in Figure 3.1. For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in the NF EN 1990 apply to all Eurocodes and those given in the NF EN 19971 specific to the calculation of geotechnical structures also apply. Finally, the different types of deep foundation elements under this document are described in Annex A.

9 - tip Enlargement 10 - Diameter of the cage
9
- tip Enlargement
10
-
Diameter of
the
cage

Figure 3.1 - Terms and definitions on an example of bored pile of

Diameter of the barrel

11

 

diameter at the base

12

 

height of the shell length

13

 

Drilling depth layer (s)

14

 

greater than (s)

15

 

Foundation layer

16

 

Longitudinal axis

17

 

reinforcement cage

18

 

retractor plunger tube

19

13

21

reinforced concrete

  • 3.1 Terms and definitions

    • 3.1.1 Geotechnical share (NF EN 1990)

Action transmitted to the structure by the ground, an embankment, a body of water or groundwater.

  • 3.1.2 comparable experience

Information documented or clearly established by other means, on the ground considered in the calculation, involving the same types of soil and rock, which can be expected to have similar geotechnical behavior, and similar structures. Information obtained locally are considered particularly relevant.

  • 3.1.3 foundation

Lower part of a structure intended to ensure its stability. This term refers as the case of shallow foundations (insole, rafts), semi-deep (wells, wells) or deep.

NF P 94-262

  • 3.1.4 stake

slender structural member placed in the soil, to transfer thereto the actions that are transmitted by the scope structure him or by the surrounding terrain. It can be prefabricated or produced in place and be implemented by drilling, boring, by vibration, by hammering, screwing or jacking.

  • 3.1.5 bar

diaphragm wall element or set of elements interconnected molded wall (for example L-shaped, T or cruciform) and concreted simultaneously.

  • 3.1.6 well

deep foundation or semi-deep, of metric order diameter dug shovel or clamshell.

  • 3.1.7 micropieu

Pile of small diameter (less than or equal to 300 mm), generally made with special techniques.

  • 3.1.8 drilled pile

deep foundation made by drilling or by manual excavation (for example a pile or a drilled micropile, a bar, a shaft, etc.).

  • 3.1.9 pile in soil discharge

deep foundation formed by threshing, or jacking or vibration, or screwing of a prefabricated element of reinforced concrete or metal. This term also includes deep foundations implemented by introduction of concrete, grout or mortar in a recess formed by bores, threshing or screwing a tube closed at its base.

  • 3.1.10 Integrity Test

Test performed on a finite stake, to check its geometry and condition of the materials in place.

  • 3.1.11 loading test

Test consisting in applying a force at the head of a test pile and measuring at least the displacement of the latter under the applied force. There are different types of tests depending on the nature of the force applied (low static loading bearings, single or multiple dynamic impact variable effort jacking speed constant depression), depending on the orientation of force applied (axial or transverse loading head) and in function of measurements (measurements in only head or a pile instrumented allowing access to the distribution of forces along the long pile).

  • 3.1.12 downdrag

Geotechnical action where the surrounding land transfer to the deep foundation a downward load when compared to the cup was of deep foundation.

  • 3.2 Symbols and indices

    • 3.2.1 Soils and books

(1) The main symbols used in this document relating to land and deep foundations are in 3.2.1.1 and

3.2.I.2.

NOTE 1 - The other symbols are defined in the appropriate places in the text.

3.2.1.1

Latin letters

ab

surface of the base of a deep foundation

ace

area of the cross section of the shank of a deep foundation

adistance nude naked entredeux élémentsde fondationprofonde

bdistance nude naked entredeux élémentsde fondationprofonde

NF P 94-262

B smaller width or diameter of the section of a deep foundation effective

c'cohésion

Ce

coefficient of efficiency of a group of deep foundations taken into account to determine its resistance

Cmax

maximum value of the compressive strength of the concrete

cu undrained cohesion

dentraxe between two deep foundation elements

D length of the deep foundation within the field

Of

height equivalent Recessed

def

effective installation height

eCM

concrete modulus

Edif

Delayed modulus of the concrete

EM

Ménard pressuremeter modulus

fck* Characteristic compressive strength to be considered for checks compressive stress of the concrete structure of deep foundation

fck

Ala resistance characteristic 28-day compressive

fck(T) characteristic resistance to compression Ala t days; t <28 days

k1

empirical coefficient tenantcompte of the delivery mode Inthe soil as well as possible variations in section according to the technique used

k2

empirical coefficient taking into account the difficulties concreting related to the geometry of the foundation

k3

empirical coefficient taking into account the integrity checks

Lplus great length of a deep foundation section (B = L for a deep foundation circular)

nNumber piles or test profiles

P perimeter of a deep foundation or group of deep foundations

Pi pressure pressiometric Ménard mp limit

flow

pressure pressiometric Ménard

qc resistance to penetration (measured Static penetrometer according to EN 22476-12) vertical zdistance

  • 3.2.1.2 Greek letters

access

a coefficient taking into account the long-term effects on the concrete strength (EN 1992-1

1)

Y

specific weight

Y

'Half-gauge unit weight

incl

partial factor for concrete (EN 1992-1-1)

NF P 94-262

9'angle internal friction effective stress

  • 3.2.2 Actions and resistances

(1)

The main symbols used in this document relating to the actions and resistances are shown in articles

3.2.2.1 and 3.2.2.2.

NOTE 1 - The other symbols are defined in the appropriate places in the text.

NOTE 2 - For the geotechnical resistance of a deep foundation, indices "c" and "cr" respectively refer to the ultimate strength and creep load of a single deep foundation, "cal" indices "m "respectively refer to a value calculated from test results on the ground and to a value measured during a load test, finally indices" ug "and" MAF "refer to the limit and resistance respectively the pile group creep load.

NOTE 3 - "str" index is own actions from possible superstructure or resistance of the structure.

NOTE 4 - The indices "dst" and "stb" clean respectively destabilizing and stabilizing effect of an action. The indices "inf" and "sup" are respectively related to the favorable and unfavorable nature of the effect of a permanent action for audits of ultimate limit states STR and GEO and UPL.

NOTE 5 - The index "k" and "d" respectively refer to the characteristic value and the calculation value of a share or its purpose, or a resistor, or a property of a material .

  • 3.2.2.1 Latin letters

"+" Means "should be combined with"

A surface of a deep foundation

ab

surface of a deep foundation to take into account for the calculation of the limit resistance point

ad

design value of the accidental action

AEd

value for calculating a seismic action

CD

value calculating limit the effect of an action

Ed

value for calculating the effect of stock

Fd design value of an action

Fk characteristic value of an action

Fnot negative friction on a deep foundation

ft

value of the axial tensile load on a deep foundation tensile or a group of deep foundations tensile

ftr

value of the transverse load over a deep deep foundation or a group of deep foundation

permanent Gaction

Gdst

permanent action for destabilizing vis-à-vis the uprising verification

GSTB

stabilizing permanent vertical action vis-à-vis the uprising audit

Ginf

actionpermanente destabilizing

GSUP

unfavorable actionpermanente

Gsnactionde downdrag

NF P 94-262

Gspactionde transverse thrusts

horizontal Hforce

kf

linear demobilisationdela pressionfrontale module A widget of fondationprofonde

Ksmodule linear demobilisationdela réactiontangentiellepourunélément defondation

deep

Side friction engagement Lslongueur for a deep foundation member

Mmoment flexing

QAction variable

Qk1

combination value of the prevailing unfavorable variable action

Qki

combination of value from another unfavorable variable action

qb

resistant pressure limit on the basis of a deep foundation

qs i

stress limit axial friction in the i layer

Ppérimètre a foundation profondecirculaire

Rb

Miter limit resistance of a deep foundation

rc

limit resistance to compression of the field of deep foundation

Rc cr

creep load compression of the field of deep foundation

Rc; cacalculated ivaleur R

c inferred from test results on the ground

Rc; m

measured value of Rc in one or more load tests of a deep foundation

NF P 94-262

R c; pr

Rs

 

calculated value of Rc following the recommendations of the Annex to the NF EN 1990

Rs;

 

limit axial friction resistance of a deep foundation calculated value of Rs

cal

 

tensile yield strength of a deep foundation tensile

rt

 

creep load of deep foundation

R t cr

 

Rt value measured in one or more loading tests a profound resistance foundation of a

Rt; m

 

deep foundation with transverse loads shear

rtr

3.2.2.2

Greek letters

T

 

Y

partial factor for the peak strength of a deep foundation

YG

partial factor for a permanent action

YG, sup Partial /TG.inffacteurs for unfavorable / favorable permanent actions YG, sn / YG, sp partial factors for negative friction shares / transverse thrusts

YM

partial factor for a parameter of soil (a material property), taking into account also uncertainties in the model

YQ

partial factor for a variable action

YQ, I / Y Q

partial factors for the dominant variable actions / support i

TRdfacteur part to uncertainty in a model of resistance

Ys

partial factor for the axial frictional resistance of a deep foundation

Ysdfacteur part to uncertainties in modeling the actions effect

Ys; t

partial factor for the tensile strength of a deep foundation

Y

partial factor for the total resistance of a deep foundation

Ç

correlation factor based on the number of piles tested or test profiles

G; C2

correlation factors to assess the results of static load tests depieux

C3; C4

correlation factors to derive the strength of a deep foundation of résultatsde field reconnaissance at the pile load tests exclusion

C5; C6

correlation factors to derive the strength of a deep foundation testing dynamic impact factor for converting the characteristic value representative value of an action

NF P 94-262

VojQkî

combination of value to the unfavorable variable action Accompanying i

Vl, LQK, 1

frequent value of the prevailing unfavorable variable action

VQ

frequent value of the unfavorable variable action Accompanying i

V2 IQK i

almost permanent value of the prevailing unfavorable variable action

V2 iQki

almost permanent value to the unfavorable variable action Accompanying i

I

means "the combined effect"

NOTE 1 - The indices of ^ for the combination of values of variable actions Q have the following meanings:

the first index (0) indicates that it is a combination of value (1) indicates that it is a frequent value, (2) an almost constant value.

the second index refers to the action of the variable number.

3.2.3

Abbreviations

(1)

The main abbreviations used in this document are:

-

ultimate limit state

ELECTED

-

LIVE

serviceability limit state

-

EQU

equilibrium (ultimate limit state)

-

GEO

Geotechnical (ultimate limit state)

-

STR

structure (ultimate limit state)

-

UPL

uprising (ultimate limit state)

NF P 94-262

  • 4 Behavior of deep foundations

    • 4.1 Overview

(1) The purpose of the section 4 is to describe the behavior under axial load (Section 4.2) and under transverse load (Section 4.3) of a single deep foundation (Notes 1 to 3).

NOTE 1 - The behavior of deep foundations under axial load, described in Section 4.2, based on many static load tests in real compression piles conducted until failure (characterized by agreement by pressing the deep foundation over 10% of its width), and usually instrumented throughout the pile length. The behavior of deep foundations under transverse load, described in section 4.3 is also based on full-scale load tests, but limited in number, and of testing of scale models.

NOTE 2 - The behavior of deep foundations under cyclic loading is not described in this document. Refer if necessary to specialized articles describing experiments performed on these topics. In the current state of knowledge, only specific tests such as those used for offshore projects help to identify the behavior of deep foundations under cyclic efforts. When the cyclical part of the effort is significant, it is necessary to consider the possibility of a gradual decrease in soil resistance fatigue.

NOTE 3 - Schematic behavior patterns recommended for confirmation of stability of deep foundations are presented in Sections 9 and 10 of this document.

  • 4.2 under axial load behavior

(1) When gradually applies an axial load stepwise compression of the head of a single deep foundation, there is a progressive sinking thereof depending on the applied load. Is obtained, usually, a load curve (Figure 4.2.1 a) with a first portion where the depression of the head of the deep foundation remains moderate when the load increases and stabilizes rapidly when held constant and a second part, where the depression of the head of the deep foundation is growing rapidly with each load increment, and stabilizes for a significant period of time (Figures 4.2.1 and 4.2.1 b and c Rating 1).

NOTE 1 - The loading curve allows to highlight the limit resistance to compression or limit the lift of the deep foundation Rc and observation of the deep foundation behavior under each loading bearing its creep load Rc cr ( Figure 4.2.1 a).

(2) When applying an axial compression load of the head of a deep foundation, there is a decrease of the axial compressive stress in the deep foundation with depth due to the mobilization of unitary axial friction (Figure 4.2.2).

(3) The unit mobilized axial friction force at a given level of deep foundation increases progressively with the vertical movement of it at this level and limit value is most often reached for a very small displacement (or less than one two centimeters). 2

  • 2 The peak strength of a deep foundation (Rb) (Figure 4.2.2) gradually increases with the driving of its tip, but in general, the maximum resistance peak is usually mobilized for a major depression the tip of the deep foundation (over 10% of its width).

NF P 94-262

a - load-deflection curve of the head b -

stabilization of straight

legend:

a - X: load applied [kN) - Y: Settling of the pile [m] b - X: Time

[min] - Y: Settling of the pile [mm / h] c - X: load applied [kN) -

Y: speed driving [m]

Figure 4.2.1 - Examples of curves obtained in a static loading test of pile APARTIR only measures the movement of the head of the pile

NF P 94-262

NF P 94-262 Legend: X: pile head load [kN] - Y: Depth [m] Figure 4.2.2 -

Legend: X: pile head load [kN] - Y: Depth [m]

Figure 4.2.2 - Evolution of efforts with depth in a post subjected to a load static progressive stepwise

  • 4.3 Behavior under transverse stresses

(1) When gradually applied stepwise transverse load (horizontal) at the head of a single deep foundation, there is a progressive horizontal movement thereof depending on the applied load. Is obtained, usually, a load curve with the first part, where the horizontal movement of the head of the deep foundation remains moderate when the load increases and stabilizes quickly when held constant, and a second part, where the horizontal movement of the head of the deep foundation is growing rapidly with each load increment, and stabilizes for a significant period of time.

(2) When applying a transverse load the head of a deep foundation, the cross reaction of the mobilized ground at a given level increases progressively with the horizontal movement of the deep foundation at this level (Figure 4.3.1 and Note 1) and, generally, the maximum mobilized effort is achieved for a horizontal displacement of deep foundation rather large (several centimeters).

NOTE 1 - curve P (y) is usually called ground reaction curve (Figure 4.3.1).

NF P 94-262 Legend: X: pile head load [kN] - Y: Depth [m] Figure 4.2.2 -

Legend: P: reaction pressure (Pa) - y: displacement relative horizontal (m) - P: distributed force on the pile (N / m) (P = Pb) (cross-reaction) - Es: Reaction Module (Pa)

Figure 4.3.1 - mobilization curves of the cross-reaction on a stake

(3)

When a deep foundation is subjected to transverse

stresses

in

head (horizontal force and /

or

moment), the distribution with the depth of the mobilized cross-reaction is shown diagrammatically in

 

Figure 4.3.2.

NF P 94-262

NF P 94-262 Legend: Fc: against stop - Fp stop Figure 4.3.2 - Mobilization of the

Legend: Fc: against stop - Fp stop

Figure 4.3.2 - Mobilization of the cross reaction of the field depending on the depth in the case of a short pile

(4) When a deep foundation is subjected to lateral force due to an overall horizontal displacement of the soil (Figure 4.3.3 a), the cross-reaction of the mobilized ground at a given level gradually increases with the difference between the horizontal movement of the deep and the free movement of foundation soil at this level (Figure 4.3.3 b).

NF P 94-262 Legend: Fc: against stop - Fp stop Figure 4.3.2 - Mobilization of the

a - stress on the pieub - Reaction Curve

Legend: g (z): free movement of the floor - y (z) displacement with the pile - Ay = y (z) - g (z)

Figure 4.3.3 - Mobilization of the cross reaction of the field in the case of a displacement

Overall thereof

  • 4.4 failure mechanisms or unacceptable disorders

4.4.1

Overview

NF P 94-262

(1) Deep foundations and structures they support may perish or suffer unacceptable disorders mainly due to the failure or excessive deformation of the structure, the field in which the foundation is completed or the site where the structure is built .

(2) It follows the behaviors and mechanisms described in sections 4.2 and 4.3 that different limit states to be considered for the deep foundations (Note 1):

ultimate limit states of the ground fault resistance by lift failure, tensile strength or cross reaction (Section 4.4.2);

the ultimate limit states fault structural strength of deep foundations compressive, tensile, bending, buckling or shear (Section 4.4.3);

the ultimate limit state general stability of the site (Article 4.4.4);

the ultimate limit states and ground deformation service and the foundation (Article 4.4.5).

NOTE 1 - The detailed list of limit states to be considered for a project is given in section 7.2 of EN 1997-1 standard. It is specified in section 8 of this document borderlines usually to check for current projects.

(3) It is necessary to check, where appropriate, that no such limit states can not be achieved during the construction of the scope and structure during its expected useful life.

  • 4.4.2 Lot Resistance

(1) The ruin of the scope structure or the foundation itself, can occur when the forces transmitted to the ground by a single pile or all of the foundation exceed a critical threshold or are too close to the limit resistance mobilized by the ground.

(2) As appropriate (axial or lateral force), different failure mechanisms terrain may occur (punching, tearing or rupture stop modes).

  • 4.4.3 structural strength

(1) The ruin of a deep foundation may occur when the structural strength is insufficient vis-à-vis the impact of the worst action (bending moment, shear, axial force of compression or tension) it will have to undergo, under construction or in use.

(2) The elements of a deep foundation structure must be verified vis-à-vis the breakdown according to the specifications of 2.4.6.4 items (Notes 1 and 2) and 7.8 of EN 1997-1 standard.

NOTE 1 - Design values of material strengths and resistances of structural elements are to be determined in accordance with instructions on the appropriate calculation standards constituent material of deep foundations (eg DIN EN 1992 for concrete piles and NF EN 1993 for metal piles structural steel).

NOTE 2 - Additional provisions to DIN EN 1992 are provided in Sections 6.4 and 12 of this document. They concern the factors to be applied to the characteristic values of concrete resistance to reflect the embodiment of deep concrete foundations, integrity checks and design specifics of deep foundations vis-à-vis the effort edged.

  • 4.4.4 general site stability

(1) In each relevant case-specific analysis of the stability of the site which is located pile foundation and a study of the risk of instability of the site linked to the achievement of the work must be performed (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - the overall stability verification procedures are subject to Section 13 of this document.

(2) When the general stability of the site before work begins or under construction is not required level of security, it should take appropriate structural arrangements to make steady work zone (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - There is therefore no need to consider the actions caused by a movement of all the land linked to a site of general instability phenomenon as vis-à-vis actions of deep foundations.

NOTE 2 - The realization of deep foundations can be to stabilize an unstable site, but in this case, their justification is

NF P 94-262

5 Actions and geometric data

not part of this document.

  • 4.4.5 Disorders related to travel deep foundations

(1) The displacement of deep foundation is likely to be unacceptable for the structure of deep foundations themselves or for the construction of current scope structure and / or during operation (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - Depending on their size and as applicable, the vertical displacement and the horizontal displacement of deep foundations, can cause disorders and impair the function of buildings they support or even lead to their ruin.

NOTE 2 - structures carried for which a horizontal displacement of the foundation may be excessive for example:

a foot bridge abutment of an embankment built on a compressible layer;

of dolphins or very slender structures (wind or the like);

(2) In all cases, it is appropriate to adopt constructive measures that are appropriate to field conditions and take account of predictable moves, while aiming, whenever possible, to limit the importance (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - In general, displacement calculations give only an approximate indication of their real value and is useful where possible to refer to comparable experience.

NF P 94-262

5.1

stock

  • 5.1.1 General calculation principle

(1) The shares shall be classified in accordance with Article 4.1.1 of the NF EN 1990, distinguishing:

permanent actions (G);

variable actions (Q);

accidental actions (A).

(2) The representative values of the shares shall be determined in accordance with sections 4.1.2 and

 

4.1.3

of NF EN 1990 and Article 2.4.5 of the standard EN 1997-1 (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - The shares have more representative values. The characteristic value of an action (subscripted k) is its main representative value. It is determined in accordance with section 4.1.2 of EN 1990 standard completed for geotechnical actions by section 2.4.5.1 of EN 1997-1 standard.

NOTE 2 - The values of the variables representative actions other than the characteristic value Qk is determined according to the principles set out in section 4.1.3 of the standard NF EN 1990. These are derived from the Qk value by multiplying it by a coefficient Ÿ The coefficients T0, Ti, and corresponding T are given for normal loads (building, road traffic, track, etc.) in the appropriate places of the NF EN 1990.

(3) share calculation values and their effects must be determined in accordance with sections 6.3.1 and

 

6.3.2

of the standard NF EN 1990, supplemented, for geotechnical actions by Article

  • 2.4.6.1 of the NF EN 1997-1 (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - The actions to take into account the different combinations of actions are determined by the NF EN 1990 section 6.4 for calculations for ultimate limit states and section 6.5 for calculations limit state on duty.

(4) The ranking of actions and the determination of their value must also consider the provisions of this standard (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - Details are provided in this section or in the appropriate places in this document, firstly for the classification of actions depending on their origin, their spatial variation and nature, and secondly to determining values of geotechnical actions and the consideration of the effects due to water.

  • 5.1.2 direct drive Shares

(1) The actions applied to the foundation, other than those due to water, the origin of which is not related to the presence of ground and are not passed through it, should be determined in accordance with NF EN 1991 or otherwise set by the market (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - Attention is drawn to the fact that the intensity of direct drive action may depend on the soil-structure interaction. For example, the distribution of shares between the different piles may depend on the rigidity of the structure and scope of that of each pile. 3

  • 3 The weight of the foundation is to be introduced in the calculations with the most likely value, evaluated from the volumes defined by the dimensions provided on the execution plans.

NF P 94-262

5.1.3 Actions due to ground

 

5.1.3.1

weight original stock

(1) Actions underweight origin (weight, thrust, thrust) must be treated as permanent actions in the combinations of actions.

(2) The characteristic value of an original weight action must be determined:

from volumes, taking into account the adopted operating model (Note 1) and a possible adverse change in geometry when it is foreseeable;

from the volume weight land measured at the geotechnical and / or representative of bibliographic data in the case of ground up (Note 2)

from representative volumetric weight into account the nature of the soil, its implementation mode and compactness in the case of reported soil (Note 2).

NOTE 1 - In the case of a structure providing a supporting function, the volume of land causing a weight effect on the foundation depends on the calculation model adopted for the mobilization of the thrust.

NOTE 2 - Indications are given in Section 6 and Annex M for determining the specific gravity of the land in place (Articles 6.2 and M.2) and reported materials (items 6.3 and M.3).

 

5.1.3.2

thrust or thrust actions

(1) Shares of thrust or passive earth that act on a screen or wall must be determined in accordance with the NF EN 1997-1, Section 9.5 and NF P 94-281 and NF P 94-282 standard (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - The intensity and distribution of thrust or thrust actions depend on the considered type of structure, mechanical characteristics of the soil and the amplitude of the displacements may affect the screen on which carry these pressures.

NOTE 2 - The recommended procedures for the calculation of these actions are indicated in the Complementary Standards NF P 94-281 and NF P 94-282 dealing with retaining structures, respectively walls and screens.

(2) Soil pressure acting on deep foundations due to a displacement of the foundation should be treated as the reactions of support and be evaluated from suitable calculation models (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - It is for example the case of the reaction of the ground around a deep foundation solicited by a horizontal force in the lead.

NOTE 2 - The recommended models for the calculation of these pressures are indicated in Annexes I and K.

(3) The actions of pushing or soil abutment must be treated as permanent actions in the combinations of actions (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - Depending on the case, are attributed to these shares, a maximum characteristic value alone or a couple of characteristic values, maximum and minimum, respectively, considering the worst of both to limit state studied.

 

5.1.3.3

Actions due to an overall displacement of the soil

(1) Actions due to an overall displacement of soil (Notes 1 to 3) shall be determined in accordance with the NF EN 1997-1 and this document.

NOTE 1 - These actions may be due to:

is a phenomenon of instability of the book's website,

either a slowdown or a soil creep under the lasting effect of a load or a lowering of the water table.

NOTE 2 - The shares resulting from site instability phenomenon beyond the scope of this standard. This type of problem occurs especially when the book is set in the mountains and foundations across scree stability limit. Similarly, this standard does not apply to the case of mining sites, underground quarries, karst sites or sites where loess (or fill) effondrables are present. Such conditions are likely to motivate a project classification in geotechnical category 3.

NF P 94-262

5.1.5 Actions due to water

NOTE 3 - considered actions are:

the actions caused by a soil compaction, called negative friction;

actions generated by a horizontal displacement of the soil, called transverse thrusts.

(2) The forces due to the negative friction on a pile foundation or part of backfilled structure should be evaluated according to an appropriate model (Annex H) and be introduced into the calculations as a representative characteristic value of the corresponding action.

(3) The transverse forces acting on a pile foundation or part of backfilled structure must be evaluated from a representative function of the soil displacement by considering it as an action (Appendix K).

(4) The forces due to friction and negative transverse forces should be treated as permanent actions in equity combinations (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - The shares due to overall ground displacements have an intensity that varies generally in the same direction by moving towards a limit, so it should place them in the category of permanent actions. These actions, however, were isolated from other permanent actions because they may not be the same weights, difficulty circumvented by applying a coefficient model to determine.

  • 5.1.4 Shares soilborne

(1) Shares soilborne, other than those due to water and the origin of which is not related to the presence of the ground, but seeking the foundation through it must be determined in accordance with NF EN 1997-1 section 9.5 and NF P 94-281 and NF P 94-282 standard (Notes 1 to 3).

NOTE 1 - In the usual case, this is mainly the effect of pressure on a retaining wall (abutment for example) supporting an operating expense or storage.

NOTE 2 - The intensity and distribution of these pressures depend on the considered type of structure, mechanical properties of the soil and the amplitude movements may affect the screen that exert such pressures. For example, the distribution of a variable load through an embankment can be studied according to different models whose validity depends on the type of the load, its duration of application, and the nature of the structure.

NOTE 3 - The recommended procedures for the calculation of pressure on a screen are shown in complementary standards NF P 94-281 and NF P 94-282 dealing with retaining structures, respectively walls and screens. 4

5.1.5.1 Overview

(1) Targeted actions are of two types:

the water in the field is in equilibrium or near hydrostatic equilibrium, ie the effect of hydraulic gradients is negligible and actions due to water can be represented in the form of static pressures (Note 1 );

Water generates hydrodynamic actions.

NOTE 1 - This is the water pressure field in contact with the structure. This action is similar to a direct drive action. In most cases, it results in pushing "Archimedes" on the structure. The presence of water also has the effect of changing the actions due to field by the effect of "planing" of it. If water flows into the ground, the hydraulic gradient also changes the actions due to ground by the effect commonly called "stream of pressure."

(2) The choice of the positions of the free water surface and the piezometric levels of groundwater must (Notes 1 to 4):

be done based on the recognition of hydraulic and hydrogeological conditions of the site;

be appropriate to limit state considered taking into account the positive or negative nature of the effect of resulting actions.

  • 4 Shares soilborne, other than those due to water and the origin of which is not related to the presence of the soil, should be treated as variable or permanent actions in combinations of actions according to their duration application in relation to the project situation examined.

NF P 94-262

NOTE 1 - Changes in water conditions (soaking, drying) can alter underground water status of soil and thus their mechanical characteristics. The imbibing of some soils (loess embankment or have experienced only low saturation degrees) can cause a phenomenon of land subsidence. The floors immediately below the base of a deep foundation may lose because of imbibing some of their lift which can lead to more or less consequential damages for the scope structure.

NOTE 2 - It is important to note that the values of the mechanical parameters of soils vary according to their state of saturation and should therefore be attentive to the time of year during which awards were performed.

NOTE 3 - It is recalled that the water levels fall geometric data (Article 5.2) and that their values are, as the case of excess or by default measured levels, nominal or estimated (Clause 5.2.2 ( 2)).

NOTE 4 - The values of water levels are determined during the project studies. Indications are given in sections 7.1 and 5.2 of this document for establishing the reference levels.

  • 5.1.5.2 static pressures

(1) The intensity and pressure distribution must be evaluated from the reference levels for the design situation considered (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - The situations and reference levels to consider during construction and during operation respectively in clauses 7.1.2 and 7.1.3 of this standard. Article 5.2 reminds definitions usually considered baselines.

(2) Action due to water, the effect can be likened to that of static pressures must be processed for a given project situation as a permanent action in the combinations of shares (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - It is through the different design situations studied its variability is taken into account.

NF P 94-262

hydrodynamic 5.1.5.3Actions

(1) The current hydrodynamic actions should be evaluated from the reference levels for the design situation considered (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - In the case of structures operating in coastal location, attention is drawn to the fact that the intensity of wave effect becomes significant when the wave amplitude reaches about two meters or more. A specific study (dynamic) is required in each case because the effects of the swell highly dependent on geometrical and mechanical characteristics of the structure.

NOTE 2 - In usual cases, the forces generated by an average speed of water vein v and height h a width B fixed obstacle can be assimilated to a triangular pressure pattern with maximum pressure is located at the free surface and the resultant is (Figure 5.1.5):

h and B are expressed in

m; v is the speed in m / s;

F is the resultant force in N;

F = kpwhBv 2

(5.1.5)

pw is the density of water that is allowed to take equal to 1000kg / m3 in all cases; k takes the following values:

0.72 if the planar section of the obstacle is rectangular or square,

0.35 if the planar section of the obstacle is circular.

The height h takes into account the possible general scour considered equal to the water level, but does not include the height of local scour.

NF P 94-262 hydrodynamic 5.1.5.3Actions (1) The current hydrodynamic actions should be evaluated from the reference

Figure 5.1.5 - hydrodynamic effects of the current

(2) The hydrodynamic effects other than current action should be specific and the corresponding action will study, according to its nature and intensity, be classified as variable or accidental actions (Notes 1 to

3).

NOTE 1 - hydrodynamic actions referred mainly those due to swell, the tidal current, wave action or to those caused by an earthquake.

NF P 94-262

NOTE 2 - The choice of model of action to be adopted to assess the pseudo-static value of a share hydrodynamics for a project given situation is based on project requirements and limit state considered.

2

It is most often specialists and is to be defined before the project studies.

NOTE 3 - In the case of structures operating in coastal location, a specific study (dynamic) is usually necessary to set the intensity of the effects of the swell.

  • 5.1.6 seismic actions

(1) The calculation of deep foundation under seismic conditions not directly from this standard. Seismic actions are transmitted through the ground to calculate and take into account according to the specifications of DIN EN 1998.

(2) This standard deals, regarding the consideration of seismic conditions, only partial factors to be applied to the lift or the tensile strength of a deep foundation (Section 1 Clause (11)) (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - In the context of the use of models with local laws of soil-structure interaction to evaluate the behavior of a deep foundation under seismic loading, indications concerning the estimation of the reaction module and the plastic bearing are given in Annex I.

  • 5.2 geometric data

    • 5.2.1 General principles

(1) The rating and slope of the land surface, water levels, the levels of the interfaces between the layers, levels of geotechnical excavations and the dimensions must be treated as geometric data and ratings should reflect the variation of the actual values in situ.

(2) When uncertainty AThas relative to a geometric data is significant and likely to have a significant impact on the reliability of the project, the design value of this data, ad, be deduced from the anom nominal value by applying the relationship:

at d = A "

± Aa

  • 5.2.2 marker levels and layer interfaces

(5.2.1)

(1) It must be based on actual values (Note 1) in situ ground level, and if any of the planned excavations and the potential scour the terrain (Clause 7.1.2 (3)).

NOTE 1 - These important data are normally set during project development and validation stage of implementation studies.

(2) When the values

of

the

levels

of

the

ground

surface

and

conservatively, uncertainty AThas to consider is zero.

layer

interfaces

are

determined

  • 5.2.3 Water levels

(1)

The choice of the values of groundwater levels in waters outside the ground and groundwater (Note 1)

must be performed based on the recognition of hydraulic and hydrogeological conditions of the site. 5

5 in the Recommendations can be found for the limit states of Water Site Works (ROSA 2000) released by CETMEF guidance for the calculation of hydrodynamic loads of river or ocean current and the effects of the swell and wave action.

NF P 94-262

NOTE 1 - Groundwater can be free or captive (charge sheet). External waters are open water (river or other). The water levels may be different from those found during the site reconnaissance. They may also change during the life of the structure (for example when the screen is dam to the flow of a sheet or in the case of a confined aquifer).

(2) For a given design situation (Article 7.1), the value of a groundwater level should be a conservative estimate (Note 1) the worst level vis-à-vis the limit state considered (Note 2), may occur during the project situation examined.

NOTE 1

-

The characteristic value is, as appropriate, by a plus or minus value of measured levels, nominal or

estimated.

NOTE 2 - This is to say, taking into account the positive or negative nature of the effect of resulting actions.

(3) He agreed that the groundwater level of the waters outside the ground and underground, in situations of persistent and transient design or set priority by referring, at EB (almost permanent level) at EF (common) and in EH (characteristic) (Notes 1 and 2), when the values of these levels are easily accessible (Note 3) (Figure 5.2.3).

NOTE 1 - adopted notations and definitions that follow refer to the National Annex to standard EN 1990 and adapted to the case of piles based on books. EB level can be defined as that corresponding to the level likely to be exceeded for 50% of the reference time, the level EF for 1% of the reference time and the level EH present in principle a return period of 50 years.

NOTE 2 - The reference time is normally the life of the book and, failing that, it should be considered the equal to 50 years.

NOTE 3 - The levels to be considered may be different EH and EB levels as defined in this clause, especially during the construction phase.

(4) Where appropriate, it should set the maximum EE level attainable during the lifetime of the structure for accident situations (Note 1 and Figure 5.2.3).

NOTE 1 - EE level corresponds to a dimension in the structure in which a capping device limits the pressure of the water.

(5) Unless otherwise specified, the design value of a water level must be taken equal to its characteristic value (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - A water level is normally treated as a geometrical data and calculation value deduced from its nominal value characteristic or from the relationship 5.2.1. To the extent that the characteristic value of the position of a water level is set by the market, or when it was given the fluctuations of a layer to define its characteristic level, uncertainty Aa to consider is zero.

NF P 94-262

NF P 94-262 Figure 5.2.3 - Representation of water levels EB, EF, EH and EE 36

Figure 5.2.3 - Representation of water levels EB, EF, EH and EE

NF P 94-262

  • 6 Properties of land and materials

    • 6.1 General principles

(1) The properties of the land and the characteristic values of geotechnical parameters shall be determined in accordance with standards NF EN 1997-1 (Articles 2.4.3 and 2.4.5.2) and EN 1997-2, taking into account the provisions of Articles 6.2 for land in place and 6.3 for the reported materials.

(2) The materials properties characteristic values of deep foundations must be determined in accordance with the relevant design standards (Notes 1 and 2) and where necessary the appropriate product standards.

NOTE 1 - For example, according to the specifications of DIN EN 1992-1-1 for concrete piles and those of the standard NF EN 1993-1-1 for steel piles of structural steel.

NOTE 2 - Additional rules applicable to conventional products (reinforced concrete, structural steel) for the calculation of deep foundations, however, are listed in section 6.4 of this document.

  • 6.2 Land up

(1)

It is necessary to conduct a geotechnical site (Notes 1 to 3), to a sufficient depth, to identify fields in

place as well as hydraulic and hydrogeologic conditions, establish geotechnical model of the site and set the representative values properties the land necessary for the verification of limit states and execution of the work.

NOTE 1 - For deep foundations, it is not possible to ensure that the minimum requirements will be met with negligible risk only on the basis of experience and qualitative geotechnical. Surveys including a characterization of the mechanical properties of land are needed.

NOTE 2 - The importance and content of recognitions are based on the type of structure, ground conditions and successful role models and should adjust the consistency and volume of recognitions and studies Geotechnical Category project (Appendix P). A geological and hydrogeological site investigation completed by recognition with tests on the soil in place or laboratory testing is usually required.

NOTE 3 - The essential requirements and important points regarding the objective of the geotechnical investigations and their contents are listed in the NF EN 1997-1 and EN 1997-2. Recall in Annex M (Article M.1) important points to consider.

(2) A geotechnical terrain model must be established (Note 1) in the pre-project studies and projects within the meaning of the NF P 94-500 standard. For each of the project areas within which the thicknesses of the different layers of soil can be regarded as uniform and homogeneous properties, should be defined:

the mean values and the representative values or characteristics of the parameters of the different soil layers (Note 2);

conditions to the geometric limits (ground layers, ... conditions,

).

),

mechanical (overload,

)

and water (water flow

NOTE 1 - A geotechnical model is essential to design, study and design a pile foundation and also to monitor and control its execution.

NOTE 2 - These parameters include the specific weight, drained shear parameters and undrained, parameters derived from pressuremeter and penetrometer testing and other relevant parameters.

(3)

The properties of the land and the characteristic values of geotechnical parameters to be determined,

including the construction phases, in accordance with sections 2.4.3 and 2.4.5.2 of standard NF EN 1997 (Notes 1 and 2), supplemented by indications of articles and M.2.1 M.2.2.

NOTE 1 - It is particularly important that the properties of the land is deducted directly or correlations, testing up or standardized laboratory tests, and that the characteristic parameter value is based on the data that can be if necessary

NF P 94-262

supplemented by the teachings of the experiment (Clause 6.2 (4)). When using correlations for the property values of land, it is appropriate that the correlations used are appropriate to field conditions and the test equipment used and documented (M.2 Clause (3)).

NOTE 2 - It is also important that the chosen characteristic value for a geotechnical parameter is a conservative estimate of the value that influences the limit state considered (Article M.2.2).

(4) The representativeness and coherence of different characteristic values of geotechnical parameters used in justification of calculations must be controlled (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - geotechnical parameters characteristic values are for example compared to previous information obtained locally. These comparisons were intended to eliminate manifestly irrelevant or inconsistent values.

  • 6.3 materials reported

(1) It should specify the nature of a reported material and its property values before the project studies distinguishing if the source material is not prescribed, from where it is imposed (Notes 1-3 ).

NOTE 1 - When the source of the reported land is not prescribed, they are not subject to prior geotechnical studies and the procedure is:

before the start of studies: to define the properties of the fill (Note 2 and Clause M.3 (3)) and to set criteria to be met in order to obtain (eg: Field class and creation condition);

before beginning work: searching borrow areas or possible sources corresponding to the defined criteria, based on a geotechnical or on documented existing data;

during the work: to control the convenience of the stocked material and its implementation.

NOTE 2 - in Annex M.3 It shows the volume weight values usually taken into account in the calculations for the reported ground currents.

NOTE 3 - When the source of the insert material is imposed (material from the site or near the site borrowing), the procedure comprises:

before the start of study: performing a geotechnical for securing at least the specific gravity and to identify the reported properties of the soil;

during the work: to control the convenience of the stocked material and its implementation.

(2)

Should be defined during the project studies the following geotechnical properties:

the volume and weight when it takes place, the shearing parameters (angle of internal friction and cohesion) and strain as well as other relevant parameters;

the requirements for the particle size distribution (class of material, uniformity coefficient) and, when appropriate, those relating to the implementation of the material (water content, optimal density, etc.).

NF P 94-262

  • 6.4 Constituent materials of deep foundations

    • 6.4.1 Concrete, grout or mortar

(1) For checking the structural strength of a deep foundation in concrete, grout or mortar, the provisions of EN 1992-1-1 standard with its national annex NF EN 1992-1-1 / NA apply, supplemented by the following specifications.

(2) Pursuant to the standard EN 1992-1-1, for the establishment of projects, concrete, grout or mortar must be defined:

by its characteristic compressive strength fck *;

by its characteristic resistance to traction fctk005;

Ecm by its modulus of elasticity.

(3)

The characteristic value of the compressive strength of concrete, grout or mortar in a deep foundation

is to be determined from the following formula (Notes 1 to 3 and Table 6.4.1.1).

fl = Inf (((0; C_, f) tV

k 1k2

(8.4.1.1)

NOTE 1 - Cmax reflects the constraints of implementation of concrete, grout or mortar costs following the technology used.

NOTE 2 - Verification of concrete, grout or mortar SLE is sufficient provision dispensation to take into account the standard abatement on the nominal dimensions as envisaged in Article 2.3.4.2 NF EN 1992-1.

NOTE 3 - coefficients ki and k2Which reflect the implementation conditions are for them to replace the coefficient kf equal to 1.1 of section 2.4.2.5 of EN 1992-1-1 standard.

(4) The design value of the resistance to simple compression of the concrete, grout or mortar in a deep foundation is to be determined from the following formula and Table 6.4.1.2:

f

fcd = Min

\

ak ^ ck ■

has

cc ^

3

" c

incl

inc

l

(6.4.1.2)

acc with a coefficient whose value is equal to 1.0 of the height where the pile is armed and 0.8 on the

height at which the pile is not armed.

(5) The coefficient k1 shown in Table 6.4.1.1 can be decreased by 0.1, only for bored piles and the webs (class 1), where the nature of the terrain to be traversed ensures stable borehole wall or when the pile is cased and concrete to dryness.

(6) The value of the coefficient k2 is equal to 1.0 except in the cases described below:

k2 = 1.05 for bored piles and the bars whose ratio of the smallest dimension B to the length is less than 1/20;

k2 = 1,3-B / 2 for bored piles and the webs of which the smallest dimension B is less than 0.6 m;

k2 = 1.35-B / 2 for bored piles and the webs connecting the two above conditions.

NF P 94-262

(7) The values of Cmax parameter and the coefficient k3 are generally respectively equal to 35 MPa 1.0. Particular specifications for foundations supporting bridges are listed in Appendix Q.

(8) The value of the coefficient k3 may be taken equal to 1.2 in the case of enhanced control of the quality and continuity of the drum (Table 6.4.1.2).

(9) The average values (acmoy) and maximum (ACmax) (Note 1) compressive stress of the concrete to the characteristic serviceability limit state should not exceed, regardless of the exposure class, the following value:

and Low (0M3fC, k; 6FC °, k )

(6413)

NOTE 1 - acmoy and ACmax are respectively the average and maximum stress calculated on the pressed surface of the most stressed section of the element.

(10) The grip limit constraint fbd high adhesion reinforcements must be determined according to standard NF EN 1992-1-1 (Section 8.4.2) with a coefficient n equal to 1.0 (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - To determine the limit of adhesion stress fbd high adhesion reinforcement is referred to fck fck, not * that is only used for verification of limit states of compressive concrete.

(11) The Ecm modulus of elasticity of concrete forming deep foundations must be determined in accordance with Article 3.1.3 of the NF EN 1992-1-1 (Table 3.1).

(12) For checking the long term stability of deep foundation concrete, grout or mortar, it should take into account a deferred unit Edif equal to (Notes 1 and 2):

E Edlf = -y

(6.4.1.4)

NOTE 1 - When checking a deep foundation, composed especially for bending forces, it is customary to enjoy its deformations assimilating its section to that of a homogeneous material and bending resistant. For this purpose, it is appropriate to adopt a medium longitudinal deformation modulus concrete equal to 20 000 MPa for the construction phases of the structure and equal to 10 000 MPa to characterize the long-term behavior. It is also necessary to determine the inertia of a deep foundation without deduction of any metallic core or reservations for auscultation, ie that corresponding to the uncracked structural element gross inertia.

NOTE 2 - The effects of concrete shrinkage of the foundation are not taken into account.

NF P 94-262

Table 6.4.1.1 - Coefficients for the determination of the resistance characteristic decompression of concrete, grout or mortar piles

   

C

max

 

Class

MPa

ki

1

bored piles and strips

 

35

1.3

2

Flight auger piles with recording parameters (Notes 1,3 and 4)

 

30

1.35

3

screwed cast piles (Note 2)

 

35

1.3

4

molded driven piles

 

35

1.3

Notes:

(1) For the purposes of the NF EN 1536, a continuous record of the excavation and concreting parameters graphically must be provided for each pile and be subject to a report in paper form. The values of these variables can be displayed in real time in the machine performing the piles.

(2) When the concrete is not done through a hopper but directly to the concrete pump, it is advisable to carry out a specific record of execution parameters. These variables can be displayed in real time by the operator of the machine as a graph.

(3) The stakes, for which continuous recording system of excavation and concreting parameters will not work, will be tested by an integrity test. An identical number of integrity tests is to perform on stakes for which registration of the parameters has been completed correctly to serve calibration when interpreting tests.

(4) For greater than or equal fck values at 25 MPa, the value of fck * is taken to be 18.33 MPa when the relationship 6.4.1.1 leads to a lesser value.

Table 6.4.1.2 - Minimum number of piles or strips to listen to controls

enhanced integrity

 

auscultatory methods (Notes 1 to 4)

 

AT

B

C

   

1/8 by transparency (Note

 

Number of pious

1/6 by transparency (Note

2)

1/4 impedance (Note

concerned

2)

+

3)

1/6 impedance (Note 3)

Notes:

(1) Procedures A, B or C are allowed but either A and B procedures are possible only if the stakes are armed to their full height.

(2) According to NF P 94-160-1 (Sonic through method). In this case, the tubes used, 40 mm minimum inside diameter, are placed so as not to harm the coating of the main reinforcement cages.

(3) According to the NF P 94-160-4 and NF P 94-160-2 (vibratory method impedance or reflection). When this method is not applicable or when the geometry and geotechnical context are likely to compromise the relevance, it should use the method B. When the default representation of the impedance method is found retrospectively, it appropriate to perform auscultation through the parallel seismic method according to NF P 94-160-3 standard.

(4) EN kind of standards will replace the type of standards NF P 94-160 when they are applicable.

6.4.2 Steel

(1) The behavior of the steel must be set to the appropriate standard for verification of this document applies to:

NF P 94-262

the structural steels as defined in the NF EN 1993-1-1 (Note 1);

to steel reinforced concrete, as defined in the NF EN 1992-1-1 (Note 2);

prestressing steels, as defined in the NF EN 1992-1-1 (Note 3);

steels for "supporting elements" as defined in the EN 14199 standard.

NOTE 1 - NF EN 1993-1-5 standard applies to steel piles structural steel whose elastic limit fy (Reh in the product standard) is usually between 235 and 460 MPa. The other properties (ductility, elongation, etc.) are specified in Section 3.2 of the standard EN 1993-1-1.

NOTE 2 - The standard NF EN 1992-1-1 applies to high adhesion and weldable reinforcing materials for a range of yield strength fyk between 400 and 600 MPa. The other properties (ductility, elongation, etc.) are specified in Section 3.2 of the standard EN 1992-1-1.

NOTE 3 - EN 1992-1-1 standard applies to son, bars and strands used as prestressing steel in concrete structures and with a sufficiently low susceptibility to stress corrosion in accordance with the criteria specified in standard PR NF EN 10138 or given in a European Technical Approval.

(2) For checking the resistance of the metal structures of structural steel (e.g. the tubular bearing piles or caissons piles), the calculations should be carried out according to standard NF EN 1993-1 and EN 1993- 5 with national schedule, supplemented where appropriate by the provisions specified in this document.

(3) It should be verified that the spacing of the reinforcement is less than 5 times (c + © / 2) (with c the thickness of coating and the diameter of the reinforcement ©) and the stress at the almost permanent ELS in steels liabilities do not exceed the following values in the combination of action considered:

CTS < 1000 wmax for elements or parts of bent elements (that is to say having a tight surface and a compression face);

CTS <600 wmax for elements or parts of elements fully tensioned.

with CTS (MPa) absolute value of the maximum allowable stress in the frame immediately after the formation of the crack and wmax (mm) opening calculated cracks.

NF P 94-262

  • 7 Situations of calculation, loads and combinations of actions

    • 7.1 Situations calculation

7.1.1

General rules

(1) The design situations to be considered in defining the design situations should be selected and classified according to the principles defined in Article 3.2 of the NF EN 1990, distinguishing:

sustainable design situations;

transient design situations;

the accidental design situations;

seismic design situations.

(2) The choice of design situations should be done before the project studies, taking into account the provisions of Article 2.2 of the NF EN 1997-1.

(3)

travel criteria (Note 1) a pile foundation must be fixed before the justification for its stability and the

sizing.

NOTE 1 - The travel criteria can condition some constructive options and be important to the choice of calculation models.

(4) In the case of structures subjected to the action of water from a table, consider the situations must be analyzed specifically, especially when the level of the table is linked to a water plan submitted to rapid height variation (floods, scoured, tides, etc.).

(5) The various cases of operating expenses should be considered to define the most unfavorable transitional situation vis-à-vis each ultimate limit state.

(6) The accidental design situations that may be related to site conditions or the execution of the work must be considered.

7.1.2

under construction situations

(1) One must check the conditions set by the regulations, by the market, and the worst case for each relevant limit state.

(2) For structures established aquatic site, one must always consider the situation defined by the maximum water level for the work of the implementation period (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - Attention is drawn to the fact that the definition of a maximum level should be compatible with certain enforcement provisions, including those relating to temporary structures.

NOTE 2 - This level is set by the market or failing is defined before the project studies. Indications are given in 5.1.5 and 5.2 sections of this document for determining the different water levels.

(3)

For structures established affouillable website, one must always consider the level of scouring (Note

1).

NOTE 1 - This level is set by the market or failing is defined in the project studies.

7.1.3

Situations in operation

(1) One must check the design situations fixed by the regulations, by the market, and the worst situation for each project ultimate limit state and limit state of each relevant service.

(2) For a book set in an aquatic site, one should always consider two or three design situations to define the most unfavorable current situation vis-à-vis operating an ultimate limit given Staff (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - These situations are normally set by the market or in default are defined before the project studies.

NF P 94-262

NOTE 2 - In general, the consideration of a minimum and not an average level for assessing the maximum intensity of vertical loads.

(3) When the structure is located on a navigable waterway and is likely to be subjected to a boat shock, transient situation defined according to the considerations of section 5.2.3 should be considered.

(4) For structures established affouillable website, one must systematically consider a level determined scour from a bed bottom level taking into account its expected development (development or mining operations) (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - These scour levels are set by the market or failing is defined in the project studies.

  • 7.2 Combination of actions

(1) The effects of actions should be determined by combining the actions in accordance with Article 6.4.3 of the standard NF EN 1990 (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - The different combinations of actions to consider are summarized in this section. Additional provisions applicable to the calculation of deep foundation are given in section 7.3.

  • 7.2.1 General principle

(1) For each project situation, under construction or in operation, it is necessary to consider the case load and the combination of the worst actions vis-à-vis the target limit state.

(2) In a given combination, the different terms should designate original shares and different kind, which excludes share the same action between two terms of the same suit (principle of consistency) (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - For example, one can not separate the vertical component of the earth pressure (stabilizing effect) of the horizontal component (destabilizing action).

(3) Geotechnical share the same origin must be calculated in a given combination, from the same representative values of basic properties (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - This excludes be assigned to a field two different densities depending on whether one evaluates a thrust action or stop action of this field.

  • 7.2.2 General Expressions combinations vis-à-vis the ultimate limit state action

(1) The different combinations of actions to be considered for the ultimate limit states are:

combinations of actions for persistent and transient design situations (fundamental combinations);

combinations of actions for accidental design situations (accidental combinations);

NF P 94-262

- combinations of actions for seismic design situations (seismic combinations).

(2) In situations of persistent or transient project, it should determine the design value of the effect of actions from the following general expression (fundamental combination for ultimate limit-states STR and GEO) applied in accordance with the provisions of Article 7.3.1 (Notes 1 and 2):

E d = EjZYo ".fGt, ip" + "ZYo.", G "M" + "reiQk.t" + " 'LrOitnA I j> 1d> 1¿> 1

(7.2.2.1)

NOTE 1 - The values of partial factors ^ depend on the chosen calculation approach and the favorable character or unfavorable vis-à-vis action considered borderline. They can be found in the national annex NF EN 1990.

NOTE 2 - The values of Yo coefficients are less than or equal to one to account for the probability of combination of variable actions. They are given for usual loads the appropriate places of the NF EN 1990 (Clause 5.1.1 (2) Note 2 of this document).

(3) For accidental design situations, it should determine the design value of the equity effect from the following general expression (accidental combination for ultimate limit states STR and GEO) (Note 1):

NOTE 1 - The values of coefficients Y1 and Y2are less than 1 to account for the probability of combination of variable

Ed = E -¡I, "" + "! Gkj, Nfl "+" Ad "+

j>

1

j> 1

"(Y / ifiUVdd ') Oi," + "IY2, Qi., f

ij.2.2.2)

actions. They are given for usual loads the appropriate places of the NF EN 1990 (5.1.1 (2) Note 2 of this document).

(4) For seismic design situations, it should determine the value of calculating the effect of actions on the deep foundation of the structure studied from the relationship (3.17) presented in the article 3.2.4 of the NF EN 1998-1.

  • 7.2.3 general expressions of combinations of actions vis-à-vis the serviceability limit states

(1)

The different combinations of actions to be considered for serviceability limit states are as follows

(Note 1):

the characteristic combinations;

frequent combinations;

the quasi-permanent combinations.

NOTE 1 - Normally, characteristics combinations are used for irreversible limit states, frequent combinations for reversible limit states and quasi-permanent combinations for long-term effects and the appearance of the structure.

(2) For the characteristics combinations, it should determine the design value of the effect of actions Ed from the following general expression:

E d

E \ I Gj " "+" I G "M "+" OK,, "+" Iy. "Q"

¿> 1

(7.2.3.1)

NF P 94-262

E d = E {Z Gj sup "+" Z gkh Inf "+" ¥. i Qk i "+" Z ¥ 2. t Qk

ljdi

jdi

i> 1

(7.2.3.2)

(4) For the quasi-permanent combinations, it should determine the design value of the effect of actions from the following general expression:

E d

E {ZG

jdi

K J.

sup

Z G-

j di

K J.

inf

+ "Z ¥2. Q ii

  • 7.3 Provisions for determining deep foundations

    • 7.3.1 Determination of the effect of actions ULS

(7.2.3.3)

(1) For the verification of ultimate limit states GEO and STR in situations of persistent or transient project, it should determine the calculation solicitations from the following expression (Notes 1 to 4)

E = E {Zj Zj GjsupV Gkjf '+ "\r"G"] '+ "r"G r'+ "YQ.Qk.

l jdi

jdi

ZYQ.i ¥ o ,, Qk.ij

i> 1J

(7.3.1.1)

NOTE 1 - This expression is the combination of actions 7.2.2.1 expression, isolating actions Gsn negative friction (because they do not stack fully with those due to variable actions) and the transverse pushing action of Gsp land given their particular nature (Clause 5.1.3.3 (3)). The cumulation rules of the negative friction and variable actions are specified in Article 7.3.3.

NOTE 2 - The values of partial factors to be applied are given in the NF EN 1990. For computational approach 2and actions other than shares due to an overall movement of the ground, it is recommended to apply the values specified in Annex C (Table C.2.1) herein (1.35 and 1.0 respectively to adverse and favorable permanent actions, 1,5 and 0 respectively to adverse and favorable variable actions). For any action of negative and friction transverse thrusts, the values of the partial factors to be applied are indicated in clause 7.3.1 (2).

NOTE 3 - It is recalled that, in a given combination, gkj, sup and Gkj.int designate original shares and of different natures, which excludes share the same action between the two parties. For example, it can not affect to the same soil two different masses depending on whether one evaluates a thrust action or weight action.

NOTE 4 - It is recalled that the levels of water, selected through situations defined in Article 7.1 should correspond to a low probability of occurrence, and the actions of water (5.1.5) falls permanent actions.

(2) For the verification of ultimate limit states GEO and STR in situations of persistent or transient project, where appropriate taking into account the shares of negative friction or transverse forces, it is appropriate to adopt the values following partial factors:

ysn is 1.35 or 1.125, the value being selected so as to obtain the most unfavorable effect (Sections

  • 7.3.3 and 8.8);

Ysp is 1.35 or 0.675, the value being selected so as to obtain the most unfavorable effect (Sections

  • 7.3.3 and 8.8).

(3) For the verification of ultimate limit states UPL in situations of persistent or transient project, it should determine the calculation solicitations from the following expression (Notes 1 to 4)

E d =% r E ° '

G

dst ^ kj, dst

"+ 'ZRG,." BG ,,, tt "+" 7q, ¡Q k' + " '^ LrQj, JQK j> 1i

> 1

NF P 94-262

(7.3.1.2)

NOTE 1 - This expression is the combination of actions 7.2.2.1 expression, taking into account the special nature of this failure mode by global hydraulic lift.

NOTE 2 - The values of partial factors to be applied are set out in Annex C (Table C.3.1) of this document (1.0 and 0.9 respectively to adverse and favorable permanent actions, 1.5 and 0, respectively to unfavorable and favorable variable actions).

NOTE 3 - The values of Yo coefficients are less than or equal to one to account for the probability of combination of variable actions. They are given for usual loads the appropriate places of the NF EN 1990 (5.1.1 (2) Note 2 of this document).

NOTE 4 - Unless otherwise specified, it is permissible to assign globally to all unfavorable variable actions transmitted by the field, a product YQ, YJ 1, 1 equal to 1.35.

(4) For the verification of ultimate limit states GEO and STR in accidental design situations, it should determine the calculation solicitations from the following expression (Notes 1 to 3):

NOTE 1 - This expression is the combination of actions 7.2.2.2 expression, isolating actions Gsn negative friction

Ed =EG,

j> 1

"+" \ 1 g "+" A

J Gj, sup "the"^

j> 1

Gj, inf "l" ^ d

"+" [G "}" + "G" "+" (uor ¥ x¡) 1 "+" Y V'-Qk \ (7 3.1.3)

i> 1

(because they do not stack fully with those due to variable actions) and the transverse pushing action of Gsp field given its particular character (Clause 5.1.3.3 (3)). The cumulation rules of the negative friction and variable actions are specified in Article 7.3.3.

NOTE 2 - In most cases, there is no reason to consider concomitant variable actions with the accidental action, their effects are generally low compared to the portion of accidental solicitations.

NOTE 3 - The values of coefficients Ÿ1 and Ÿ2are less than 1 to account for the probability of combination of variable actions. They are given for usual loads the appropriate places of the NF EN 1990 (5.1.1 (2) Note 2). 6 NOTE 1 - The effect of negative friction action Gsn and transverse thrust Gsp due to an overall movement of the ground are not considered.

NOTE 2 - Section 13 spécificiquement deals with the study of the overall stability of a site.

(6)

For seismic design situations, it should determine the value of calculating the effect of actions on the

Ed E =

, sup

G

kj, sup

"+" 1 ^.

j> 1

G"

inf ^ k

/> inf

^ QQ, 1

'+ "ZYQ,

VoQki

(7.3.1.4)

deep foundation of the structure studied from the relationship (3.17) presented in the article 3.2.4 of the NF EN 1998-1.

  • 7.3.2 Determination of the effect of actions to LIVE

(1) For checking the serviceability limit states, it is necessary to determine the calculation demands from the following expressions (notes 1,2 and 4):

- Combinations characteristics (Note 3)

6 For the verification of ultimate limit states of general stability of the site, it should determine the calculation solicitations from the following expression (Notes 1 and 2):

NF P 94-262

Ed = ffc Ge "" + "I G "J: n,V [G "] '+ "G" "+" Q ,,,"+" I VdjQ ,,,

I j> 1d> 1i> 1

frequent combinations (Note 3)

(7.3.2.1)

Ed = E JI Odds, "+" I Gjdf "+" [G ']' + "G" "+" r., Q f, i "+" IV, dQ,

there j> 1d> 1i> 1

quasi-permanent combinations

(7.3.2.2)

NOTE 1 - These terms correspond to the combinations of actions 7.2.3.1 to 7.2.3.3 expressions,

Ed = EJI Gj, C "+" I gkj, Inf "+" [Gsn \ + "G p" + "IwuQtj

J> 1

j> 1

i> 1

(7.3.2.3)

isolating actions Gsn negative friction (because they do not stack fully with those due to variable actions) and the transverse pushing action Gsp ground given its particular character (Clause 5.1.3.3 (3)). The cumulation rules of the negative friction and variable actions are specified in 7.3.3.

NOTE 2 - It is recalled that, in a given combination, gkj, sup and Gkj.int designate original shares and of different natures, which excludes share the same action between the two parties. For example, one can assign the same soil two different masses depending on whether one evaluates a thrust action or weight action.

NOTE 3 - The values of coefficients Yo, Y1 and Y2are less than or equal to one to account for the probability of combination of variable actions. They are given for usual loads the appropriate sections of the NF EN 1990 (Clause 5.1.1 (2) Note 2).

NOTE 4 - The combinations incorporating consideration of negative friction Gsn are specifically described in Section

7.3.3.

  • 7.3.3 Accumulated negative friction and loads due to variable actions

(1) Unless more representative model for justifications in which the normal force has a negative character vis-à-vis the compression, retains the following value Fd (Notes 1 to 4)

F d = max {f j sn d; Q d } + Gd

fd is the design value of the force to be considered;

Gsn; d is the design value of the negative friction;

( 7.3.3.1)

G'd is the normal force calculation value due to permanent actions (except the negative friction) to which can be added the values of the quasi-permanent units of variable actions;

Q'd is the normal force calculation value due to the variable part of variable actions on the same element (the almost permanent part of variable actions is included in the value of G'd).

NOTE 1 - In case ^ 2 is nonzero, the value for calculating the effects of Ed shares must be defined using the following specific combinations:

- For the quasi-permanent combinations (Note 3), it should determine the calculation solicitations from the following expression:

Ed = E \ IGkjsu ,, "+" IGC inf "+" [G "]" + "G" + "I ^ JQD.,

j> 1

j> 1

(7.3.3.2)

NF P 94-262

where Q are the operating costs (without combination with other variable loads) (7.3.3.2)

- For the verification of ultimate limit states, it should determine the calculation of loads from the following expression (Note 1):

E d = zZroj,SUPGk, SU p "+" Z jGk, Mi ''+ 'r sp G sp "+"{Y sn ouy e , X) max (Gs "; Q k , X) '+ "Z

yj> j> ii> ij

\

(7.3.3.3)

where Q is the operating expenses (without overlapping with other variable loads) (7.3.3.3) and where yo, i is given in the National Annex to the relevant Annex (building, bridge, etc.), the NF EN 1990 or, failing that, in the parts market.

NOTE 2 - The need for such rules is because the breakdown of the normal force along the shaft of the elements is different in the case of negative friction and in the case of variable loads. There is no cumulative maximum. The diagram of Figure 7.3.3 shows the behavior for a single element.

NOTE 3 - The possible negative friction exerted on the bonding pad and the land or structure of the parts are considered fully overcoming deferred head of the elements. Their design value is therefore added directly to Gd. This provision is justified by the fact that the travel required to reverse the negative friction are more important in the case of an abutment in the case of a deep foundation.

NOTE 4 - negative friction should be considered in the type of justifications GEO only in combinations on LIVE. Indeed, in theory, increased negative friction on a deep foundation induced depression of the latter which then allows it to mobilize more positive axial friction than before the increase of the same negative friction. For STR type of justification, always involved in negative friction combinations for ULS.

(2) If more representative model for vis-à-vis justifications which the normal force has a favorable character, it is assumed that the normal force generated by the negative friction on the foundation members is zero.

  • 7.3.4 Consideration of variable actions for the calculation of travel

(1) For the verification of travel limit states, unless the contract provides otherwise, it should not accumulate as almost permanent actions with permanent actions in combinations of shares (Notes 1 to 3).

NOTE 1 - displacement limit states concern mainly the verification of serviceability limit states for deep foundations (Section 8.3).

NOTE 2 - Where appropriate determine the displacement of deep foundation (Clause 8.3 (5)), the values are most often derived from empirical rules, which should if necessary be associated with controls course work, given the approximate nature of the forward estimates.

NOTE 3 - The calculation methods available does not allow to consider simply the effect of varying loads, cyclic or dynamic.

ol

Figure 7.3.3 - Accumulated negative friction and loads due to variable actions

NFP 94-

1 lllllllllllllllllllll llllll

nuuuunuuunuuuu nuuuunuuunuuuu

N

O

T

uuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuunuuunuuuu + UUI / uu naked CD / UUI in / uuu ii / i
uuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuunuuunuuuu
+ UUI
/
uu naked
CD
/
UUI
in
/
uuu
ii / i Irni 11
uuiwfHTu îiuunm
uai

Tuuuuuur-

nuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuunuuunuuuu nuuuunuuunuuuu nuuuunuuunuuuu uuuuuuuuuuuuuu

uuuuunuuunuuuu nuuuunuuunuuuu

UUUUUUUUUUUUUU "

NF P 94-262

8

General rules for justification of deep foundations

8.1 Overview

(1)

The rules in this section apply only to fully current structures under Geotechnical Category 2 (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - For projects in geotechnical category 3 (eg for complex structure works or structures on areas requiring justifications seismic conditions or deep foundations used to stabilize unstable slopes) or when conditions ground are unusual, specific tests may be needed.

(2)

The supporting calculations of deep foundation must be conducted (Notes 1 and 2):

selecting for each relevant the limit state (or) position (s) the (or the) worst (s) under construction and in operation (Figure 8.1) in accordance with section 7.1;

by determining the stress and the resistors taking into account the provisions of Section evaluation of actions and geometric data and the section 6 for evaluation of material properties;

5

for

selecting combinations of shares pursuant to Article 7.2.

NOTE 1 - All behaviors and the mechanisms described in Section 4, which may cause the ruin of a book are to be considered when selecting the relevant limit states and the choice of (or) location (s ) of (the) worst (s).

NOTE 2 - In particular, the accidental design situations that may occur in connection with the site conditions (boat bumpers for example), or related to the execution of the work are to be considered.

(3) For each work based on deep foundations, it must justify, when applicable (Note 1) vis-vis the ultimate limit states:

the stability of each pile and complete foundation vis-à-vis a local failure of the land (Note 2);

the breaking strength of deep foundations (Note 3);

the stability of the work carried vis-à-vis the displacement of pile foundation (Note 1);

the overall stability of the complete foundation vis-à-vis a general breakdown of the site (Note 4).

NOTE 1 - The checks to depend on project requirements (Table 8.1) and the justification for ultimate limit state is not necessarily to be done by calculation (eg, that of the general stability of the site or that the destruction or severe damage of the book focused because of a displacement of the foundation).

NOTE 2 - The limit states covered are those concerning the lift of the land or the tensile strength of a deep foundation in response to axial displacement of the foundation elements (single pile and pile group in compression or tension) . The audit of a deep foundation the material is also to perform. Under the effect of a transverse displacement of deep foundations, limitations are imposed in terms of constraints in the field. For this type of movement, security concerns compliance with the limit states for the constituent materials of the foundation structure and scope. However, it is permitted for certain projects (eg for dolphins) to set a level of stress not to exceed under transverse stress.

NOTE 3 - checks the structural strength of a deep foundation are to do according to the appropriate standard calculation to the material thereof, complemented by the recommendations in this document. The effects of actions to consider are to be determined taking into account the specifications of this document.

NF P 94-262

NOTE 4 - Verification of general stability of the site is cited for memory and is not detailed in this document. It is assumed stable site once the realized work platform and the assumption is that the performance of work does not have a destabilizing effect on the site. If necessary, however, should be checked in the same conditions as for studies of the initial general site stability, and for the most unfavorable final situation, each potential failure surface that includes deep foundation level sufficient security. Section 13, however, provides some elements related to the analysis of the overall stability of a site.

(4) Each deep foundation, it must justify, where appropriate, vis-à-vis the serviceability limit states:

the function of focused work is ensured during its expected life vis-à-vis the displacement of pile foundation (ie the axial and transverse displacements of the pile foundation are compatible with the requirements of the scope structure in service condition)

that the axial load calculation transmitted to the deep foundation is less than a certain proportion of the creep load (Note 1 and Section 14)

the axial and transverse loads of deep foundation are compatible with the requirements of the appropriate standard to the justification provided in its service structure.

NOTE 1 - The creep load of a deep foundation is derived from a static loading test or failing to directly lift its limit (Section 14).

(5) Vis-à-vis the bearing service limits or traction state, it is therefore necessary to achieve either a calculation by limiting the load exerted to the deep foundations in a proportion of the creep load (lift or pull) is a calculation to justify the move. If the work requires, a calculation justification movements must however always be achieved.

jBremj'ciüès

sustainable ' Work ' ite phases served in \ construction book in COrWiTJOrtS SITUATIONS paraeuireres Figure
sustainable
' Work '
ite phases
served in \
construction
book in
COrWiTJOrtS
SITUATIONS
paraeuireres
Figure 8.1 - Codification of checks in the Eurocodes
Accidertelios
Ogvragi-
Deeonstn
book
book
outstandin
ucîjon
enservice
orrservice
g
outstandin
venttemo
(teconsrru
g work
(Texptortafion
cîion
n screw-
ofJ eraïs
-ins -jmues
urfimcS elete

NF P 94-262

Table 8.1 - Checks to make the ultimate limit states for the worst durablesou transient design situations during construction and operation

     

Computation

ELECTED kind

al approach

deep foundations under axial load

 
 

Bearing (Note 1)

GEO

2

 

tensile strength (Notes 1 and 2)

GEO / UPL

2

 

Structural Strength (Note 3)

STR

2

deep foundations under transverse load

 
 

Structural Strength (Note 4)

STR

2

 

head displacement (Note 5)

GEO

2

Work site

 
 

General stability (Note 6)

GEO

2 (or 3)

Notes :

 

(1)

Verification may cover several failure mechanisms (isolated deep foundation and group of deep foundations).

(2)

Verification of deep foundations Group considered a block is done according to a type of ELU GEO / STR and UPL.

(3)

According to the appropriate calculation to standard material of deep foundation.

 

(4)

The audit focuses only on compliance with limit states for the materials of the foundation.

(5)

The audit focuses only on compliance with limit states regarding the scope structure

(6)

See clause (3) Note 4 of Article 8.1.

 
  • 8.2 ultimate limit states

(1) We should at least check for situations of the worst persistent and transient design under construction or in operation, as the ultimate limit states listed in Table 8.1 are not met (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - ultimate limit states to be considered fall within the limit state of rupture or excessive deformation of a structural member or ground (STR and GEO) and state limits overall uplift of the structure or the land (UPL) caused by the water pressure (buoyancy) or other vertical actions.

NOTE 2 - The ultimate equilibrium limit state (EQU) do not apply to the justification of deep foundations.

(2) In certain draft conditions (work established Aquatic site land subject to flow forces of groundwater or a charge sheet) however it is important to adopt appropriate structural arrangements, regardless of STR and GEO checks (Note 1 ).

NOTE 1 - In general, the design of a geotechnical structure is to prevent the occurrence of a brittle fracture, such as efforts redistribution possibilities can be considered to alleviate the accidental failure of support.

(3) Where appropriate, the worst accidental and seismic design situations must be considered.

(4) Each ultimate limit state GEO or STR, one should check under the approach of calculation shown in Table 8.1 and in accordance with the specifications in this document, Ed <Rd where Ed is the design value of the effect of actions and Rd is the design value of resistance corresponding actions. 7

NOTE 1 - The different combinations to consider vis-à-vis the ultimate limit states are listed in Section 7.2 of this document. For more details, reference is made to the NF EN 1990.

  • 8.3 Serviceability limit states

  • 7 The effects of actions (Note 1) must be determined by considering the combination of appropriate actions to the design situation (lasting or transient, accidental, seismic).

NF P 94-262

(1) All phenomena that can be detrimental to the function of the worn book and pile foundation should be considered (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - vis-à-vis justification of serviceability limit states is essentially to ensure that the movements of the pile foundation and the efforts it supports remain low enough to allow the focused work and the foundation deep itself, to perform their intended functions.

NOTE 2 - Usually the rationale for deep foundations vis-à-vis the serviceability limit states is to check:

that the loads transmitted to the deep foundation are eligible for this structure (for example to avoid an unacceptable cracking or corrosion problems);

the mobilization of the land is low enough under axial load to avoid unacceptable trips to the scope structure.

(2) We must check for all situations of the worst persistent or transient project under construction or in operation (Figure 8.1) that the relevant serviceability limit states are not met (Note 1).

NOTE

1

-

It

must be ensured

that Ed

corresponding limit value.

<CD where

Ed

is

the design

value

of

the

effect of actions, Cd

is

the

(3) We must check for the construction phases that the serviceability limit states are not achieved vis- à-vis the characteristics combinations and operating phases they are not achieved vis-à-vis the characteristics and combinations quasi-permanent (Section 7.3.2).

(4) Eligible travel limits of the complete foundation must be established before the start of the project study (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - The travel limits are based on project requirements (sensitivity range structure). If necessary, they are to be established by experts in structure.

(5) Where appropriate to proceed with supporting calculations for the study of movement (Notes 1 and 2), they must be led from an appropriate calculation model to the complexity of the geometry of the structure and field conditions. In any case, one should consider that the displacement calculation results give only an approximate indication of their real value (Note 3).

NOTE 1 - For current projects, it is permissible to determine the movements of a deep foundation from empirical rules or comparable experience or verifying that the transmitted axial load is less than a certain proportion of the creep load deep foundation (Article 14.3).

NOTE 2 - Where appropriate (transverse stresses, complex geometry, mixed foundations) should be used digital soil interaction methods - structure (Article 8.6).

NOTE 3

- Where possible, the results of displacement calculations are to confront the values

comparable experience.

observed at a

(6) Where appropriate, it should provide deep foundations movement controls running and, if appropriate, to adopt the observational method (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - When a criterion of lower displacement calculation precision is imposed, the observational method is to be adopted to ensure that the travel limit states are not achieved. NOTE 2 - This article covers cases where the allowable displacement of a pile foundation is weak and / or result classes are medium or high (Appendix P) and / or you do not have a comparable experience.

  • 8.4 Calculation models

    • 8.4.1 General principles

(1) The choice of calculation models must be adapted to the intended limit state (Note 1) and the complexity of the problems from the point of view of the operation of the structure as a geotechnical standpoint (Notes 2 and 3).

NOTE 1 - It should generally use a limit equilibrium model to study default ruin of risk bearing capacity of deep foundation or to study the stability of a deep foundation "rigid" subjected to a horizontal solicitation head. A soil- structure interaction model (MISS) is most often appropriate to study a slender deep foundation subjected to transverse stresses (calculation of efforts in the deep foundation and its displacement). The general principles to be respected are given in Section 8.4.2 below, supplemented by information in different sections dedicated to different limit states.

NF P 94-262

NOTE 2 - Care should be taken to use the laws of behavior of materials simple enough not to detract from the clarity and justifications that are based on field properties "measurable."

NOTE 3 - Similarly, for lack of a more elaborate calculation model, it is worth checking the stability of a deep foundation from simplified models to link the movement of the head of each element constituting the foundation's efforts exerted on it.

(2) In a computational model of soil-structure interaction, the foot and the head of a deep foundation must be considered free by default (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - A partial installation Length can be considered if justified in some cases (anchoring in rocky terrain).

NOTE 2 - Other head binding conditions with the superstructure can be taken into consideration, with justifications.

(3) Assuming continuity of stress is taken into account between the deep foundation and superstructure, should be taken into account in modeling the interaction between deep foundation and superstructure, stiffness induced by the presence of superstructure and effort (normal force, shear, bending moment) it brings.

  • 8.4.2 Calculation models and limit states

(1) The study of ultimate limit states of lift and pull of a deep foundation subjected to a purely axial loading must be conducted from equilibrium calculation models limit under the provisions of sections 9 and 10 (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - The justification based on the results of physical models, scale experimentation, observation running is permitted by the NF EN 1997-1 standard. These procedures are beyond the scope of this document.

(2) The study of a deep foundation subjected to a transverse stress (stress in the deep foundation and deformation thereof) must be conducted from a soil-structure interaction calculation model in accordance with sections 11 ( ultimate limit state resistance to transverse loads), 12 (structural strength) and 14 (service limit state) (Notes 1 to 4).

NOTE 1 - Guidance for determining the calculation parameters to be used for a model reaction coefficient are given in Annex I and Annex K.

NOTE 2 - These methods generally give an approximate indication of the real value of travel deep foundations, except in the case of comparable experience. NOTE 3 - The use of finite element models or finite difference can be useful to estimate travel to serviceability limit states of certain works in the case of complex geometry, interaction between works or to analyze the behavior of some geotechnical category of works 3. however, it is necessary to verify that the mobilized stresses in the numerical model used does not exceed the physical limitations usually considered (for example, by comparing the numerical results in terms of the axial stress and friction values tip resistance deducted pressuremeter or penetrometer methods).

NOTE 4 - For the use of finite element methods or finite difference, the use of a parametric study is usually the rule to assess the sensitivity of the movements of the deep foundation and soil mass, and associated stress.

  • 8.5 Deep foundation isolated subjected to an axial force

    • 8.5.1 Model behavior

(1) To characterize the behavior of a deep foundation isolated under axial compressive load, it is necessary to define two resistance or load parameters (Note 1 and Figure 8.5.1):

a compressive yield strength or a lift limit Rc;

a compression creep load Rc; cr.

NOTE 1 - The values of Rc and Rc cr respectively are determined according to the provisions of Section 9 and Section 14.2.

(2) To characterize the behavior of a deep foundation isolated under axial traction load, it is necessary to define two resistance or load parameters (Note 1 and Figure 8.5.1):

NF P 94-262

a tensile limit resistance Rt,

Rt a tensile creep load; cr.

NOTE 1 - The values of Rt and RTCR are determined respectively according to the provisions of Section 10 and Article 14.2.

(3) Deep foundations can be subjected to compressive and tensile strength vis-à-vis all load combinations (ULS and SLS). However, a number of tests are carried out during the phases of studies and execution depending on the type of stresses applied to the deep foundations (compression or tension) and the consequence of class and the geotechnical category of 'supported book (Article 8.9).

(4) Vis-a-vis normal force, it must be accepted for the calculation of the stresses that the deep foundation behaves linearly elastic, and that without a more elaborate model (Note 1) the axial stiffness of the element can be calculated assuming the free element on its lateral surface and simply supported at its tip.

NOTE 1 - Appendix L presents two models that are also free to use.

(5) It must be given the load application time (Note 1) when determining the axial stiffness of a deep foundation for calculating vis-à-vis the normal force loads.

NOTE 1 - should be identified vis-à-vis the duration of application of a load behavior of the material of the deep foundation (short or long-term module) and the ground according to its conditions drainage and its possible ability to creep.

NF P 94-262 — a tensile limit resistance Rt, — Rt a tensile creep load; cr.

Figure 8.5.1 - Role Models to consider for a deep foundation under axial load compression and under axial tensile load

  • 8.5.2 Calculation methods

(1) The characteristic value of the lift Rc; k and / or the tensile strength Rt; k must be determined from one of the following methods (Note 1):

static loading test results obtained and interpreted in accordance with DIN EN 1997-1, Section 7.5.2 (Note 2 and Schedule S);

the results of soil tests made profiles and construed in accordance with the appropriate standards with model calculations whose validity has been demonstrated (Note 3 and Appendices F and G) and using the procedure known as the "model pile," either the form described in clauses 7.6.2.3 (5) and (6) of the standard EN 1997-1 or by application of Annex D of the standard NF EN 1990 (Note 4);

the results of soil tests made profiles and construed in accordance with the appropriate standards of computational models whose validity has been demonstrated (Note 3 and Appendices F and G) and using the so-called "alternative" that is presented to the 7.6.2.3 clause (8) of the standard NF EN 1997-1. This method is called by the following procedure "terrain model" (Notes 5 and 6);

NF P 94-262

of dynamic impact test results (Articles 7.5.3 and 7.6.2.4 of standard NF EN 1997-1) performed on deep foundations in accordance with an agreed procedure and a calculation procedure whose validity has been demonstrated ( Note 7).

NOTE 1 - Other possible approaches (e.g., from the behavior observed for a comparable foundation piles, under threshing formulas or lift derived from the wave propagation tests) fall outside the scope of this standard .

NOTE 2 - Until the publication of the standard EN ISO 22477-1, the provisions of the NF P 94-150-1 standard apply. Recall that pile load tests are required as specified in clause 7.5.1 (1) of the EN 1997-1 standard. deep foundation load tests must be performed in the following situations:

when using a type of deep foundation or an installation method for which there are no comparable experiences;

when deep foundations have not been tested under similar conditions of soil and loading; when deep foundations will be subject to loading for which theory and experience do not provide sufficient confidence in the design made. During the load test, then it should be applied to deep foundation similar load to the planned shipment;

when the observations made during installation indicate a behavior of deep foundations that deviates strongly and unfavorably the expected behavior based on the recognition of the site or experience and when additional recognitions do not explain the reasons for this gap.

NOTE 3 - The evaluation methods of the lift from the results of tests performed on soil must be established from deep foundation load testing and comparable experiences. Empirical methods described in Appendices F and G respectively based Ménard pressuremeter tests and static penetration tests are examples of calculation methods that can be considered validated.

NOTE 4 - The procedure, known as the "model pile" is to calculate in a homogeneous area lift or the tensile strength of a deep foundation, type and geometry (diameter, length) attached to the right of each survey recognition deemed representative of the site and to implement the choice two methods:

is applied by means of the correlation factors £ 3 and £ 4 the general formula of (9.2.3.1) to determine the lift characteristic of the deep foundation or the general formula (10.2.3.1) to determine the characteristic resistance of the tensile deep foundation ;

either apply to the N values of lift Rc corresponding to the N polls the study area the procedure in Article D.7.2 of DIN EN 1990. It is recommended to assume that the distribution of values Rc is lognormal.

Attention is drawn to the need for both methods to work on a homogeneous area of statistical standpoint. It is then necessary to have identified the polls surveys or groups of individuals or by small values or by high values, and have had an appropriate geotechnical zoning for working separately on homogeneous areas so determined. If an area has an insufficient number of surveys (1 or 2) not allowing the application of the method described in Annex D of the standard EN 1990 can be applied in this area procedure factors correlation£ 3 and £4.

NOTE 5 - The procedure called "terrain model" consists in deducing a geotechnical model of the site, optionally divided into homogeneous zones, qb characteristic values k and qs k of the resistance peak and the unit axial friction in the different layers and then applying the general formulas (9.2.4.1) and (9.2.4.2) to determine the characteristic lift the deep foundation or the general formula (10.2.4) to determine the characteristic resistance of the traction deep foundation .

NOTE 6- For the procedure known as the "terrain model" when applying a statistical analysis is possible, it is nevertheless difficult. The difficulties are related to the determination of the dispersion plane and the dispersion in the vertical geotechnical strength parameter. Statistical analysis, if conducted, but must at least be based on the principles described in Annex D of the standard NF EN 1990.

NOTE 7 - Until the publication of a standard for this type of test, the provisions of the NF P 94-151 standard apply. Recall that in order to use a stake by dynamic impact testing in accordance with clause

  • 7.6.2.4 (1) of the NF EN 1997-1, it must be shown prior the validity of the calculation model by static load tests carried

out in the same field conditions for comparable posts.

(2) Methods based on soil tests favor the use of data obtained from pressuremeter and penetrometer surveys (Appendices F and G). It is however possible to use other types of data (number of blows to the SPT, friction angle and cohesion). In this case, the calculation method and the associated model coefficient, which may be used, must be validated by a set of static loading tests of deep foundations made in circumstances reflecting a comparable experience in terms of terrain and type of deep foundation. The calculation method must be of type "direct", that is to say, it directly correlates the results of soil tests

NF P 94-262

to the parameters of the bearing capacity. Furthermore, 8 Later during the project phase. The preliminary project phases and project are defined in the NF P 94-500 standard. This choice can be challenged in later phases if the new geotechnical information required (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - This choice is guided by considerations relating to knowledge of the site and the dispersion and changes in its characteristics (NF Standards EN 1990 and EN 1997). It should not be guided by the more or less conservative level of both methods.

NOTE 2 - When a survey was conducted in line with a support, respecting the usual practice, especially regarding the vertical spacing of the tests, we can apply the procedure of the "terrain model" taking as values characteristic values from the survey directly, provided that the site's stratigraphy is regular, that soils are relatively homogeneous and that the bearing surface is limited. In general, we can consider that the survey values apply as such within less than 5 m.

  • 8.6 Deep foundation isolated as a transverse force

    • 8.6.1 Interaction soil-pile in common part of the barrel

(1) It should characterize the transverse behavior of a deep foundation isolated by the relationships between the movement and rotation of the head of the element to the shear forces and bending moments applied thereto.

(2) It should define two types of reaction laws, one vis-a-vis the demands of long-term application of the force, the other vis-à-vis short-term application of stress (Notes 1 and 2).

NOTE 1 - At a given depth, these laws give locally the relationship defined by the function O between the transverse movement 8and the linear density of r forces resulting from this displacement. They are noted:

  • - r. =O. (8) for the long period of application of stress;

  • - rt = O t (8) for short-term application of stress.

NOTE 2 - The recommended procedure for construction of these laws from pressuremeter and penetrometer data is given in Annex I. The proposed laws do not allow a priori to treat the case of cyclic loading.

  • 8.6.2 Act force-displacement for a given type of stress

8.6.2.1 principles

(1) In the usual case (Note 1), it is accepted to consider only the first linear portion ( "elastic pseudo") laws, provided (Note 2) to verify, for the shares of combinations, the range of validity the law is not exceeded in the layers that have been taken into account (Note 3).

NOTE 1 - In general, the effect of the shock of vehicles or boats on support can not be analyzed from a simplified law and requires considering a nonlinear law efforts - traverse.

NOTE 2 - These simplifications assume that the allocation of minimum requirements for soil behavior laws leads to the most severe stresses in any point of the structure. It is therefore appropriate to assess in which cases these simplifications are eligible.

NOTE 3 - An intersecting linear law can be substituted for a non-linear law, provided to ensure that the plastic bearing is never exceeded.

  • 8.6.2.2 flexural rigidity

(1) In calculating the stress, the deep foundation bending stiffness is determined with the simplifications allowed by the justification rules reinforced concrete limit state considering for deep concrete foundation provided with a thick sheath of this last by giving it a thickness that must be initially at least 2 mm less the thickness of steel sacrificed corrosion (Notes 1 to 3 and Articles 12.2.6 and 12.3.2).

NOTE 1 - These simplifications return to consider what is commonly called sections "raw".

NOTE 2 - Remember that this approximation is permissible only insofar reports deformability of the various parts are

  • 8 For one, it is recommended that the choice of the procedure of "model pile" and procedure of the "terrain model" to determine the bearing capacity Rc, kand Rt tensile strength k from soil test results done

from the draft. On the other hand, it is imperative that this choice is done

NF P 94-262

not fundamentally changed.

NOTE 3 - In the cases covered by section 8.8.4 of this document, for which assesses the effects of lateral movement of the surrounding soil on a deep foundation, we can take into account the adjustments resulting from an elastomeric behavior plastic deep foundation if:

it is not fragile;

adaptations are compatible with resistance to other stresses.

  • 8.6.2.3 Modeling of ground-based interaction

(1) Generally, it is assumed that the transverse displacements and rotations of the base of a deep foundation will mobilize any reaction from the ground, that is to say, shear and bending moment are zero at level thereof (Notes 1 to 3).

NOTE 1 - This model called "free edge" is to overlook friction that can develop between the ground and the base of the deep foundation and the eccentricity of the normal force.

NOTE 2 - In the case of a deep foundation anchored in bedrock calculated with conditions called "articulated tip" or "embedded", following the anchorage length, it retains the hypothesis of the "free edge" by mapping bedrock by a high stiffness of soil.

NOTE 3 - When the interaction between the field and the base intervenes significantly (bars, well large transverse dimensions, short piles), it is permissible to retain more elaborate behavior laws.

  • 8.7 Behavior of a group of deep foundations

    • 8.7.1 Application domain

(1) The requirements of section 8.7 apply only to cases of deep foundations composed of one or more vertical elements of the same section (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - If adaptations are necessary to best represent the behavior of the foundation.

  • 8.7.2 axial behavior

(1) The axial behavior of a group of deep foundations significantly different from a single deep foundation both as regards on one hand the bearing or its resistance to traction and secondly its axial rigidity.

(2) The analysis of the behavior of a group of deep foundation requires taking into account two factors:

the first is related to the effects of the implementation of deep foundations on the ground because of their close spacing; - the second is linked to the loading interaction between the various deep foundation by the geometry of the group considered.

(3) Lift value or traction resistance of a group of n deep foundations differs from n times the lift or the tensile strength of an insulated element. The methods for determining the lift of value or tensile strength of a group of deep foundations are presented in sections 9.3 and 10.3 and in Appendix J.

(4) The analysis of the behavior of a group of deep foundations, in terms of travel, based on complex methods (Article 14.3 and Appendix L) based on matching the movements of different piles up the group of deep foundations and soil surrounding.

(5) The stakes of a group of deep foundations generally have different stiffness depending on their location within the group. The efforts they experience can then be significantly increased or minus compared to a value corresponding to the case where they would present all the same stiffness.

  • 8.7.3 cross behavior

(1) It can be considered that the laws of transverse behavior of n foundation elements placed in the direction of travel does not interfere if the distance was bare naked between them satisfies the following condition (Figures 8.7.3.1 and 8.7.3.2):

NF P 94-262

at> 2max {B; L} (8.7.3.1)

B is the largest width of the elements measured perpendicular to the direction of travel;

  • L is the length of the elements measured in the direction of travel.

(2) It can be considered that the laws of transverse behavior of n foundation elements located perpendicular to the direction of travel does not interfere if the distance b naked naked between them satisfies the following condition (Figure 8.7.3.2):

b> 2max {B; L}

(8.7.3.2)

B is the largest width of the elements measured perpendicular to the direction of travel;

  • L is the length of the elements measured in the direction of travel.

(3) When the bare away bare foundation elements does not meet one of the inequalities (8.7.3.1) or (8.7.3.2), it must define the stress-strain laws taking account of their mutual interaction.

NF P 94-262 at > 2max {B; L} (8.7.3.1) B is the largest width of the

Figure 8.7.3.1 - non-interference condition laws transverse behavior of foundation elements placed in the direction of travel

NF P 94-262

2.5

Figure 8.7.3.2 - non-interference condition laws of transverse behavior of foundation elements located perpendicularly to the direction of travel

  • 8.7.4 Behavior of the bonding pad

(1) In calculating the stress, it is acceptable to consider the bonding pad as an infinitely rigid body if it satisfies the following condition:

h is the height of the sole;

(8.7.4)

d is the greatest distance between two founding members of the group.

  • 8.8 Consideration of overall displacements of the ground

    • 8.8.1 principles

(1) The overall movement of the ground surrounding a deep foundation generates thereon the stresses which must be given in the justifications (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - Given the difficulty fully understand the intensity of these stresses, it should as far as possible to reduce by an appropriate choice of the design of the foundation and the phasing of the work.

(2)

The behavior models defined below should be considered when the following conditions are true:

the foundation is composed solely of identical vertical members connected at the top by a rigid sole,

ground displacements are caused by loading up land.

NF P 94-262

(3) In other cases, the foundation must be justified from the most appropriate models, possibly obtained by adapting the principles set out in Articles 8.8.2 and 8.8.3.

  • 8.8.2 Negative friction on a secluded deep foundation

(1) A relative soil compaction compared to a deep foundation leads on the perimeter of the latter friction forces directed downward (note 1) which must be considered in the justification.

NOTE 1 - The intensity of these constraints called negative friction increases with time, reaching a maximum value at the end of soil consolidation. In some cases it is necessary to consider in addition the creep phenomena.

(2) Failing other models (Note 1), the intensity of the negative friction constraint must be assessed following the directions given in Appendix H.

NOTE 1 - simpler but more pessimistic models than those specified in Annex H may be sufficient in some cases.

(3) The sum of the negative friction stresses on the entire side surface of the deep foundation located above the neutral point (Note 1) is the total negative friction on the isolated element.

NOTE 1 - The neutral point is the point of the axis of the deep foundation over which the side faces thereof are subject to negative friction. This is theoretically the point of the deep foundation where compaction of the latter is equal to soil compaction.

  • 8.8.3 negative friction on a set of deep foundation elements

(1) At other prescribed models default, negative friction Gsn suffered by the foundation element must be assessed following the directions in Appendix H.

(2) Generally, the limit resistance Rc; k is estimated by assuming that the axial friction is zero over the entire height of compressible soil, including those located below the determined neutral point for an isolated assumed member (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - When the negative friction is low, it is possible to consider the value of negative friction on a group of n deep foundations as the sum of n negative friction values calculated over the deep foundation of the group.

  • 8.8.4 Accumulated negative friction and loads due to variable actions

(1) Without more representative model, we must adopt the cumulation rules of negative friction and loads due to variable actions specified in Article 7.3.3.

  • 8.8.5 Behavior of a single element vis-à-vis horizontal displacements of the ground

(1) For justification foundations, any horizontal movement of the ground must be characterized by a marked function g (z) that the amplitude of this displacement depending on the depth (Note 1).

NOTE 1 - In the absence of representative measurements, the choice of the function g (z) can be carried out following the instructions given in Appendix K.

(2) The behavior of the element must also be modeled on the principles set out in Article

  • 8.6.2 relative to the transverse behavior of a single element by considering, for the study of long-term

equity of application, the relative movements between the deep foundation and soil, which is to take as an

expression of rv:

r v ° = v {Sv - g )

(8.8.5)

NF P 94-262

(3) When a foundation must be justified vis-à-vis a horizontal displacement of the soil, the amplitude of this displacement is usually large enough to require a non-linear analysis of the behavior.

(4) The effect of the actions induced by a horizontal displacement g (z) must be estimated from a MISS method (11.2). The ysp partial factor applies for this type of calculation to equity effects (Notes 1 to 3).

NOTE 1 - It is also recalled that in the presence of ground displacements, it is usually the soil-structure interaction laws with maximum features that create the most adverse stress. It is therefore appropriate to choose accordingly Oi and Ov defined in Clause 8.6. 1 (2).

NOTE 2 - In the absence of more representative model, the maximum characteristics of the interaction laws are evaluated following the directions given in Appendix K.

NOTE 3 - The modeling of a deep foundation may consider the elastic-plastic behavior of the material constituting the (clauses 8.6.2.1 (1) Note 3 and 12.1 (2) Note 1).

(5) Provided the foundation elements are sufficiently distant from each other so that we can consider that their transverse behavior laws do not interfere, the behavi