BEARING CAPACITY OF STEEL PIPE PILES IN EXPANSIVE SOILS
By: Rasha Abu Elgasim Abd Elrhman Osman B.Sc. (Honor) Civil Eng. (University of Khartoum) 2007
A Thesis Submitted to the University of Khartoum in Partial Fulfillment for the Degree of Master Science in Building Technology
Supervisor: Dr. Ahmed Mohamed Elshareif
Building and Road Research Institute December 2011
Dedication
Lovingly dedicated to my Father, Mother, Supervisor, Brothers and Friends.
ACKNOLEDGMENT I wish to express my deep gratitude and appreciation to my supervisor Dr. Ahmed Mohamed Elshareif, for his help and guidance which contributed to this work. I am indebted to technical staff of BRRI for their help to carryout the experimental work especially Mr. Abedelih M. Elhassan & Miss. Sahar Yousif. I cannot find words to express my gratitude to the Soba Brick Plant staff for their kindness and great help. Finally I would like to thank with an appreciation my family for their support.
Table of Content Table of content ........................................................................................................I Abstract in English .................................................................................................. V Abstract in Arabic ................................................................................................ VII List of Figures ..................................................................................................... VIII List of Tables ......................................................................................................... XI List of Plates ....................................................................................................... XIII Abbreviations & Notations ................................................................................. XIV CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Objective of the study ........................................................................................ 2 1.3 Methodology ...................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Outlines of Thesis contents ................................................................................ 2 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Expansive Soils .................................................................................................. 5 2.2.1 Origin and Distribution ................................................................................ 5 2.2.2 Identification of Expansive Soils ................................................................. 6 2.2.3 Active Zone and Zone of Moisture Variation .............................................. 7 2.2.4 Heave of Expansive Soils ............................................................................ 8 2.2.4.1 The Main Factors affecting on the Magnitude of Swelling of Expansive Soils.................................................................................................. 8 2.2.4.2 Depth of Heaving ................................................................................... 9 2.3 Pile Foundation System ..................................................................................... 9
2.3.1 Definition ..................................................................................................... 9 2.3.2 Main Factors governing the Selection of Pile Foundation ......................... 10 2.3.3 Types of Pile Foundation ........................................................................... 10 2.4 Steel Pipe Pile Foundation ............................................................................... 11 2.4.1 Definition ................................................................................................... 11 2.4.2 Types of Pipe Piles Foundations ................................................................ 11 2.4.2.1 Closed - ended Pipe Pile ...................................................................... 12 2.4.2.2 Open - ended Pipe Pile ......................................................................... 12 2.4.2.2.1 Open - ended Plugged Pile............................................................. 13 2.4.2.2.2 Open - ended Unplugged Pile ........................................................ 13 2.4.2.3 Concrete Pile with Steel Casing ........................................................... 13 2.4.3 Uses, Advantages and Disadvantages of Steel Pipe Piles .......................... 14 2.4.4 Plugging of Steel Pipe Pile Foundation...................................................... 15 2.4.5 Bearing Capacity of Steel Pipe Pile Foundation ........................................ 19 2.4.5.1 End - Bearing Resistance .................................................................... 19 2.4.5.2 Frictional Resistance ........................................................................... 20 2.4.6 Corrosion of Steel Pipe Piles...................................................................... 24 2.4.6.1 Reasons ............................................................................................... 24 2.4.6.2 Corrosion Rates of Steel Pipe Piles ..................................................... 24 2.4.6.3 Design Options for Steel Piles Subjected to Degradation or Abrasion .......................................................................................................................... 25 CHAPTER 3 EXPERMENTAL PROGRAM AND TEST RESULTS 3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 28 3.2 Model piles in Expansive Soils ........................................................................ 28 3.2.1 Introduction................................................................................................ 28 3.2.2 Setup of the Model Pile Experiments......................................................... 29
3.2.2.1 Characteristics of soil used in the model pile tests ............................... 29 3.2.2.2 Setup of the Model Pile Tests Components ......................................... 30 3.2.2.3 Model Pile Test Procedure and Results ............................................... 38 3.3 Shear Strength and Interface Shear Strength Tests .......................................... 42 3.3.1 Introduction................................................................................................ 42 3.3.2 Properties of Materials used in the Shear Strength and Interface Shear Strength ............................................................................................................. 42 3.3.3 Testing Apparatus ...................................................................................... 42 3.3.4 General Description of the Shear Strength and Interface Shear Strength Tests .................................................................................................................. 44 3.3.5 Results of shear strength and interface shear tests ..................................... 45 CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 53 4.2 The Analysis and Discussion of Plugging Data ............................................... 53 4.3 The Analysis and Discussion of Model Pile Load Tests Results ..................... 54 4.4 Analysis and Discussion of the Shear Strength and Interface Shear Strength Tests Results .......................................................................................................... 57 4.4.1 Introduction................................................................................................ 57 4.4.2 Analysis and Discussion of Shear Strength Test Results ........................... 57 4.4.3 Analysis and Discussion of Interface Shear Strength Test Results ............ 58 4.4.4 Adhesion factor .......................................................................................... 59 CHAPTER 5
CASE STUDY: ANALYSIS OF DRIVING RECORDS OF STEEL PIPE PILES IN ADAR OIL FIELD
5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 62 5.2 Geotechnical Investigation ............................................................................... 62 5.3 Sub Surface Conditions at the Site ................................................................... 63
5.4 Description of the Piles and the Driving Process ............................................. 69 5.5 Discussion of the Results ................................................................................. 70 CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Conclusions ...................................................................................................... 79 6.1.1 Introduction................................................................................................ 79 6.1.2 Model Experiments .................................................................................... 79 6.1.3 Case Study ................................................................................................. 80 6.2 Recommendations for Future Work ................................................................. 82
References .......................................................................................................... 84 Appendix (A) ..................................................................................................... 89 Appendix (B) ................................................................................................... 108
ABSTRACT The objective of this research is to study the performance of steel pipe piles in expansive soil media focusing on the bearing capacity of the piles. The research is composed of series of laboratory and field experiments. Model experiments on small diameter short steel pipe piles were conducted using expansive soil from Khartoum. To study their behavior in this type of soil, static pile load tests were conducted on the model piles to study the effect of plugging on bearing capacity of the piles. The unplugged pile measured about 63% of the total capacity of the plugged pile having the same diameter and length. It is useful to note that the model studies on piles showed that the bearing capacity of steel pipe piles in plugged condition dropped by 8% due to wetting of the surrounding soil. Also wetting reduced the total capacity of concrete pile by 46%. The steel pile – soil interface strength and adhesion were studied in the laboratory. The tests showed that the adhesion factor is 0.48 for moisture content values less than or equal the plastic limit of the soil. The adhesion factor increased with increasing moisture content beyond the plastic limit. A case - study was given in this thesis. Field and laboratory tests data for foundations and soils were collected from a construction site in Adar field in the Upper Nile State. Piles of different diameters were driven in very stiff to hard swelling soil media. Driving records and plug lengths were collected from Asawer Petroleum Company. The results of these tests were analyzed to study the effects
of pile diameter on the plugging of the pipe piles. It was found that the plugging length of the piles increased linearly with increasing the pile diameter. Also the driving records were analyzed to study the effects of diameter on the driving resistance of the piles. It was found that the small diameter piles offered lower resistance for driving compared to the large diameter piles.
ﺑﺴﻢ اﷲ اﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ اﻟﺮﺣﻴﻢ
ﻣﻠﺨﺺ اﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﻳﻬﺪف هﺬا اﻟﺒﺤﺚ اﻟﻰ دراﺳﺔ أداء اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ اﻟﻔﻮﻻذﻳﺔ اﻟﻤﻔﺘﻮﺣﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ اﻟﻄﻴﻨﻴﺔ اﻟﻔﻮارة وﺑﺼﻔﺔ رﺋﻴﺴﻴﺔ دراﺳﺔ ﻗﻮة ﺗﺤﻤﻞ هﺬﻩ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ ﻟﻠﻀﻐﻂ اﻟﺮأﺳﻲ .اﻟﺒﺤﺚ ﻳﺘﻜﻮن ﻣﻦ ﺳﻠﺴﻠﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻔﺤﻮﺻﺎت اﻟﻤﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ واﻟﺤﻘﻠﻴﺔ. اﺳﺘﺨﺪﻣﺖ ﺗﺮﺑﺔ ﻃﻴﻨﻴﺔ ﻓﻮارة ﻣﻦ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ اﻟﺨﺮﻃﻮم ودرﺳﺖ ﺧﺼﺎﺋﺼﻬﺎ اﻟﻬﻨﺪﺳﻴﺔ ﺑﻐﺮض اﻻﺳﺘﻔﺎدة ﻣﻨﻬﺎ ﻓﻲ إﺟﺮاء اﺧﺘﺒﺎرات أﻧﻤﻮذج ﻟﺪراﺳﺔ أداء اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ اﻟﻔﻮﻻذﻳﺔ اﻟﻤﻔﺘﻮﺣﺔ واﻟﻤﺪﻗﻮﻗﺔ ﻓﻴﻬﺎ ،وآﺬﻟﻚ دراﺳﺔ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ اﻟﻤﻮﺟﻮدة داﺧﻞ هﺬﻩ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻗﻮة ﺗﺤﻤﻠﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﻀﻐﻂ اﻟﺮأﺳﻲ .ﺗﻢ اﻟﺘﻮﺻﻞ اﻟﻲ ان ﻗﻮة ﺗﺤﻤﻞ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ اﻟﻐﻴﺮ ﻣﺴﺪودﻩ ﻟﻠﻀﻐﻂ اﻟﺮأﺳﻲ ﺗﺸﻜﻞ %63ﻣﻦ ﻗﻮة ﺗﺤﻤﻞ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰاﻟﻤﺴﺪودﻩ ذات ﻧﻔﺲ اﻟﻘﻄﺮ واﻟﻄﻮل .اﻧﻪ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﻬﻢ اﻟﺘﻨﺒﻪ اﻟﻲ ان اﻟﻔﺤﻮص اﻟﻤﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ واﻟﺤﻘﻠﻴﺔ أﺛﺒﺘﺖ ان ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺗﺤﻤﻞ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ اﻟﻤﻔﺘﻮﺣﺔ ﻟﻠﻀﻐﻂ اﻟﺮأﺳﻲ ﻗﺪ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺼﺖ ﺑﻨﺴﺒﺔ %8وذﻟﻚ ﺑﻔﻌﻞ ﺗﻐﻴﺮ اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻮى اﻟﻤﺎﺋﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﺮﺑﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﻴﻄﺔ ﻧﺘﻴﺠﺔ ﻟﻠﺒﻠﻞ ،وآﺬﻟﻚ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﺗﺤﻤﻞ اﻟﺨﻮازﻳﻖ اﻟﺨﺮﺳﺎﻧﻴﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﻔﻮرة ﻗﺪ ﺗﻨﺎﻗﺼﺖ ﺑﻨﺴﺒﺔ .%46 ﻣﻦ ﺧﻼل اﻟﺘﺠﺎرب اﻟﻤﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﻼﻣﺲ ﺑﻴﻦ اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ واﻻﺳﺎس ﺗﻢ اﻟﺘﻮﺻﻞ اﻟﻲ أﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻗﻴﻤﺔ 0.48ﻟﻤﻌﺎﻣﻞ اﻟﺘﻼﻣﺲ ﻋﻨﺪﻣﺎ ﺗﻜﻮن ﻗﻴﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻮى اﻟﻤﺎﺋﻲ اﻗﻞ ﻣﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ اﻟﻠﺪوﻧﺔ او ﻳﺴﺎوﻳﻪ ،وﺗﺘﺰاﻳﺪ ﻗﻴﻤﺔ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ اﻟﺘﻼﻣﺲ ﻣﻊ ازدﻳﺎد ﻗﻴﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻮى اﻟﻤﺎﺋﻲ ﻟﻠﺘﺮﺑﺔ.
ﺗﻤﺖ ﻣﺘﺎﺑﻌﺔ اﻻﻋﻤﺎل اﻟﺤﻘﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﺘﺸﻴﻴﺪ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ اﻟﻔﻮﻻذﻳﺔ ﻟﻤﻮﻗﻊ اﻟﻤﺨﻴﻤﺎت ﻓﻲ ﻣﻨﻄﻘﺔ ﻋﺪراﺋﻴﻞ ﺑﻮﻻﻳﺔ أﻋﺎﻟﻲ اﻟﻨﻴﻞ، وﺟﻤﻌﺖ ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ اﻟﻔﺤﻮﺻﺎت اﻟﺤﻘﻠﻴﺔ واﻟﻤﻌﻤﻠﻴﺔ ﻟﻠﺘﺮﺑﺔ واﻻﺳﺎﺳﺎت ﻣﻦ ﺷﺮآﺔ أﺳﺎور ﻟﻠﺒﺘﺮول .ﺣﻠٌﻠﺖ اﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﻟﻤﻌﺮﻓﺔ ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻗﻄﺮ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ اﻟﻔﻮﻻذﻳﺔ اﻟﻤﻔﺘﻮﺣﺔ ﻋﻠﻲ ارﺗﻔﺎع اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ داﺧﻠﻬﺎ ،وﻟﻮﺣﻆ ان ارﺗﻔﺎع اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ داﺧﻞ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ ﻳﺬداد ﺧﻄﻴﺎ ﺑﺰﻳﺎدة ﻗﻄﺮ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ .آﻤﺎ درس ﺗﺄﺛﻴﺮ ﻗﻄﺮ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ اﻟﻤﻔﺘﻮﺣﺔ ﻋﻠﻲ ﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺘﻬﺎ ﻟﻠﺪق وﺗﺒﻴﻦ ان اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ ﺻﻐﻴﺮة اﻟﻘﻄﺮ أﻗﻞ ﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺮآﺎﺋﺰ اﻻآﺒﺮ ﻗﻄﺮا.
List of Figures Figure No. 2.1 2.2
Name of figure Sketch of soil plug formed in open-end pipe pile Loss of thickness by corrosion for steel piles in sea water (After Morley & Bruce, 1983)
Page No. 23 25
3.1
Sketch of plugging of pipe pile
34
3.2
Load settlement curve for model pile p1
39
3.3
Load settlement curve for model pile p2
40
3.4
Load settlement curve for model pile p7
40
3.5
Load settlement curve for model pile p3
41
3.6
Load settlement curve for model pile p8
41
3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11
Shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (14%) moisture content
45
Shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (18%) moisture content
46
Shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (23%) moisture content
46
Shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (27%) moisture content
47
shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (30%) moisture content
47
List of Figures (Continued) Figure No. 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 3.16
Name of figure
Page No.
Interface shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (14%) moisture content
48
Interface shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (18%) moisture content
49
Interface shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (23%) moisture content
49
Interface shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (27%) moisture content
50
Interface shear stress versus horizontal deformation for (30%) moisture content
50
4.1
The results of pile load tests before wetting
55
4.2
The results of pile load tests for plugged piles
56
4.3
The results of pile load tests for concrete piles
56
4.4
Variation of shear strength with moisture content
57
4.5
Variation of interface shear strength with moisture content
58
4.6
Variation of adhesion factor with moisture content
60
5.1
Boreholes locations
65
5.2
Typical soil profile for B.H# (1, 2, 3, and4)
66
List of Figures (Continued) Figure No.
Name of figure
Page No.
5.3
Typical soil profile for B.H# (5, 6, 7, 8, and9)
67
5.4
Variation of average pile plugging length with the pile diameter
73
5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9
Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (1.5m)
75
Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (3.0m)
75
Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (4.5m)
76
Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (6.0m)
76
Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (8.0m)
77
List of Tables Table No. 2.1 3.1
Name of Table The initial estimate guidance for pile plugs based on diameter of open pile Physical and engineering properties of the soil used in model pile tests
Page No. 17 30
3.2
Test results of the compacted samples from the soil used for pile model tests (before wetting)
31
3.3
Driving records for the model piles
33
3.4
The results of plugging of piles
34
3.5
Summary of testing conditions for the piles
37
Test results of the compacted samples from the soil used for pile 3.6
model tests (after wetting)
39
3.7
Results of shear strength tests
48
3.8
Results of interface shear strength tests
51
4.1
Summary of plugging piles records
54
4.2
Summary of load test results of model piles before and after wetting
54
4.3
Summary of results of adhesion factor
59
5.1
Summary of Swelling pressure tests results
68
5.2
Summary of plugging piles records
71
5.3
Summary of average pile plugging length
73
List of Tables (Continued) Table No.
Name of Table
Page No.
Summary of the average cumulative number of blows and the 5.4
pile diameter
74
A.1
Soil properties of B.H # 1
89
A.2
Soil properties of B.H # 2
91
A.3
Soil properties of B.H # 3
93
A.4
Soil properties of B.H # 4
95
A.5
Soil properties of B.H # 5
97
A.6
Soil properties of B.H # 6
99
A.7
Soil properties of B.H # 7
101
A.8
Soil properties of B.H # 8
103
A.9
Soil properties of B.H # 9
105
B.1
Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.168 m
108
B.2
Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.219 m
109
B.3
Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.273 m
113
B.4
Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m
114
List of Plates Plate No.
Name of Plate
Page No.
General view for the trench, compacted layer and compactor 3.1
machine
32
3.2
General view of driving system for steel pipe piles
35
3.3
Steel pipe piles used for model tests
36
3.4
Reaction and measuring system used for model pile tests
37
3.5
Shear box apparatus
43
3.6
Shear box apparatus, components and accessories
43
5.1
General view for a typical light structure at Petroleum Camp
64
5.2
Side view of the foundations of the Petroleum Camp structure
64
5.3
The driving system of steel pipe piles
69
Abbreviations & Notations Symbol or Notation Qu
Meaning Ultimate bearing capacity
Qft
Frictional resistance
Qp
End-bearing resistance
Ap
End bearing contact area
qp
Unit end bearing resistance
Asteel
Area of steel section
Asoil
Area of plug soil
Qf
The outside skin friction
Qpf
The inside skin friction
Ca
Average adhesion over the total pile embedded length
Cai
Average adhesion of the soil plug over the length of the pile
D
The outer diameter of the pipe pile
Di
The internal diameter of the pipe pile
Ld
Total pile embedded length
Lp
Length of soil plug inside the pile
η
A reduction factor based on Japanese code
Abbreviations & Notations (Continued) Symbol or Notation
Meaning
As
Pile-soil surface area
Cu
Average undrained shear strength at the pile toe
S.P.T
Standard penetration test
C.P.T
Cone penetration test
CH
Silty CLAY of high plasticity
L.L
Liquid limit
P.L
Plastic limit
P.I
Plasticity index
O.M.C
Optimum moisture content
M.D.D
Maximum dry density
I.M.C
Initial moisture content
F.M.C
Final moisture content
γb
Bulk density
γd
Dry density
qu
Unconfined compression shear strength
Abbreviations & Notations (Continued) Symbol or Notation α
Meaning Adhesion factor
N.m.c
Natural moisture content
B.H #
Borehole number
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Chapter One Introduction 1.1 Introduction Expansive clay deposits prevail large areas of Sudan. These deposits are problematic to the civil engineering construction such as irrigation systems, water lines, sewer lines, buildings, roads etc… located within these deposits, due to their swelling and shrinkage characteristic. These soils cover over one-third of Sudan's (2.6 million square kilometer) area. The annual damage caused by expansive soils is estimated to exceed 5 million Sudanese pounds as reported by Osman and Charlie(1984). Researches dealing with piles in Sudanese expansive soils attempted to study the performance of bored piles. This is mainly due to the reasons that they have been known long time ago and in view of the availability of contractors and equipments. Less attention was given to study the performance of other pile types. Steel pipe piles have been extensively used in the petroleum area in the Republic of south Sudan and in south- western Sudan e.g. Hegleig, Adar, Palauge and Monga to support light structures with no feed back of their long term performance. Their use have been encouraged by the scarcity of local building materials and their ease of construction. Major disadvantage of the use of steel pipe piles is that they are imported and their performance in swelling soils is not guaranteed.
1.2 Objective of the Study The objective of this research is to study the performance of steel pipe piles in expansive soils focusing on the bearing capacity of the piles. The research attempts to study the effect of moisture increases on the bearing capacity of the piles, also the effect of plugging on the bearing capacity of the piles. The research outcomes could be used for setting guidelines for the design of steel pipe piles in expansive soils. 1.3 Methodology In order to attain the objectives of this study a series of laboratory and field experiments were carried out to covering the following tasks: •
Tests on model piles behavior in expansive soils
•
Shear and interface strength tests
•
Field data (driving records) were used to study the factors affecting Plugging length
1.4 Outlines of Thesis contents The thesis constitutes six main parts. Each part deals with a section of the study. Chapter One gives a general review about the dissertation, its scopes and outlines. Chapter Two is a brief literature on expansive soils and pile foundation systems dealing with steel pipe piles. Chapter Three outlines the laboratory and model tests programs. Their procedures, equipments and results.
Chapter Four presents the analysis and discussion of the laboratory and model tests. Chapter Five discusses a case study of the steel pipe piles driven in the New Operation Base Camp at Adar. Chapter Six gives the conclusions from the study and recommendations for the future work in the same areas of this study.
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
Chapter Two Literature Review 2.1 Introduction This chapter presents literature review on topics related to the themes of the thesis. The first part summarizes literature review on expansive soils, such as origin, distribution, identification, active zone, zone of moisture variation, heave of expansive soil, factors affecting the magnitude of swelling and depth of heaving. The second part highlights literature review on pile foundation systems; the main factors governing the selection of piles and their types. The third part presents literature review on the types of foundation adopted for expansive soils with emphasis on short steel pipe piles. This includes their types, uses, advantages, disadvantages, plugging, capacity and design. 2.2 Expansive Soils 2.2.1 Origin and Distribution Expansive soils are one of the most problematic materials that are widely encountered in significant land areas in several parts of the world, e.g. in parts of Africa, Australia, India, United state and Canada. They are generally characterized by the presence of a clay mineral of the smectite group. These soils can give rise to problems in civil engineering works because of their capacity to undergo large volume changes with changes in the moisture content or suction. It possesses certain mineralogical structures (e.g. Na montmorillonite), generally have high affinity for water; their volume increases as they absorb water and their volume decreases as they lose water (Gillent 1968).
Expansive soils cause more damage to structures, particularly light building and pavements than any other natural hazard including earthquakes and floods (Jones and Holtz 1973). The magnitude of damages to structures can be extensive, impair the usefulness of the structure and detract aesthetically from the environment; maintenance and repair requirements can be expensive and may grossly exceed the original cost of the foundation. Damages can occurs within a few months following construction or may develop slowly over a period of about 5 years, or may not appear for many years until some activity occurs to disturb the soil moisture. The probability of damages increases for structures on swelling foundation soils if the climate and other field environment, effects of construction and effects of occupancy tend to promote moisture changes in the soil. 2.2.2 Identification of Expansive Soils Recognition of potentially expansive soils has been a major problem in geotechnical engineering and many methods of identification have been desired in the literature. Chen (1975) summarized three different methods for identifying potentially expansive, these are: •
Mineralogical identification.
•
Indirect methods, such as the index properties, potential volume change and
activity methods. •
Direct measurement method where swelling pressures and swelling
percentages are measured in the laboratory.
Snethen (1984) summarized and compared 17 different techniques for identification of potentially expansive soils. He concluded that the liquid limit and plasticity index are the most consistent indicators of potential swell. Empirical correlations between swell potential and other soil properties were reported by many authors (e.g. Chen 1975, Sced et al 1962). Many of these correlations were summarized by Arnold (1984). Chen (1975) used the S.P.T N value coupled with the liquid limit and the percentage passing sieve No.200 as for estimating the probable volume change of expansive soils. He stated that “clays with penetration resistance in excess of 15 usually possess some swelling potential” and also the C.P.T machine provides a quick estimation of the swelling properties. 2.2.3 Active Zone and Zone of Moisture Variation Over the past two or three decades the term “active zone” has taken on the several different meanings. These generally refer to, in some way, the zone of soil that either is contributing to or has the potential of producing heave of the ground surface. Nelson et al (1998) and Durkee (2000) defined the active zone as the zone of soil that is contributing to heave due to soil expansion at any particular time. The active zone will normally vary with time and it depends on the zone of moisture fluctuation which is defined as that zone of soil in which water content changes due to climatic changes at the ground surface. Nelson et al (1998) and Durkee (2000) also defined the maximum depth of active zone or the depth of potential heave as the depth to which the overburden vertical stress equals or exceeds the swelling pressure of the soil.
2.2.4 Heave of Expansive Soils Free field heave is the heave that will occur at the surface of a soil profile if no surcharge or stress is applied. It is believed that for a structure with a potential free field heave of less than 5cm, the risk of movement that could damages the structure is low; whereas the risk of movement is high if a structure has a potential heave of 10 or 15 cm respectively (John et al, 2006). 2.2.4.1The Main Factors affecting on the Magnitude of Swelling of Expansive Soils The Main Factors affecting on the Magnitude of Swelling of Expansive Soils are: •
Soil plasticity.
•
Dry density (the greater density, the greater expansive potential).
•
Initial moisture content.
•
Moisture variation (if the moisture is balanced and there are no variations in
moisture then the cycle is interrupted). 2.2.4.2 Depth of Heaving The depth of soil that is contributing to heave at any instant of time depends on two factors: The depth to which water contents in the soil has increased since the time of construction and the expansion potential of the various soil strata.
2.3 Pile Foundation System 2.3.1 Definition A pile is a slender, structural member installed in the ground to transfer the structural loads to the soils at significant depth below the base of the structure. A structure can be founded on piles if: the soil immediately beneath its base does not have adequate bearing capacity; the results of site investigation show the shallow soil is unstable and weak; or if the magnitude of the estimated settlement is not acceptable. A pile foundation may become considered, if a cost estimate indicates that a pile foundation option may be cheaper than any other compared ground improvement costs. In the cases of heavy constructions, it is likely that the bearing capacity of the shallow soil will not be satisfactory and the construction should be built on pile foundation. Piles can also be used in normal ground conditions to resist horizontal loads. 2.3.2 Main Factors governing the Selection of Pile Foundation The design, performance and options of piled foundation depend on several factors, such as: •
Constituents and nature of sub soil (e.g. existing of boulders, cohesive /non
cohesive nature of soil etc…) •
Physical environment of site.
•
Local availability of each pile type.
•
Durability of the pile material in a specific environment.
•
Loading condition of pile (compression /tension pile).
•
Anticipated driving conditions.
•
Layout of the structure.
•
Speed of work.
•
Efficacy of using a right kind of pile (required diameter & length).
2.3.3 Types of Pile Foundation According to Tomlinson (1987), Poulos(1980), Fleming et al (1985), Whitaker(1970) piles can be classified according to: •
Their material type (timber, steel, concrete pile and composite pile).
•
Their method of installation (driven and bored pile).
•
Their effect during installation (displacement and replacement).
•
The way they provide load capacity (end bearing, skin friction and composite pile).
2.4 Steel Pipe Pile Foundation 2.4.1 Definition Pipe piles consist of seamless, welded or spiral welded steel pipes .The diameter varying from less than 200 to as large as 1200mm and the wall thickness ranging from 3 to 25mm. Large steel pipe piles are suitable for many difficult application environments and structures, such as: •
For large pile load.
•
For difficult soil conditions.
•
For water structures, especially harbor structures and bridges.
•
For piling in the vicinity of sensitive structures, open piles are especially suitable.
Steel pipe piles especially acting as a composite structure sustain large compression and tensile stresses. When the soft soil layers are thick or the water depth is considerable there is a demand for good buckling resistance of the large diameter steel pipe piles. Typically, pipe piles are spliced using full penetration groove welds , propriety splicing sleeves are available and should be used only if the splice can provide full strength in bending ( unless the splice will be located at a distance below ground where bending moment are small ). 2.4.2 Types of Pipe Pile Foundation Pipe piles may be driven either closed or open ended.
2.4.2.1 Closed - ended Pipe Pile It is generally formed by welding 12 to 25mm thick flat steel plate or a conical point to the pile toe .When pipe piles are driven to weathered rock or through boulders, a cruciform end plate or a conical point with rounded nose is often used to prevent distortion of the pile toe. A closed end steel pipe is a displacement pile because it increases lateral ground stresses (Cheney & Chassise , 1993 ) and it is driven from the pile head and can be also driven from the bottom using a mandrel. Closed ended piles are recommended mainly when piles are resting on a strong moraine and always when the piles are resting on rock.
2.4.2.2 Open - ended Pipe Pile This type can be socketed into bed rock (rock socketed piles). In driving through dense materials, open end piles may form soil plug, the plug makes the pile act like a closed end pile and can significantly increase the pile toe resistance. The plug should not be removed unless the pile is filled with concrete. Open ended steel pipe piles are considered non displacement pile and are not suited as friction piles in coarse granular soils and often have low driving resistances in these deposits making field capacity verification difficult thereby often resulting in excessive pile lengths (Cheney and Chassie 1993). Open end steel pipes are driven from the pile head only and can be reinforced with steel cutting shoes to provide protection against damage. Open-end steel pipe piles include open end plugged piles, open end unplugged piles and concrete piles with steel casing.
2.4.2.2.1 Open - ended Plugged Pile It is a geotechnically favorable pile, but its use requires confirmation of the plug formation. Plugging may occur if the ratio of the thickness of the plugging soil layer to the pile diameter is sufficient. The plugging pile is suitable when a soil plug develops inside the pile due to the influence of friction and the pile acts similar to a closed ended pile.
Wherever sufficient formation of the plug
formation cannot be confirmed, piles should be designed unplugged and extended deeper.
2.4.2.2.2 Open - ended Unplugged Pile It can be used in such cases, where plugging does not occur and due to the prevailing conditions, a closed ended pile is unsuitable. The soil mass displaced by open ended unplugged piles is small and the disturbance of the piles is insignificant, thus they are suitable for use in vicinity of sensitive structures, In addition pile driving is less laborious and the stresses passing through the shaft are small compared to closed ended driven piles.
2.4.2.2.3 Concrete Pile with Steel Casing It is used in such cases, as steel pipe is driven with piling rig. Soil must be scooped out from the steel pipe; however a thin dense layer of soil can be left at the lower end of the pile. A concrete pile with a steel casing can be considered to have a bearing capacity equals to cast-in- place pile resting on moraine or acting as friction pile. The shaft friction is at maximum 70% of the shaft friction of the cast - in - place pile with corresponding size. When a concrete pile with steel casing is applied, the pipe can be driven by hammering, vibrating, pressing or friction. The wall of pipe in the concrete pile with a steel casing can be thinner and steel quality can be lower than in the steel pipe pile.
2.4.3 Uses, Advantages and Disadvantages of Steel Pipe Piles The use of steel pipe pile generally becomes more popular in recent years; the major advantage of the steel pipe pile is the high strength of pipe material itself. In design, maximum utilization of the steel strength is usually considered, however the actual design capacity is often affected by the buckling strength of the pile during driving. In order to reduce driving resistance, open end pipe piles are often used. It is commonly used where variable pile lengths are required since splicing is relatively easy, common off-shore or near application of pipe piles include their use as bridge foundation piles, fender system, and large diameter mooring dolphins. With the increased ductility requirements for the earthquake resistant design, pipe piles are being used extensively in seismic areas. The use of open-ended steel pipe piles can reduce vibrations and displacements developed during pile driving and diminish the decreasing of the strength of the soil due to the disturbances and the increase of pore water pressure. Steel pipe piles have broad ended their usage in the piling industry due to their relatively high strength of the material and speed of installation. Driving of pipe piles into the soil layers causes increase of pore water pressure which reduces the shear strength of the ground. Development of pore water pressure can be limited by using open-ended piles or minimizing the cross section of closed-ended piles. The disadvantage of open - ended pipe pile rather than
closed-ended pipe pile bearing capacity of open pipe pile is generally smaller than that of the closed-ended pipe pile. 2.4.4 Plugging of Steel Pipe Pile Foundation Plugging of the soil occurs when the shearing resistance inside the pile becomes equal to or greater than the base resistance on the soil core inside the pile during. Driving the soil will stop moving upwards and so, the pile is said to have plugged. Pailkowsky (1990) reported that, during the initial stage of installation of open pipe piles in sand, soil enters the pile at a rate equal to the pile penetration. As penetration continues the inner soil cylinder may develop sufficient resistance to prevent further soil intrusion, causing the soil to become “plugged”. Vijayvergiya (1980), emphasized the mechanism of plug formation and reported that , as long as the base resistance on the soil core inside the pile driving is greater than the shearing resistance on the inside of the pile , the soil core will keep on moving upward as the pile is driven. Randolph (1997), concluded from experiments and numerical work that, the developed skin friction along the inside of pipe piles is significantly higher than common design values for external skin friction. A soil plug develops in open - ended piles in cohesionless soil layer, if the plugging soil layer includes only small amounts of fines and is sufficiently well graded and at least medium dense and if the pile is installed sufficiently deep in
the plugging soil layers; in additions to this the pile driving should be performed using slow driving hammer. The pile plugging becomes more effective, when the acceleration caused by the hammer blow to the pile is decreasing. If the pile is installed using a vibratory hammer, no plugging occurs. If the pile is designed to sustain the loading as plugged a driving test should be performed to verify the plugging in a reliable way. Plugging can be verified if the settlement of the soil surface inside the pipe in the plugging soil layer is at least half of the settlement of the pile. The initial estimate guidance for pile plugs based on diameter of open pile (Pailkowsky and Whitman, 1990) is presented in Table (2-1).
Table (2-1): The initial estimate guidance for pile plugs based on diameter of open pile (Pailkowsky and Whitman, 1990). Strength of material
Likely pile plug
Very soft clay
25 to 35 pile diameters
Soft to stiff clays
10 to 20 pile diameter
Very stiff to hard clays
< 15 pile diameter
Very loose to loose sand
> 30 pile diameter
Medium dense to dense sands
20 to 35 pile diameter
Very dense sands
50
P.I = 27, N >50
P.I = 54, N = 40
P.I = 51, N = 32
P.I = 58, N >50
P.I = 34, N >50
P.I = 22, N >50
P.I = 33, N = 44
P.I = 35, N >50
None - Plastic, N >50
None - Plastic, N = 26
None - Plastic, N = 36
P.I = 35, N >50
None - Plastic, N =39
None - Plastic, N = 19
None - Plastic, N = 26
P.I = 38, N >50
P.I = 34, N >50
None - Plastic, N = 43
None - Plastic, N = 33
SC
8.0 9.0 10.0
SP
11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 15.0
SM
Fig 5-2: Typical soil profile for B.H# (1, 2, 3 and4)
0.0 1.0 2.0
B.H#7
B.H#6 N.m.c=11 P.I =47, N=16
N.m.c=17 P.I =47, N.m.c=24, U.C.S=277 N.m.c=25 P.I =69, N.m.c=29, U.C.S=377 N.m.c=33 P.I =70, N.m.c=38 N.m.c=36 P.I =73, N.m.c=26, U.C.S=440 N.m.c=28 P.I =63, N.m.c=36, U.C.S=378 P.I =48, N=31
B.H#8
B.H#9
P.I =54, N.m.c=28, U.C.S=503 N.m.c=34 P.I =64, N.m.c=38, U.C.S=54 N.m.c=15 P.I =36, N.m.c=22, U.C.S=362 N.m.c=38 P.I =67, N.m.c=29, U.C.S=203 P.I =42, N=37
N.m.c=22 P.I =24, N.m.c=8, U.C.S=353 N.m.c=28 P.I =58, N.m.c=30, U.C.S=266 N.m.c=33 P.I =68, N.m.c=36, U.C.S=213 N.m.c=24 P.I =38, N.m.c=21, U.C.S=506 N.m.c=38 P.I =71, N.m.c=38, U.C.S=108 P.I =50, N=20
N.m.c=20 P.I =57, N.m.c=30, U.C.S=117 N.m.c=38 P.I =66, N.m.c=39, U.C.S=94 N.m.c=33 P.I=72, N.m.c=34, U.C.S=272 N.m.c=40 P.I=55, N.m.c=30, U.C.S=100 N.m.c=42 P.I=61, N.m.c=34, U.C.S=196 P.I =42, N=33
P.I =54, N.m.c=32, U.C.S=133
5.0
P.I =57, N.m.c=30, U.C.S=341 N.m.c=34 P.I =65, N.m.c=36, U.C.S=124 N.m.c=21 P.I =28, N.m.c=17, U.C.S=189 N.m.c=33 P.I =78, N.m.c=38, U.C.S=76
6.0
P.I =52, N.m.c=20, U.C.S=585
7.0
P.I =50, N=33
P.I =40, N>50
P.I =50, N=39
P.I =49, N=41
P.I =58, N=37
P.I =60, N=34
P.I =49, N=36
P.I =59, N=44
P.I =54, N=48
P.I =46, N>50
P.I =45, N=38
P.I =48, N=44
P.I =38, N>50
P.I =73, N=37
P.I =42, N>50
3.0 4.0
Depth ( m )
B.H#5
CH
CL
SC
8.0 9.0 10.0
SP
11.0 12.0 13.0
P.I =41, N=42
P.I =45, N>50
P.I =21, N>50
P.I =43, N=42
P.I =35, N>50
P.I =44, N=46
P.I =51, N>50
P.I =20, N=41
P.I =38, N=47
P.I =23, N>50
P.I =48, N>50
P.I =42, N>50
P.I =26, N>50
P.I =38, N>50
P.I =34, N>50
14.0 15.0
SM
Fig 5-3: Typical soil profile for B.H# (5, 6, 7, 8 and9)
Table (5-1): Summary of Swelling pressure tests results B.H No.
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
9
Depth (m)
Swelling Pressure (KN/m2)
2.5
120
3.5
280
4.5
80
2.5
20
4.5
140
5.5
420
1.5
105
2.5
100
3.5
280
3.5
220
3.5
175
6.5
320
1.5
320
2.5
280
4.5
320
1.5
140
3.5
280
5.5
320
2.5
245
3.5
210
2.5
210
4.5
350
5.5
210
5.4 Description of the Piles and the Driving Process The steel pipe piles used in the project site had external diameter 0.168m, 0.219 m, 0.273 m and 0.324 m and wall thickness 7 mm, 8 mm, 9 mm and 10 mm respectively. The piles were driven by a hydraulic hammer weighing 5 tons and falling freely from a height of 2.5 m (Plate 5-3). The number of blows were counted and recorded for each 30 cm penetration. The contractor was requested to measure the total plugging length of the soil was measured at the end of driving for all the piles. The results of the driving records and plugging length of the piles were presented in Appendix (B).
Plate 5-3: The driving system of the steel pipe piles
5.5 Discussion of the Results The ground condition showed dominance of stiff to hard silty clay of high plasticity from the ground surface down to 11.0m depth. Four diameter sizes were chosen for the pipe piles 0.168m, 0.219m, 0.273 and 0.324m. The piles length ranges from 8.0 m to 8.4 m and piles are totally embedded in the expansive soil. The length to diameter ratio (Ld/D) is greater than 20 therefore the piles could be considered as long piles. Plug length was measured for each pile at the end of driving. The summary of the results of plugging lengths of the pipe piles is presented in Table (5-2). It can be seen that plugging length to diameter ratios (Lp/D) ranges from (3 - 11). Also it is noted that the ratio between the pile plugging length to pile embedded length (Lp/Ld) increased with increasing the pile diameter . Table (5-3) presents summary of average pile plugging length for each pile diameter. Fig 5-2 illustrates the relationship between the average pile plugging length (Lp) and the pile diameter. From this figure, it is clear that the plugging length of the pile increased linearly with increasing the pile diameter and it follows the equation: Plugging length of the pile (Lp) = 12.822* pile diameter – 1.5322 The above equation has a correlation coefficient of 0.9986 which indicates a strong relationship between the average pile plugging length and the pile diameter.
Table (5-2): Summary of plugging piles records Pile
Total pile
Embedded
Plugging
diameter
length
pile
soil
(m)
(m)
length(m)
length(m)
9.0
8.0
9.0
3
Pile
Lp / Ld
Ld / D
Lp / D
0.56
47.619
3.333
7
8.17
0.73
48.631
4.345
9
9.0
8.0
1.60
36.712
7.306
20
4
9.0
8.0
1.07
36.530
4.886
13
5
9.0
8.7
1.89
39.726
8.630
22
6
9.0
8.02
1.00
36.621
4.566
13
7
9.0
8.02
1.46
36.621
6.667
18
9.0
8.0
1.60
36.530
7.306
20
9.0
8.01
1.31
36.575
5.982
16
10
9.0
8.05
0.97
36.758
4.429
12
11
9.0
8.0
1.10
36.530
5.023
14
12
9.0
8.11
0.93
37.032
4.247
12
13
9.0
8.07
1.80
36.849
8.219
22
14
9.0
8.39
1.03
38.311
4.703
12
9.0
8.42
1.93
30.842
7.070
23
16
9.0
7.99
2.40
24.660
7.407
30
17
9.0
8.0
1.72
24.691
5.309
22
18
9.0
8.0
2.85
24.691
8.796
36
19
9.0
8.04
2.80
24.815
8.642
35
20
9.0
8.07
1.90
24.907
5.864
24
9.0
8.0
2.77
24.691
8.549
35
9.0
8.06
2.22
24.877
6.852
28
23
9.0
8.02
2.41
24.753
7.438
30
24
9.0
8.03
3.08
24.784
9.506
38
25
9.0
8.0
3.00
24.691
9.259
38
26
9.0
8.03
2.18
24.784
6.728
27
27
9.0
8.02
2.03
24.753
6.265
25
Number 1 2
8 9
15
21 22
Continue…
0.168
0.219
0.273
0.324
(%)
Table (5-2): Summary of plugging piles records ( Continued …) Pile
Total pile
Embedded
diameter
length
pile
(m)
(m)
length(m)
28
9.0
8.09
29
9.0
30
Pile
Plugging
Lp / Ld
Ld / D
Lp / D
3.50
24.691
10.802
44
8.03
3.19
24.784
9.846
40
9.0
8.09
3.09
24.969
9.537
38
31
9.0
8.10
2.10
25.000
6.481
26
32
9.0
8.04
2.94
24.815
9.074
37
33
9.0
8.05
2.94
24.846
9.074
37
34
9.0
8.0
3.20
24.691
9.877
40
35
9.0
8.05
2.94
24.846
9.074
37
9.0
7.97
2.49
24.599
7.685
31
9.0
7.95
2.37
24.537
7.315
30
38
9.0
8.0
2.75
24.691
8.488
34
39
9.0
8.01
3.03
24.722
9.352
38
40
9.0
8.0
2.20
24.691
6.790
28
41
9.0
8.0
2.93
24.691
9.043
37
42
9.0
8.03
2.50
24.784
7.716
31
43
9.0
7.96
3.13
24.568
9.660
39
44
9.0
8.0
2.71
24.691
8.364
34
45
9.0
8.01
2.21
24.722
6.821
28
Number
36 37
0.324
length(m)
(%)
Table (5-3): Summary of average pile plugging length Pile diameter (m)
Average plugging length (m)
0.168
0.645
0.219
1.260
0.273
1.930
0.324
2.653
Fig 5-4: Variation of average pile plugging length with the pile diameter
The driving records for the piles which are presented in Appendix (A) are analyzed. An attempt is made to relate the average cumulative number of blows for different pile penetration depths (1.5m, 3.0m, 4.5m, 6.0m, and 8.0m) with the pile diameter. In other words the cumulative number of blows needed to drive the piles to the mentioned depths was computed and averaged for each diameter. The average cumulative blows needed to drive the piles with same diameter was plotted against diameter and the plots are shown in Figures (5-3 to 5-7). The correlation coefficient is given in the same figure. Table (5-4) Summary of the average cumulative number of blows for different penetrations lengths. Pile diameter
Average cumulative number of blows
(m) 1.5m
3.0m
4.5m
6.0m
8.0m
0.168
3
9
28
74
224
0.219
6
25
84
163
271
0.273
15
59
142
277
373
0.324
14
77
158
249
411
Fig 5-5: Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (1.5m)
Fig 5-6: Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (3.0m)
Fig 5-7: Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (4.5m)
Fig 5-8: Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (6.0m)
Fig 5-9: Variation of average cumulative No. of blows with the pile diameter for pile penetration depth (8.0m) From Figures (5-3 to 5-7), it can be seen that the driving resistance of the piles increased with increasing the pile diameter. This indicates that piles with small diameter offered lower driving resistance compared to those with higher diameters.
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIOS
Chapter Six Conclusions and Recommendations 6.1 Conclusions 6.1.1 Introduction Open - ended pipe piles are often used in practice, but very limited high - quality information is available on the bearing capacity of these piles. The core of the present study is the pile load tests done on two model pipe piles: one at plugged condition and another at unplugged condition. The information generated by the load tests is particularly useful for the design of open-ended pipe piles in clays. Better understanding of carrying-capacity of these piles can lead to significant cost savings. Both driving response and static bearing capacity of open-ended pipe piles are affected by the soil plug that is formed inside the pile during driving. The outcomes of this research are as follows: 6.1.2 Model Experiments With reference to model experiments on the behavior of short steel pipe piles in expansive soils presented in Chapter Four the following conclusions were drawn: 1.
The plugging soil length to the pile diameter ratio range from (9- 12)
2.
A concrete pile with diameter and length equivalent to a steel pipe pile offers higher load carrying capacity than the steel pile.
3.
The unplugged steel pipe pile measured about (63%) of the total capacity of the plugged pile.
4.
A loss of about (8%) in the total bearing capacity of steel pipe pile in plugged condition was measured as a result of excessive wetting of the soil around the pile; also wetting reduced the total capacity of concrete pile by (46%).
5.
The shear strength tests on the expansive soil samples indicated that the shear strength of the soil decreases with increasing the moisture content at the same dry density.
6.
The interface tests showed that the maximum interface shear strength value was measured at the lowest moisture content and decreases with increasing of moisture content at the same dry density.
7.
The interface tests indicated that the adhesion factor has a value of 0.48 for moisture content values less than the plastic limit of the soil whereas for the moisture content values higher than the plastic limit the adhesion factor increased with moisture content.
6.1.3 Case Study With reference to the case study on the driving records of steel pipe piles having different diameters and driven in expansive soils media at New Operation Camp at Adar (Upper Nile State), which is presented in Chapter Five the following conclusions were drawn: 1.
The plugging length to diameter ratios ranges from (3-11).
2.
Piles were successfully driven into the very stiff to hard highly plastic clay. The pile plugging length to pile embedded length ratios increased with increasing the pile diameter.
3.
The plugging length of the pile increased linearly with increasing the pile diameter. Avery good linear relationship was found between average plugging length and pile diameter for the case study data.
4.
The results of analysis of the driving records showed that the piles with small diameters gave lower resistance to driving compared with the piles with higher diameters.
6.2 Recommendations for Future Research The work presented in this thesis was concerned with the study of the behavior of short steel pipe piles in expansive soils. The behavior of steel pipe piles in expansive soils is complicated topic, guidelines of the design are given, but a lot of work is still needed in order to gain a practical and more concise understanding of the proper design of steel pipe piles in clayey soils. The following recommendations are suggested for future research: 1.
Behavior of short steel pipe piles were studied using model scale experiments. Fully instrumented piles are highly recommended.
2.
The model tests were made using piles having the same diameter, hence the effect of diameter on the bearing capacity of piles is recommended to be studied.
3.
Further efforts are needed to investigate the response of the soil plug during driving and the relationship between the pile penetration depth and the rise of the soil inside the pile.
4.
The performance of the existing piles in the southern and south western Sudan needed to be investigated.
REFERENCES
References 1. Abdrabbo, F.M. and EL-Hansy, R.M. (1994). ''Plugging of Open Pipe Piles Driven in Sand'', Second Alexandria Conference on Structural and Geotechnical Engineering, pp. 65 - 72. 2. 3. Ahmed, E.O. (2006). "Guide Lines for the Design of Piles in Expansive Soils", Thesis Submitted for the Degree of M.Sc. Civil Engineering, Building and Road Research Institute, University of Khartoum. 4. 5. Awd, M.A. (2003). ''The Dependence of Bearing Value on Diameter of
Driven Steel Piles in Sand'', Journal of the Islamic University of Gaza Vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 26 - 42. 6. 7. Banerjee,
P.K. and Butterfield (1980). ''Advanced Geotechnical
Analysis'', Developments in Soil Mechanics & Foundation Engineering, New York, pp. 223 - 272. 8.
9. Brucy, F., Meunier, J. and Nauroy, J.F. (1991). ''Behavior of Pile Plug in Sandy Soils during and after Driving'', 23rd Annual OTC in Huston, Texas, pp145 - 154. 10. 11. Byrne, B. (1992). ''Driven Pipe Piles in Dense Sand'', Geomechanics
group, University of Western Australia. 12.
13. Charlie, W.A., Osman, M.A. and Ali E.M. (1984). ''Construction on Expansive Soils in Sudan'', Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 110, No.3, pp.359 – 374. 14. 15. Emilio, M.M. and Mark, K.M. (2006). ''Expansive Soils-Identification Detection and Remediation Strategies'', University of California. 16. 17. Hannigan, P.J., Goble, G.G., Thendean, G., Linkins, G.E, and
Rausche, F. (1997). ''Design and Construction of Driven Pile Foundations'', Workshop Manual, US Department of Transportation, National High way Institute, Vol.1. 18. 1. Heerma, E.P. and Jong, A. (1980). ''An advanced Wave Equation
Computer Program which Simulates Dynamic Pile Plugging through A couple mass – Spring System'', Numerical Method in Offshore Pilling, ICE, London, pp37 - 47 . 2. 3. Hyrkkönen, A. and Koskinen, M. (2000). ''Steel Pipe Piles'', Published
by: Finnish National Road Administration (FinnRA), Finland, Helsinki. 4. 5. Kishida, H. and Isemoto, N. (1977). ''Behavior of Sand Plugs in Open –
End Steel Pipe Piles'', 19th International Conference on Soil Mechanics & Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Vol.1, pp 601 - 604. 6. 7. Klos, J. and Tejchman, A. (1977). ''Analysis of Behavior of Tabular Piles
in Subsoil'', 19th International Conference on Soil Mechanics & Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Vol.1, pp 605 - 608.
8.
9. Mohamed, A.A. (1994)."Laboratory and Filed Studies on Bored Pile Foundations in Expansive Soils", Thesis submitted for the Degree of M.Sc. of Civil Engineering, Building and Road Research Institute, University of Khartoum. 10. 11. Nelson, J.D., Chao, K., and Overton, D.D. (2006). ''Definition of Expansion Potential for Expansive Soil'', Colorado State University. 12. 13. Olson, R.E. (1990). ''Axial Load Capacity of Steel Pipe Piles in Sand'', 22nd Annual OTC in Huston, Texas, pp17 - 24. 14. nd
15. Pailkowsky, G. (1990). ''The Mechanics of Plugging in Sand''. 22 Annual
OTC in Huston, Texas, pp593 - 604. 16. 17. Poulos, G., Davis, H. (1980). ''Pile Foundation Analysis and Design'',
University of Sydney. 18. 19. Rakash, S., Sharma, H.D. (1997). ''Pile Foundation in Engineering
Practice'', McGraw – Hill, New York. 20. 21. Randolph, M.F., Leong, E.C. and Houlspy, G.T. (1991). ''One
Dimensional Analysis of Soil Plugs in Pipe Piles'', Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 41, No.4, pp587 - 598. 22.
23. Randolph, M.F., May, M., Leong, E.C., Hyden, A.M. and Murff, J.D.
(1992). ''Soil Plug Resistance in Open – Ended Pipe Piles'', Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol.118, No.5, pp743 - 758. 24. 25. Richard, D.R., Oscar, G.U. and Michael, W.O. (1992). ''Driving
Characteristics of Open – Toe Piles in Dense Sand'', Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol.118, No.1, pp72 - 88.
26. Salgado, R. (2002). ''Load Tests on Pipe Piles for Development of CPT
Based Design Method'', Technical Summary. 27. 28. Soo, C.F., Lin, C.C., Wang, R.F. and Mohamed, Z.C. (1980). ''Plugging
of Open – Ended Steel Pipe Piles'', 6th Southeast Asian Conference on Soil Engineering, Taipei, Vol.2, pp315 - 325. 29. 30. Vijayvergiya, V.N. (1980). ''Soil Response during Driving'', Numerical
Method in Offshore Pilling, ICE, London, pp53 - 58. 31. 32. Yamahara, H. (1964). ''Plugging Effect and Veering Mechanics of Steel
Pipe Piles (in Japanese)'', Transportation & Architectural Institute of Japan, Vol.96, pp 28 – 35 and Vol.97, pp 34 - 41. 33. 34.
APPENDIX (A)
Table ( A-1) : Soil properties of B.H # 1 Coordinates E: 496609 N: 1106731 Depth (m)
Description
Group Symbol
1.0 Hard, light brown, Silty CLAY of high 2.0
plasticity. Becomes very stiff and dark brown with
3.0 Becomes stiff. 4.0 Becomes hard. 5.0 6.0
Becomes light brown.
CH
Water table was not encountered Atterberg Limits N.M.C %
γb
L.L %
P.L %
P.I %
78
26
52
21
72
23
49
78 83
31 28
47 55
19 23 29 37
100 70 101 67 81 70
34 24 28 22 20 16
66 46 73 45 61 54
82
25
57
kN/m3
37 37 25 39 21
γd
kN/m3
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
%pass sieve #200
558
94
314
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
95
13,8,9,11,9
37
99 99
6,3,3,5,6
17
159
99
571
98
478
69 78
11,7,7,9,7
30
71
14,9,9,13,11
42
Remarks
7.0 8.0 9.0
82
24
58
81
15,10,13,13,15
>50
Penetration 2.5"
>50
Penetration 2.75"
10.0 76 11.0
Continue ..
18
58
83
15,12,13,14,12
Table ( A-1) : Soil properties of B.H # 1 (continued …) Coordinates E: 496609 N: 1106731 Depth (m)
Description
Water table was not encountered
Atterberg Limits Group L.L P.L P.I Symbol % % %
N.M.C %
γb
3
kN/m
γd
3
kN/m
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
%pass sieve #200
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
Remarks Penetration
12.0
Very dense, light brown, Clayey SANDwith
51
16 35
42
20,16,18,17
>50
0.5"
>50
Penetration 1.5"
calcereous material. SC
13.0
46
14
32
22
30,15,21,15
14.0 Penetration 15.0
Hard , light brown, Silty CLAY of high plasticity with calcereous material End of borehole @15.0 m
CH
54
16
38
72
27,20,20,11
>50
1.25"
Table ( A-2) : Soil properties of B.H # 2 Coordinates E:496686 N: 1106953 Depth (m)
Description
1.0
Very stiff dark brown, Silty CLAY of high
Water table was not encountered Group Symbol
Atterberg Limits L.L %
P.L %
P.I %
52
17
35
N.M.C %
γb
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
19
SPT-Results
%pass sieve #200
Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
94
18,6,4,5,5
20
13,9,10,13,13
45
Remarks
plasticity with calcareous material. 89
32
57
61
26
35
33 38 39 25
66
15 33
141
98
335
88
802
66
2.0 Becomes hard. 3.0 Becomes stiff. 4.0
Becomes light brown.
CH
96
30
Becomes very stiff.
82
26
56
36 30
Becomes hard.
58
19
39
17
Hard , light brown, Silty CLAY of low plasticity with calcereous material.
49
15
34
5.0
758
96
163
94
6.0 7.0 8.0
70
CL Penetration
9.0
Very dense, light brown, Clayey SAND with calcereous material.
40
13
27
45
14,9,13,17,12
>50
2.5"
>50
Penetration 1.75"
SC
10.0
47 11.0
Continue ..
13
34
49
25,16,16,19
Table ( A-2) : Soil properties of B.H # 2 (continued … ) Coordinates E:496686 N: 1106953 Depth (m)
Description
Group Symbol
Water table was not encountered
Atterberg Limits L.L %
P.L %
P.I %
N.M.C %
γb
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
%pass sieve #200
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
Remarks Penetration
12.0
Very dense, light brown, Silty SAND with
None Plastic
29
30,16,13,13,9
>50
None Plastic
32
16,9,8,9,13
39
2.5"
cacereous material. SM
13.0 Becomes dense. 14.0
Penetration 15.0
Hard, light brown, Silty CLAY of low plasticity with calcereous material End of borehole @ 15.0 m
CL
49
17
32
70
17,14,15,17,5
>50
1"
Table ( A-3) : Soil properties of B.H # 3 Coordinates E: 496358 N: 1106754 Depth (m)
Description
Water table was not encountered Group Symbol
Atterberg Limits L.L %
P.L %
P.I %
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
%pass sieve #200
145
85
315
97
72
99
164
97
536
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
65 70
13,8,12,9,9
38
Remarks
24
1.0 Stiff, dark brown, Silty CLAY of high 2.0
N.M.C %
γb
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
56
18
38
45
plasticity with calcereous material. Becomes very stiff.
96
29
67
Becomes medium stiff.
107
35
72
Becomes stiff and light brown.
67
21
46
70 55
21 17
49 38
59
19
40
70
13,7,8,13,14
42
68
14
54
74
15,9,9,12,10
40
3.0 4.0 5.0 Becomes hard.
CH
6.0
26 34 38 38 21 21 36 18
7.0 8.0 9.0
Penetration
10.0 Very dense, light brown, Clayey SAND. 11.0
Continue ..
SC
36
14
22
29
26,17,23,11
>50
1"
Table ( A-3) : Soil properties of B.H # 3 (continued … ) Coordinates E: 496358 N: 1106754 Depth (m)
12.0
Description
Group Symbol
Medium dense, light brown, Silty SAND.
Water table was not encountered
Atterberg Limits
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
SPT-Results
%pass sieve #200
Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
None Plastic
18
11,5,6,7,8
26
None Plastic
37
9,4,4,6,5
19
None Plastic
11
19,9,9,13,12
43
L.L %
P.L %
P.I %
N.M.C %
γb
3
kN/m
γd
3
kN/m
SM
13.0 14.0 15.0
Dense, light brown, poorly graded SAND. End of borehole @ 15.0 m
SP
Remarks
Table ( A-4) : Soil properties of B.H # 4 Coordinates E: 496419 N: 1106974 Depth (m)
Description
1.0 Light brown, Silty CLAY of low plasticity.
Water table was not encountered Group Symbol
CL
Atterberg Limits L.L %
P.L %
P.I %
3.0
46
16
30
CH
194
75
81
99
62
99
213
99
481
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
16 30 39 43 38 21 39 42
66 76
9,5,7,8,8
28
33
66
100
34
66
106
31
75
70 65
22 19
48 46
67
22
45
77
10,5,6,7,8
26
75
24
51
90
12,8,8,8,8
32
51
18
33
37
15,9,9,11,15
44
5.0 6.0
kN/m3
%pass sieve #200
99
4.0
Becomes very stiff.
kN/m3
γd
10
2.0 Dark brown, Silty CLAY of high plasticity with calcereous material.
N.M.C %
γb
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
17
7.0 8.0 9.0
Becomes hard.
10.0 Dense, light brown, Clayey SAND. 11.0
Continue ..
SC
Remarks
Table ( A-4) : Soil properties of B.H # 4 (continued …) Coordinates E: 496419 N: 1106974 Depth (m)
12.0
Description
Dense, light brown, poorly graded SAND.
Atterberg Limits Group Symbol L.L P.L P.I % % %
SP
Water table was not encountered Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
SPT-Results
%pass sieve #200
Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
None Plastic
10
14,8,10,9,9
36
None Plastic
16
16,6,7,7,6
26
None Plastic
10
12,5,6,9,12
32
N.M.C %
γb
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
13.0 Mediumdense, light brown, Silty SAND. SM
14.0 15.0
Dense, light brown, poorly graded SAND. End of borehole @15.0 m
SP
Remarks
Table ( A-5) : Soil properties of B.H # 5 Coordinates E: 496525 N: 1106853 Depth (m)
Description
Water table was not encountered Group Symbol
Atterberg Limits L.L %
P.L %
P.I %
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
SPT-Results
%pass sieve #200
Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
94
5,4,3,5,4
16
11
1.0 Stiff, dark brown, Silty CLAY of high 2.0
N.M.C %
γb
66
19
47
plasticity with calcereous material. Becomes very stiff.
341
97
65
27 30 34 36
87
30
57
Becomes stiff.
100
35
124
99
28
21 17
189
67
3.0 4.0 45
17
33
5.0 Becomes medium stiff. 6.0 Becomes hard and light brown..
CH
114
36
78
38
76
99
68
16
52
20
585
76
80
30
50
86
9,7,7,9,10
33
84
24
60
95
13,6,7,11,10
34
65
20
45
91
14,8,10,10,10
38
7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0
Continue ..
Remarks
Table ( A-5) : Soil properties of B.H # 5 (continued … ) Coordinates E: 496525 N: 1106853 Depth (m)
Description
Group Symbol
Water table was not encountered
Atterberg Limits N.M.C %
γb
γd
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
SPT-Results
%pass sieve #200
Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
L.L P.L % %
P.I %
60
19
41
90
12,9,9,12,12
42
63
19
44
96
8,8,11,11,16
46
3
kN/m
3
kN/m
Remarks
Same as above. 12.0 13.0
CH
14.0 65
15.0 End of borehole @ 15.0 m
17
48
89
8,13,16,14,8
>50
Penetration 1.0"
Table ( A-6) : Soil properties of B.H # 6 Coordinates E: 496501 N: 1106791 Depth (m)
Description
Water table was not encountered Group Symbol
Atterberg Limits L.L %
P.L %
P.I %
3
kN/m
γd
3
kN/m
%pass sieve #200
277
94
377
98
92
99
440
99
378
99 75
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
9,5,8,9,9
31
Remarks
17
1.0 Very stiff, dark brown, Silty CLAY of high 2.0
N.M.C %
γb
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
71
24
47
plasticity with calcareous material. 92
23
69
Becomes medium stiff.
104
34
70
Becomes hard.
105
32
73
3.0 4.0
24 25 29 33 38 36 26 28
5.0 Becomes very stiff, light brown. 6.0
CH
93 68
30 20
63 48
36
7.0 Becomes hard.
58
18
40
70
13,10,14,15,12
>50
71
22
49
84
12,7,7,10,12
36
63
15
48
75
12,8,11,12,13
44
8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0
Continue ..
Penetration 1.5"
Table ( A-6) : Soil properties of B.H # 6 (continued …) Coordinates E: 496501 N: 1106791 Depth (m)
Description
Water table was not encountered
Atterberg Limits Group L.L P.L P.I Symbol % % %
N.M.C %
γb
3
kN/m
γd
3
kN/m
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
%pass sieve #200
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
Same as above.
Penetration 63
12.0 13.0
Remarks
CH
66
18
15
45
51
64
83
15,11,12,14,1 4
14,10,14,18,9
>50
2.75"
>50
Penetration 2.0"
>50
Penetration 0.25"
14.0 56
15.0 End of borehole @15.0 m
14
42
58
28,24,24,3
Table ( A-7) : Soil properties of B.H # 7 Coordinates E: 496591 N: 1106844 Depth (m)
Description
Water table was not encountered Group Symbol
Atterberg Limits
γb
N.M.C 3 kN/m %
γd
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
%pass sieve #200
L.L P.L % %
P.I %
Stiff, dark brown, Silty CLAYof high
83
29
54
32
133
98
plasticity with calcareous material. Becomes hard.
85
31
54
503
97
Becomes medium stiff and light brown.
99
35
64
28 34 38
54
99
Becomes very stiff.
55
19
36
15 22
362
62
203
3
kN/m
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
92 62
9,7,10,9,11
37
Remarks
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
CH Becomes hard.
38 95 59
28 17
67 42
29
73
23
50
77
11,7,8,12,12
39
84
25
59
84
13,8,10,13,13
44
7.0 8.0 9.0
Penetration
10.0 11.0
Very dense, light brown, Clayey SAND calcereous material.
Continue ..
SC
54
16
38
45
14,12,15,18,6
>50
1"
Table ( A-7) : Soil properties of B.H # 7 (continued …) Coordinates E: 496591 N: 1106844 Depth (m)
Description
Water table was not encountered
Atterberg Limits Group L.L P.L P.I Symbol % % %
N.M.C %
γb
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
%pass sieve #200
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
Remarks Penetration
12.0
Same as above.
35
14
21
26
41,24,27
>50
34
14
20
28
22,10,10,10,1 1
41
SC
13.0 Becomes dense. 14.0 15.0
1.5"
Hard, light brown, Silty CLAY of low plasticity. End of borehole @15.0 m
CL
41
15
26
75
17,10,10,16,1
>50
Penetration 2.5"
Table ( A-8) : Soil properties of B.H # 8 Coordinates E: 496535 N: 1106917 Depth (m)
Description
1.0 Very stiff, light brown, Silty CLAY of low 2.0 3.0
Water table was not encountered Group Symbol
CL
plasticity with calcereous material. Very stiff, dark brown, Silty CLAY of high plasticity with calcereous material.
Atterberg Limits L.L P.L % %
P.I %
N.M.C %
γb
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
%pass sieve #200
353
61
266
97
213
99
506
80
108
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
98 70
3,3,5,6,6
20
22 37
13
24
8 28 30 33 36 24 21 38
85
27
58
99
31
68
Becomes hard and light brown.
58
20
38
Becomes stiff.
107 72
36 22
71 50
70
21
49
82
12,7,8,13,13
41
78
24
54
67
14,11,9,16,12
48
94
21
73
81
13,8,8,10,11
37
4.0 5.0 6.0
38
CH
7.0 Becomes hard. 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0
Continue ..
Remarks
Table ( A-8) : Soil properties of B.H #8 (continued …) Coordinates E: 496535 N: 1106917 Depth (m)
12.0
Description
Atterberg Limits Group L.L P.L P.I Symbol % % %
Becomes dark brown.
13.0
Water table was not encountered
CH
N.M.C %
γb
3
kN/m
γd
3
kN/m
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
57
14
43
87
11,8,9,11,14
42
54
16
38
82
17,11,13,11,1 2
47
14.0 15.0
Same as above. End of borehole @15.0 m
SPT-Results
%pass sieve #200
55
17
38
83
25,13,15,19,4
>50
Remarks
Penetration 2.5"
Table ( A-9) : Soil properties of B.H # 9 Coordinates E: 496455 N: 1106869 Depth (m)
Description
Water table was not encountered Group Symbol
Atterberg Limits L.L P.L % %
P.I %
Stiff, dark brown, Silty CLAY of high
91
34
57
plasticity with calcareous material. 97
31
66
Becomes medium stiff
106
34
72
Becomes stiff and light brown.
88
33
55
94 61
33 19
61 42
83
25
58
3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
%pass sieve #200
117
96
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
Remarks
20
1.0 2.0
N.M.C %
γb
Unconfined Compression Strength kN/m2
Becomes hard.
CH
30 38 39 33 34 40 30 42
94
98
272
92
100
99
34
196
99 63
8,7,8,9,9
33
84
10,6,8,11,12
37
7.0 8.0 9.0
69
23
46
87
15,10,14,18,9
>50
Penetration 1.5"
>50
Penetration 0.25"
10.0 60 11.0
Continue ..
18
42
75
17,13,14,19,5
Table ( A-9) : Soil properties of B.H #9 (continued …) Coordinates E: 496455 N: 1106869 Depth (m)
Water table was not encountered
AtterbergLimits
Description
Group L.L P.L P.I Symbol % % %
N.M.C %
γb
kN/m3
γd
kN/m3
Unconfined %pass Compression sieve Strength #200 kN/m2
SPT-Results Blows Each 6,3,3,3,3in
NValue
Remarks Penetration
12.0 Hard, light brown, SiltyCLAYof low plasticity with calcareous material.
CL
46
11
35
66
20,12,13,15,1 1
>50
2.5" Penetration
13.0 Very dense, light brown, Clayey SAND.
36
13
23
34
0.25"
29,22,27,2
>50
24,19,26,6
Penetration >50 0.25"
SC
14.0 15.0 Hard, dark brown, SiltyCLAYof high plasticity with calcereous material. End of borehole @15.0 m
CH
51
17
34
58
APPENDIX (B)
Table (B - 1): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.168 m Pile No: 1
Pile No: 2
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0 m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.17m
Plugging soil length: 0.56 m
Plugging soil length: 0.73 m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
60
0
60
0
90
0
90
1
120
1
120
2
150
0
150
1
180
0
180
1
210
2
210
1
240
2
240
0
270
3
270
1
300
2
300
1
330
3
330
1
360
5
360
1
390
7
390
1
420
8
420
1
450
9
450
2
480
10
480
1
510
14
510
2
540
16
540
5
570
17
570
3
600
18
600
6
630
18
630
8
660
27
660
12
690
22
690
16
720
22
720
23
750
24
750
24
780
26
780
29
800
26
810
22
Table (B - 2): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.219 m Pile No: 1
Pile No: 2
Pile No: 3
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.7m
Plugging soil length: 1.6m
Plugging soil length: 1.07m
Plugging soil length: 1.89 m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
1
90
1
90
1
120
2
120
1
120
1
150
3
150
1
150
1
180
4
180
1
180
1
210
3
210
1
210
1
240
4
240
2
240
1
270
5
270
3
270
1
300
8
300
4
300
1
330
9
330
5
330
2
360
13
360
7
360
1
390
17
390
11
390
2
420
18
420
14
420
5
450
20
450
14
450
6
480
19
480
15
480
7
510
18
510
10
510
16
540
18
540
9
540
18
570
17
570
9
570
17
600
17
600
10
600
18
630
18
630
9
630
17
660
19
660
9
660
15
690
20
690
10
690
14
720
21
720
10
720
18
750
24
750
11
750
22
780
25
780
11
780
26
800
16
800
9
800
12
Continue…
Table (B - 2): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.219 m (Continued …) Pile No: 4
Pile No: 5
Pile No: 6
Total pile embedded depth: 8.02m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.02m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Plugging soil length: 1.0m
Plugging soil length: 1.46m
Plugging soil length: 1.6m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
0
90
1
90
1
90
1
120
2
120
1
120
2
150
4
150
1
150
2
180
5
180
1
180
1
210
8
210
1
210
1
240
11
240
1
240
1
270
13
270
1
270
1
300
15
300
1
300
1
330
17
330
2
330
2
360
19
360
1
360
3
390
19
390
2
390
4
420
20
420
5
420
6
450
18
450
6
450
9
480
19
480
7
480
10
510
18
510
16
510
20
540
19
540
18
540
20
570
20
570
17
570
19
600
21
600
18
600
19
630
20
630
17
630
18
660
19
660
15
660
17
690
18
690
14
690
18
720
18
720
18
720
17
750
20
750
22
750
19
780
22
780
26
780
25
800
12
800
12
800
18
Continue…
Table (B - 2): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.219 m (Continued …) Pile No: 7
Pile No: 8
Pile No: 9
Total pile embedded depth: 8.01m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.05m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Plugging soil length: 1.31m
Plugging soil length: 0.97m
Plugging soil length: 1.1m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
0
90
1
90
1
90
1
120
2
120
1
120
1
150
2
150
3
150
1
180
1
180
2
180
2
210
2
210
3
210
3
240
2
240
4
240
2
270
4
270
3
270
4
300
14
300
7
300
5
330
22
330
8
330
7
360
22
360
13
360
8
390
21
390
12
390
11
420
23
420
16
420
12
450
26
450
14
450
13
480
25
480
14
480
13
510
22
510
14
510
11
540
21
540
15
540
12
570
20
570
13
570
12
600
18
600
12
600
14
630
17
630
13
630
14
660
15
660
14
660
15
690
19
690
14
690
14
720
20
720
15
720
15
750
24
750
15
750
16
780
25
780
16
780
16
800
12
800
12
800
13
Continue…
Table (B - 2): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.219 m (Continued …) Pile No: 10
Pile No: 11
Pile No: 12
Total pile embedded depth: 8.11m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.07m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.39m
Plugging soil length: 0.93m
Plugging soil length: 1.8m
Plugging soil length: 1.03m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
1
90
1
90
2
120
2
120
1
120
2
150
4
150
1
150
3
180
3
180
1
180
2
210
4
210
1
210
3
240
3
240
1
240
5
270
4
270
1
270
10
300
6
300
1
300
11
330
4
330
1
330
14
360
11
360
2
360
14
390
13
390
3
390
15
420
14
420
5
420
18
450
18
450
4
450
25
480
17
480
14
480
22
510
16
510
15
510
19
540
15
540
15
540
19
570
16
570
14
570
15
600
18
600
9
600
9
630
16
630
10
630
7
660
15
660
11
660
7
690
14
690
11
690
8
720
13
720
12
720
8
750
10
750
12
750
8
780
11
780
13
780
9
800
8
800
10
800
9
820
10
840
10
Continue…
Table (B - 3): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.273 m Pile No: 1 Total pile embedded depth: 8.42m Plugging soil length: 1.93m Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
60
1
90
3
120
4
150
7
180
5
210
6
240
6
270
14
300
13
330
16
360
16
390
17
420
16
450
18
480
16
510
17
540
17
570
17
600
18
630
17
660
23
690
19
720
19
750
18
780
18
810
15
840
17
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m Pile No: 1
Pile No: 2
Pile No: 3
Total pile embedded depth: 7.99m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Plugging soil length: 2.4m
Plugging soil length: 1.72m
Plugging soil length: 2.85m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
3
90
1
90
3
120
10
120
2
120
6
150
7
150
5
150
8
180
16
180
15
180
12
210
18
210
14
210
13
240
17
240
15
240
15
270
19
270
20
270
14
300
20
300
11
300
13
330
21
330
11
330
18
360
21
360
11
360
19
390
20
390
12
390
18
420
18
420
13
420
18
450
20
450
14
450
19
480
19
480
14
480
21
510
18
510
16
510
20
540
21
540
17
540
20
570
23
570
17
570
19
600
25
600
16
600
19
630
27
630
17
630
20
660
29
660
19
660
22
690
25
690
20
690
25
720
34
720
25
720
26
750
45
750
25
750
29
780
43
780
27
780
30
800
28
800
22
800
23
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 4
Pile No: 5
Pile No: 6
Total pile embedded depth: 8.04m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.07m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Plugging soil length: 2.8m
Plugging soil length: 1.9m
Plugging soil length: 2.77m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
2
90
1
90
2
120
2
120
1
120
2
150
5
150
2
150
6
180
7
180
2
180
11
210
9
210
3
210
15
240
12
240
4
240
16
270
15
270
5
270
21
300
14
300
7
300
19
330
16
330
9
330
20
360
17
360
12
360
20
390
17
390
13
390
19
420
18
420
13
420
18
450
18
450
16
450
19
480
19
480
17
480
19
510
18
510
19
510
18
540
21
540
16
540
17
570
22
570
15
570
18
600
20
600
19
600
19
630
17
630
21
630
18
660
19
660
22
660
19
690
21
690
21
690
21
720
25
720
23
720
25
750
26
750
23
750
26
780
28
780
24
780
28
800
21
800
17
800
23
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 7
Pile No: 8
Pile No: 9
Total pile embedded depth: 8.06m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.02m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.03m
Plugging soil length: 2.22m
Plugging soil length: 2.41m
Plugging soil length: 3.08m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
1
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
2
90
2
90
2
120
16
120
7
120
3
150
19
150
4
150
4
180
10
180
23
180
5
210
8
210
22
210
7
240
10
240
20
240
12
270
12
270
21
270
18
300
20
300
21
300
17
330
18
330
22
330
15
360
19
360
21
360
15
390
18
390
22
390
16
420
20
420
21
420
15
450
21
450
22
450
15
480
21
480
23
480
17
510
20
510
20
510
16
540
21
540
21
540
15
570
23
570
19
570
16
600
22
600
17
600
16
630
24
630
19
630
18
660
24
660
18
660
18
690
23
690
19
690
19
720
24
720
20
720
20
750
26
750
21
750
25
780
27
780
27
780
27
800
18
800
17
800
18
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 10
Pile No: 11
Pile No: 12
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.03m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.02m
Plugging soil length: 3.0m
Plugging soil length: 2.18m
Plugging soil length: 2.03m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
1
90
1
90
1
120
2
120
1
120
2
150
3
150
2
150
9
180
4
180
3
180
11
210
7
210
6
210
13
240
8
240
8
240
14
270
10
270
9
270
15
300
11
300
10
300
16
330
11
330
10
330
15
360
11
360
11
360
14
390
12
390
11
390
16
420
12
420
16
420
17
450
13
450
15
450
18
480
14
480
16
480
21
510
13
510
13
510
20
540
15
540
15
540
18
570
14
570
14
570
17
600
15
600
16
600
20
630
16
630
16
630
21
660
15
660
17
660
20
690
16
690
17
690
26
720
16
720
18
720
28
750
17
750
21
750
29
780
18
780
22
780
28
800
11
800
16
800
18
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 13
Pile No: 14
Pile No: 15
Total pile embedded depth: 8.09m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.03m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.09m
Plugging soil length: 3.5m
Plugging soil length: 3.19m
Plugging soil length: 3.09m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
2
90
1
90
1
120
3
120
6
120
2
150
5
150
20
150
3
180
3
180
21
180
5
210
4
210
18
210
6
240
11
240
18
240
8
270
20
270
17
270
11
300
18
300
16
300
20
330
17
330
14
330
19
360
17
360
15
360
18
390
18
390
16
390
20
420
16
420
17
420
18
450
19
450
15
450
19
480
20
480
14
480
21
510
18
510
15
510
21
540
19
540
16
540
19
570
19
570
15
570
20
600
18
600
16
600
18
630
18
630
17
630
23
660
19
660
17
660
24
690
19
690
20
690
26
720
20
720
22
720
28
750
27
750
26
750
27
780
28
780
27
780
30
800
20
800
17
800
21
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 16
Pile No: 17
Pile No: 18
Total pile embedded depth: 8.1m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.04m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.05m
Plugging soil length: 2.1m
Plugging soil length: 2.94m
Plugging soil length: 2.94m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
1
90
1
90
1
120
2
120
2
120
3
150
5
150
3
150
6
180
24
180
5
180
8
210
20
210
6
210
12
240
21
240
8
240
10
270
15
270
11
270
11
300
13
300
20
300
10
330
14
330
19
330
11
360
15
360
18
360
12
390
14
390
20
390
12
420
16
420
18
420
13
450
17
450
19
450
14
480
19
480
21
480
18
510
18
510
21
510
20
540
20
540
19
540
19
570
21
570
20
570
17
600
22
600
18
600
18
630
23
630
23
630
18
660
22
660
24
660
20
690
24
690
26
690
23
720
24
720
28
720
25
750
25
750
27
750
25
780
27
780
30
780
27
800
21
800
21
800
23
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 19
Pile No: 20
Pile No: 21
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.05m
Total pile embedded depth: 7.97m
Plugging soil length: 3.2m
Plugging soil length: 2.94m
Plugging soil length: 2.49m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
1
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
1
90
1
90
2
120
2
120
3
120
6
150
5
150
6
150
7
180
7
180
8
180
9
210
10
210
12
210
10
240
10
240
10
240
10
270
19
270
11
270
8
300
18
300
10
300
5
330
18
330
11
330
6
360
15
360
12
360
11
390
15
390
12
390
14
420
16
420
13
420
17
450
15
450
14
450
18
480
16
480
18
480
17
510
17
510
20
510
17
540
16
540
19
540
16
570
17
570
17
570
17
600
22
600
18
600
18
630
23
630
18
630
19
660
23
660
20
660
21
690
23
690
23
690
22
720
25
720
25
720
25
750
26
750
25
750
27
780
27
780
27
780
32
800
20
800
23
800
25
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 22
Pile No: 23
Pile No: 24
Total pile embedded depth: 7.95m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.01m
Plugging soil length: 2.37m
Plugging soil length: 2.75m
Plugging soil length: 3.03m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
1
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
2
90
2
90
1
120
7
120
8
120
3
150
6
150
24
150
14
180
7
180
21
180
19
210
6
210
18
210
19
240
6
240
19
240
20
270
7
270
20
270
20
300
14
300
19
300
18
330
21
330
12
330
17
360
22
360
12
360
18
390
18
390
17
390
20
420
19
420
16
420
20
450
18
450
18
450
18
480
19
480
17
480
19
510
17
510
16
510
18
540
17
540
16
540
23
570
20
570
18
570
22
600
21
600
18
600
22
630
20
630
19
630
23
660
20
660
21
660
24
690
20
690
23
690
23
720
21
720
25
720
25
750
25
750
26
750
27
780
26
780
27
780
27
800
19
800
17
800
21
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 25
Pile No: 26
Pile No: 27
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.03m
Plugging soil length: 2.2m
Plugging soil length: 2.93m
Plugging soil length: 2.5m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
0
30
0
30
0
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
2
90
2
90
2
120
3
120
3
120
3
150
4
150
4
150
8
180
5
180
6
180
18
210
4
210
5
210
16
240
4
240
7
240
17
270
3
270
17
270
18
300
3
300
18
300
16
330
3
330
17
330
16
360
6
360
15
360
20
390
12
390
15
390
18
420
15
420
16
420
18
450
15
450
17
450
19
480
14
480
17
480
18
510
14
510
16
510
16
540
14
540
17
540
17
570
15
570
18
570
19
600
16
600
18
600
20
630
17
630
21
630
22
660
17
660
24
660
23
690
20
690
25
690
24
720
21
720
25
720
26
750
23
750
26
750
25
780
27
780
27
780
28
800
17
800
17
800
21
Continue…
Table (B - 4): Steel pile driving records for pile diameter 0.324 m (Continued …) Pile No: 28
Pile No: 29
Pile No: 30
Total pile embedded depth: 7.96m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.0m
Total pile embedded depth: 8.01m
Plugging soil length: 3.13m
Plugging soil length: 2.71m
Plugging soil length: 2.21m
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
Depth driven in Cm
No. of blows
30
1
30
1
30
1
60
1
60
1
60
1
90
1
90
1
90
2
120
2
120
5
120
5
150
6
150
5
150
6
180
17
180
5
180
5
210
20
210
4
210
5
240
19
240
14
240
8
270
18
270
19
270
15
300
20
300
17
300
16
330
19
330
16
330
20
360
18
360
15
360
24
390
16
390
15
390
19
420
19
420
16
420
15
450
20
450
17
450
14
480
22
480
20
480
15
510
22
510
21
510
15
540
20
540
20
540
16
570
21
570
20
570
20
600
21
600
21
600
21
630
24
630
19
630
25
660
25
660
22
660
25
690
26
690
22
690
29
720
27
720
24
720
29
750
29
750
25
750
30
780
31
780
28
780
38
800
18
800
18
800
25
