PILE GROUPS

PILE GROUPS
Group “efficiency”
Group capacity not always = (pile capacities)
RATIO of group to pile capacity = EFFICIENCY
Group Capacity Qag F
 
Sum individual Piles n Qs  Q p  
where: η = group efficiency factor
Qag = net allowable capacity of pile group
F = factor of safety
n = number of piles in group
Qp = net end bearing capacity of single pile
Qs =skin friction capacity of single pile
Converse-Labarre formula

 m  1n  n  1m 
  1  
 90mn 
  tan 1 ( D S )

Sayed and Bakeer (1992)

η‘ = geometric efficiency parameter,

  1  (1   k)
'  Q s
which can be computed using an
equation similar to Converse-Labarre

 Q  Q 
s p
giving values generally in the range of
0.6 to 2.5
K = group interaction factor (also to be
estimated); ranges from 0.4 to about 9.0
Example:
Compute the efficiency of the group of friction piles shown in the Fig. by
the Converse-Labarre equation recommendation. Take D = 400 mm and
spacing s = 1000 mm (both ways) and all cohesionless material in the pile
embedment zone.

Solutions
m  5, n  3
  tan 1 ( D S )  tan 1 400 1000  21.8
 m  1n  n  1m 
  1  
 90mn 
 5  13  3  15 
 1   21.8
 90 X 5 X 3 
 0.64
 Individual vs Block Failure Mode

S D

Individual Failure Mode Block Failure Mode

Typical pile-
group patterns:
(a) for isolated
pile caps; (b) for
foundation
walls.
 Group characteristics

• Common C-C spacing: 2.5 to 3.0 diameters

- close spacings in loose sand are efficient
- close spacings in clay are inefficient
- “Block Action” may determine Group capacity
• Converse-Labarre formula for group efficiency
usually do not give accurate result.
• From O’Neill (1983):
• In loose cohesionless soils, η > 1 and is highest at S/D
= 2. Increases with n.
• In dense cohesionless soils at normal spacings
(2 < S/D < 4), η is slightly greater than 1 if the pile is
driven.
• In cohesive soils, η < 1; Cap in contact w/ ground
increases efficiency but large settlement is required.
 Block Action

4x4 pile group, dia. D, Block base, (3s + D)2,

spacing, s perimeter, 4(3s + D)L
Block Action …
 Design Guidelines

• Use engineering judgment - no good recipes

• Block failure not likely unless S/D < 2
• In most cohesive soil, if S/D>2, eventual η ≅ 1.0 but
early values range from 0.4 to 0.8.
• In cohesionless soils, design for η between 1.0 and
1.25 if driven piling w/o predrilling. If predrilling or
jetting used, efficiency may drop below 1.0.
• For design, adopt the smaller of Group Capacity and
(pile capacities)
 design of a pile foundation

• The design of a pile foundation subjected to

vertical loads consists of:
– The determination of the ultimate load bearing
capacity of the group Qu(g).
– Determination of the settlement of the group, Sg,
under an allowable load Qa(g).
 Stresses on underlying strata from piles

• These stresses are difficult to estimate for several reasons:

• Influence of pile cap—usually in direct contact with ground
except on expansive soils. This results in both the cap and
the pile carrying the load with the interaction highly
indeterminate.
• The distribution of friction effects along the pile, which are
generally not known; hence point load is also not known.
• The overlap of stresses from adjacent piles, which is
difficult to evaluate.
• The influence of driving the piles on the adjacent soil.
 Failure assumptions

• Experimental results have indicated that when

a pile group installed in cohesive soils is
loaded, it may fail by any one of the following
ways:
– May fail as a block (called block failure).
– Individual piles in the group may fail.
Block failure
 Equation

• The equation for block failure may be written

as:
Qu ( g )  cN c Ag  Pg Lc
where
c = cohesive strength of clay beneath the pile group,
c = average cohesive strength of clay around the group,
L = length of pile,
Pg = perimeter of pile group,
Ag = sectional area of group,
Nc = bearing capacity factor which may be assumed as 9 for deep foundations.
 Simplified the stress computations

• For friction piles two cases may be considered:

• case 1: the load is assumed to spread from a fictitious rigid
footing located at the top of the layer providing friction
resistance at a 2:1 slope (or 30°). (For a homogeneous stratum
this is the ground surface.)
• case 2: the load is placed on a fictitious rigid footing located at
Lp/3 from the bottom of the piles (average depth). Case 1 or 2
should be used, whichever gives the larger computed stresses
on underlying strata.
• For point-bearing piles (case 3) in dense sand or sand-gravel
deposits, the fictitious footing is placed on the deposit in which
the piles penetrate.
 Example

• Calculate the bearing capacity and group

efficiency of pile foundation installed in
uniform clay of bulk unit weight,  of 20 kN/m3
and undrained shear strength of Cu of 50
kN/m2. The foundation consists of 25 piles
each 18 m long ,0.4 m in diameter and weight
60 kN. The weight of the pile cap is 600 kN
and founded 1 m below the ground level. The
adhesion factor a for the soil/pile interface has
a value of 0.8
 Solution
• Calculating single pile bearing capacity:
– Qs = αCuAs = 0.8X50Xπx0.4X18 = 904.8 kN
– Qp = 9CuAp = 9x50xπx0.22 = 56.55 kN
– Qu = 904.8 + 56.55 = 961 kN
– Wcap + Wp - Ws= 600 + 25x60 – 25x18x20Xπ(0.2)2 – 5x5x1x20= 469 kN
– Total load capacity of 25 piles = 961x25 – 469 = 23,556 kN
• Calculating block load capacity:
– Qu(g) = 4αcAs + cNcAp = 4x0.8x50x4.4x18 + 50x9x 4.4x4.4 = 21,384 kN
 Pile Settlements

Are usually small:

• Slip should be included
• Pile elastic compression can dominate
• Refer: Poulos for details settlement
calculations

Caution: Block action of groups may stress far deeper

than any pile in the group
– greater settlements!
 Settlements of Blocks

L
Stress
bowls

Compressible soil layer

 Shear failure of pile group

(a) Test load on single isolated pile when soft clay is not stressed
significantly (b) Load applied to group of piles
when soft clay is not stressed significantly is stressed heavily
 Group Effects
• Complexities arise:
– load distribution amongst piles in group
– differences between group effect and single pile
• O’Neill (1983) has identified an important characteristic: pile-
soil-pile interaction (PSPI).
• Larger interaction in closely spaced piles.
• Lateral deflection of pile group is greater than single isolated
pile subjected to proportional share of load.
 Imaginary Footing Method

• Replace pile group with an imaginary footing; then use

analysis methods discussed.
• Friction piles: place imaginary footing at two-thirds
depth (0.67L)
• End bearing piles: place imaginary footing at pile tip
elevation (at L)
• When both skin friction and end bearing resistance is
available, place it somewhere in between
Imaginary Footing Method
 Elastic Solution

• According to Poulos and Davis (1990), the

immediate settlement of a single pile (with a
load of p) can be estimated from the following
expressions:
PI
s
Es D

Floating piles:
I = IoRkRhRv

End-bearing piles:

I = IoRkRbRn
 Elastic Solution
• where Io is the influence factor for an incompressible pile in a semi-infinite
medium with  = 0.5(Fig. 4.5),
• Rh is the correction factor for a finite medium of thickness h (Figure 4.6),
• Rk is the correction factor for pile compressibility K (= Ep/Es)(Fig. 4.7),
• R is the correction factor for the Poisson ratio (v) of soil (Figure 4.8),
• Rb is the correction factor for stiffness of bearing medium (Figure 4.9),
• d is the minimum pile dimension (pile diameter),
• db is the diameter of the pile base, and
• h is the total depth of the soil layer.
• The Equations account for all of the following components of settlement:
– Immediate settlement occurring at the tip
– Immediate settlement due to the stressing of surrounding soil
– Elastic pile shortening.
Figure 4.5 Settlement-
influence factor, I0
Figure 4.6 Depth corrector
for settlement, Rh
Figure 4.7 Compressibility
correction factor for settlement, Rk
Figure 4.8 Poisson’s ratio correction factor for settlement, RV
 Settlement of Pile Groups

• One simple method of determining the

immediate settlement of a pile group is by
evaluating the interaction factor, αF, defined as
follows:
F 
   S j,i
Additional settlement caused by adjacent pile j or pile i s j ,i
settlement of pile i under its own load ( s i ) si

where si is the settlement of a pile (i) under its own

load and sj,i is the additional settlement in pile i caused
by the adjacent pile j.
• The settlement of individual piles can be
determined on the basis of the method
described in the previous section.
• Then, once αF is estimated from Fig. 4.10a, b,
or c; based on the length–diameter ratio, the
relative stiffness k, the spacing–diameter ratio,
and soil elasticity properties, one can easily
compute the settlement of each pile in a
group configuration.
FIGURE 4.10 Determination of αF factor for: (a) L/d = 10; (b) L/d = 25; and (c) L/d =50.
L is the pile length and d is the pile diameter; K and Vs are as defined in Equation (6.33).
(From Poulos, H.G. and Davis, E.H., 1990).
 Example

• The pile group (6, 30x30 cm piles) shown in Figure

is subjected to a load of 356 kN. A compression
test performed on a representative clay sample at
the site yielded unconfined compression strength
of 20.7 kPa and an elastic modulus of 55,200 kPa,
while a consolidation test indicated no significant
overconsolidation, with a compression index of 0.3
and a water content of 15%. Estimate the safety of
the pile foundation and its total settlement. The
saturated unit weight is 18 kN/m3.
 Solution
• Computation of skin friction of a single pile (Assuming α = 1.0).
• f = αCu
• =1.0(0.5)(20.7kPa) = 10.35 kPa
• The resultant skin-frictional force,
• Qs = 1⁄2 (20.7kPa)(4x0.3)(15) (or 10.35x4x0.3x15)
• = 186.3 kN
• Computation of end bearing of a single pile
• Qp = 9ApCu = 9x0.3x0.3x0.5x20.7 = 8.4 kN
• Thus, the ultimate capacity of the pile is: 186.3 + 8.4 = 194.7 kN
• Estimation of group efficiency. Using converse-Labarre equation:
 m  1n  n  1m 
  1   ,   tan 1
(D S )
 90mn 
 = tan-1(0.3/1.2) = 14
  m  1n  n  1m   3  12  2  13 
  1    1=
 14
 90mn   90 x 2 x3 
 0 .8

• Then, the group capacity can be obtained as 0.8(194.7)(6)=934.6 kN

• and the safety factor can be computed as 934.6/356 = 2.6
• Estimation of single pile immediate settlement.
• The relative stiffness factor of the pile, K, is (Assume Econc = 2.76e7 kPa):
• Econc/Esoil = 2.76e7/5.52e4 = 500, L/D = 15/0.3 = 50, h/L = (15+7.6)/15= 1.5. Then
• Io = 0.045 (Fig. 4.5)
• Rh = 0.8 (Fig. 4.6)
• Rk = 1.85 (Fig. 4.7)
• R = 1.00 (undrained  = 0.5) (Fig. 4.8) s
PI
Es D
• Substituting the above parameters in Equation:
P0.0450.81.851.0
s  4.022 x10 6 P
5.52 X 10 4 X 0.3
 Analysis of group settlement

• If the cap is assumed to be rigid, then the total

settlement of all six piles must be identical.
• Owing to their positions with respect to the
applied load, it can be seen that piles 1, 3, 4,
and 6 can be considered as one type of pile
(type 1) carrying identical loads, while piles 2
and 5 can be categorized as type 2.
• Thus, it will be sufficient to analyze the
behavior of pile types 1 and 2 only.
4P1 + 2P2 = 356 kN
Pile Type 1 Pile type 2
Pile i s/d for pile i αF from pile i Pile i s/d for pile i αF from pile i
1 0 - 1 4 0.4
2 4 0.4 2 0 -
3 8 0.3 3 4 0.4
4 4 0.4 4 5.67 0.35
5 5.67 0.35 5 4 0.4
6 8.94 0.25 6 5.67 0.35
∑αF 1.7 1.9

the total settlement of pile type 1 is estimated as (1+1.7)(4.022x10 -6P1),

and the total settlement of pile type 2 would be (1+1.9)( 4.022x10 -6P2).
By equating the settlement of pile types 1 and 2 (for equal immediate),
one obtains:
2.7P1 = 2.9P2
P1 = 1.074P2
Substituting in (i) into (ii):
2(1.074P1) + P2 = 356/2  P1 = 56.54 kN
 P2 = 52.64 kN
Hence the immediate settlement is :
1 =(2.7)(4.022X10-6)(56.54) = 0.00061 m
 Negative skin friction
• Occurs when
upper soils
consolidate,
perhaps due to
weight of fill.
 Methods to reduce downdrag

• Coat piles w/ bitumen (reducing adhesion)

• Use a large diameter predrill hole, reducing
lateral earth pressure (K)
• Use a pile tip larger than diameter of pile,
reducing K
• Preload site with fill prior to driving piling