2008 workshop deep foundation types design and construction issues

DEEP FOUNDATION TYPESDESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION

ISSUES

OFFICE OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERINGOFFICE OF STRUCTURAL ENGINEERINGOHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

JAWDAT SIDDIQI P.E. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR

Reliability Index

!"

!

#$%

#

&

!"

!

#$%

#

&

The LRFD philosophy provides a more uniform, systematic, and rational approach to the selection

of load factors and resistance factors than LFD.

LRFD: Load & Resistance Factor Design

For Safety:

=i i i n rQ R R Qi - Load Effect Rn - Component Resistance i - Load Factor - Resistance Factor i - Load Modifier (Ductility, Redundancy

and Operational Importance) Rn - Factored Resistance

Variability of Loads and Resistances

'

(

)

&

*

%

+

(

Variability of Loads and Resistances

2 2( )R Q R Q = +

( )

( )

Mean R QR Q

=

Reliability Index

P(Failure)1.02.02.33.03.5

15.9%2.28%1.00%0.135%

0.0233%

3.5 0.0233%

AISC:

D+(L or S) D+L+W D+L+E

Members 3.0 2.5 1.75

Reliability Index

AASHTO:

Connections 4.5 4.5 4.5

= 3.5 Super/Sub Structures = 2.3 Foundations

LRFD: Load & Resistance Factor Design

For Safety:

=i i i n rQ R R Qi - Load Effect Rn - Component Resistance i - Load Factor - Resistance Factor i - Load Modifier (Ductility, Redundancy

and Operational Importance) Rn - Factored Resistance

Load CombinationLimit State

DCDDDWEHEVESEL

LLIMCEBRPLLS WA WS WL FR

TUCRSH TG SE

Use One of These at a Time

EQ IC CT CVSTRENGTH I (unless noted)

p 1.75 1.00 1.00 0.50/1.20 TG SE

STRENGTH II p 1.35 1.00 1.00 0.50/1.20 TG SE

STRENGTH III 1.00 1.40 1.00 0.50/1.20

LRFD: Load & Resistance Factor DesignTable 3.4.1-1 Load Combinations and Load Factors.

STRENGTH III p 1.00 1.40 1.00 0.50/1.20 TG SE

STRENGTH IV p 1.00 1.00 0.50/1.20

STRENGTH V p 1.35 1.00 0.40 1.0 1.00 0.50/1.20 TG SE

EXTREME EVENT I

p EQ 1.00 1.00 1.00

EXTREME EVENT II

p 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

SERVICE I 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.30 1.0 1.00 1.00/1.20 TG SE

SERVICE II 1.00 1.30 1.00 1.00 1.00/1.20

SERVICE III 1.00 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00/1.20 TG SE

SERVICE IV 1.00 1.00 0.70 1.00 1.00/1.20 1.0

FATIGUELL, IM& CE ONLY

0.75

Load CombinationLimit State

DCDDDWEHEVESEL

LLIMCEBRPLLS WA WS WL FR

TUCRSH TG SE


EQ IC CT CV


Limit State EL LS WA WS WL FR SH TG SE EQ IC CT CVSTRENGTH I (unless noted)

p 1.75 1.0 1.0 0.5/1.2 TG SE

STRENGTH II

p 1.35 1.0 1.0 0.5/1.2 TG SE

STRENGTH III

p 1.0 1.4 1.0 0.5/1.2 TG SE

STRENGTH IV

p 1.0 1.0 0.5/1.2

STRENGTH V

p 1.35 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 0.5/1.2 TG SE

Load Combinatio

n

DCDDDWEHEVES

LLIMCEBRPL

TUCR



n

Limit StateESEL

PLLS WA WS WL FR

CRSH TG SE EQ IC CT CV

EXTREME EVENT I

p EQ 1.0 1.0 1.0

EXTREME EVENT II

p 0.50 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

FATIGUELL, IM &CE ONLY

0.75

Load Combinati

on

DCDDDWEHEV

LLIMCEBR TU

Use One of These at a

Time


on

Limit State

EVESEL

BRPLLS WA WS

WL FR

TUCRSH TG SE

EQ

IC

CT

CV

SERVICE I

1.0 1.0 1.0 0.3 1.0 1.00 1.00/1.20 TG SE

SERVICE II

1.0 1.3 1.0 1.00 1.00/1.20

SERVICE III

1.0 0.8 1.0 1.00 1.00/1.20 TG SE

SERVICE IV

1.0 1.0 0.7 1.00 1.00/1.20 1.0

Resistance FactorsTable 10.5.5.2.2-1 Resistance Factors for Geotechnical Resistance of Shallow Foundations at the Strength Limit State.

Method/Soil/Condition Resistance Factor

Bearing Resistance b

Theoretical method (Munfakh et al., 2001), in clay 0.50Theoretical method (Munfakh et al., 2001), in sand, using CPT 0.50Theoretical method (Munfakh et al., 2001), in sand, using SPT 0.45Semi-empirical methods (Meyerhof, 1957), all soils 0.45Semi-empirical methods (Meyerhof, 1957), all soils 0.45Footings on rock 0.45

Plate Load Test 0.55

Sliding

Precast concrete placed on sand 0.90

Cast-in-Place Concrete on sand 0.80

Cast-in-Place or precast Concrete on Clay 0.85

Soil on soil 0.90

ep Passive earth pressure component of sliding resistance 0.50

Table 10.5.5.2.3-1 Resistance Factors for Driven Piles.

Condition/Resistance Determination Method Resistance FactorDriving criteria established by static load test(s); quality controlby dynamic testing and/or calibrated wave equation, or minimumdriving resistance combined with minimum delivered hammerenergy from the load test(s). For the last case, the hammer usedfor the test pile(s) shall be used for the production piles.

Values in Table 2

Resistance Factors

Nominal Resistance of Single Pile in Axial CompressionDynamic Analysis and Static Load Test Methods, dyn

Driving criteria established by dynamic test with signal matchingat beginning of redrive conditions only of at least one productionpile per pier, but no less than the number of tests per siteprovided in Table 3. Quality control of remaining piles bycalibrated wave equation and/or dynamic testing.

0.65

Wave equation analysis, without pile dynamic measurements orload test, at end of drive conditions only

0.40

FHWA-modified Gates dynamic pile formula (End of Drivecondition only)

0.40

Engineering News Record (as defined in Article 10.7.3.8.5)dynamic pile formula (End of Drive condition only)

0.10

Table 10.5.5.2.3-1 Resistance Factors for Driven Piles (continued).Condition/Resistance Determination Method Resistance Factor

Nominal Resistance of Single Pile in Axial CompressionStatic Analysis Methods, stat

Skin Friction and End Bearing: Clay and Mixed Soils-method (Tomlinson, 1987; Skempton, 1951)-method (Esrig & Kirby, 1979; Skempton, 1951)-method (Vijayvergiya & Focht, 1972; Skempton, 1951)

Skin Friction and End Bearing: SandNordlund/Thurman Method (Hannigan et al., 2005)SPT-method (Meyerhof)

CPT-method (Schmertmann)End bearing in rock (Canadian Geotech. Society, 1985)

0.350.25 0.40

0.45 0.30

0.500.45

Block Failure, b1 Clay 0.60

Resistance Factors


Uplift Resistance of Single Piles, up

Nordlund Method-method-method-methodSPT-methodCPT-methodLoad test

0.350.250.200.300.250.400.60

Group Uplift Resistance, ug Sand and clay 0.50

Horizontal Geotechnical Resistance of Single Pile or Pile Group

All soils and rock 1.0

Structural Limit StateSteel piles See the provisions of Article 6.5.4.2Concrete piles See the provisions of Article 5.5.4.2.1Timber piles See the provisions of Article 8.5.2.2 and 8.5.2.3

Pile Drivability Analysis, da

Steel piles See the provisions of Article 6.5.4.2Concrete piles See the provisions of Article 5.5.4.2.1Timber piles See the provisions of Article 8.5.2.2In all three Articles identified above, use identified as resistance during pile driving

Table 10.5.5.2.3-1 Resistance Factors for Driven Piles (continued).

Condition/Resistance Determination MethodResistance

Factor

Nominal

Skin Friction and End Bearing: Clay and MixedSoils

-method (Tomlinson, 1987; Skempton, 1951)-method (Esrig & Kirby, 1979; Skempton,

1951)

0.350.25

Resistance Factors

Nominal Resistance of Single Pile in Axial CompressionStatic Analysis Methods, stat

1951)-method (Vijayvergiya & Focht, 1972;

Skempton, 1951)Skin Friction and End Bearing: Sand

Nordlund/Thurman Method (Hannigan et al.,2005)

SPT-method (Meyerhof)

CPT-method (Schmertmann)End bearing in rock (Canadian Geotech. Society,1985)

0.40

0.45

0.30

0.500.45

dyn x Rn = stat x Rnstat (C10.7.3.3-1)

where:dyn = the resistance factor for the dynamic method

used to verify pile bearing resistance duringdriving specified in Table 10.5.5.2.3-1

Resistance Factors

driving specified in Table 10.5.5.2.3-1

Rn = the nominal pile bearing resistance (kips)

stat= the resistance factor for the static analysis method usedto estimate the pile penetration depth required toachieve the desired bearing resistance specified inTable 10.5.5.2.3-1

Rnstat = the predicted nominal resistance from the static analysis method used to estimate the penetration depth required (kips)

DYN

iiindr

QR

=

The Ultimate Bearing Value for each pile to be shownin the plans shall be determined as follows:

Resistance Factors

iii Q = Total factored load for highest loaded pile at each substructure unit (Kips)

DYN = Resistance factor for driven pilesDYN = 0.70 for piles installed according to CMS 507 and CMS 523.

Where:Rndr = Ultimate Bearing Value (Kips)


Condition/Resistance Determination Method Resistance FactorBlock Failure, b1 Clay 0.60

Resistance Factors


Uplift Resistance of Single Piles, up

Nordlund Method-method-method-methodSPT-methodCPT-methodLoad test

0.350.250.200.300.250.400.60

Group Uplift Resistance, ug

Sand and clay 0.50


Condition/Resistance Determination MethodResistance

FactorSteel piles See the provisions of Article 6.5.4.2

Resistance Factors

Structural Limit State

Steel piles See the provisions of Article 6.5.4.2Concrete piles See the provisions of Article 5.5.4.2.1Timber piles See the provisions of Article 8.5.2.2 and 8.5.2.3

Pile Drivability Analysis, da

Steel piles See the provisions of Article 6.5.4.2Concrete piles See the provisions of Article 5.5.4.2.1Timber piles See the provisions of Article 8.5.2.2

In all three Articles identified above, use identified as resistance during pile driving

6.5.4.2 Resistance Factors

For axial resistance of piles in compression and subject to damage due tosevere driving conditions where use of a pile tip is necessary:H-piles c = 0.50

pipe piles c = 0.60

Resistance Factors

For axial resistance of piles in compression under good driving conditionswhere use of a pile tip is not necessary:H-piles c = 0.60pipe piles c = 0.70

For combined axial and flexural resistance of undamaged piles:axial resistance for H-piles c = 0.70axial resistance for pipe piles c = 0.80Flexural resistance f = 1.00

Resistance Factors

Table 10.5.5.2.3-2 Relationship between Number of Static Load Tests Conducted per Site and (after Paikowsky et al., 2004).

Resistance Factor,

Number of Static Load Tests per Site

Site Variabilitya

Lowa Mediuma Higha

1 0.80 0.70 0.552 0.90 0.75 0.653 0.90 0.85 0.75

>4 0.90 0.90 0.80

Resistance FactorsTable 10.5.5.2.3-3 Number of Dynamic Tests with Signal Matching Analysis per Site to Be Conducted During Production Pile Driving (after Paikowsky et al., 2004).

Site Variabilitya Lowa Mediuma Higha

Number of Piles Number of Piles Located Within

SiteNumber of Piles with Dynamic Tests and Signal Matching

Analysis Required (BOR)500 4 7 12

Resistance FactorsTable 10.5.5.2.4-1 Resistance Factors for Geotechnical Resistance of Drilled Shafts.


Nominal Axial Compressive Resistance of Single-Drilled Shafts, stat

Side resistance in clay -method (ONeill and Reese, 1999) 0.45

Tip resistance in clay Total Stress (ONeill and Reese, 1999) 0.40

Side resistance in sand -method ONeill and Reese, 1999) 0.55Tip resistance in sand ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.50Side resistance in IGMs ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.60Tip resistance in IGMs ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.55Side resistance in rock Horvath and Kenney (1979) ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.55Side resistance in rock Horvath and Kenney (1979) ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.55Side resistance in rock Carter and Kulhawy (1988) 0.50Tip resistance in rock Canadian Geotechnical Society (1985)

Pressuremeter Method (Canadian Geotechnical Society, 1985) ONeill and Reese (1999)

0.50


Uplift Resistance of Single-Drilled Shafts, up

Clay -method (ONeill and Reese, 1999) 0.35Sand -method (ONeill and Reese, 1999) 0.45Rock Horvath and Kenney (1979) Carter and Kulhawy (1988) 0.40

Group Uplift Resistance, ug Sand and clay 0.45

Horizontal Geotechnical Resistance of Single Shaft or Shaft Group

All materials 1.0

Static Load Test (compression), load All Materials Values in Table 10.5.5.2.3-2, but no greater than 0.70Static Load Test (uplift), upload All Materials 0.60



Nominal Axial

Side resistance in clay -method (ONeill and Reese, 1999) 0.45

Tip resistance in clay Total Stress (ONeill and Reese, 1999) 0.40

Side resistance in sand -method ONeill and Reese, 1999) 0.55

Tip resistance in sand ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.50Axial Compressive Resistance of Single-Drilled Shafts, stat

Tip resistance in sand ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.50Side resistance in IGMs ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.60Tip resistance in IGMs ONeill and Reese (1999) 0.55Side resistance in rock Horvath and Kenney (1979) ONeill

and Reese (1999)0.55

Side resistance in rock Carter and Kulhawy (1988) 0.50Tip resistance in rock Canadian Geotechnical Society (1985)

Pressuremeter Method (Canadian Geotechnical Society, 1985) ONeill and Reese (1999)

0.50

Block Failure, b1

Clay 0.55

Resistance Factors

Table 10.5.5.2.4-1 Resistance Factors for Geotechnical Resistance of Drilled Shafts.

Resistance Method/Soil/Condition

Resistance Factor

Uplift Resistance of Single-Drilled Shafts, up

Clay -method (ONeill and Reese, 1999)

0.35

Sand -method (ONeill and Reese, 1999)

0.45

Rock Horvath and Kenney (1979) Carter and Kulhawy (1988)

0.40

Group Uplift Resistance, ug

Sand and clay 0.45


Method/Soil/ConditionResistance

FactorHorizontal Geotechnical Resistance of Single

All materials 1.0

Resistance of Single Shaft or Shaft GroupStatic Load Test(compression), load

All Materials

Values in Table

10.5.5.2.3-2, but no greater

than 0.70Static Load Test(uplift), upload

All Materials 0.60

10.8.2.2.3 Intermediate GeoMaterials (IGMs)For detailed settlementestimation of shafts inIGMs, the proceduresprovided by ONeill and

C10.8.2.2.3IGMs are defined by ONeilland Reese (1999) as follows:Cohesive IGMclay shalesor mudstones with an Su of 5to 50 ksf, and

Intermediate Geo Materials

provided by ONeill andReese (1999) should beused.

to 50 ksf, andCohesionlessgranulartills or granular residual soilswith N160 greater than50 blows/ft.

Intermediate Geo Material (IGM)10.8.3.5.2b Side Resistance

4.0 for 0.25 1.2 vs

q = (10.8.3.5.2b-1)

in which, for sandy soils:1.5 0.135 z = (10.8.3.5.2b-2)for N60 15:

for N60 < 15:60 (1.5 0.135 )

15N

z = (10.8.3.5.2b-3)

( )0.752.0 0.06 z = (10.8.3.5.2b-4)in which, for IGMs:

for N60 50:

10.8.3.5.2c Tip Resistance

(10.8.3.5.2c-1)

Intermediate Geo Material (IGM)

for sandy soils:

for N60 < 50: qp = 1.2 N60

0.8

600.59'

ap v

v

pq N =

(10.8.3.5.2c-2) for N60 50:

for IGMs:

Scour Assessment of Rocks

Bridges on aggressive steams and waterwayswaterways

Thank YouThank You

2008 workshop deep foundation types design and construction issues

Documents

load combinations

tg se strength iip

selectionof load factors

tg se strength ivp

tg se strength iiip

tg se service ii1

tg se service iv1

tg se strength iv p