Design of Pile Caps Final
Design of Pile Caps Final
Design of Pile Caps Final
10.1 Introduction
A pile cap is defined as a concrete block cast on the head of a group of piles, to
transmit the load from the structure to the group of piles. Generally, pile cap
transfers the load form the structures to a pile group, then the load further
transfers to firm soil.
External pressures on a pile are likely to be greatest near the ground surface.
Ground stability increases with depth and pressure. The top of the pile
therefore, is more vulnerable to movement and stress than the base of the pile.
Pile caps are thus incorporated in order to tie the pile heads together so that
individual pile movement and settlement is greatly reduced. Thus stability of
the pile group is greatly increased.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Initial Layout:
The simplest pile layout is one without batter piles. Such a layout should be
used if the magnitude of lateral forces is small. Since all piles do not carry an
equal portion of the load, axial pile capacity can be reduced to 70 percent of
the computed value to provide a good starting point to determine an initial
layout.
In this case, the designer begins by dividing the largest vertical load on the
structure by the reduced pile capacity to obtain the approximate number of
pile. If there are large applied lateral forces, then batter piles are usually
required. Piles with flat batters 2.5 (V) to 1 (H), provide greater resistance to
lateral loads and the less resistance to vertical loads. Piles with steep batters 5
(V) to 1 (H) provide greater vertical resistance and less lateral resistance.
Final Layout:
After the preliminary layout was developed remaining load cases should be
investigated and the layout revised to provide an efficient layout. The goal
should be to produce a pile layout in which most piles are loaded as near to
capacity as practical for the critical loading cases with tips located at the same
elevation for the various pile groups within a given monolith. Adjustments to
the initial layout by the addition deletion, or relocation of piles within the
layout grid system may be required. Generally, revisions to the pile batters
will not be required because they were optimized during the initial pile layout.
The designer is cautioned that the founding of piles at various elevations or in
different strata may result in monolith instability and differential settlement.
x ,y Mx , My
x y x , y
: x2 , y2
Ix = Io + A . X2
( ( A) )A Io
:
Where Mx, My moments about the axes x, y
The distance between the y axis and x-axis to any hazing in the group
x2 , y2
equation:
Ix = Io + A . X2
Io neglecting
the small value, and delete limit A ( where (A) pile section )
of the equation space, we find that the pile load resulting from moments
applied to the value is shown in the equation :
Eccentricity of load
( Single )
Eccentricity of load
( Double)
Graphical Method
Installation error:
Until now we have been calculating theoretical force distribution on piles.
However during installation of piles slight changes in position do occur and
piles may miss their designed locations.
So the designer must compare theoretical and the actual load distribution as a
result of misalignment after pile installation.
Deviation of the piles
Most piling specifications permit a deviation in pile position of not exceeding
75 mm in any direction from the intended position. Additional deviations of
1:75 from the vertical piles and 1:25 from the designed rake for raking piles
are also permitted.
Thus, the pile cap should be large enough to accommodate those piles which
have deviated from the intended position. The pile cap should extend for a
distance of 100 to 150 mm outside the outer face of the piles in the group.
Location and Alignment Tolerance:
The pile head at cutoff elevation shall be within 50 mm of plan locations for
bent caps supported by piles, and shall be within 150mm of plan locations for
all piles capped below final grade. The as driven centroid of load of any pile
group at cutoff elevation shall be within 5% of the plan location of the
designed centroid of load.
No pile shall be nearer than 100mm from any edge of the cap. Any increase in
size of cap to meet this edge distance requirement shall be at the Contractors
expense.
Piles shall be installed so that the axial alignment of the top 3m of the pile is
within 2% of the specified alignment. For piles that cannot be inspected
internally after installation, an alignment check shall be made before
installing the last 1.5m of pile, or after installation is completed provided the
exposed portion of the pile is not less than 1.5m in length. The Engineer may
require that driving be stopped in order to check the pile alignment. Aligned
section on a misaligned section shall not be permitted.
If the location and/ or alignment tolerances specified in the preceding
paragraphs are exceeded, the extent of overloading shall be evaluated by the
Engineer. If in the judgment of the Engineer, corrective measures are
necessary, suitable measures shall be designed and constructed by the
Contractor. The Contractor shall bear all costs, including delays, associated
with the corrective action.
If the pile group is analyzed with a flexible base, then the forces required
to design the base are obtained directly from the structure model.
If the pile group is analyzed with a rigid base, then a separate analysis is
needed to determine the stresses in the pile cap.
There are many methods for designing pile caps from which we could
mention the following:
1- Circulage Method
2- Beam Method
3- FEM methods
Circulage method can only be used when the column is loaded with an
axial force and piles are arranged on the circumference of a circle. Piles are
not allowed to carry horizontal forces in this case.
Strut-and-tie model
The strut-and-tie model should be considered for the design of deep footings
and pile caps or other situations in which the distance between the centres of
applied load and the supporting reactions is less than about twice the member
thickness.
The Beam Method is the most widely used method as it suitable for any
type of loading and any shape of the pile cap.
Design Procedure:
A- Required Data:
Pile Data:
B- Design Steps:
Notes:
9- Details of reinforcement:
Plane
Grid used for FLAC 3D analysis of pile groups (After Poulos, 2001)
10.5
Grade Beams
The top and bottom reinforcement of a ground beam are usually made equal
to overcome lateral forces or settlement of one pile cap relative to the
adjacent one.
Ground beams may also require shear reinforcement in the form of binders.
The depth of the ground beam is usually more than 1/15 of the span. The
width of the beam depends on design requirements.
Ground beams can also be designed to transmit loads from walls to pile caps.
A pile cap is required to transfer the load from a 400 mm 400 mm column to four 600 mm
diameter piles, as shown in Fig. 14.30.
Pile caps can be designed either by the truss analogy or by bending theory (see BS 8110: Part 1:
3.11.4.1(5)). In this example bending theory will be used.
For a pile cap with closely spaced piles, in addition to bending and bond stress checks, a check
should be made on the local shear stress at the face of the column, and a beam shear check for
shear across the width of the pile cap. For more widely spaced piles (spacing > 3 diameter), a
punching shear check should also be carried out.
The corresponding shear stress is given by vu = Vu/bvd, where bv is the breadth of section for
reinforcement design.
In accordance with BS 8110: Part 1: 3.11.4.4, this must not exceed (2d/av)vc where av is dened
in Fig. 14.30 and vc is the design concrete shear stress from BS 8110: Part 1: Table 3.8. Thus
For grade C35 concrete, from BS 8110: Part 1: Table 3.8, assuming six T25 bars, the minimum
value of vc is 0.4 N/mm2, giving
Thus, provided the average effective depth exceeds d = 846 mm (the local shear check),
minimum reinforcement to satisfy bond and bending tension requirements will be adequate in
this instance.
The necessary depth for the pile cap is
h = d + 25(diameter bar) + 75(cover)
= 846 + 100
= 946 mm use h = 950 mm
Previously design example is to be reworked on the assumption that the building is now to be
relocated in an area where the 5 m depth of ll is of a much poorer quality, and is con- sidered
unsuitable for supporting a oating ground oor slab. The ground oor slab is therefore to be
replaced by wide plank precast concrete oors, spanning 8 m parallel to grid lines AE.
The additional loads due to this suspended oor are shown in Fig. 14.32, and the increased pile
loads are indicated.
The increased loads could be catered for by increasing the number of piles along each loadbearing internal wall (parallel to grid lines 15). In this case however, it has been decided to
maintain the same pile and ground beam layout as in Design Example 3.
Pile capacities
As previously, the pile capacities given in Table 14.9 are derived from previously design
Example (Fig. 14.29).
Piles of 450 mm diameter will again be used. Comparison with Design Example 3 indicates
increases in length of between 0.5 m and 4.6 m.
The calculations will be found to indicate that the 600 mm 625 mm deep ground beams in
previously design example will need to be deepened by approximately 200 mm to accommodate
this additional loading.
Pile Caps.
Fig. 14.32 Piled ground beam and suspended slab design example.
1 Introduction
The design of pile caps had at one time become a math-ematicians delight and a designers
nightmare. Highly complex formulae with numerous empirical variants could result in expensive
design and construction to save a couple of reinforcing bars. As in all design and construction the
aim must be to keep it simple.
Pile caps are usually of concrete but can be large slabs of rock or mats of treated timber. This
discussion is limited to the more common use of concrete.
To allow for the pile deviation the pile cap should extend 100150 mm beyond the outer face of
the piles. The pile group centroid should ideally coincide with the columns position (see Fig.
14.16).
It is sometimes necessary to drive a group of piles to support heavy loadings and it is important
to notice two effects:
(1) The pressure bulb of the group affects deeper layers of soils than a single pile of the same
depth (see Fig. 14.13) in a similar manner to a wide foundation.
(2) The load-bearing capacity of a group is not necessarily the product of the capacity of the
single pile times the number of piles. There can be a pressure overlap (see Fig. 14.14) and the
capacity of the group could decrease as the difference between a pad and strip foundation.
A single pile, in driving, displaces soil which can result in heave at ground level and a group can
cause greater heave and displacement; this fact should be checked and considered. Driving a
single pile, too, in loose sand and lls will compact the soil around the pile to a diameter of
approximately 5.5 times the pile diameter and make it denser. If a group of piles is driven it
could create such a compact block of soil as to prevent driving of all the piles in the group. The
central piles should be driven rst and then, working out to the perimeter of the group, the
remaining piles should be driven.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
These values are affected by the soil conditions, the group behaviour of the piles,
the possible heave and compaction, and the need to provide sufcient space to
install the piles to the designed penetration without damage to the pile or group.
Piles - Factor of safety.
BS 8004 recommends a factor of safety of between 2 and 3 for a single pile. The factor of safety
is not a xed constant and depends on the allowable settlement of the pile which is dependent on
the piles surface and cross-sectional area, the compressibility of the soil, and the reliability of
the ground conditions. The factor should be increased when:
(1) The soil is variable, little is known of its behaviour or its resistance is likely to deteriorate
with time.
(2) Small amounts of differential settlement are critical.
(3) The piles are installed in groups.
The factor may be decreased when:
(1) As a result of extensive loading tests, the resistance can be condently predicted.
(2) As a result of extensive local experience, the soil properties are fully known.
A common factor of safety taken in design is 2.5. A properly designed single 500 mm diameter
pile driven into noncohesive soil is unlikely to settle more than about 15 mm.
In a load test the settlement is noted for increasing increments of load and a settlement/load
graph is plotted. The graph resembles that of the stress/strain graph for many structural materials
(see Fig. 14.12). Up to working load there tends to be practically full recovery of settlement on
removal of load but beyond that loading there is likely to be a permanent set (as in steel loaded
beyond the elastic limit) and at ultimate load there is likely to be no recovery at all.
Choice of Pile.
should also be asked to visit the site to inspect the access for piling plant
movements.
(2) Driven and cast-in-place piles, where the shell is left in, are used on sites over
water (jetties, piers, etc.), on sites known to contain large voids, and on sites
subject to high water pressure. Driven piles should not be chosen where the ground
is likely to contain large boulders but they are one of the best piles for loose-tocompact wet sands and gravels.
These types of piles are frequently the cheapest to use on building sites with lightto-moderate pile loadings
and where the charges for moving onto site are spread over a large number of piles.
(3) Bored piles are frequently the lowest cost piles when piling into rm clays or
sandstone and when vibration and ground heave would cause problems to existing
adjacent buildings.
(4) Jacked piles need something to jack against and tend to be expensive. Their
main use is therefore in underpinning when they can prove to be cost-effective.
(5) Steel H piles are often chosen when long length piles with deep penetration into
sands and gravels are required.
2 Durability
The ground conditions can affect the choice and method of protection of piling
material. Sulfates and acids will attack poor-quality concrete, some acids will cause
problems with steel piles and alternate wetting and drying can cause timbers to rot.
3 Cost
Piles are, or should be, chosen as the economic and safe alternative to strip and raft
foundations but there is more to cost analysis than comparing the cost per metre
run of piles; there are on-costs. In comparing piling contractors estimates it can be
unwise to accept the lowest cost per metre run.
Examination of extra over-costs for such items as extending lengths of piles,
conducting check loading tests, etc. is prudent. The designer should examine the
piling contractors resources available to complete the project on time, the length of
notice required to start work and the contractors experience in piling on similar
sites. The contractors reputation should be investigated and proof obtained of
adequate insurance to indemnify building owners for any claims or damage to
adjoining buildings or failure of piles due to design and construction faults.
To the cost of the piles must be added the cost of excavation for constructing pile
caps and any necessary tie beams. This increases the cost of construction
1 Driven piles
This method is used for piles of timber, precast concrete, prestressed concrete and
the various types of steel piles.
The pile is hammered into the ground by pile-driving plant shown in outline in Fig
14.10 (a). Methods of protecting the head of the pile from shattering are shown in Fig. 14.10 (b).
A closed ended hollow steel or concrete casing is driven into the ground and then lled with
fresh concrete. The casing may be left in position to form part of the whole pile or withdrawn
for reuse as the cast concrete is placed.
The cast concrete is rammed into position by a hammer as the casing is withdrawn ensuring rm
contact with the soil and compaction of the concrete. Care must be taken to see that the cast
concrete is not over-rammed or the casing withdrawn too quickly. There is a danger that as the
liner
tube is withdrawn it can lift up the upper portion of in situ concrete leaving a void or necking in
the upper portions of the pile. This can be avoided by good quality control of the concrete and
slow withdrawal of the casing.
Driven cast in situ piles can prove to be economic for sands, loose gravels, soft silts and clays
particularly when large numbers of piles are required. For small numbers of piles the on-site
costs can however prove to be expensive.
4 Screw piles
Screw piles of steel or concrete cylinders with helical blades attached are screwed into the
ground by rotating the blades. Their best application is in deep stratum of soft alluvial soils
underlain by rm strata. Due to the large diameter of the blades the piles have increased
resistance to uplift forces. Screw piles can be removed after use in temporary works.
5 Jacked piles
Jacked piles are used where headroom for the pile and pile driver are limited as in underpinning
within an existing building. The pile is jacked in short sections using the existing superstructure
as a reaction frame.
The ight auger pile system uses a hollow stem auger mounted on a mobile rig. The auger is
drilled into the
ground with very little vibration and spoil removal. When the required depth has been reached
(see Fig. 14.11), concrete or grout is injected through the auger shaft. Usually the concrete or
grout mixing plant and the pumping equipment are located nearby but can, if such areas are
sensitive, be located well away from such positions. Pile lengths of up to 25 m can generally be
achieved with pile diameters from 300 mm to 600 mm. Piles can be raked up to an angle of 1 in
6 from vertical. The system is suitable for use in most virgin soils and ne granular lls and rigs
can operate in areas with restricted headroom.
The piles are not generally suitable in mining areas where surface movements and lateral strains
may be expected to distort or shear the piles.
Concrete Piles.
Concrete piles are the most widely used in the developed countries and may be cast
in situ, precast, reinforced and prestressed.
(a) Precast
This type is commonly used where:
(i) The length required can be realistically predicted.
(ii) Lateral pressure from a stratum within the soil prole is sufcient to squeeze
(neck) a cast-in-situ pile.
(iii) Where there are large voids in
sections of the soil which would possibly have to be lled with an excessive amount
of in situ concrete or could cause loss of support for wet concrete prior to setting.
(iv) For structures such as piers and jetties above water level on coastal, estuary
and river sites.
Though precast piles can be manufactured on site it is more common to have them
designed, manufactured and installed by specialist subcontractors.
There are disadvantages in the use of precast concrete piles as follows:
(i) It is not easy to extend their length.
(ii) They are liable to fracture when driven into such obstacles as large boulders in
boulder clay and the damage can remain out of sight.
(iii) Obstructions can cause the pile to deect from the true vertical line.
(iv) There is an economic limit, restricted by buckling, of the unrestrained length of
the pile.
(v) Noise and vibration caused by driving can cause nuisance and damage.
(vi) There can be large wastage and health and safety risks to the workforce caused
by noise and vibration due to the need to cut off the projecting length after driving.
(vii) The accuracy of the estimated length is only proved on site when short piles
can be difcult to extend and long piles can prove to be expensive and wasteful.
(viii) The relatively large rig required for driving often needs extensive hardstandings to provide a suitable surface for pile driving.
The advantages of precast concrete piles are:
(i) It is easier to supervise the initial quality of construction in precast than in situ.
(ii) The pile is not driven until the concrete is matured.
(iii) Stresses due to driving are usually higher than those due to foundation loading
so that manufacturing faults are more easily discovered and, in effect, the pile is
preload tested (provided the defects can be detected).
The reinforcement, while adding to the load-bearing capa- city, is mainly designed
to cope with handling, transporting and driving stresses.
(c) Prestressed
Prestressed concrete in superstructure design is made of higher strength concrete,
requires smaller cross-sectional area and can be made impact-resistant. The same
results apply to prestressed piles relative to comparison with pre- cast reinforced
of all necessary tolerance, is only slight and where a reduction in beam depth helps to
compensate for the additional concrete, a wider beam omitting the pile caps can be more
economic.
Often the ground beam can be designed compositely with the walls above and by using
composite beams a standard nominal size ground beam, dictated mainly by the practicalities for
construction, can be used. This has the advantage of standardizing shuttering, reinforcement and
excavation, making site construction simple, economic and quicker than the traditional solution.
Many different beams designed ignoring the benet of the contribution from the structure above
can severely complicate the foundations (see Fig. 14.23).
When considering the use of composite action, consideration must be given to services which
may pass through below ground level in these zones. It is often the case that in adopting
composite beams the resulting shallow beams can be more easily made to pass over the services.
The use of composite action should however be used with caution if there is a requirement to
maintain exibility of future layout. Any modications involving the introduction of major
openings in the walls would invalidate the design assumption that the wall and foundation act
together.
A further help in standardizing a smaller and more economic section is that composite action
often makes it
possible to precast the beams alongside the excavation and roll them into position, speeding up
construction.
For building structures the basic alternative foundations for support on piles generally adopted
consists of one or a combination of the following:
Type 1 Concrete ground beams with or without caps sup- porting the main superstructure load
but with a oating ground oor slab between the main wall (see Fig. 14.24).
Type 2 Concrete ground beams and suspended in situ or precast concrete oor slabs (see Fig.
14.25).
Type 3 Flat slab construction (see Fig. 14.26).
Type 4 Suspended slab and beam foundations with voids or void formers (see Fig. 14.27).
The economic viability of the pile solutions for the above foundations will differ depending on
many variables but, by applying the following basic principles, realistic cost comparisons can be
made and piling options exploited:
(1) Minimizing pile numbers relative to pile length/cost and beam length/cost ratio.
(2) Maintaining axial loads on piles and ground beams wherever practical.
(3) Providing pile restraints from other necessary structures wherever practical.
(4) Standardizing on the minimum beam size which can accommodate pile driving tolerances,
restraint stresses and pile eccentricity while exploiting any possible composite action.
(5) Minimizing the depth of excavations.
(6) Minimizing the required bending of reinforcement.
(7) Minimizing the shuttering costs by simple standard beam proles.
(8) Use of simply supported design and simple beam cages wherever possible unless some small
cantilever action can greatly reduce the number of piles per unit.
(9) Minimizing the need for pile caps wherever practical by the use of slightly wider beams.