IGC-2004

STUDY ON THE BEHAVIOUR OF CIRCULAR PILED RAFT IN SAND

V. Balakumar, Research Scholar K. Ilamparuthi, Professor & Head V. Kalaiarasi, Graduate Student Division of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Anna University, Chennai 600 025

ABSTRACT : In order to understand the behaviour of circular piled raft system installed in sand of various compactness a series of tests were conducted on laboratory models. The parameters related to soil, pile and raft have been varied and their influence on the load sharing behaviour of the bearing elements (pile and raft) described by the piled raft coefficient have been brought out through 1g model tests conducted in the laboratory. Reduction in settlement as well as influence of settlement on the load sharing behaviour has also been brought out. 1. INTRODUCTION Raft and pile foundations are the two alternative foundations normally adopted by geotechnical engineers to support heavy structures like storage tanks and tall buildings. Raft foundation is adopted in situations where the structure is designed for higher order of total and differential settlements. In the case of restriction on settlement pile foundations are adopted. In real situations the combination of these two types of foundation system compensates the limitations of one on the other, which has resulted on effective foundation known as piled raft. The concept of piled raft is not new and has been described by several authors including Zeevaert, 1957. The piled raft foundation is becoming essential in situation where large tanks used for storing oils and hazardous liquids and gases designed with stringent conditions especially on total and differential settlements. Further this problem is apparent in case of loose to medium sand deposits wherein permissible total and differential settlements are lesser than clay despite the settlement is immediate. Therefore, understanding of interaction mechanism between the soil, raft and piles is essential to design the piled raft foundation. Various methods of analyses of piled raft foundation have been developed over last three decades and an overview of the literature indicates that the research have progressed in three different directions namely numerical modelling, field monitoring on real size piled raft and study on laboratory models. Numerical models are based on finite element analyses or boundary element analyses taking various models for pile, raft and the soil. Appropriate Ep/Es ratios have been taken and parametric study has been done to study the settlement and load sharing behaviour. Studies conducted on instrumented prototype piled raft rely mostly on the Es values estimated through back working of the parameters from the load tests. However the influence of pile installation and construction sequence has not been well accounted so for. Tests on simulated small scale models in the lab appear to be a good procedure to understand the settlement and load sharing behaviour of the piled raft. Weisner and Brown (1980) studied the behaviour of model piled raft system by conducting tests on over consolidated clay and validated their findings through finite element analyses. Cooke (1986) carried model tests on freestanding groups and piled rafts in stiff clay and reported that longer the length of pile lesser is the settlement of piled raft system. Horikoshi and Randolph (1996) presented the results of centrifuge model tests on piled raft on kaolin clay. All these works are on the prepared overconsolidated clay beds. Work on piled raft supported on sand has gained momentum very recently. Kim et al., (2002) conducted model tests on piled raft embedded in sand and developed a genetic algorithm based analysis for optimizing pile locations. Turek and Katzenbach (2003) reported the results of model tests conducted on loose and dense sand bed. Most of the laboratory studies reported covers only the effect of spacing of piles on load sharing between raft and pile. Therefore an elaborate parametric study for circular rafts is essential to establish the loadsettlement and the load sharing behaviour, so that a design procedure can be evolved. This paper presents the results of a series of tests conducted in the Geotechnical engineering laboratory of Anna University, Chennai. 2. MODEL TESTS Tests were performed on models of piled raft and plain raft founded in sand beds of different densities with and without raft contact on soil. All the tests were carried out in 362

IGC-2004

a steel tank of dimension 1000mm x 600mm x 600mm. The sand used in this study is free from fines with coarse, medium and fine sand contents of 3%, 85% and 12% respectively. The Cu and Cc values are 2.63 and 1.22 respectively and is classified as uniformly graded sand (SP). The average densities of sand bed at which experiments conducted are 16.2kN/m3, 15.5kN/m3 and 14.8kN/m3 for the dense (=410), medium (=370) and loose (=340) conditions respectively. The models used in this study are fabricated from Perspex. Perspex sheets of 6mm, 8mm and 10mm thickness have been chosen for the raft and solid rods of 6mm, 8mm and 10mm diameter have been used as piles. 2.1 Experimental Procedure One of the most important aspects in such a model study that influences the results is the preparation of the bed. Sand raining technique has been adopted with calibrated height of fall and controlled compaction. For dense and medium dense conditions, preweighed sand for each layer was placed and compacted by supplying calibrated energy. In the case of loose sand, the known weight of sand was poured into the tank from precalibrated height. The sand bed was prepared from the bottom of the tank in layers. A specially made template was placed on top of the sand bed and piles were driven through an outer sleeve fitted to the template. Piles were left projecting and the raft was fixed on them. The foundation was vertically loaded using a hydraulic jack fitted to a loading frame and the load required for the penetration of piles was monitored by a proving ring of 20kN capacity. The settlement gauges placed on opposite corners having travel of 50mm and a least count of 0.01mm were reset. The load was applied in very small increments and the corresponding settlements were recorded. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Tests were conducted on circular raft of 200mm diameter with various pile lengths of 120mm, 160mm and 200mm. The parameters investigated are length of pile, diameter of pile, configuration of piles and density of sand bed. Influence of these parameters on settlement reduction ratio and piled raft coefficient are discussed below. 3.1 Load-Settlement Behaviour Figure 1 shows the load-settlement curve for a free standing pile group and the pile group with raft in contact with the soil in medium dense sand. The load carrying capacity of pile group, in the case of raft in contact with the soil is higher than free standing pile group except for the settlements less than 3mm. At this settlement free standing piles reached their limiting resistance, there after piles exhibited uncontrollable settlement under limiting load. In the case of raft in contact with the soil the resistance of the piles increased steadily with settlement and reached the limiting load of free standing pile at a settlement of 2mm. 363

This behaviour is due to the increase in the normal stress on pile, as a result of the transfer of load from the raft to the soil.
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Settlement (mm) 1 Load (kN) 2 3 4 Free pile Pile group

Fig 1 Load-settlement behaviour of pile group (N=21, L=200mm d=10mm, =370) Figure 2 shows the typical load-settlement curve for pile group, plain raft and piled raft. The load-settlement curve indicates that in the initial stages more load is transferred to the piles and the raft takes lesser load. As the settlement increases beyond 2mm the raft starts taking more load than the piles. It indicates that the pile has mobilized almost its full resistance within a settlement of 2mm. However, the piled raft show increase in load with the settlement. Similar observations were made in tests on piled rafts tested in loose and dense sand as well as piles of various lengths and diameters.
0 0 Settlement (mm) 5 10 15 20 25 2 Load (kN) 4 6 8 Raft Pile Piled raft

Fig 2 Load-settlement behaviour (N=21, L=200mm, d=10mm, D=200mm, t=8mm and =370) 3.2 Settlement Reduction Ratio In order to understand the influence of various parameters of piled raft on the reduction of settlement a parameter called settlement reduction ratio Sr [=(r-pr)/ dr] was used. Where r and pr are the settlements of raft and piled raft respectively for the given load. 3.2.1 Effect of Length of Pile on Sr Figure 3 shows the effect of slenderness ratio of pile on the settlement reduction ratio in medium dense sand. The Sr presented is for a settlement corresponding to 5mm, 15mm and 20mm of plain raft. The Sr ratio increases with increase in L/d ratio irrespective of the magnitude of piled raft settlement. The Sr ratio is higher for lower settlement irrespective of L/d ratio.

IGC-2004

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 10 12

=370 d=10mm

of order of settlements compared. The reduction in settlement is least for 450 which is attributed to lesser in number of piles.
5mm 15mm 20mm
0 .8 0 .6
Sr
=370 d=10mm L=160mm

Sr

14 L/d

16

18

20

22

0 .4 0 .2 0 14.5 15 1 5.5 16 De n sity (kN/m 3)

Fig 3 L/d ratio Vs Sr 3.2.2 Effect of Pile Diameter on Sr

5mm 10mm 15mm 20mm 16.5

Three different diameters of piles have been used to study the effect on settlement reduction. The reduction in settlements is presented for the settlement of 2mm, 10mm and 20mm of plain raft. Figure 4 shows the effect of variation in diameters of pile on the settlement reduction ratio in the case of piles of 160mm long embedded in medium dense sand. Higher the diameter higher is the settlement reduction. The maximum settlement reduction ratio is 0.75 for the raft settlement of 2mm and for the diameter of pile of 10mm. This indicates higher the area ratio (area of piles/ raft area) of piled raft higher is the reduction in settlement.
0.8 0.6 Sr 0.4 0.2 0.0 4 6 8 10 Diameter of pile (mm) 2 mm 10 mm 20 mm 12
=370 L=160mm

Fig 5 Variation of Sr with density

0.8 0.6
Sr
=370 d=10mm L=160mm

5 mm 10 m m 20 m m

0.4 0.2 0 10 20 30 40 Radi al an gl e i n de gre e s 50

Fig 6 Radial angle () Vs Sr 3.3 PILED RAFT COEFFICIENT The distribution of the total load between the two bearing elements of piled raft (pile and raft) is described by the piled raft coefficient pr which is the ratio between the sum of the pile loads (SRpile) and the total load (Rtot) on the piled raft. 3.3.1 Effect of Length of Pile on pr Figure 7 shows the variation of pr with settlement of piled raft in medium dense sand for L/d of 12, 16 and 20. The pr increases with increase in lengths of pile which is independent of magnitude of settlement. Lesser the settlement and higher the L/d ratio (longer the pile) higher is the pr value. However the variation in apr value for settlements of 10mm and 20mm are negligible. This indicates that the load shared by the piles remain almost same at higher settlements. 3.3.2 Effect of Pile Diameter on pr Figure 8 shows the effect of diameters pile on piled raft coefficient. The pr value decreases with increase in settlement but it increases with increase in pile diameter. The minimum pr obtained is 0.1 for pile diameter of 6mm. This indicates that the load shared by the 6mm diameter pile at settlement of 20mm is 10% of the total load. However the load shared by the 10mm diameter pile is 25% for the same order of settlement. 364

Fig 4 Effect of pile diameter on Sr 3.2.3 Effect of Bed Density on Sr The variation of Sr with the density is presented in Figure 5 for 5mm, 10mm, 15mm and 20mm settlements of plain raft. Sr value increases with the increase in density. The increase in Sr is almost linear with density for all the settlements compared except 5mm. Further the variation in Sr ratio for settlements more than 5mm is marginal for a given density. This observation also confirms that reduction in settlement is effective only when the load on pile is lesser. The maximum reduction is around 70% in dense sand for a settlement of 5mm. 3.2.4 Effect of Pile Radial Angle on Sr

Figure 6 shows the effect of configuration of piles spaced at a radial angle of 200, 300, 360 and 450 on the settlement reduction ratio for 5mm, 10mm and 20mm of plain raft. The numbers of piles in each configuration are 37, 25, 21 and 17 for =200, 300, 360 and 450. The settlement reduction ratio decreases almost linearly with radial angle and is independent

IGC-2004

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 10 12

=370 d=10mm

0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 20 40 Radi al an gl e i n de gre e s 2mm 5mm 15m m 20m m

=370 d=10mm L=160mm

2 mm 10 mm 20 mm 14
L/d

16

18

20

22

60

Fig 7 L/d Vs pr
0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 4 6 8 10 D ia m e te r o f pi l e (m m ) 12 2m m 10m m 20m m
=370 L=160mm

Fig 10 Radial angle (a) Vs apr 4. 1. CONCLUSION The parametric study clearly indicates that the pile group in the piled raft has a higher group capacity than the free standing group confirming that the confining stress increases around the piles. In the initial stages the settlement and load sharing behaviour is influenced equally by length and diameter. However at higher level of settlement the behaviour is influenced more by the length than by the diameter. The performance of piles as settlement reducer is more pronounced in the case of loose sand than in medium dense and dense sand. This indicates the improvement of the soil properties due to pile installation, though the improvement has not been quantified. Increase in the number of piles does not have appreciable influence on the performance of piled raft at higher of settlements.

2.

Fig 8 Diameter Vs pr 3.3.3 Effect of Bed Density on pr The variation of apr with the density is presented in Figure 9 for 5mm, 10mm, 15mm and 20mm settlements of plain raft. The apr decreases with increase in density for the settlement of 5mm and 10mm. At higher settlements the apr value is higher for medium dense condition than loose and dense sand.
0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00
1 4.5 15 1 5.5

3.

4.

REFERENCES
=370 d=10mm L=160mm

5m m 10m m 15m m 20m m

1 6 16.5

D e n s i ty (k N /m 3 )

Cooke, R.W. (1986) Piled raft foundations on stiff clay a contribution to design philosophy. Geo-technique, 2, 169203. Horikoshi, K., and Randolph. M.F. (1998). A contribution to optimum design of piled rafts, Geo-technique, 48 (3), 301317. Kim, H.T., Yoo, H.K., and Kang, I.K. (2002) Genetic Algorithm-Based Optimum Design of Piled Raft Foundations with model tests. Jl. Of South East Asian Geotechnical Society, 1-9 Turek, J, and Katzenbach, (2003) Small-Scale model tests with combined pile-raft foundations', Proc. 4th Int. Geo-tech. Seminar on Deep Foundations on Bored and Auger Piles, Ghent, 409-413. Weisner, T.J. and Brown, P.T. (1980). Laboratory Tests on Model Piled Raft Foundations, Jl. of the Geotechnical Engg Division, 106(GT7), 767-780. 365

Fig 9 Density Vs pr 3.3.4 Effect of Pile Radial Angle on pr Figure 10 shows the effect of configuration of piles spaced at a radial angle of 200, 300, 360 and 450 on the piled raft coefficient. When the radial angle is small the area ratio of piles is higher therefore, the apr is also higher irrespective of the order of settlement indicating that the piles take more load. As the settlement increases the load taken by the pile reduces and beyond a certain limit the variation in the radial angle does not appreciably alter the apr value. This indicates that at higher level of settlement increase in the number of piles does not influence the load sharing of the piles very much.