Sei sulla pagina 1di 221

SHAFT v2017 – User’s Manual

A Program for the Study


of Drilled Shafts
under Axial Loads

by

Lymon C. Reese
Shin Tower Wang
Luis Vasquez
Jose A. Arrellaga

for

ENSOFT, INC.
3003 W. Howard Lane
Austin, Texas 78728
United States of America

(Release Date: August 2018)


ii

SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEMENT & DISCLAIMER


IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please carefully read the terms of the license
agreement and disclaimer at the end of this book. Usage of this software
signifies acceptance with those terms.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


iii

Contents
CHAPTER 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 General Description ................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.2 History of Development ............................................................................................................. 1-2
1.2.1 SHAFT1 (1987) .................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.2.2 SHAFT, Version 2 (1989)..................................................................................................... 1-2
1.2.3 SHAFT 3.0 for Windows (1995) .......................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.4 SHAFT 4.0 for Windows (1998) .......................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.5 SHAFT 5.0 for Windows (2001) .......................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.6 SHAFT 6.0 for Windows (2007) .......................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.7 SHAFT 2012 (v7) ................................................................................................................. 1-3
1.2.8 SHAFT 2017 (v8) ................................................................................................................. 1-4
1.3 Organization of SHAFT Manuals ................................................................................................ 1-4
1.4 Typographical Conventions........................................................................................................ 1-5
1.5 Contents of the SHAFT Package ................................................................................................. 1-5
1.6 Hardware Requirements ............................................................................................................ 1-5
1.7 Technical Support ...................................................................................................................... 1-6
1.7.1 Preferred Methods of Software Support ........................................................................... 1-6
1.7.2 Upgrade Verification and Internet Site .............................................................................. 1-6
1.7.3 Renewal of Program Maintenance .................................................................................... 1-7
1.7.4 Changes of Support Policy ................................................................................................. 1-7
CHAPTER 2. Installation and Getting Started ..................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Installation Procedures .............................................................................................................. 2-2
2.1.1 Installation of Single-User Version ..................................................................................... 2-2
2.1.2 Introduction of Network Version ....................................................................................... 2-7
2.1.3 Backup of Original Software .............................................................................................. 2-8
2.1.4 Software Updates on the Internet ..................................................................................... 2-8
2.2 Getting Started........................................................................................................................... 2-8
2.2.1 Starting the Program .......................................................................................................... 2-9
2.2.2 File Management ............................................................................................................. 2-10
2.2.3 Data Input of Application Problem .................................................................................. 2-11
2.2.4 Computation Options....................................................................................................... 2-12
2.2.5 Graphics ........................................................................................................................... 2-13
2.2.6 Arrangement of Windows ................................................................................................ 2-15
2.2.7 Help Files .......................................................................................................................... 2-16
CHAPTER 3. References for Data Input .............................................................................................. 3-1

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


iv

3.1 File Menu ................................................................................................................................... 3-2


3.1.1 File > New ........................................................................................................................... 3-2
3.1.2 File > Open ......................................................................................................................... 3-2
3.1.3 File > Save........................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.1.4 File > Save As ...................................................................................................................... 3-3
3.1.5 File > Exit ............................................................................................................................ 3-3
3.2 Data Menu ................................................................................................................................. 3-4
3.2.1 Numeric Data Entries ......................................................................................................... 3-5
3.2.2 Data > Units........................................................................................................................ 3-6
3.2.3 Data > Design Method (ASD or LRFD) ................................................................................ 3-6
3.2.4 Data > Title ......................................................................................................................... 3-7
3.2.5 Data > Drilled-Shaft Properties .......................................................................................... 3-8
3.2.6 Data > Soil Layer Data ...................................................................................................... 3-10
3.2.7 Data > Soil Layer Data > Edit Layer x ................................................................................ 3-13
3.2.8 Data > Factor of Safety (Allowable Stress Design) ........................................................... 3-30
3.2.9 Data > Computation Methods ......................................................................................... 3-30
3.2.10 Data > Water Table .......................................................................................................... 3-32
3.2.11 Data > Evaluate Multiple Shaft Lengths ........................................................................... 3-33
3.2.12 Data > ASD/LRFD Design Charts ....................................................................................... 3-33
3.2.13 Data > Control Options... ................................................................................................. 3-34
3.3 Help Menu................................................................................................................................ 3-36
CHAPTER 4. References for Program Execution and Output Reviews ............................................... 4-1
4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.2 Computation Menu .................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.2.1 Computation > Run Analysis .............................................................................................. 4-2
4.2.2 Computation > Edit Input Text ........................................................................................... 4-3
4.2.3 Computation > Edit Processor Run Notes .......................................................................... 4-4
4.2.4 Computation > Edit Output Text ........................................................................................ 4-4
4.2.5 Computation > View Shaft Elevation ................................................................................. 4-5
4.2.6 Computation > 3D View ..................................................................................................... 4-6
4.2.7 Show 3D View Menu .......................................................................................................... 4-6
4.3 Graphics Menu ........................................................................................................................... 4-8
4.3.1 Mouse Commands in the Graphics Mode ....................................................................... 4-10
4.3.2 Graphics > Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth...................................................................... 4-11
4.3.3 Graphics > Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth .................................................................. 4-12
4.3.4 Graphics > Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth................................................................... 4-13
4.3.5 Graphics > Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) .............................................................. 4-14
4.3.6 Graphics > ASD/LRFD Skin Friction vs Depth ................................................................... 4-15
4.3.7 ASD/LRFD Graphics > Tip Resistance vs Depth ................................................................ 4-16
4.3.8 ASD/LRFD Graphics > Total Capacity vs Depth ................................................................ 4-17

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


v

4.3.9 Graphics > Combined Plots vs Depth (ASD/LRFD) ........................................................... 4-18


4.3.10 Graphics > Axial Load vs Settlement (Averaged) ............................................................. 4-19
4.3.11 Graphics > Axial Load vs Settlement (Upper Bound) ....................................................... 4-20
4.3.12 Graphics > Axial Load vs Settlement (Lower Bound) ....................................................... 4-21
4.3.13 Graphics > Combined Plots of Load vs Settlement .......................................................... 4-22
4.3.14 Graphics > t-z curves ........................................................................................................ 4-23
4.3.15 Graphics > Q-w curves ..................................................................................................... 4-24
4.3.16 Graphics > Additional t-z curves ...................................................................................... 4-24
4.3.17 Graphics > Design Chart (xx movement).......................................................................... 4-26
4.3.18 Graphics > Export Plots to Excel....................................................................................... 4-26
4.4 Plot Menu................................................................................................................................. 4-27
CHAPTER 5. Example Problems.......................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.2 Example Problem 1 – Sand ........................................................................................................ 5-4
5.2.1 Soil Profile .......................................................................................................................... 5-4
5.2.2 Soil Properties .................................................................................................................... 5-4
5.2.3 Construction ....................................................................................................................... 5-4
5.2.4 Loadings ............................................................................................................................. 5-4
5.2.5 Factor of Safety .................................................................................................................. 5-4
5.2.6 Ultimate Load ..................................................................................................................... 5-5
5.2.7 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft ............................................................................................ 5-5
5.2.8 Hand Computations ........................................................................................................... 5-5
5.2.9 Comparison of Results ....................................................................................................... 5-5
5.2.10 Input Data for Computer Analysis...................................................................................... 5-6
5.2.11 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis ............................................................................ 5-6
5.2.12 Output Data ....................................................................................................................... 5-9
5.3 Example Problem 2 – Mixed Clay/Sand ................................................................................... 5-31
5.3.1 Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 5-31
5.3.2 Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 5-31
5.3.3 Construction ..................................................................................................................... 5-31
5.3.4 Loadings ........................................................................................................................... 5-31
5.3.5 Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 5-31
5.3.6 Ultimate Load ................................................................................................................... 5-31
5.3.7 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft .......................................................................................... 5-32
5.3.8 Hand Computations ......................................................................................................... 5-32
5.3.9 Comparison of Results ..................................................................................................... 5-32
5.3.10 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 5-33
5.3.11 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 5-33
5.3.12 Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 5-36
5.4 Example Problem 3 – Clay........................................................................................................ 5-43

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


vi

5.4.1 Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 5-43


5.4.2 Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 5-43
5.4.3 Construction ..................................................................................................................... 5-43
5.4.4 Loadings ........................................................................................................................... 5-43
5.4.5 Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 5-43
5.4.6 Ultimate Load ................................................................................................................... 5-43
5.4.7 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft .......................................................................................... 5-44
5.4.8 Hand Computations ......................................................................................................... 5-44
5.4.9 Comparison of Results ..................................................................................................... 5-45
5.4.10 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 5-45
5.4.11 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 5-45
5.4.12 Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 5-47
5.5 Example Problem 4 – Belled, Silty Sand & Silty Clay ................................................................ 5-52
5.5.1 Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 5-52
5.5.2 Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 5-52
5.5.3 Construction..................................................................................................................... 5-52
5.5.4 Loading ............................................................................................................................. 5-52
5.5.5 Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 5-52
5.5.6 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft .......................................................................................... 5-53
5.5.7 Hand Computations ......................................................................................................... 5-53
5.5.8 Comparison of Results ..................................................................................................... 5-54
5.5.9 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 5-54
5.5.10 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 5-54
5.5.11 Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 5-56
5.6 Example Problem 5 – Strong Rock ........................................................................................... 5-61
5.6.1 Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 5-61
5.6.2 Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 5-61
5.6.3 Construction ..................................................................................................................... 5-61
5.6.4 Loading ............................................................................................................................. 5-61
5.6.5 Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 5-61
5.6.6 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft .......................................................................................... 5-62
5.6.7 Hand Computations ......................................................................................................... 5-62
5.6.8 Comparison of Results ..................................................................................................... 5-62
5.6.9 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 5-62
5.6.10 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 5-63
5.6.11 Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 5-64
5.7 Example Problem 6 – Weak Rock ............................................................................................ 5-68
5.7.1 Description of the Problem – Rough Socket .................................................................... 5-68
5.7.2 Hand Computations – Rough Socket ............................................................................... 5-68
5.7.3 Description of the Problem – Smooth Socket .................................................................. 5-70
5.7.4 Hand Computations – Smooth Socket ............................................................................. 5-70

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


vii

5.7.5 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 5-71


5.7.6 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 5-71
5.7.7 Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 5-73
5.8 Example Problem 7 – Gravel .................................................................................................... 5-77
5.8.1 Description of the Problem .............................................................................................. 5-77
5.8.2 Hand Computations ......................................................................................................... 5-77
5.8.3 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 5-79
5.8.4 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 5-80
5.8.5 Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 5-80
5.9 Example Problem 8 – Gravelly Sand & Gravel ......................................................................... 5-85
5.9.1 Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 5-85
5.9.2 Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 5-85
5.9.3 Construction ..................................................................................................................... 5-85
5.9.4 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 5-85
5.9.5 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 5-86
5.9.6 Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 5-87
5.10 Example Problem 9 – LRFD ...................................................................................................... 5-93
5.10.1 Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 5-93
5.10.2 Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 5-93
5.10.3 Hand Computations ......................................................................................................... 5-94
5.10.4 Comparison of Results ..................................................................................................... 5-95
5.10.5 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 5-96
5.10.6 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 5-97
5.10.7 Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 5-98
5.11 Example Problem 10 – Multiple Shaft Lengths ...................................................................... 5-107
5.11.1 Soil and Shaft Properties ................................................................................................ 5-107
5.11.2 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................. 5-107
5.11.3 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis ........................................................................ 5-108
5.12 Example Problem 11 – Use of Design Charts ......................................................................... 5-109
5.12.1 Soil and Shaft Properties ................................................................................................ 5-109
5.12.2 Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................. 5-110
5.12.3 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis ........................................................................ 5-110
List of Technical References .......................................................................................................................... 1
License Agreement & Disclaimer .................................................................................................................. 1

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


viii

List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Main installation screen for ENSOFT software (may change with time) ................................ 2-4
Figure 2.2 Installation screen with License Agreement (may change with time) .................................... 2-5
Figure 2.3 Selection of Single-User License (may change with time) ....................................................... 2-5
Figure 2.4 Default Installation Directory for Program Files (may change with time) .............................. 2-6
Figure 2.5 File Extension Association for Shaft Data Files (may change with time) ................................ 2-6
Figure 2.6 Default Shortcut Folder in Windows Start Menu (may change with time) ............................ 2-7
Figure 2.7 Sample organization and operational flow chart for SHAFT .................................................... 2-9
Figure 2.8 Options contained in the File menu ...................................................................................... 2-10
Figure 2.9 Options contained in the Data menu .................................................................................... 2-12
Figure 2.10 Options contained in the Computation menu .................................................................... 2-13
Figure 2.11 Options contained in the Graphics menu ........................................................................... 2-15
Figure 2.12 Options contained in the Window menu ............................................................................ 2-16
Figure 2.13 Options contained in the Help menu .................................................................................. 2-17
Figure 3.1 Window screen for the File > Open dialog............................................................................... 3-3
Figure 3.2 Message window advising that changes were not saved to disk............................................ 3-4
Figure 3.3 Options contained in the Data menu ...................................................................................... 3-5
Figure 3.4 Window screen for Data Menu > Design Method (ASD or LRFD) ........................................... 3-7
Figure 3.5 Window screen for sample Data > Title .................................................................................. 3-8
Figure 3.6 Window screen for sample Data - Drilled-Shaft Properties .................................................. 3-10
Figure 3.7 Sample Data > Soil Layer Data dialog box for ASD Method .................................................. 3-11
Figure 3.8 Sample Data > Soil Layer Data dialog box for LRFD Method ................................................ 3-11
Figure 3.9 Sample soil data for sand layers............................................................................................ 3-14
Figure 3.10 Sample soil data for clay and shale layers........................................................................... 3-20
Figure 3.11 Sample soil data for layers of strong rock ........................................................................... 3-23
Figure 3.12 Sample soil data for decomposed rock layers..................................................................... 3-25
Figure 3.13 Sample soil data for weak rock layers ................................................................................. 3-26
Figure 3.14 Sample soil data for gravelly sand and gravel layers .......................................................... 3-29
Figure 3.15 Sample screen of Data > Factor of Safety (ASD Method) ................................................... 3-30
Figure 3.16 Options contained under Data> Computation Methods .................................................... 3-31
Figure 3.17 Sample entries under Data > Computation Methods > Specify the shaft length ............... 3-32
Figure 3.18 Sample entries under Data > Computation Methods > Specify the design load ................ 3-32
Figure 3.19 Options contained in Data Water Table.............................................................................. 3-32
Figure 3.20 Dialog box for Data > Evaluate Multiple Shaft Lengths....................................................... 3-33
Figure 3.21 Dialog box for Data > ASD/LRFD Design Charts .................................................................. 3-34
Figure 3.22 Entries under Data > Control Options… .............................................................................. 3-36
Figure 4.1 Commands in the Computation menu. ................................................................................... 4-2
Figure 4.2 Sample use of Microsoft Notepad© for editing input text of Example Problem 1. ............... 4-3
Figure 4.3 Sample Microsoft Notepad © session of processor-run notes for Example Problem 1. ........ 4-4
Figure 4.4 Sample use of Microsoft Notepad © for editing the output-text file of Example Problem 1.4-5

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


ix

Figure 4.5 Sample Computation > View Shaft Elevation command option. ............................................ 4-6
Figure 4.6 Sample Computation > 3D View command option. ................................................................ 4-7
Figure 4.7 Show 3D View menu for Computation > 3D View command option. ..................................... 4-7
Figure 4.8 Speed buttons for Computation > 3D View command option................................................ 4-8
Figure 4.9 Show 3D View > Combined Plots Dialog Screen. .................................................................... 4-8
Figure 4.10 Sample options contained in the Graphics menu. ................................................................ 4-9
Figure 4.11 Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1. ....................... 4-11
Figure 4.12 Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1. .................... 4-12
Figure 4.13 Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 1. ................................................. 4-13
Figure 4.14 Combined Plots vs Depth (Ultimate) for Example Problem 1. ............................................ 4-14
Figure 4.15 Skin Friction vs. Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1...................................................... 4-15
Figure 4.16 Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. .................................................. 4-16
Figure 4.17 Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. .................................................... 4-17
Figure 4.18 Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. ................................................ 4-18
Figure 4.19 Axial Load vs Settlement (averaged) for Example Problem 1. ............................................ 4-19
Figure 4.20 Axial Load vs Settlement (upper bound) for Example Problem 1. ...................................... 4-20
Figure 4.21 Axial Load vs Settlement (lower bound) for Example Problem 1. ...................................... 4-21
Figure 4.22 Combined Axial Load vs Settlement Curves for Example Problem 1. ................................. 4-22
Figure 4.23 t-z curves for Example Problem 1. ...................................................................................... 4-23
Figure 4.24 Q-w curves for Example Problem 1. .................................................................................... 4-24
Figure 4.25 Additional t-z curves for Example Problem 1. ..................................................................... 4-25
Figure 4.26 Design Chart (0.1-in movement) for Example Problem 11. ................................................ 4-26
Figure 4.27 Sample Export Plots to Excel dialog box. ............................................................................ 4-27
Figure 4.28 Sample Plot menu. .............................................................................................................. 4-29
Figure 5.1 General soil description of Example Problem 1. ..................................................................... 5-4
Figure 5.2 Curve of Skin Friction vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. ........................................... 5-7
Figure 5.3 Curve of Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. ........................................ 5-7
Figure 5.4 Curve of Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. ........................................ 5-8
Figure 5.5 Curve of Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. ..................................... 5-8
Figure 5.6 General soil description of Example Problem 2. ................................................................... 5-31
Figure 5.7 Curve of Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth for Example Problem 2. ....................................... 5-34
Figure 5.8 Curve of Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth for Example Problem 2. ..................................... 5-34
Figure 5.9 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 2. .................................... 5-35
Figure 5.10 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement (averaged) for Example Problem 2. ............................. 5-35
Figure 5.11 Graphical plot of ultimate skin friction with depth for Example Problem 2. ...................... 5-36
Figure 5.12 General soil description of Example Problem 3. ................................................................. 5-43
Figure 5.13 3D View of Example Problem 3. .......................................................................................... 5-44
Figure 5.14 Curve of Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) for Example Problem 3. .............................. 5-46
Figure 5.15 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement (combined) for Example Problem 3. ............................ 5-46
Figure 5.16 General soil description of Example Problem 4. ................................................................. 5-52
Figure 5.17 Curve of Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth for Example Problem 4. ..................................... 5-55
Figure 5.18 Curve of Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth for Example Problem 4. .................................. 5-55

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


x

Figure 5.19 General soil description of Example Problem5. .................................................................. 5-61


Figure 5.20 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 5. .................................. 5-63
Figure 5.21 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 5. ................................................ 5-64
Figure 5.22 General pile and soil description for Example Problem 6. .................................................. 5-68
Figure 5.23 Curves of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6 (rough and smooth sockets).
Obtained from hand computations (O’Neill et al., 1975) ............................................ 5-71
Figure 5.24 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6 using rough socket with closed
joints............................................................................................................................. 5-72
Figure 5.25 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6 using smooth socket with closed
joints............................................................................................................................. 5-72
Figure 5.26 General pile and soil description for Example Problem 7. .................................................. 5-77
Figure 5.27 Curves of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 7. Obtained from hand
computations (O’Neill et al., 1975). ............................................................................. 5-79
Figure 5.28 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 7. ................................................ 5-80
Figure 5.29 General soil description of Example Problem..................................................................... 5-85
Figure 5.30 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 8. .................................. 5-86
Figure 5.31 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 8. ................................................ 5-87
Figure 5.32 General soil description of Example Problem 9 .................................................................. 5-94
Figure 5.33 Curves of LRFD Geotechnical Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 9. .......................... 5-97
Figure 5.34 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 9. ................................................ 5-98
Figure 5.35 Data > Evaluate Multiple Shaft Lengths for Example Problem 10. ................................... 5-107
Figure 5.36 Axial Load vs Settlement (averaged) for Example Problem 10. ........................................ 5-108
Figure 5.37 Data > ASD/LRFD Design Charts for Example Problem 11. ............................................... 5-109
Figure 5.38 Design Chart for 0.5-in Movement for Example Problem 11............................................ 5-111

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


xi

List of Tables
Table 2.1 Files created in SHAFT runs .................................................................................................... 2-11
Table 3.1 Supported mathematical operations and constants ................................................................ 3-5
Table 3.2 Relationship between N and  (after Gibbs and Holtz, 1957) ................................................ 3-18
Table 4.1 Mouse commands in the graphics mode ................................................................................ 4-10
Table 5.1 Comparison of results for Example Problem 1 ......................................................................... 5-5
Table 5.2 Comparison of results for Example Problem 2 ....................................................................... 5-32
Table 5.3 Comparison of results for Example Problem 3 ....................................................................... 5-45
Table 5.4 Comparison of results for Example Problem 4 ....................................................................... 5-54
Table 5.5 Comparison of results for Example Problem 5 ...................................................................... 5-62
Table 5.6 Numerical computation of load-transfer factors for Example Problem 7 ............................. 5-78
Table 5.7 Summary of factored loads for Example Problem 9. ............................................................. 5-93
Table 5.8 Summary of subsurface profile for Example Problem 9......................................................... 5-93
Table 5.9 Calculations for Axial Compressive Resistance and Strength I Limit State for Example Problem
9. .................................................................................................................................. 5-95
Table 5.10 Comparison of results for Example Problem 9 ..................................................................... 5-96

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 1. Introduction
CHAPTER 1 – Introduction – 1-2

1.1 General Description


It is beyond the scope of this document to discuss methods of construction, but it is certainly appropriate
to emphasize the importance and influence of these methods. While past failures of drilled shafts to
perform properly under axial loading have been relatively rare, the difficulties that have been reported,
almost without exception, have been related to errors in construction. Therefore, the user of the SHAFT
software is urged to give careful attention to the preparation of construction specifications and to the
performance of field inspection by qualified personnel to ensure that good construction is achieved.
At the present time it is well established that drilled shafts can carry a substantial portion of their load in
skin friction or side resistance. Much of the data from field tests of instrumented drilled shafts show that
the initial loads are sustained almost completely by skin friction. Usually, at a relatively small downward
movement, the full resistance in skin friction is mobilized and the remaining load is carried in end
bearing. At the ultimate load, a sizeable portion may be carried in end bearing but at a significant amount
of downward movement of the drilled shaft. In some instances, there is some reduction in the load carried
in side resistance as the downward movement is continued, due probably to the reduction in shear
strength of the soil along the sides of the shaft. Thus, the designer must take into account the amount of
downward movement and the resulting influence on load transfer when both end bearing and skin friction
are being counted on.
As noted above, tests of instrumented drilled shafts have allowed the load that was transferred to the soil
in skin friction (side resistance) to be measured and correlations have been developed between the skin
friction and soil properties. The scatter in the correlation is relatively small where excellent methods of
construction were employed. However, there are several reasons to use caution in making designs that
depend strongly on skin friction: the number of instrumented tests is relatively small, there are some types
of soil where tests have not been performed, and the load transfer in skin friction is influenced strongly by
construction procedures. Therefore, designs that make use of skin friction must be made with care or
field load tests must be made to prove the design or to obtain revised design parameters.
SHAFT is a special-purpose program based on rational procedures for analyzing a drilled shaft under
axial loading. The program computes settlement of the top and base of the shaft as a function of axial
loading, along with the distribution of axial load along the length of the shaft.

1.2 History of Development


1.2.1 SHAFT1 (1987)
With the advent of wide-spread availability of personal computers, the founder of ENSOFT, Inc., had a
vision to improve the engineering capability for analysis and design of deep foundations by providing
useful and practical software tools. The development of SHAFT1 was completed under the direction of
Dr. Lymon C. Reese and was first commercially distributed in 1987. While based on an earlier
mainframe program, SHAFT1 was developed to use an interactive input method in DOS.

1.2.2 SHAFT, Version 2 (1989)


Version 2 of SHAFT was released in 1989. This version incorporated the improved methods of analysis
developed by Reese and O’Neill (1988). In addition, a new menu-based DOS interface was introduced.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 1 – Introduction – 1-3

1.2.3 SHAFT 3.0 for Windows (1995)


The success of Windows 3.1 from Microsoft, Inc., as the dominant platform for personal computers
pushed software development to adopt a standard, graphical-user interface. This version of SHAFT
utilized Windows-based pre-and post-processors, while retaining the original computation engine from
Version 2.

1.2.4 SHAFT 4.0 for Windows (1998)


SHAFT 4.0 was a complete recoding of both the pre-and post-processing programs running under
Windows 95/NT and the computation engine. The graphical-user interface was coded to provide a more
intuitive process for data input and to enhance the graphical capabilities.
In addition, in the technical side, Version 4 includes new capabilities to analyze drilled shafts in
intermediate geomaterials, such as gravel and soft rock. Version 4 was capable of automatically com-
puting capacities for shaft subjected to uplift forces.

1.2.5 SHAFT 5.0 for Windows (2001)


This version of SHAFT has been improved over the previous version in that the computational methods
have been updated to conform to the recommendations by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA,
1999). In addition, the graphical output features have been updated to allow the user to plot both the
ultimate and service load cases for the shaft. SHAFT 5.0 also included an updated help file that contained
information on all areas of the program where the user is asked to input information, as well as
information on program output.

1.2.6 SHAFT 6.0 for Windows (2007)


SHAFT Version 6.0 added new soil criteria for computing the axial capacity of drilled shafts in strata of
gravelly sand and gravel based on the studies by Rollins et al (2005). Another new feature in Version 6.0
is to allow the user to include both side friction and tip resistance for drilled shafts in strong rock (for
comparative purposes). The load-versus-settlement curve at the top of drilled shafts in soils had become
important for structural engineers in specifying the stiffness of the foundations. The new version of
SHAFT allowed users to compare the upper-bound, lower-bound, and trend (averaged) curves together
for engineering assessment. The user may specify the increment length, such as 1 ft, 2 ft, 1 m, or 2 m, for
printing the output. SHAFT Version 6.0 also generates t-z curves for each soil layer and saved the data in
an external file. The graphics allow the user to present the soil profile along the predicted pile capacity as
a function of depth.

1.2.7 SHAFT 2012 (v7)


The SHAFT program used the year number in the version sequence starting in 2012. The major
improvement in v2012 was to provide options for specifying the reduction factors on side friction and tip
resistance for each soil/rock layer if the user selects the LRFD method for design. The option for the
conventional Allowable Stress Design (ASD) method through specifying factors of safety is still available
in SHAFT 2012. The program allows the user to change the line width and font sizes in the generated
plots. In addition, the v2012 release introduced compatibility to Windows 8. The program text book was
updated and released in separate User’s and Technical Manuals, both improved plus released
electronically in protected PDF format.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 1 – Introduction – 1-4

1.2.8 SHAFT 2017 (v8)


A number of major improvements were implemented in SHAFT v2017 (equivalent to SHAFT v8 when
using the old release numbering).

1.2.8.1 Computational Changes


1. New option to generate curves of load settlement with pile penetration.
2. New option to generate design curves (capacity vs penetration/diameter) for specified
settlements.
3. New option to estimate side friction using Kulhawy and Chen Method for Sand.
4. Expanded computations of side resistances for sand based on SPT blow counts (when
provided).

1.2.8.2 Interface Changes


5. Added a new option to display elevations instead of depth for vertical axes in all applicable
plots.
6. This release also includes a change in the data format for the input data files (now using the
extension “sf8d” for the new input-data files). An input-data converter is introduced to read
older data files and make them compatible to the new format.
7. Updated interface and speed buttons.
8. New prints of t-z curves and Q-w curves as text in file extension “sf8z”. Depending on the
model type, the new t-z curves may correspond to maximum shaft length, initial shaft diameter
and for averaged values. Depending on the model type, the new Q-w curves may correspond to
maximum shaft length, various shaft diameter and for averaged values.
9. Added a new 3D view window where users can choose to see the soil layers, depths and load
transfers with depth for the modeled shaft.

1.2.8.3 File Handling Changes


10. The File > Open dialog box has been updated with more user-friendly features for navigation.
11. Any of the output graphics from the new SHAFT program can be exported to a pre-formatted
spreadsheet with multiple descriptive tabs.
12. t-z and Q-w curves outputted by the program or at depths required by the user can now be
exported to text or pre-formatted spreadsheet. Depending on the model type, the new t-z curves
may correspond to maximum shaft length, initial shaft diameter and for averaged values.
Depending on the model type, the new Q-w curves may correspond to maximum shaft length,
various shaft diameter and for averaged values.

1.3 Organization of SHAFT Manuals


The documentation provided with the computer program SHAFT consists of two volumes. The User’s
Manual contains full documentation about the operation of the program on personal computers. The
User’s Manual covers the areas of installation, preparation of input data, program execution, view of
computational results, and example applications. The distribution of the User’s Manual is made via
standard & unprotected Adobe© PDF file format.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 1 – Introduction – 1-5

The Technical Manual provides information about the theories of load-transfer and settlement of drilled
shafts in different types of soil/rock strata. The Technical Manual includes other helpful references
related to concepts utilized in program SHAFT. ENSOFT holds a copyright of the Technical Manual so
it is distributed in protected form that can only be opened by licensed users of the SHAFT program.
Both Manuals are installed with the SHAFT program and accessible via any one of the following three
methods: i) from the Windows Start Menu, ii) from the Ensoft tile in Windows 10, 8 and 8.1, or iii) from
the Help menu within the SHAFT program.

1.4 Typographical Conventions


To orient the user to different program features, certain terms are set in typefaces that distinguish them
from the body text. The following formatting conventions are used throughout the manuals:
 Commands that are typed directly on the keyboard: “Enter” ; “F1” ; “Esc”
 Commands with keys simultaneously pressed in the keyboard: “Alt+F” ; “Ctr+O”
 Menu items and other text displayed on the screen are in sans serif:
From the File menu choose Open
 File names and names of directories and folder and icon names are in italics:
Open the example file example1.sf8d
 Internet and electronic mail addresses are underlined:
Send email to support@ensoftinc.com

1.5 Contents of the SHAFT Package


The standard package sent with SHAFT consists of the following items:
 One USB Key (sometimes known as hardware key or dongle),
 One USB Memory Stick (this contains installation routines for the most recent release of
SHAFT, as well as other Ensoft programs, at the time of shipment)
The user-selected installation directory (default directory is Program Files\Ensoft\Shaft2017) contains the
main Windows-program module (winsh2017.exe), the program engine for direct computations
(Shaft2017_DLL.dll), the Help file (Shaft_2017.chm), and other support files. The User’s and Technical
Manuals are also included in the installation directory. Several examples of input files (all files with
extension *.sf8d) are installed in a separate Ensoft/Shaft2017-Examples subdirectory in the root Windows
drive (usually c:\).

1.6 Hardware Requirements


To use SHAFT, the user needs the following minimum hardware configuration:
 Any personal computer with an Intel® Pentium® or newer processor.
 A hard disk with at least 50 MB of free space.
 Microsoft Windows® 2000, XP, VISTA, Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 8.1 or Win 10. A
newer release of the Microsoft Windows® operating system may need a more recent update of
the SHAFT software.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 1 – Introduction – 1-6

 Minimum of 640 KB of free RAM memory.


 A mouse or similar pointing device.
 Optional: Any windows-compatible printer.

1.7 Technical Support


Although computer program SHAFT was designed to be distinguished by its ease of use and by the
accompanying User’s and Technical Manuals, some users may still have questions. The technical staff at
ENSOFT strongly supports all registered users with questions related to the installation or use of SHAFT,
according to the stipulations presented below. For new users, the software is provided with free
maintenance service for the first year (included in purchase price). After the first year the user is
encouraged to purchase/renew the services for yearly maintenance. The yearly maintenance services
include free download of the latest version and free technical support for installation and usage issues as
described below.

1.7.1 Preferred Methods of Software Support


Software support is given, in order of preference, by the following methods:
 Electronic mail to: support@ensoftinc.com
 Fax to: (512) 244-6067
 Telephone call to: (512) 244-6464, extension 2
Users are strongly encouraged to utilize electronic means of support via email. In all technical support
requests via email, please include the following information:
 full software version/release/update (obtained from the Help > About dialog),
 a description of the user’s problem or concern,
 attach a copy of the input-data file that is associated with the issue/concern (files with
name/extension of the type filename.sf8d), and
 name and telephone number of the contact person and of the licensed user (or name and office
location of the licensed company site and/or serial number of the USB Key).
Although immediate answers are offered on most technical support requests, please allow up to two
business days for a resolution in case of difficulties or schedule conflicts.
Technical help by means of direct calls to our local telephone number, (512) 244-6464, is available, but is
limited to the business hours of 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (US central time zone, UTC −6:00). The current policy of
Ensoft is that all telephone calls for software support will be answered free of charge if the user has a
valid maintenance contract.

1.7.2 Upgrade Verification and Internet Site


Starting from SHAFT v2012 the software provides options for the user to check the most recent
maintenance release through an internet connection by selecting Help > Check for Updates from within
the software. This command starts the default internet browser and will display the user’s maintenance
expiration date, the user’s software release number and the most recent release number that is available
for downloading.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 1 – Introduction – 1-7

If the user’s version is not the latest version and the maintenance has not expired, the user can download
the latest version from our web server directly (www.ensoftinc.com). Users may also consult our internet
site for additional information on software updates, demos, and new applications; technical news; and
company information.

1.7.3 Renewal of Program Maintenance


The cost to renew program maintenance will depend on the length of time for which the program
maintenance has been expired. There are small price increases with time after expiration. The pricing
policy for renewing a program maintenance that has not expired can be found on the Ensoft website at
http://www.ensoftinc.com

1.7.4 Changes of Support Policy


The software support policy and associated expenses are subject to change at ENSOFT’s discretion and
without specific mailed notices to the users. However, any change of rules will be verbally provided
during telephone calls for software support.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2. Installation and Getting
Started
CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-2

2.1 Installation Procedures


Program SHAFT is distributed with an associated USB Key (hardware key or dongle). The USB Key
consists of a device that is attached to an empty USB port (or USB hub) of the computer in use (or in the
designated software server in the case of local network licenses). This method of software protection has
been found to provide compatibility with existing operating systems, better stability than other
alternatives, and allows users to obtain software updates or replacements via downloads from the internet.
Users with standard single-user licenses can check the following link to a PDF with Installation Notes:
https://www.ensoftinc.com/doc/Ensoft_Single-User_License_Installation_Booklet.pdf
Users with local network licenses can check the following link to a PDF with Network Installation Notes:
https://www.ensoftinc.com/doc/Ensoft_Network_License_Installation_Booklet.pdf

2.1.1 Installation of Single-User Version


This version of SHAFT has been tested to be compatible with the following versions of the Microsoft
Windows® operating systems: 2000, XP, Vista, Windows 7, 8, 8.1 and Win 10.
The following guidelines are recommended to be followed during the installation process of SHAFT for
single-user licenses.
1. Plug the supplied USB Key (hardware key or dongle – black colored) into one of the available USB
ports in your computer (or on USB hub). The USB Key is plug-and-play compatible so the
operating system will recognize the USB Key automatically and a small solid green light should be
noticeable at the end of the USB Key (a flickering green light or no light indicate problems with the
standard windows driver or with the USB Key).
2. If the user installs from a distribution USB Memory Stick, please plug the device into an available
USB port in your computer and then click on the Windows Start Menu button and select Run. On
the command line, type d:\setup.exe or e:\setup.exe, where d: or e: represents the drive that contains
the USB Memory Stick. Click OK to execute the command and start the main installation program
for ENSOFT’s software. A screen similar to the one in Figure 2.1 should appear.)
(If the user installs from a distribution CD-ROM and the main installation program does not start
automatically upon insertion of the CD then click on the Windows Start Menu button and select
Run. On the command line, type d:\setup.exe or e:\setup.exe, where d: or e: represents the drive
that contains the distribution CD. Click OK to execute the command and start the main installation
program for ENSOFT’s software. A screen similar to the one in Figure 2.1 should appear.)
(If the user installs from a downloaded file then please run the downloaded file (double click) and
follow instructions below.)
3. Click anywhere on the SHAFT icon and then click on the Install Standard button to start the
installation of SHAFT.
4. The user should read the license agreement shown in Figure 2.2. Please click Yes if you agree and
would like to proceed.
5. Select Single-User License in Figure 2.3 then click Next. For network installations please contact
Ensoft support (support@ensoftinc.com).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-3

6. The user will be provided with an option to select a drive and directory for the installation of SHAFT
(see Figure 2.4); the default is c:\Program Files (x86)\Ensoft\Shaft2017. If the desired directory
does not exist, the installation program will automatically create a new directory in the chosen hard
drive.
Most distribution files will be copied to the installation directory (either the default or the one
selected by the user). However, certain files are copied to system directories in Windows and some
Windows services are started during installation (mainly for Network installations). The name of the
system files, their exact locations, and the type of services that are started may change in time and
for different versions of the Microsoft Windows® operating system.
Example files are copied to the following subdirectory under the root Windows drive (unless
selected differently by the user during installation):
(Root Drive)\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples
7. During the installation the user will be asked to set the file extension association for opening Shaft
v2017 input data files (see Figure 2.5). If the user agrees (leaves the default check mark) then
double clicking (or running) any input data file with extensions of the type filename.sf8d will start
the installed Shaft v2017 software.
8. The user will be prompted to confirm the shortcut directory name that will be created in the
Windows Start Menu (See Figure 2.6). The default is Start Menu/Programs/Ensoft/Shaft2017.
Windows 10 and 8 will automatically create an Ensoft tile with the same shortcuts.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-4

Figure 2.1 Main installation screen for ENSOFT software (may change with time)

After the installation is finished, it is usually not necessary to reboot Windows for the program to run.
The user may run the program by selecting Shaft v2017 from the standard links installed in the
Microsoft Windows® Start Menu: Start Menu > All Programs > Ensoft > Shaft2017

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-5

Figure 2.2 Installation screen with License Agreement (may change with time)

Figure 2.3 Selection of Single-User License (may change with time)

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-6

Figure 2.4 Default Installation Directory for Program Files (may change with time)

Figure 2.5 File Extension Association for Shaft Data Files (may change with time)

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-7

Figure 2.6 Default Shortcut Folder in Windows Start Menu (may change with time)

2.1.2 Introduction of Network Version


Special network licenses with USB Net Key (network key) are available for users that desire to operate
SHAFT on a Windows network. The network version is limited to users within a specified range of IP
addresses at each licensed physical site. Discounted rates apply for purchases of multiple network seats
for the same site.
Network versions of SHAFT have special subroutines written for installations in “software servers” and
for installations of “individual clients”. The “software server” is known as the computer that will be
carrying the network key provided by ENSOFT, INC. The software server is not necessarily the same as
the existing network server. Any computer in the existing Windows network may be designated software
server for SHAFT as long as the network key is attached to an available USB port (or through an USB
hub) and the “server” version of the software is installed on its hard drive. Software “clients” may be all
other computers of the network that have the program installed as client. Client computers do not need
any hardware key attached to their local system. The program installed in “client computers” will be
allowed to run as long as the computer designated as “software server” is accessible on the network with
the proper operating system and with its network key secured in place.
Users of the network version of SHAFT are allowed to have the software installed in as many computers
as desired within their specified IP ranges of their local Windows network. However, only a number of
users equal to the total number of purchased licenses will be able to operate the program at the same time.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-8

2.1.2.1 Installation of Network Version


Installers of network licenses should refer to a separate booklet with installation instructions for the
Network version of this product. The document can be downloaded from the Ensoft web site
(http://www.ensoftinc.com/updates/Ensoft Network Installation Notes.pdf) or can be requested via email
to support@ensoftinc.com

2.1.2.2 Silent Installations on Client Computers


For installation of network licenses on local client computers there is an option for command-based
installations that are completely silent (performed without other user input). Instructions for silent
installations on client computers can be downloaded from the Ensoft web site using the following link:
http://www.ensoftinc.com/updates/Silent Install on Client Computers.pdf
Alternatively, the document can be requested via email to support@ensoftinc.com

2.1.3 Backup of Original Software


The distributed software may be copied for backup purposes. The program may be installed in several
computers at the same time. However, unless network licenses are purchased, the program will only
operate in computers that carry the appropriate hardware key.

2.1.4 Software Updates on the Internet


Occasionally, ENSOFT will produce software improvements and/or fixes and place the latest software
programs on ENSOFT’s internet site. Users can check for available updates by selecting Help > Check
for Updates from the SHAFT menu. Software users may freely download the latest program update
from the PRODUCTS > Downloads link in the following site: http://www.ensoftinc.com

2.2 Getting Started


A general diagram showing the menu choices and operational flow chart of program SHAFT is presented
in Figure 2.7. The following paragraphs provide a short description of the operational features of SHAFT
and should quickly enable the user to get started with the program.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-9

Figure 2.7 Sample organization and operational flow chart for SHAFT

2.2.1 Starting the Program


The program is started by double clicking the left mouse button anywhere in the SHAFT icon. A new
blank window will appear on the screen, with the following top-menu choices: File, Data, Computation,
Graphics, Window, and Help.
As a standard Windows feature, pressing the “Alt” key displays the menu operations with underlined
letters. Pressing the underlined letter after pressing “Alt” is the same as clicking the operation. For

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-10

example, to open a New File, the user could press “Alt+F” followed by “N”, or “Ctrl+N”, or click File
then New. Additionally, holding the mouse cursor over an icon displays the icon function.

2.2.2 File Management


The File menu option contains five submenus, as shown in Figure 2.8; they are:
 New to create a new data file.
 Open… to open an existing data file.
 Save to save input data under the current file name.
 Save As… to save input data under a different file name.
 Exit to exit program SHAFT.
A history list of up to the last ten recently-opened data files is located between the Save As and the Exit
options. This list varies on each user’s computer and allows for easy access to recent data files.

Figure 2.8 Options contained in the File menu

Several additional files are created in every new SHAFT run. A general description of these files is
presented in Table 2.1. Every run of SHAFT thus generates four text files in the same drive and directory
where the input-data file was saved or opened. Any of these files may be opened with standard text
editors or word-processing programs.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-11

File Name Usage File Example


Extension Description Format Files
example1.sf8d
*.sf8d Input-data file Text file
example2.sf8d
example1.sf8o
*.sf8o Output-data file Text file
example2.sf8o
example1. sf8p
*.sf8p Plot-data file Text file
example2. sf8p
example1. sf8r
*.sf8r Processor-data file Text file
example2. sf8r
Table 2.1 Files created in SHAFT runs

2.2.3 Data Input of Application Problem


The Data menu contains several choices of submenus, as shown in Figure 2.9. The choices are listed
below, along with a general description of their use.
Title .................. to enter a single line of text with a general description for the project.
Units ................ this option allows the user to select either English Units (using pounds, feet, and inches)
or SI Units (using kiloNewtons and meters) or any other consistent set of units of force
and length. English units are enabled, as a default, for all new data files. The user may
change the system of units as many times as desired and values that were previously
inputted will be automatically converted by the program.
Design Method (ASD or LRFD) ......users may select the Allowable Stress Design (ASD) or the Load
and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) for the model.
Drilled Shaft Properties …to describe dimensions, and material properties of the drilled shaft.
Soil Layer Data .............. this is used to define the type and depth of each soil/rock layer and to enter the
associated mechanical properties for each soil/rock layer.
Factor of Safety (Allowable Stress Design)….here the user enters the factor of safety that will be used
during computations with ASD method (menu is disabled for LRFD method).
Computation Methods .. this submenu is used to select the analysis for a specific shaft length or for a
specific design load.
Water Table .... this is used to specify the depth of the water table. The depth of water table is referenced
from the ground surface or finished grade.
Evaluate Multiple Shaft Lengths .....(optional entry) users can choose to evaluate multiple shaft
penetrations in one single model to see a graphical representation of pile capacities for
various lengths (this menu is disabled if the user selects ASD/LRFD Design Charts).
ASD/LRFD Design Charts ...............(optional entry) these are design aids for either ASD or LRFD
methods, containing pile capacity charts for user-specified pile-head settlements for
various pile diameters and/or pile penetrations (this menu is disabled if the user selects
Evaluate Multiple Shaft Lengths).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-12

Control Options… .......... (optional entry) includes various optional control parameters that users may
choose for certain analyses. Available options in this menu include choosing elevation
instead of depth measurements, printing of t-z curves at specified depths, analytical
option for end bearing in sands and text editor.

Figure 2.9 Options contained in the Data menu

2.2.4 Computation Options


The Computation menu is provided to run the analytical computations after all data are entered and
saved. After the computation is executed successfully this menu also provides options for the reviews of
plain-text input data, notes produced during computation, and output data. It also provides selections for
the graphical observation of the modeled pile and soil layers. Submenu choices, shown in Figure 2.10,
are briefly described below.
Run Analysis .. ............... this is chosen to run the analytical computations. This option should be
selected after all data have been entered and saved.
Edit Input Text ............... this is to use the Text Editor (selected under Data > Control Options) to
observe and/or edit the analytical input data in plain-text format.
Edit Processor-Run Notes ...............in this selection the chosen Text Editor (selected under Data >
Control Options) is used to observe, format, and/or print the notes provided during
processing. This selection only becomes available after a computational run. The user is
encouraged to read the processor-run notes if the model is not running successfully. The
processor-run notes may provide the user with some additional information about
possible causes of the problem.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-13

Edit Output Text............. the chosen Text Editor (selected under Data > Control Options) is used here
to observe, format, and/or print the analytical-output data. This selection only becomes
available after a successful run has been made. Certain output files may be too large for
the Microsoft Notepad editor, so other text editors would have to be used (Microsoft
Word Pad should be able to open most text files).
View Shaft Elevation ..... here users can see a simple graphical representation of the elevation of the
modeled shaft and the location of the specified soil layers.
3D View........... this selection allows the modeler to see a more descriptive graphical representation of the
shaft elevation, soil layers, depths and also charts of load transfers (available only after a
successful run). When in 3D View users have access to the Show 3D View menu that
allows for the various display options.

Figure 2.10 Options contained in the Computation menu

2.2.5 Graphics
The Graphics menu is used to observe plots of output data after a successful program run. Options for
the observation of output curves under this menu are only enabled after a successful run has been made.
Even after performing successful runs, some selections may be disabled since the output data depends on
specifications provided in the input file of each program run. Submenu choices, shown in Figure 2.11,
are briefly described below.
Ultimate Skin Friction vs. Depth ......provides a plot of ultimate skin friction on the modeled shaft
versus depth.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-14

Ultimate Tip Resistance vs. Depth…. provides a plot of ultimate end bearing on the modeled shaft
versus depth.
Ultimate Total Capacity vs. Depth…. provides a plot of the ultimate total capacity (skin friction + tip
resistance) of the modeled shaft versus depth.
Combined Plots vs. Depth…. provides a plot of ultimate skin friction, ultimate tip resistance, and the
ultimate total capacity versus depth all combined on the same plot. If a model uses
multiple shaft lengths the combined plot is only provided for the initial length. If a model
uses multiple shaft diameters the combined plot is only provided for the initial diameter.
ASD/LRFD Skin Friction vs. Depth…. provides a plot of skin friction on the modeled shaft versus
depth with the specified factor of safety (ASD) or the specified resistance factors
(LRFD).
ASD/LRFD Tip Resistance vs. Depth…. provides a plot of top resistance of the modeled shaft versus
depth with the specified factor of safety (ASD) or the specified resistance factors
(LRFD).
ASD/LRFD Total Capacity vs. Depth…. provides a plot of the total capacity (skin friction + tip
resistance) of the modeled shaft versus depth with the specified factor of safety (ASD) or
the specified resistance factors (LRFD).
Combined Plots vs. Depth…. provides a plot of skin friction, tip resistance, and the total capacity
versus depth on the same plot all with the specified factor of safety (ASD) or the
specified resistance factors (LRFD). If a model uses multiple shaft lengths the combined
plot is only provided for the initial length. If a model uses multiple shaft diameters the
combined plot is only provided for the initial diameter.
Axial Load vs. Settlement (Averaged)…. provides a plot of the axial loads versus settlement at the
shaft head based on the averaged trend.
Axial Load vs. Settlement (Upper Bound)… provides a plot of the axial loads versus settlement at the
shaft head based on the upper-bound data.
Axial Load vs. Settlement (Lower Bound)…. provides a plot of the axial loads versus settlement at the
shaft head based on the lower-bound data.
Combined Plots of Load vs. Settlement…. provides a plot of the axial loads versus settlement curves
at the shaft head based on the upper-bound, lower-bound, and averaged trend data. If a
model uses multiple shaft lengths the combined plot is only provided for the initial
length. If a model uses multiple shaft diameters the combined plot is only provided for
the initial diameter.
t-z Curves…. provides a plot of the load-transfer curves in side resistance that are printed for
approximately four depths on each soil layer that was defined in the model. The plotted
t-z curves correspond to the averaged trend and also for the initial shaft diameter (if the
model uses multiple shaft diameters).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-15

Q-w Curves…. provides a plot of the load-transfer curves in end bearing that are printed for each shaft
diameter (if the model uses multiple shaft diameters). The plotted Q-w curves correspond
to the averaged trend.
Additional t-z Curves…. optional plot of the load-transfer curves in side resistance that are printed for
user-defined depths (in Data > Control Options > Print Additional t-z Curves). The
plotted t-z curves correspond to the averaged trend and also for the initial shaft diameter
(if the model uses multiple shaft diameters).
Design Chart (xx movement)…. optional plots of design charts for each user-defined (xx) movements
(defined under Data > ASD/LRFD Design Charts).
Exports Plots to Excel…. allows the user to export some (or all) of the above plots to an excel file.
Each plot will be exported to two sheets, one contains the data and the second the chart.

Figure 2.11 Options contained in the Graphics menu

2.2.6 Arrangement of Windows


The Window menu provides two standard functions for organizing open- screen windows and/or
minimized screen-window icons. Submenu options, shown in Figure 2.12, are briefly described below.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-16

Cascade .......... this option organizes all open-windowed menus so that all become visible with their tops
cascading from the top left portion of the screen.
Arrange Icons. ............... this option organizes the icons of all minimized windowed menus so that all
become visible and aligned at the bottom portion of the screen.
Other entries under the Windows menu are names of any open windows or plot file, that the user may
select to navigate between open windows.

Figure 2.12 Options contained in the Window menu

2.2.7 Help Files


The Help menu provides an online help reference on topics such as: using the program, entering
data, information about variables used in the program and methods of analyses. Submenu options, shown
in Figure 2.13, are briefly described below. The menu may be accessed at any time while in SHAFT.
Contents ......... the main reference files for help are accessed through this submenu option. The Help
files usually do not provide as much information as the electronic manuals that are also
accessible from the Help menu.
User’s Manual ............... this selection calls the installed version of Adobe Acrobat or Acrobat Reader to
open the User’s Manual. This document is formatted as an Adobe PDF file.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 2 – Installation and Getting Started – 2-17

Technical Manual .......... this selection calls the viewer of the Technical Manual. This is a protected file
(for a copyright document) that can only be opened with this viewer and by user’s that
are running the program in full mode.
About.. ............. this screen describes the program version, date, maintenance expiration date, USB serial
number and methods for accessing technical support.
Check for Updates ........ starts the default Internet browser and sends the user to a page that describes
information about the user’s license (release and maintenance expiration date) as well as
the latest release that is available for downloading at the Ensoft site. Users may only run
in full mode maintenance updates that were released before the expiration date of the
user’s license.

Figure 2.13 Options contained in the Help menu

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3. References for Data Input
CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-2

3.1 File Menu


This menu contains selections related to the management of input-data files and to exit the program.
Input-data files created for SHAFT are provided with a standard file-name extension in the form of
*filename*.sf8d (where *filename* represents any Windows-allowable file name). All input data files are
standard text files and may be edited with any text editor or word-processing program.

3.1.1 File > New

Once the program is started, default values are used for certain operating parameters and a blank
input-data file is created. Selecting New under the File menu resets all SHAFT variables to either default
or blank values, as appropriate. This option should be selected when a new data file is desired to be
created from a blank form. This menu option may also be accessed with the Ctrl+N keyboard
combination.

3.1.2 File > Open

This is used to open a file that has been previously prepared and saved to disk. The File > Open
window dialog, shown in Figure 3.1, is used to search for an existing input-data file. By default, the file
is initially searched in the directory where SHAFT was installed. After initial usage the program will
default to the last directory where a data file has been successfully opened. Standard windows-navigation
procedures may be used to locate the name and directory of the desired project file. This menu option
may be accessed with the Ctrl+O keyboard combination.
Every analytical run of SHAFT produces several additional files (previously described in Table 2.1 of this
manual). The name of the input-data file indicates the names of all related files produced by a successful
program run (output, graphics, and processor text files). All the additional program files will be created
in the same directory as the input file. Input-data files that are partially completed may be saved and later
opened for completion, run, and observation of results.
Opening partially-completed SHAFT input files or invalid data files may produce an information window
reporting that an “invalid or incomplete” file is being opened. The user should click the OK button and
all partial-input data that was previously prepared should become available.
The program allows users to read input-data files created for the previous SHAFT 2012 or 6.0 versions by
selecting the drop-down arrow at the bottom right corner of the File > Open dialog window (Figure 3.1).
The program will automatically convert the opened SHAFT 2012 or 6.0 input files to the latest version of
SHAFT when the user saves the file.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-3

Figure 3.1 Window screen for the File > Open dialog

3.1.3 File > Save

This selection is used to save input data under the current file name. With this method of storing
data to disk, any input data that was previously saved with the same file name is replaced with the current
parameters. Input-data files should be saved every time before proceeding with runs for analytical
computation. This menu option may also be accessed with the Ctrl+S keyboard combination.

3.1.4 File > Save As


This selection allows the user to save any opened or new input data file under a different file name and/or
different directory. Any input data file saved under an existing file name will replace the contents of the
existing file.

3.1.5 File > Exit


This is selected to exit SHAFT. Any input-data file that was modified and not yet saved to disk will
produce a confirmation window before exiting the program (see Figure 3.2).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-4

Figure 3.2 Message window advising that changes were not saved to disk

3.2 Data Menu


The input of specific parameters for an application is controlled under selections contained within this
menu (shown in Figure 3.3). It is recommended that the user choose each submenu and enter parameters
in a consecutive manner starting from the top of this menu.
Selecting or clicking any of the submenu choices contained in the Data menu produces various types of
windows. As a reminder of standard commands of Microsoft Windows®, open windows may be closed
by all or some of the following methods:
 clicking the OK button (if available),or
 clicking the X-box on the upper-right corner of the window, or
 double-clicking the SHAFT icon on the upper-left corner of the window, or
 clicking once on the SHAFT icon on the upper-left corner of the window and then choosing
Close.
Open windows may optionally be left open on the screen. The selection of other menu options will then
produce new windows on top of those that were left open.
Many sub-windows of the Data menu will show an Add Row, Insert Row and/or Delete Row buttons.
The Add Row button always adds new rows at the end after all existing rows. The Insert Row button
always inserts a new row right after an existing row highlighted by the mouse. Clicking on the Delete
Row button deletes the row where the cursor is located.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-5

Figure 3.3 Options contained in the Data menu

3.2.1 Numeric Data Entries


Cells that require numeric data may accept entries of mathematical expressions in addition to simple
numeric entries. Entering a mathematical expression works similarly to normal numeric data. The user
types the expression that represents the data and presses the Return key to calculate the entered
expression and to display the numeric result in the same cell.
Table 3.1 below shows the list of supported operations and constants. The order of operations follows the
order in the list of Table 3.1. Note that implicit multiplication (i.e. 2(4+6)) is not supported (instead, use
2*(4+6) for the previous example).

OPERATORS
Symbol Description
() Parenthesis (may be nested)
^ Exponentiation
* Multiplication
/ Division
+ Addition
- Subtraction
- Negation (same as subtraction)

CONSTANTS
Symbol Value
PI (or pi) 3.1415927
e (or E) 2.7182818
Table 3.1 Supported mathematical operations and constants

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-6

The two constants that are currently supported are PI and e. Implicit multiplications using constants is
not supported (use 2*e instead of 2e). Negation of the constants PI or e is not allowed. For instance,
instead of entering -PI the user must enter - (PI).
Scientific notation (i.e. 1.65e8 or 1.65e-8) may be used to input very large or very small numbers. After
an expression is calculated, very large or very small numbers will be displayed using scientific notation.

3.2.2 Data > Units


This selection provides the user with a choice of specifying input data in English Units, and S.I. Units
(international units). In general, the following specific units of measurements will be used throughout the
program:
Units Length Force Modulus
English foot (ft) pounds (lbs) psi
International meters (m), kilo Newtons (kN) kPa
The user should always check the unit specification, which is affixed to each variable, for data input. For
instance, psi instead of psf is used for the elastic modulus of materials.
The user may change from one system of units to the other as many times as desired. The program will
automatically convert all the appropriate input that was already specified by the user before the time of
selection of a different system of units. Small conversion errors may appear if multiple changes of units
are performed. The user must always check that input data have been converted appropriately.

3.2.3 Data > Design Method (ASD or LRFD)


This submenu option allows the user to select either the Allowable Stress Design (ASD) method or the
Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) method as shown in Figure 3.4. In the United States, many
engineers use a combination of the ASD method for geotechnical analysis of the foundation and the
LRFD method for analysis of the foundation as a structural member.
The ASD method is also known as the factor of safety method. The ASD method is most often used by
foundation engineers and is usually referenced as the global approach. The engineer will consider all of
the factors at hand, including such things as the quality of the subsurface investigation, the statistical
nature of the loading, and the expected competence of the contractor, and an overall factor of safety is
selected for individual piles and for the group of piles.
The LRFD method originated in structural engineering and is usually termed as the component approach.
The LRFD method was accepted formally in 1994 by the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) as a standard.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-7

Figure 3.4 Window screen for Data Menu > Design Method (ASD or LRFD)

3.2.4 Data > Title

This selection activates the window shown in Figure 3.5, where the user can enter a line of text
containing a general description for the application problem. Any combination of characters may be
entered in the text box in order to describe a particular application. The user input will be restrained
automatically once the maximum length of text is reached. This is done to prevent the user from going
beyond the maximum permissible length of characters allowed for the title line.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-8

Figure 3.5 Window screen for sample Data > Title

3.2.5 Data > Drilled-Shaft Properties

This submenu option allows the user to input pile dimensions and section properties. A general
description for the data needed under each entry of the Data > Drilled-Shaft Properties submenu option
is listed below and shown in Figure 3.6.

Minimum Shaft Diameter (smallest stem diameter to be considered)


This is the minimum (or initial) stem diameter to be considered in the computations. The English unit for
this variable is “ft”, while “meter” is for the SI unit.

Maximum Shaft Diameter (largest stem diameter to be considered)


This is the largest stem diameter to be considered in the computations. The English unit for this variable
is “ft”, while “meter” is for the SI unit.
The program will compute the axial capacity of drilled shafts starting with the minimum stem diameter
and then add 0.5 ft (0.15 m) to the diameter for each consecutive run until the diameter reaches the largest
(maximum) specified. This default increment of diameter can be changed in Data > ASD/LRFD Design
Charts for models that use such analytical option.
If the user only wants to run with the initial diameter, the variable for the largest stem diameter should be
left as zero (or same as the minimum diameter).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-9

In models where there is one or more layers of rock along with defined Minimum and Maximum shaft
diameters the program will use the defined ratio of (rock socket diameter/shaft diameter) for all analyzed
cases of increased shaft diameter (up to the Maximum defined).

Ratio of Base Diameter to Shaft Diameter


To define a belled shaft the user should enter the ratio of the base diameter to the stem diameter. The
program will calculate the dimension of the bell accordingly. For a straight shaft, the value for this
variable should be left as zero.
Belled shafts are not used in cohesionless soils (sand, gravel) or rock.
For belled shafts in uplift, the program computes side resistance of a column with a diameter equal to that
at the base of the bell (Bb).

Angle of Bell with Respect to Vertical


For a belled shaft, the user should enter the angle (in degrees) from the vertical line to the slope of the bell
(always smaller than 90 degrees). The program will calculate the dimension of the bell accordingly. For
a straight shaft, the value for this variable should be left as zero.
Belled shafts are not used in cohesionless soils (sand, gravel) or rock.

Length of Upper Exclusion Zone without Skin Friction


This number (always positive) represents the section length on the top of the shaft that is declared as
noncontributing to side resistance.
This upper exclusion zone is not recommended in cohensionless soils.
The English unit for this variable is “ft” while “meter” is for the SI unit.

Length of Bottom Portion of Shaft without Skin Friction


This number (always positive) represents the section length at the bottom of the shaft that is declared
noncontributing to side resistance. For a belled shaft, this length is taken above the beginning of the bell.
This lower exclusion zone is not recommended in cohensionless soils. For shafts in cohesive soils, this
lower exclusion zone is not recommended for uplift loading.
The English unit for this variable is “ft” while “meter” is for the SI unit.

Modulus of Elasticity of the Drilled Shaft


This number (always positive) represents the modulus of elasticity of the drilled shaft. The user may
enter in this variable the elastic modulus of the composite section or simply use the elastic modulus of the
concrete. The English unit for this variable is “psi” while “kPa” is for the SI unit.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-10

Figure 3.6 Window screen for sample Data - Drilled-Shaft Properties

3.2.6 Data > Soil Layer Data

This submenu allows the user to specify the different types of soil/rock and material properties to
be used for the computations. Illustrations of the Soil Layer Data window for example applications are
shown in Figure 3.7 and Figure 3.8.
A general description for the data needed under each column in the Data > Soil Layer Data submenu
option is listed below.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-11

Figure 3.7 Sample Data > Soil Layer Data dialog box for ASD Method

Figure 3.8 Sample Data > Soil Layer Data dialog box for LRFD Method

Layer
This column includes Edit Layer x buttons where x is a sequential number that is automatically and
sequentially provided to each soil layer. This number is computed by the program as new rows of soil
layers are added. The maximum number of soil layers that may be used in a model is limited to 40.
Clicking on each Edit Layer x button allows the user to specify soil or rock properties that correspond to
the defined soil layer. A sub-window will pop on the screen when each Edit Layer x button is selected.
The program requires different input parameters for each type of soil and rock. Therefore, the data

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-12

column in the sub-window that appears varies with the selection made by the user in the Soil Type drop-
down list. A detailed description of the parameters needed for each soil and rock type is described in
Section 3.2.7.

Soil Type
This column includes drop-down buttons that are used to select the type of each soil layer. There are
currently nine internal types of soils that may be specified for program SHAFT. The user specifies the
desired soil type using a drop-down list with the following choices:
Code Number Internal Soil Type
1 Sand (FHWA)
2 Clay (FHWA)
3 Shale (Aurora and Reese)
4 Strong Rock (FHWA, qu > 1000 psi, either Side Friction or Tip Resist.)
5 Decomposed Rock/Gravel (FHWA)
6 Weak Rock (FHWA)
7 Strong Rock (Side Friction + Tip Resistance)
8 Gravelly Sand (Rollins et al)
9 Gravel (Rollins et al)
For strong rock, FHWA recommends to use either side friction or tip resistance but not both, as described
in the Technical Manual. However, in some cases the user may want to observe the shaft capacity that
includes the side friction and tip resistance together. Such evaluation may be done by selecting Soil Type
7. The user must consider good engineering judgment when selecting such option.

Depth at Bottom of Each Layer


Values for the bottom of each soil layer are entered with respect to an origin of coordinates set at the
ground surface. As a minimum, the bottom of the last soil layer must be two pile diameters deeper than
the depth of the modeled shaft.

Max. Side Friction


In this entry the user may specify the maximum value of skin-friction transfer that is permissible for a
given stratum. If the user enters a value for the maximum-permissible skin friction, the program will
compare its internally-computed value with the maximum provided and the program will use the smaller
of these two for the final computation. If the user does not want to add any restriction on the computed
value, simply enter 0 to suppress this option and always use the internally-computed values. A very small
value (eg. 0.001 psf) may be entered if the user wants to ignore any load transfer in side friction for the
selected layer.

Max. End Bearing


In this entry the user may specify the maximum value of transfer in end bearing that is permissible for a
given stratum. If the user enters a value for the maximum-permissible end bearing, the program will
compare the internally-computed value with the maximum provided and the program will use the smaller
of these two for the final computation. If the user does not want to add any restriction on the computed
value, simply enter 0 to suppress this option and always use the internally-computed values. A very small

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-13

value (eg. 0.001 psf) may be entered if the user wants to ignore any load transfer in end bearing for the
selected layer.

LRFD Resistance Factor (Side Friction)


If the user selects the LRFD design method, a data column for entering the LRFD resistance factor on
side friction is added onto the input table as shown in Figure 3.8. In this entry the user may specify the
resistance factor on skin-friction transfer that is permissible for a given stratum. Enter 1.0 for no
reductions on the computed values of side friction.

LRFD Resistance Factor (End Bearing)


If the user selects the LRFD design method, a data column for entering the LRFD resistance factor on tip
resistance is added onto the input table as shown in Figure 3.8. In this entry the user may specify the
resistance factor on the tip resistance that is permissible for a given stratum. Enter 1.0 for no reductions
on the computed values of end bearing.

3.2.7 Data > Soil Layer Data > Edit Layer x


As mentioned earlier, the Edit Layer x button allows the user to define soil and/or rock properties for the
selected strata. A sub-window appears on the screen when the Edit Layer x button is clicked. The
program requires different input parameters for each type of soil and rock. Therefore, the data column in
the sub-window that appears varies with the selection that was previously made by the user in the Soil
Type drop-down list.
In general, each sub-window that comes up under the Edit Layer x button consists of entry fields for the
top of the layer and the bottom of the layer. The user may enter different parameters for the top and the
bottom of each layer. The program will interpolate linearly the data for any point between those two
depths. The following sections will provide general description on data needed for each soil type.

3.2.7.1 Soil Data for Sand Layers


A sample window for this soil option is shown in Figure 3.9. The required properties for sand layers are
explained below.

Side Friction Procedure


Three computational methods are offered for load transfers in side resistance on cohesionless soils. The
selection of a method changes the required input below to display only information that is applicable to
the selected method.
Ko Method .... this is also known as “the fundamental method,” and was presented by Kulhawy (1991),
Mayne and Harris (1993), Chen and Kulhawy (2002), Kulhawy and Chen (2007), and
evaluates separately the values of K and δ which are then combined to determine β.
Beta Method .. this is also known as the “depth-dependent β method” and this is the basis of the
equations given in the first version of the FHWA Drilled Shaft Manual (O’Neill and
Reese, 1999) as well as the current AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications
(2007). This method requires the input of the Beta Value which is described further
below.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-14

Chen and Kulhawy (2002) Method This is basically the Ko Method described earlier but with the
ability to define the parameter m (the exponent for computation of preconsolidation
stress). See more information about this method further below while describing the
Preconsolidation Stress Exponent (m) or in the Technical Manual.

Figure 3.9 Sample soil data for sand layers

Total Unit Weight


This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight (submerged weight is calculated based on a
separate entry for depth of water table). Values for the top and bottom of the sand layer are entered in
standard units of force per unit volume (either lb/ft3 or kN/m3). The SHAFT program will interpolate
linearly between the values provided for the top and the bottom of each layer.

Ko (Coefficient of Lateral Earth Pressure)


This is only enabled in models where the user selects Ko Method for Side Friction Procedure as
defined at the beginning of this section.
This input reflects values of the lateral earth pressure coefficient for the top and bottom of the sand layer.
Values for Ko depend on the relative density of the sand and the process by which the sand deposits were
formed. If the sand deposits did not receive any artificial compaction, values of Ko range from about

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-15

0.40 for loose to 0.50 for dense sand. Artificial compaction or tamping may increase Ko values to 0.80.
The SHAFT program will interpolate linearly between the values provided for the top and the bottom of
each layer.

Beta Value
This is only enabled in models where the user selects Beta Method for Side Friction Procedure as
defined at the beginning of this section.
The Beta Value is an empirical parameter that takes into account the lateral earth pressure coefficient
and the effective-friction angle at the interface between the concrete of the shaft and the soil. The
parameter thus takes into account the fact that the stress at the interface due to the fluid pressure of the
concrete may be greater than that from the soil itself. Many factors that modify the lateral stress at the
soil-concrete interface can be taken into account with the Beta value. For instance, other factors may
include the use of drilling fluid, use of casing or a dry excavation during the construction process, and the
type of slump used in the concrete.
If the input for Beta is left as zero, the computer program automatically generates Beta values at each
foot of penetration in the sand layer (or at each 0.3 meters if SI units are used). Internally, the SHAFT
program uses the method specified in the FHWA Drilled Shaft Manual (O’Neill and Reese, 1999) as well
as the current AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (2007)
This method (Reese and O’Neill, 1988) is covered in the Technical Manual of this product. The method
uses a formula that assumes a drilled shaft construction with a concrete slump of 6 in. or higher. The
method also assumes that drilling slurry, if employed, should be such that it would not cause a weak layer
of bentonite to develop at the wall of the excavation. The following formula is used internally to compute
Beta values:

For N > 15... = 1.5 - 0.135 z0.5

For N < 15... = (N/15) (1.5 - 0.135 z0.5)

Where
 = empirical value, limited to 1.2 >  > 0.25
z = depth belowground surface, in units of ft.
N = uncorrected blow counts from the SPT test.
Optionally the user may input his own value of Beta for the top and bottom of the layer. The SHAFT
program will interpolate linearly between the values provided for the top and the bottom of each layer.

Preconsolidation Stress Exponent (m)


This is only enabled in models where the user selects Chen and Kulhawy Method for Side Friction
Procedure as defined at the beginning of this section. This is basically the Ko Method described earlier
but with the ability to define the parameter m (the exponent for computation of preconsolidation stress) in
the following equation:

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-16

where
σ'p = effective vertical preconsolidation stress. Ko is limited to an upper bound value equal to
the Rankine coefficient of passive earth pressure, Kp. A variety of methods have been
proposed for evaluation of either Ko or σ'p by correlations with in-situ test measurements.
Pa = atmospheric pressure in the same units as σ'p (for example, 2,116 psf).
The value of m is usually 0.6 for clean quartzitic sands and 0.8 for silty sands to sandy silts. The user
may input different values of m for the top and bottom of the layer. The SHAFT program will interpolate
linearly between the values provided for the top and the bottom of each layer.

Friction Angle
This column entry corresponds to values of the internal angle of friction (also known as friction or 
angle) for the top and bottom of the sand layer. The values of Friction Angle are entered in standard
units of degrees.
For the Ko Method:
 If both Friction Angle and Blow Counts are defined by the user then the program will use the
inputted Friction Angle for estimation of transfers in side resistance and the program will use
the inputted Blow Counts for estimation of transfers in end bearing.
 If the user only enters Blow Counts (Friction Angle left as zero) then the program will
estimate the Friction Angle based on Blow Counts (see Table 3.2) to estimate transfers in side
resistance and will use the inputted Blow Counts for estimation of transfers in end bearing.
The program will print the computed Friction Angle in the soil properties section on the output
text file.
 If the user only enters Friction Angle (Blow Counts left as zero) then the program will use the
inputted Friction Angle for estimation of transfers in side resistance and the program will also
use the inputted Friction Angle for estimation of transfers in end bearing.
 Values for Ko must always be entered (different than zero) for this method. If the user wants to
ignore Ko then use a different method or enter a very small value for Ko.
For the Chen and Kulhawy Method:
 If both Friction Angle and Blow Counts are defined by the user then the program will use
both, the inputted Friction Angle and Blow Counts for estimation of transfers in side
resistance and the program will use the inputted Blow Counts for estimation of transfers in end
bearing.
 If the user only enters Blow Counts (Friction Angle left as zero) then the program will
estimate the Friction Angle based on Blow Counts (see Table 3.2) to estimate transfers in side

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-17

resistance and will use the inputted Blow Counts for estimation of transfers in end bearing.
The program will print the computed Friction Angle in the soil properties section on the output
text file.
 If the user only enters Friction Angle (Blow Counts left as zero) then the program will use the
inputted Friction Angle for estimation of transfers in side resistance and the program will also
use the inputted Friction Angle for estimation of transfers in end bearing.
 If the Preconsolidation Stress Exponent (m) is missing (left as zero) then the program will
assume that OCR = 1 in equations that were shown earlier for this variable.
For the Beta Method:
 If both Friction Angle and Blow Counts are defined by the user then the program will use the
inputted Beta Value for estimation of transfers in side resistance and the program will use the
inputted Blow Counts for estimation of transfers in end bearing.
 If the user only enters Blow Counts (Friction Angle left as zero) then the program will use the
inputted Beta Value to estimate transfers in side resistance and will use the inputted Blow
Counts for estimation of transfers in end bearing.
 If the user only enters Friction Angle (Blow Counts left as zero) then the program will use the
inputted Beta Value for estimation of transfers in side resistance and the program will estimate
the Friction Angle based on Blow Counts (see Table 3.2) for estimation of transfers in end
bearing.
 If the Beta Value is missing (left as zero) then the program will estimate the Beta Value
based on Eq. 3.5 and others (Section 3.1.1) of the SHAFT Technical Manual. The program will
print the computed Beta Value in the soil properties section on the output text file.
According to the FHWA manuals, for concrete cast in place against soil, as in a drilled shaft, the interface
is assumed to be rough and the interface friction angle (δ or ) can be equal to the internal friction angle
of the soil (ie.,  = ’). This is how the SHAFT program considers within internal computations with
Sand layers.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-18

Table 3.2 Relationship between N and  (after Gibbs and Holtz, 1957)

Blow Counts from SPT


This column entry corresponds to the number of blow counts obtained at the top and bottom of the sand
layer while performing a Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). The user may optionally input Blow
Counts obtained from SPT tests in cases where the values of Friction Angle and Ko are not readily
available. When the user provides a value different than zero for Friction Angle and Ko, the values for
Blow Counts are not used in the computations and may be left as zero.
For friction transfers (transfers in side resistance) when Friction Angle is left as zero the computer
program converts internally between the provided values of Blow Counts from SPT tests to equivalent
values of Friction Angle using Table 3.2 (for further reference see the Technical Manual for comments of
side resistance in sand layers).
For transfers in end bearing, when a Friction Angle is provided (different than zero) the computer
program uses the Quiros and Reese (1977) recommendations for loose sand, medium-dense sand and very
dense sand based on ranges of  angles (for further reference see the Technical Manual for comments of
end bearing in sand layers).
When the user provides values of Blow Counts (different than zero) the computer program uses those for
computations of end bearing following equations and limits specified in the Technical Manual (comments
of end bearing in sand layers).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-19

3.2.7.2 Soil Data for Clay and Shale Layers


A sample window for this soil option is shown in Figure 3.10. The required properties for clay/shale
layers are explained below.

Total Unit Weight


This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight (submerged weight is calculated based on
separate entry for depth of water table). Values for the top and bottom of the layer are entered in standard
units of force per unit volume (either lb/ft3 or kN/m3). The SHAFT program will interpolate linearly
between the values provided for the top and the bottom of each layer.

Cohesion
This column represents the input values for the unconfined-undrained shear strength at the top and bottom
of the clay layer. Ordinarily, these values are taken as one half of the compression strength of samples
obtained from unconsolidated-unconfined triaxial tests.
The user may specify values of zero for the top and bottom of clay layers where the contribution of side
friction should be neglected. As mentioned in the Technical Manual, it is recommended to ignore the
transfer in side friction from the ground surface to the depth of 5 ft (1.5 m) if the drilled shaft is in a soil
profile with clay as the top layer. It is also recommended to ignore transfers in side friction at the bottom
one diameter of straight shafts or at the height of the bell plus the bottom one shaft diameter above the
bell for belled shafts if they are in a soil profile with clay at the bottom section of the shaft. Please see the
Technical Manual for a graphic representation of these recommendations.
The SHAFT program will interpolate linearly between the values provided for the top and the bottom of
each layer.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-20

Figure 3.10 Sample soil data for clay and shale layers

Blow Counts from SPT (Optional)


This column entry corresponds to the number of blow counts obtained at the top and bottom of the clay
layer from the performance of a Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). The user may optionally input
Blow Counts obtained from SPT tests in cases where the values of undrained shear strength (Cohesion)
are not readily available. When the user provides a value different than zero for the Cohesion, the values
for Blow Counts are not used in the computations and may be left as zero.
The option to input values of Blow Counts instead of Cohesion (undrained shear strength) should be
selected only when it is desirable to make a rough computation of the load-carrying capacity of a drilled
shaft. The computer program converts internally between the provided values of blow counts from SPT
tests to equivalent values of undrained shear strength by using the following equations (specified in the
Technical Manual):

cu = NSPT / 10, for cu in units of tons/ft2.

cu = NSPT / 0.1, for cu in units of kPa.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-21

Where:
cQ = unconsolidated-undrained shear strength of the clay.
NSPT= average number of blow counts (blows per foot) from the Standard Penetration Test.

Alpha Factor
This is an empirical factor that varies with depth and takes into account the construction procedures of the
drilled shaft. The amount of research that has been performed to date is still insufficient to allow for a
precise prediction of the Alpha Factor as a function of depth.
If the user leaves the default values of zero, the program will automatically compute values of Alpha
Factor according to recommendations from literature (O’Neill and Reese, 1999; and O’Neill and Hassan,
1994). It is evident, actually, from the results of the load tests of instrumented drilled shafts that  is not
a constant, but that it varies with the magnitude of undrained shear strength (which usually varies with
depth). The SHAFT program follows the FHWA manual, where O’Neill and Reese (1999) recommend
the following formulations for variations of alpha values

 for

(3.1)

and

 for

(3.2)

where
= atmospheric pressure (14.7 psi, 2116 psf or 101.3 kPa).
In Equation (3.1) the value of  is 0.55 for up to = 1.5 (which corresponds to of about 1.5 tsf).
If is very low, it is possible that  may be greater than 0.55, but higher values should not be taken
unless proven by load test. From = 1.5 the values of  reduces linearly to 0.4 when = 3. It
is considered that a cohesive geomaterial is no longer a cohesive soil when exceeds 2.5. Drilled
shafts in such geomaterials should be designed according the cohesive intermediate geomaterial
(Cohesive IGMs) criteria covered in Section 3.2.7.4. However, data from load tests on hard clays and
weak clay shales in the South and Southwest of the United States have indicated that  remains at about
0.40 in such geomaterials up to = 5. The cohesive soil method can be used in such geomaterials if
the  factors are confirmed by load tests. Evidence has shown that values of  are the same for loadings
in compression or tension. For further reference see the Technical Manual for comments of side
resistance in clay layers.
The values suggested for  in Equations (3.1) and (3.2) that are internally computed by the SHAFT
program are by no means certain and mainly correspond to undrained loading of drilled shafts in cohesive
soil. The user should input his own values of Alpha Factor if site-specific data is available from loading
tests. It is obvious that better estimates of values can be obtained from loading tests on drilled shafts that
are constructed in situ with the same techniques and procedures that are planned for the production shafts.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-22

Bearing Capacity Coefficient, Nc


This column corresponds to the value of bearing capacity coefficient to be used in the computations of
end bearing for clay. A value of 7.0 is suggested for the bearing capacity factor, Nc, for shafts built by
the slurry-displacement method. This value can be increased to 8.0 when shafts are constructed by the
casing or in the dry method. The SHAFT program will interpolate linearly between the values provided
for the top and the bottom of each layer.

3.2.7.3 Soil Data for Strong Rock


A sample window for this option is shown in Figure 3.11. The required properties for this type of soil are
explained below.

Rock Compressive Strength


This column corresponds to the values of uniaxial compressive strength of rock as taken from core
samples (not intact or mass). The strong rock criterion requires that the unconfined compressive strength
of rock is at least 144,000 psf (6,900 kPa). The SHAFT program takes into consideration the smaller
value between the compressive strengths of concrete and rock to compute the capacity in side resistance.
Values are entered in units of stress (force per unit area, either lb/ft2 or kPa=kN/m2).

Concrete Compressive Strength


This column corresponds to the values of unconfined compressive strength (cylinder test) of concrete.
The program takes into consideration the smaller value between the compressive strengths of concrete
and rock to compute the capacity in side resistance. Values are entered in units of force per unit area
(either lb/ft2 or kPa = kN/m2).

Discontinuity Spacing
The spacing of discontinuities is taken into account to compute the bearing capacity of the rock. The
formula is valid for a rock mass with spacing of discontinuities larger than 12 in. (305 mm). Engineering
judgment is required for shorter spacing. Values are entered in units of length (either ft or m).

Discontinuity Thickness
The thickness of discontinuities is taken into account to compute the bearing capacity of the rock. The
formula is valid for a rock mass with thickness of discontinuities smaller than 0.2 in. (5 mm).
Engineering judgment is required for larger thickness. Values are entered in units of length (either ft or
m).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-23

Figure 3.11 Sample soil data for layers of strong rock

Socket Diameter
The diameter of the rock socket is taken into account to compute the bearing capacity of the rock. Values
are entered in units of length (either ft or m).
In models where there is one or more layers of rock along with defined Minimum and Maximum shaft
diameters (under Data > Drilled-Shaft Properties) the program will use the defined ratio of (Socket
Diameter/Shaft Diameter) for all analyzed cases of increased shaft diameter (up to the Maximum
defined).

Elastic Modulus
This column corresponds to the value of Young’s modulus of the intact rock. The computer program
internally modifies the value of the elastic modulus of the intact rock according to the RQD values that
are placed in the last input data for strong rock. The objective is to obtain values for the modulus of the
in-situ rock that take into account the number of joints and their spacing. If values of the modulus of
elasticity for the rock are available from in-situ tests, the test values should be used along with an input of

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-24

100 in the RQD column (to avoid modifications of the in-situ rock modulus). Values are entered in
standard units of force per unit area (either lb/ft2 or kPa=kN/m2).

RQD
This column corresponds to the values of “rock quality designation” or RQD obtained from in-situ soil
tests. According to the RQD value, the modulus of the intact rock is modified to account for joints in the
rock. The adjustments are performed internally by the computer program using formulations in the
Technical Manual. Please read previous entry for Elastic Modulus for other information regarding
entries of RQD.

3.2.7.4 Soil Data for Decomposed Rock Layers


A sample window for this option is shown in Figure 3.12. The required properties for Decomposed Rock,
Gravel or Decomposed Geomaterial are explained below.

Total Unit Weight


This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight (submerged weight is calculated based on
separate entry for depth of water table). Values for the top and bottom of the layer are entered in standard
units of force per unit volume (either lb/ft3 or kN/m3).

Blow Counts from SPT


This column entry corresponds to the number of blow counts obtained at the top and bottom of the layer
while performing a Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). The user should preferably input the value of
N60, which is the SPT blow counts, in blows per foot (or blows per 300 mm) for the condition in which
the energy transferred to the top of the drive string is 60% of the drop energy of the SPT hammer.

Poisson’s Ratio
The Poisson ratio of the decomposed rock (gravel or decomposed geomaterial) at the top and bottom of
the layer. This value can be approximated as 0.3 to 0.4 for drained loading in gravel, unless more specific
values are available for the site. This value is only used in the computations of load versus settlement for
this type of soil/rock criteria.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-25

Figure 3.12 Sample soil data for decomposed rock layers

Young’s Modulus (Optional)


This column represents Young’s modulus of elasticity of the material at the top and at the bottom of the
socket in the gravel/decomposed rock layer. These values are only used in the computations of load
versus settlement for this type of soil. If the user leaves the default values of zero for Young’s Modulus,
the program will automatically compute values at the top and bottom of the gravel layer based on the
values of Blow Counts inputted earlier. The program computes the modulus of elasticity of the soil
based on equations presented in the Technical Manual.

Socket Diameter
The diameter of the socket in the gravel/decomposed rock may be specified to be different than at other
layers. The values on this column are only used in the computation of load versus settlement. Values are
entered in standard units of length (either ft or m). In models where there is one or more layers of rock
along with defined Minimum and Maximum shaft diameters the program will use the defined ratio of
(rock socket diameter/shaft diameter) for all analyzed cases of increased shaft diameter (up to the
Maximum defined).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-26

3.2.7.5 Soil Data for Weak Rock Layers


A sample window for this option is shown in Fig. 4.15. The required properties for this type of soil/rock
are explained below.

Figure 3.13 Sample soil data for weak rock layers

Interface Condition
This column input is related to the condition of the borehole after drilling. Weak rocks behave quite
differently if the borehole is either rough or smooth after drilling. The user must select only one of the
four available options for the top and bottom of the layer of weak rock: (1) Rough Surface w/closed
joints, (2) Smooth Surface w/closed joints, (3) Rough Surface w/open joints, or (4) Smooth Surface w/
open joints.
In general, if the user selects to use a Rough Surface option, one of the following conditions should be
present:
 The construction specifications should require that the drilling contractor roughen the borehole
by cutting circular grooves of approximately 50 mm. (2 in.) height into the sides of the
borehole. Each circular groove should penetrate at least 25 mm (1 in.) into the borehole walls

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-27

over the full 360 degrees around the holes. The circular grooves should have vertical spacing
no greater than 0.3 m (1 ft).
 The designer must be otherwise convinced that the drilling will produce a roughness pattern
generally equivalent to the specification recommended above (circular grooves), without
leaving any soft, soil-like material (or “smears”) on the wall of the borehole.
It is recommended to consider a Smooth Surface option if none of the conditions specified earlier can
be achieved. In addition, if there is a possibility that the borehole is drilled using a drilling slurry, unless
circular grooves are cut into the weak rock and verified by callipering, the user should assume a Smooth
Surface condition.
Joints are considered closed if they contain no voids or soft material in the joint. Likewise a joint is
considered open if the joint contains voids or soft material.

Rock Compressive Strength


This column corresponds to the values of qu, the uniaxial compressive strength of rock. Whenever
possible, the weak rock cores should be consolidated to the mean effective stress in the ground and then
subjected to undrained loading to establish the value for qu. The validity of this solution is for soft rocks
with 0.5< qu < 5.0 MPa (73< qu < 725 psi). The method also assumes that high-quality samples, such as
those obtained using triple-walled, core barrels, have been recovered. Values are entered in standard units
of force per unit area (either lb/ft2 or kPa = kN/m2).

Concrete Slump
This column represents the value for the slump of the concrete that will be used in the weak-rock socket.
This is provided in units of length (in or m). The user would normally use the same concrete slump at the
top and bottom of the layer. The fluidity of the concrete (as measured by the concrete slump) along with
the depth of concrete are used as an indication of the pressures that the concrete will exert against the
borehole walls.
The internal formulas used in the computer program are only valid for the following conditions:
 the concrete slump must be between 125 to 225 mm (5 in to 9 in),
 the rate of placement of concrete in the borehole should exceed 12 m/hour (40 ft per hour, or
about 8 in. per minute), and
 the ratio of the maximum size of the coarse aggregate to the borehole diameter should be less
than 0.02.

Interface Friction Angle


This column represents the value for rc in degrees. The parameter  rc, represents the angle of internal
friction of the weak rock at the interface with the concrete. A value for  rc that is considered typical of
most clay-shales and mudstones in the United States is  rc = 30 degrees. This is a value that was
measured at a test site in clay-shale.

Socket Diameter

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-28

This column represents the value for D, the diameter of the rock socket, in units of length (ft or m). The
value of socket diameter is used in the computation of settlement. The SHAFT program thus uses only
the value specified at the bottom of the layer.
The computations of settlement are only considered accurate for drilled shafts satisfying the following
conditions:
 2< L/D< 20,where L is the length of the socket in weak rock and D the socket diameter, and
 D > 0.5 m (or D > 20 in.).
In models where there is one or more layers of rock along with defined Minimum and Maximum shaft
diameters the program will use the defined ratio of (rock socket diameter/shaft diameter) for all analyzed
cases of increased shaft diameter (up to the Maximum defined).

Elastic Modulus of Rock Core


This column represents the value for Ei, Young’s elastic modulus of elasticity of intact rock cores at the
top and bottom of the socket. The parameter must be provided in units of stress (force per unit area,
either lb/ft2 or kPa=kN/m2).

RQD
This column corresponds to the values of “rock quality designation” or RQD obtained from in-situ soil
tests at the top and bottom of the socket. Internally, the computer program uses the RQD to modify the
modulus of elasticity of the rock, Ei, to obtain the mass modulus of elasticity, Em, based on the values of
Table 7.1 in the Technical Manual. Linear interpolation is used for intermediate values.
Em can be estimated from the ratios in the referenced table based on the RQD of the weak rock (IGM)
cores. In cases in which the RQD of the cores is less than 50 percent, it is advisable to make direct
measurements of Em in situ through plate loading tests, borehole jack tests, large-scale pressure meter
tests, or by back-calculating Em from drilled shaft loading tests, since the correlations in the referenced
table become less accurate with decreasing RQD.

3.2.7.6 Soil Data for Strong Rock Layers Including Side Friction plus End Bearing
The same data format described for Strong Rock in Section 3.2.7.3 is applicable to this soil option. As
described in the Technical Manual, in strong rock FHWA recommends to use either side friction or tip
resistance only, but not both. However, this soil option becomes convenient for cases where the user
desires to observe the calculated capacity that includes the side friction and tip resistance together. The
user should use a good engineering judgment when considering this option.

3.2.7.7 Soil Data for Gravelly Sand and Gravel Layers


A sample window for gravelly sand layers or gravel layers is shown in Figure 3.14. The required
properties for these soils are explained below.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-29

Figure 3.14 Sample soil data for gravelly sand and gravel layers

Total Unit Weight


This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight (submerged weight is calculated based on
separate entry for depth of water table). Values for the top and bottom of the layer are entered in standard
units of force per unit volume (either lb/ft3 or kN/m3).

Blow Counts from SPT


This column entry corresponds to the number of blow counts obtained at the top and bottom of the layer
while performing a Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). It should be noted that the Blow Counts should
be greater than 25 for usage of either criteria of gravelly sand or gravel (soils with Blow Counts less than
25 would be modeled better using the Sand criteria). User-inputted values of Blow Counts are used to
calculate End Bearing following Table 3.2 in the Technical Manual.

Beta Value (Optional)


The Beta value is an empirical parameter that takes into account the lateral earth pressure coefficient and
the effective-friction angle at the interface between the concrete of the shaft and the soil. The parameter

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-30

thus takes into account the fact that the stress at the interface due to the fluid pressure of the concrete may
be greater than that from the soil itself. Many factors that modify the lateral stress at the soil-concrete
interface can be taken into account with the Beta value. For instance, other factors may include the use
of drilling fluid, use of casing or a dry excavation during the construction process, and the type of slump
used in the concrete.
If the input for Beta is left as zero, the computer program automatically generates Beta values at each
foot of penetration in the layer (or at each 0.3 meters if SI units are used). Internally, the SHAFT
program uses the equations recommended by Rollins et al (2005) for the Beta value, which is covered in
the Technical Manual.
Optionally the user may input his own value of Beta for the top and bottom of the layer. The SHAFT
program will interpolate linearly between the values provided for the top and the bottom of each layer.

3.2.8 Data > Factor of Safety (Allowable Stress Design)


This is only enabled in models where the user selects Data > Design Method > ASD (Allowable
Stress Design).
This submenu allows the user to specify the factor of safety that will be used during internal computations
(Figure 3.15) for the ASD method. The user may enter a global factor of safety for the total ultimate
capacity, or merely apply a factor of safety to the ultimate tip resistance. Despite the factor of safety that
is specified by the user, the computer program will provide full printouts of the unfactored ultimate skin
friction and ultimate tip resistance for reference.

Figure 3.15 Sample screen of Data > Factor of Safety (ASD Method)

3.2.9 Data > Computation Methods


The user has the option to run the analysis by specifying either a desired depth or design load. As shown
in Figure 3.16, the Computation Methods under the Data menu provides the user the following options:
 Specify the shaft length
 Specify the design load

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-31

Figure 3.16 Options contained under Data> Computation Methods

If the user selects to Specify the shaft length, the dialog box in Figure 3.17 will appear for the user to
enter the proposed shaft length. Similarly, if the user selects to specify the design load, the dialog box in
Figure 3.18 will appear for the user to enter the proposed design load.
In both cases, as seen in Figure 3.17 and Figure 3.18, the user should also specify the Type of Loading
by selecting one of the following options:
 Compression. When the loads are in compression, the SHAFT program ads the contributions
from side friction and end bearing. Please notice that the weight of the shaft is not taken into
account during computations of pile capacity for compressive loads.
 Uplift. For loads in tension, the program takes into account the contributions from side friction
and weight of the shaft. The user may also reduce the side-friction contribution to uplift loads
by specifying a reduction factor smaller than 1.
The depth specified for the bottom layer must be at least two diameters deeper than the specified-shaft
length. The program uses the averaged-soil properties within two diameter below the shaft tip for
computations of end bearing. In general, users are recommended to specify the shaft length.
The program uses 150 lb/ft3 to compute the concrete weight in tension. In most cases, the weight of
concrete is ignored in compression due to the small differences that exist between the weight of the
displaced soil and the concrete.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-32

Figure 3.17 Sample entries under Data > Computation Methods > Specify the shaft
length

Figure 3.18 Sample entries under Data > Computation Methods > Specify the design
load

3.2.10 Data > Water Table


This submenu, shown in Figure 3.19, allows the user to specify the depth of the water table. If this entry
is left at the default value of zero then the SHAFT program will consider that the water table is located at
the ground surface. The water-table depth is referenced from the ground surface.

Figure 3.19 Options contained in Data Water Table

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-33

3.2.11 Data > Evaluate Multiple Shaft Lengths


This optional selection is used to calculate the axial response of multiple shaft penetrations (lengths). The
user can enter any Maximum shaft length but the program will stop at approximately 2.5 pile diameters
above the depth of the bottom soil layer. The Minimum shaft length can be left as zero and the program
will default to a minimum length that is 70% of the maximum. The minimum length must also be at least
6 pile diameters plus any exclusion zones entered in the model. The Shaft length increment may also be
left as zero so the program will use the default of 3 ft (or 1 m).
This selection is not available in models where the user chooses the separate option of Data >
ASD/LRFD Design Charts. A sample of this dialog box is shown in Figure 3.20.

Figure 3.20 Dialog box for Data > Evaluate Multiple Shaft Lengths

3.2.12 Data > ASD/LRFD Design Charts


This optional selection is used to calculate and display curves of axial capacity versus depth for user-
specified pile-head settlements. These curves are similar to the Chart 2 specified in guidelines prepared
by the Intermodal Transportation Division, Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) on December
1, 2010. This selection is not available in models where the user chooses the separate option of Data >
ASD/LRFD Design Charts. A sample of this dialog box is shown in Figure 3.20.
The user may enter any Maximum shaft length but the program will stop at approximately 2.5 pile
diameters above the depth of the bottom soil layer. The Minimum shaft length can be left as zero and the
program will default to a minimum length that is 70% of the specified maximum. The minimum length
must be at least 6 pile diameters plus any exclusion zones entered in the model. The Shaft length
increment may also be left as zero so the program will use the default of 3 ft (or 1 m). The Defined
Settlements are specified by the user as needed for the top of shaft and entered in units of in or mm.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-34

Figure 3.21 Dialog box for Data > ASD/LRFD Design Charts

3.2.13 Data > Control Options...


The windows dialog screen that comes up under this menu option is shown in Figure 3.22. The various
entries are described as follows:

Output Increment
This numeric entry describes the increments of shaft length for which the SHAFT program will provide
tabular output of its computational results. The output increment should be entered in standard units of
length (either ft or m).

Plot Options
This entry allows users to change the numeric values displayed in the vertical axis of output plots. Users
can change from the standard “Depth” (with zero value at ground/mudline) values to “Elevation” values,
which will start from the value entered in this entry (for top of shaft, ground/mudline) and decrease

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-35

downward along the shaft. If a negative value is entered here then the resulting elevations will all be
negative until reaching the shaft tip. A positive values will decrease and become negative (if the shaft is
sufficiently long).
The analysis must be completed (Computation > Run Analysis) in order to display the desired elevation
values in the resulting graphs.
Please notice that this is only a change in the numeric values of output plots, it does not change the Depth
that is used for entering input data.

Printing Additional t-z Curves


Users may select to print out the internally-generated t-z curve (load-transfer curve in side resistance) at
any depth along the modeled shaft. The resulting output text file (Computation > Edit Output Text)
will contain the additional t-z curves that correspond to the averaged, upper-bound and lower-bound trend
lines. These curves correspond only to the initial shaft diameter (if the model defines multiple shaft
diameters). The plotted additional t-z curves (Graphics > Additional t-z Curves) correspond to the
averaged trend and also for the initial shaft diameter (if the model defines multiple shaft diameters).
Please notice that t-z curves are only available for soils and shale. The concepts of load-vs-deformation
for sockets in intermediate geomaterials and rock are explained in notes on the accompanying Technical
Manual and do not separate deformation curves for side resistance and end bearing.
In models where soils and shale are on top of rock the t-z curves for soils and shale are not taken into
account. The load-vs-deformation in those models are based on elastic deformation for the length of shaft
in soils/shale plus the overall deformation from the socket in the underlying rock.

End Bearing in Sands


This dialog box is only applicable for models that have a layer of Sand, Gravel or Gravelly Sand at the tip
of the shaft. For those cases the SHAFT program computes end bearing based on recommendations from
Quiros and Reese (1977) that considers a linear variation of qb from zero at ground surface to maximum
values (shown in Tables 3.2 and 8.1 of the Technical Manual) at a penetration of 10 pile diameters.
In Gravelly Sand and Gravel, this assumption of linear interpolation from zero at ground surface may be
too conservative so designers may choose to use values from Table 3.2 of the Technical Manual
according to their input and variations of NSPT (Blow Counts) values from ground surface. For this
option the user would select the radio button to “Use maximum values at any depth” and enter
appropriate values of NSPT (Blow Counts) in the applicable Data > Soil Layer Data screens.

Text Editor
The user should input in this box the complete path and command line for the preferred-text editor or
word processor that will be used to examine and print the input, output, and the processor run notes files
created by the SHAFT program.
As a default, the command line c:\windows\notepad.exe is used to operate a standard text editor.
Microsoft Notepad is included with the Microsoft Windows operating system. However, the path to the
directory where notepad.exe is installed varies in different versions of the Microsoft Windows operating
system.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-36

There may be some instances when the output files are too large for Notepad and a different text editor or
word processor should be used. In those cases it is suggested to use Microsoft WordPad
(c:\windows\wordpad.exe).

Figure 3.22 Entries under Data > Control Options…

3.3 Help Menu


The Help > Contents submenu starts the standard Help interface for guidelines on data input of the
SHAFT program. The Help > Contents submenu has been developed for all areas of the program where
the user needs to input data. This submenu may be accessed for reference at any time while preparing
data input.
The Help > User’s Manual will start up the default installed version of Adobe Acrobat or Adobe Reader
and open the installed PDF version of the standard User’s Manual of the SHAFT program. The Adobe
Reader program is freely distributed by Adobe Systems Inc. at www.adobe.com
The Help > Technical Manual will start up a viewer of a protected file for the electronic version of this
manual. The Technical Manual is copyrighted and only works when the proper USB dongle is connected
to the computer in use.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 3 – References for Data Input – 3-37

If the Technical Manual is not opening with Acrobat or Reader (while having the proper USB key
connected to the computer in use) then perhaps the Adobe software is not configured correctly. Start
Adobe Reader (or full Adobe Acrobat) then click on "Edit/Preferences" and "Internet" under
"Categories". Please make sure that a check mark is placed under "Display PDF in Browser" then click
OK and exit Reader. You can then try to run the Technical Manual once again.
The Help > About... submenu provides general references about the program (program version, date,
maintenance expiration date, USB serial number) and how to reach Ensoft, Inc. for technical support or
sales.
The Help > Check for Updates submenu will start up the default Internet browser and report the user of
the current program version and maintenance expiration date as well as any new update that is available
for downloading from Ensoft’s website (www.ensoftinc.com). Users will be able to download, install and
run in full mode any SHAFT program release that is older than their maintenance expiration date.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4. References for Program
Execution and Output
Reviews
CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-2

4.1 Introduction
CHAPTER 4 presents choices related to execution of the program and includes methods of addressing
run-time errors. This Chapter also includes suggestions for reviewing input, output, and processor text
files. The final section of this Chapter includes descriptions about all the output curves that may be
observed in graphical form. The commands covered in this chapter are contained in the top menu, under
the Computation and the Graphics titles.

4.2 Computation Menu


This menu is selected to execute the program using the parameters that were saved in the input-data file.
Within the options contained under this menu, shown in Figure 4.1, there are commands that facilitate the
reviews of the text files produced for storing input data, output results, and processor notes. In addition,
the user may select an option to observe a graphical representation of the side view of the modeled pile
and soil layers. Detailed description of the submenu options contained under the Computation menu are
explained in the following topics.

4.2.1 Computation > Run Analysis


This command executes the analytical portion of program SHAFT. The user should remember to save
the input data under an user-specified name before executing the analytical module. When saving
data to disk, SHAFT will automatically add an extension of the type *.sf8d to the name of the input file.

Figure 4.1 Commands in the Computation menu.

When the execution process is finished the active command is returned to the main SHAFT program with
a screen indicating that computations are completed. The user should always check the output text file
(Computation > Edit Output Text) for any error or warning messages that were produced during
computations.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-3

At the beginning of the computational run the analytical module will read the saved input data. If an
input-data format is incorrect during reading, the analytical module will stop immediately and in many
cases display an error message. A status report may also be saved in a file with the same name as the
input but with the extension *.sf8r. This status-report file may be accessed by selecting Computation >
Edit Processor-Run Notes.
The analytical module automatically creates an output text file with the same name as the input but with
the extension *.sf8o. This file may be accessed by selecting Computation > Edit Output Text. Once a
successful run is produced the user may proceed to the next items for observation of results.

4.2.2 Computation > Edit Input Text


This selection is used to review/edit the input-data file that is currently processed by the program. This
command becomes active after new data files have been saved to disk or when opening existing input-
data files. The command is helpful for experienced users who may want to change one or two parameters
quickly using a plain-text editor, or for users wishing to observe the prepared input data in text mode.
This submenu automatically invokes the word processor or text editor specified in Data > Control
Options... The default setting is to use the utility program named notepad.exe provided by Microsoft
Windows©. Input-data files are automatically saved to disk with the user-specified file name and the
extension of *.sf8d by program SHAFT. Use of the notepad program for editing the input data is shown
in Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2 Sample use of Microsoft Notepad© for editing input text of Example
Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-4

4.2.3 Computation > Edit Processor Run Notes


This command is used to view a text file with processor run notes that is automatically produced during
each analytical run. This file contains notes produced during the processing of input data.
Observation of the notes produced during a processor run may become helpful to debug a data file that
did not produce a successful run. A successful run usually produces a file of processor-run notes
containing similar lines of text as those in Figure 4.3.
This submenu automatically invokes the word processor or text editor specified under Data > Control
Options... The default setting is to use the utility program named notepad.exe provided by Microsoft
Windows©.
Files containing processor-run notes are automatically saved to disk with the same file name as the input-
data file but with the extension *.sf8r. Use of the Microsoft Notepad© for editing the processor- run
notes for Example Problem 1 is shown in Figure 4.3.

Figure 4.3 Sample Microsoft Notepad © session of processor-run notes for Example
Problem 1.

4.2.4 Computation > Edit Output Text


This selection is used to edit the output-text file that is automatically produced during each successful
analytical run. This command becomes active after new data files have been saved to disk and
successfully executed, or when opening previously-executed input-data files.
The submenu automatically invokes the word processor or text editor that was previously specified under
Data > Control Options... The default setting is to use the utility program named notepad.exe provided
by Microsoft Windows©.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-5

Output files are automatically saved to disk with the same file name as the input-data file but with the
extension *.sf8o. Use of Microsoft Notepad© for editing the output file for Example Problem 1 is shown
in Figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4 Sample use of Microsoft Notepad © for editing the output-text file of
Example Problem 1.

4.2.5 Computation > View Shaft Elevation


The Computation > View Shaft Elevation command provides a graphical screen that displays an
elevation view of the drilled shaft and soil layers along with their various depths. This command
becomes active after entries under Drilled-Shaft Properties and Soil Layer Data have been entered in
the Data menu, or when opening previously-executed input-data files. A sample graphics of the
Computation > View Shaft Elevation command option is shown in Figure 4.5.
Any extension of the drilled shaft above ground surface is only provided for graphical purposes and has
no implication in the resulting computations (the shaft is only modeled starting from ground surface).

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-6

The vertical position of the cursor in the screen will display an approximate indication of the depth (from
ground surface to the cursor position).

Figure 4.5 Sample Computation > View Shaft Elevation command option.

4.2.6 Computation > 3D View


The Computation > 3D View command selection provides a graphical screen of the modeled shaft. This
command becomes active after entries under Drilled-Shaft Properties and Soil Layer Data have been
entered in the Data menu, or when opening previously-executed input-data files. A sample graphics of
the Computation > 3D View command option is shown in Figure 4.6.
The selection of Computation > 3D View introduces a new top menu labeled Show 3D View (see
Figure 4.7) and several new speed buttons (see Figure 4.8).

4.2.7 Show 3D View Menu


This menu becomes available when selecting the Computation > 3D View command. Within this menu
there are several control features for the displayed 3D graph (see Figure 4.7). The following menu
options are self-explanatory on/off features for the displayed graph: Shaft, Water Level, Soil Layers,
Layer Labels, Layer Depths and Global Axes.
The Show 3D View > Combined Plots (see Figure 4.9) introduces a graphical display of load transfers
(either Ultimate or ASD/LRFD) in Skin Friction, Tip Resistance and Total Capacity with pile depth.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-7

This may be useful to see the influence of specific soil layers in the axial load transfers. The user may
also select one graph at a time to automatically display the maximum values on the 3D screen.

Figure 4.6 Sample Computation > 3D View command option.

Figure 4.7 Show 3D View menu for Computation > 3D View command option.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-8

Figure 4.8 Speed buttons for Computation > 3D View command option.

Figure 4.9 Show 3D View > Combined Plots Dialog Screen.

4.3 Graphics Menu


This menu is selected to observe the different graphical representations of the program results contained
in the output file. Sample submenu options contained under this menu are shown in Figure 4.10. Not all
of the graphics may be enabled for observation, active curves depend on specifications contained in the
input.
All of the graphical representation of output data that may be produced by the program are contained in
the following commands of the Graphics menu:
Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth
Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth
Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth
Combined Plots vs Depth (Initial Diameter)
ASD/LRFD Skin Friction vs Depth
ASD/LRFD Tip Resistance vs Depth

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-9

ASD/LRFD Total Capacity vs Depth


Combined Plots vs Depth (Initial Diameter)
Axial Load vs Settlement (averaged)
Axial Load vs Settlement (upper bound)
Axial Load vs Settlement (lower bound)
Combined Plots of Load vs Settlement (Initial Diameter)
t-z Curves (averaged, initial diameter)
Q-w Curves (averaged)
Additional t-z Curves (averaged, initial diameter)
Design Charts (xx movement)
Export Plots to Excel
The observation of any of the above-listed curves will activate the graphics mode of SHAFT. Several
changes occur during use of the graphics mode: new mouse commands are enabled and a new top-menu
option (Plot) becomes available.

Figure 4.10 Sample options contained in the Graphics menu.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-10

4.3.1 Mouse Commands in the Graphics Mode


Table 4.1 describes mouse commands that become enabled automatically during all graphical
observations of output curves.

Event Description
Mouse Left Click Zooms in on the graphics at the clicked position (up to five zoom levels)
Mouse Right Click Zooms out from the graphics
Mouse Double Click on Legend Turns the selected curve on/off at every click
Table 4.1 Mouse commands in the graphics mode

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-11

4.3.2 Graphics > Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth


This selection provides a curve(s) of the ultimate skin friction (side resistance) versus depth for the
modeled-drilled shaft. This curve is automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled shaft. The
data value at each depth represents the unfactored, total friction (ultimate values) from the ground surface
down to that depth. A single curve is presented if the model involves only one shaft diameter. Several
curves are provided when the model involves multiple pile diameters.
A sample screen of the Graphics > Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth command option is shown in
Figure 4.11. In cases of uplift, the values of skin friction represented in the graphics have been modified
by the reduction factor that was specified for uplift loads (under Data > Computations Method). The
values of skin friction, although reduced for uplift, are still ultimate and do not take into account the
specified load factors.

Figure 4.11 Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-12

4.3.3 Graphics > Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth


This selection provides a curve(s) of the ultimate tip resistance versus depth for the modeled-drilled shaft.
The data value at each depth represents the unfactored, tip resistance (ultimate values) developed at that
depth. A single curve is presented if the model involves only one shaft diameter. Several curves are
provided when the model involves multiple pile diameters.
A sample graphics screen of the Graphics > Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth command option is
shown in Figure 4.12. The curve of Tip Resistance vs Depth is disabled (not applicable) for models
with uplift loads.

Figure 4.12 Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-13

4.3.4 Graphics > Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth


This selection provides a graphical representation of the curve(s) of the ultimate total capacity versus
depth for the modeled-drilled shaft. This curve is automatically generated in all analytical runs of an
axially-loaded drilled shaft. The data value at each depth represents the unfactored, total capacity
(ultimate loads) from the ground surface down to that depth. A sample graphics screen of the Graphics
> Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth command option is shown in Figure 4.13.
Values of total capacity are equal to skin friction plus tip resistance for compressive loads. Total capacity
is equal to skin friction plus shaft weight for uplift loads. For uplift loads, the displayed values have been
modified according to the reduction factor that the user has previously specified (under the Data >
Computations Method). The values of Ultimate Total Capacity, although reduced for uplift (if
selected), are still ultimate and do not take into account the specified factors of safety.

Figure 4.13 Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-14

4.3.5 Graphics > Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate)


This selection provides a graphical representation of the curves of ultimate skin friction, ultimate tip
resistance, and ultimate total capacity versus depth for the modeled-drilled shaft all combined on the same
plot. These curves are automatically generated in all analytical runs of an axially-loaded drilled shaft.
The data value at each depth represents the unfactored, total capacity (ultimate loads) from the ground
surface down to that depth. A sample graphics screen of the Graphics > Combined Plots vs Depth
command option is shown in Figure 4.18.
Values of total capacity are equal to skin friction plus tip resistance for compressive loads. Total capacity
is equal to skin friction plus shaft weight for uplift loads. For uplift loads, the displayed values have been
modified according to the reduction factor that the user has previously specified (under the Data >
Computations Method). The capacity values, although reduced for uplift (if selected), are still ultimate
and do not take into account the specified factors of safety. In models evaluating multiple shaft
diameters, the combined plots are only for the drilled shaft with the initial diameter (smallest).

Figure 4.14 Combined Plots vs Depth (Ultimate) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-15

4.3.6 Graphics > ASD/LRFD Skin Friction vs Depth


The user may select this command to observe a graphical representation of the curve of skin friction (side
resistance) versus depth for the modeled-drilled shaft. This curve is automatically generated in all
analytical runs of a drilled shaft. The data value at each depth represents the factored, total friction from
the ground surface down to that depth. In ASD analyses the curve uses the factor of safety that the user
specified for ultimate side friction under the Data > Factor of Safety menu. In LRFD analyses the
curve uses the resistance factors for Side Friction of each soil layer that the users specified under the Data
> Soil Layer Data menu.
A sample graphics screen of the ASD/LRFD Skin Friction vs Depth command option is shown in
Figure 4.15. In cases of uplift, the values of skin friction represented in the graphics have been modified
by the reduction factor that was specified for uplift loads.

Figure 4.15 Skin Friction vs. Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-16

4.3.7 ASD/LRFD Graphics > Tip Resistance vs Depth


This command option is selected to observe a graphical representation of the curve of tip resistance versus
depth for the modeled pile. This curve is automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled shaft,
except for cases with uplift loads. In ASD analyses the curve uses the factor of safety for ultimate base
capacity that the user specified under the Data > Factor of Safety menu. In LRFD analyses the curve
uses the resistance factors for End Bearing of each soil layer that the users specified under the Data >
Soil Layer Data menu.
The data value at each depth represents the factored, tip resistance developed at that depth. A sample
graphics screen of the ASD/LRFD Tip Resistance vs Depth command option is shown in Figure 4.16.
The curve of Tip Resistance vs Depth is disabled for uplift loads.

Figure 4.16 Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-17

4.3.8 ASD/LRFD Graphics > Total Capacity vs Depth


This selection provides a graphical representation of the curve of total capacity versus depth for the
modeled-drilled shaft. This curve is automatically generated in all analytical runs of an axially-loaded
drilled shaft. The data value at each depth represents the factored, total capacity from the ground surface
down to that depth. A sample graphics screen of the ASD/LRFD Total Capacity vs Depth command
option is shown in Figure 4.17.
Values of total capacity are equal to skin friction plus tip resistance for compressive loads. Total capacity
is equal to skin friction plus shaft weight for uplift loads. For uplift loads, the values have been modified
according to the reduction factor that the user has previously specified under the Data > Computations
Method menu. In ASD analyses the curve uses the factor of safety for ultimate base capacity and for
ultimate side friction that the user specified under the Data > Factor of Safety menu. In LRFD analyses
the curve uses the resistance factors for End Bearing and Side Friction of each soil layer that the users
specified under the Data > Soil Layer Data menu.

Figure 4.17 Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-18

4.3.9 Graphics > Combined Plots vs Depth (ASD/LRFD)


The user may select this command option to observe a graphical representation of the curves of skin
friction, tip resistance, and total capacity, all with a factor of safety applied, versus depth for the modeled-
drilled shaft on the same plot. This curve is automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled
shaft.
A sample graphics screen of the Combined Plots vs Depth (ASD/LRFD) command option is shown in
Figure 4.18. In ASD analyses the curve uses the factor of safety for ultimate base capacity and for
ultimate side friction that the user specified under the Data > Factor of Safety menu. In LRFD analyses
the curve uses the resistance factors for End Bearing and Side Friction of each soil layer that the users
specified under the Data > Soil Layer Data menu. In models evaluating multiple shaft diameters, the
combined plots are only for the drilled shaft with the initial diameter (smallest).

Figure 4.18 Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-19

4.3.10 Graphics > Axial Load vs Settlement (Averaged)


This selection provides a graphical representation of the curves of axial load versus settlement for the
modeled drilled shaft based on the trend (averaged) curves shown in the FHWA manual. This curve is
automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled shaft. A sample graphics screen of the Axial
Load vs Settlement (Averaged) command option is shown in Figure 4.19.

Figure 4.19 Axial Load vs Settlement (averaged) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-20

4.3.11 Graphics > Axial Load vs Settlement (Upper Bound)


This selection provides a graphical representation of the curves of axial load versus settlement for the
modeled drilled shaft based on the upper-bound curves shown in the FHWA manual. This curve is
automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled shaft. A sample graphics screen of the command
option is shown in Figure 4.20.

Figure 4.20 Axial Load vs Settlement (upper bound) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-21

4.3.12 Graphics > Axial Load vs Settlement (Lower Bound)


This selection provides a graphical representation of the curves of axial load versus settlement for the
modeled drilled shaft based on the lower-bound curves shown in the FHWA manual. This curve is
automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled shaft. A sample graphics screen of the Axial
Load vs Settlement (Lower Bound) command option is shown in Figure 4.21.

Figure 4.21 Axial Load vs Settlement (lower bound) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-22

4.3.13 Graphics > Combined Plots of Load vs Settlement


The user may select this command option to observe a graphical representation of the curves of axial load
versus settlement for the modeled drilled shaft based on the trend (averaged), upper-bound, and lower-
bound curves shown in the FHWA manual. These combined plots provide the user with some
comparison between each condition. For the analysis using multiple diameters, this graphics will only
display the combined plots for the drilled shaft with the initial diameter (smallest). A sample graphics
screen of the Combined Plots of Load vs Settlement is shown in Figure 4.22.

Figure 4.22 Combined Axial Load vs Settlement Curves for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-23

4.3.14 Graphics > t-z curves


This command displays a selection of t-z curves that were generated by the SHAFT program for each soil
layer. Five curves are normally displayed for each soil layer, the t-z curves are for near the top and
bottom of each layer plus three intermediate depths. For internal computations the SHAFT program
generates t-z curves at every finite increment but the printout for display is only for the five selected
depths. For analyses using multiple diameters, the displayed t-z curves are only for the drilled shaft with
the initial diameter (smallest). Also, these t-z curves correspond to the trend (averaged) curves shown in
the FHWA manual. A sample graphics screen of the t-z curves is shown in Figure 4.23.
Please notice that t-z curves are only available for soils and shale. The concepts of load-vs-deformation
for sockets in intermediate geomaterials (IGM) and rock are explained in notes on the accompanying
Technical Manual and do not separate deformation curves for side resistance and end bearing.
In models where soils and shale are on top of IGM/rock the t-z curves for soils and shale are not taken
into account. The load-vs-deformation in those models are based on elastic deformation for the length of
shaft through the soils/shale layer(s) plus the overall deformation from the socket in the underlying
IGM/rock.
In models where a layer of IGM or rock is placed between layers of soils and shale the models of load-vs-
deformation for IGM/rock are not taken into account. The load-vs-deformation in those models are based
on the elastic deformation for the length of shaft through the IGM/rock plus the t-z curves for the layers of
soils/shale.

Figure 4.23 t-z curves for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-24

4.3.15 Graphics > Q-w curves


This command displays the Q-w curves that were generated by the SHAFT program for the analyzed
model. The program will display more than one Q-w curve in models that specify multiple shaft
diameters. Also, these Q-w curves correspond to the trend (averaged) curves shown in the FHWA
manual. A sample graphics screen of the Q-w curves is shown in Figure 4.24.
Please notice that Q-w curves are only available for soils and shale. The concepts of load-vs-deformation
for sockets in intermediate geomaterials and rock are explained in notes on the accompanying Technical
Manual and do not separate deformation curves for side resistance and end bearing.

Figure 4.24 Q-w curves for Example Problem 1.

4.3.16 Graphics > Additional t-z curves


This menu option is only available in models where users selected to print additional t-z curves (under
Data > Control Options > Print Internally-Generated t-z Curves for Verification). The command
displays the t-z curves that were used by the SHAFT program for the user-specified soil depths. For
analyses using multiple shaft diameters, the displayed t-z curves are only for the drilled shaft with the
initial diameter (smallest). Also, these t-z curves correspond to the trend (averaged) curves shown in the
FHWA manual. A sample graphics screen of the Additional t-z curves is shown in Figure 4.25.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-25

Please notice that t-z curves are only available for soils and shale. The concepts of load-vs-deformation
for sockets in intermediate geomaterials (IGM) and rock are explained in notes on the accompanying
Technical Manual and do not separate deformation curves for side resistance and end bearing.
In models where soils and shale are on top of IGM/rock the t-z curves for soils and shale are not taken
into account. The load-vs-deformation in those models are based on elastic deformation for the length of
shaft through the soils/shale layer(s) plus the overall deformation from the socket in the underlying
IGM/rock.
In models where a layer of IGM or rock is placed between layers of soils and shale the models of load-vs-
deformation for IGM/rock are not taken into account. The load-vs-deformation in those models are based
on the elastic deformation for the length of shaft through the IGM/rock plus the t-z curves for the layers of
soils/shale.

Figure 4.25 Additional t-z curves for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-26

4.3.17 Graphics > Design Chart (xx movement)


This menu option is only available in models where users selected to plot ASD/LRFD Design Charts
(under the Data menu). The command displays the curves of axial capacity versus depth for the user-
specified settlements. Also, these t-z curves correspond to the trend (averaged) curves shown in the
FHWA manual. A sample graphics screen of the Design Chart (0.1-in movement) for Example
Problem 11 is shown in Figure 4.26.

Figure 4.26 Design Chart (0.1-in movement) for Example Problem 11.

4.3.18 Graphics > Export Plots to Excel


This command is selected to export some (or all) of the output plots to a pre-formatted spreadsheet file for
Microsoft Excel©. Each check-marked plot will be exported to two spreadsheet tabs, one contains the
data points and the second the plotted chart. A sample graphics screen of the Graphics > Export Plots
to Excel dialog box is shown in Figure 4.27.
Options contained in this dialog box are explained below.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-27

Add Markers in Plots


Adds markers for all the points in each plotted graph.
Select All
Marks all available plots for export to an Excel file.
Unselect All
Unselect all available plots so none will be exported.
Generate Excel File
After clicking this button the Microsoft Excel software will be started (only if available in the computer in
use). The user must wait until all the data has been exported to the file. User must save the generated
excel file before closing.
Close Window
Click this button to close the Export to Excel dialog box.

Figure 4.27 Sample Export Plots to Excel dialog box.

4.4 Plot Menu


This menu command only appears in the top-menu bar while in the graphics mode (when observing any
output graphics). Command options contained in this menu, shown in Figure 4.28, are explained below.
Notice that none of the parameters selected in this menu command are not saved with the output file and
must be changed each time the file is opened.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-28

Show Legend
This activates or deactivates the floating legend included in the graphics mode. The legend box can be
moved with click-and-drag operations of the mouse to any position in the graphics screen. Despite its
location in the screen, the legend is always located at the right-bottom corner on the printouts.

Show Soil Layers


Click this menu-item to activate or deactivate a soil profile plotted at the right side of the graphics. This
option is not available in some plots (where not applicable).

Show Markers
This menu provides the option to activate or deactivate the markers for each point of all the curves
displayed in the active screen of the graphics mode. By default, the program automatically plots at every
foot of penetration, or every 30 cm when using metric units. The user may optionally select to show
markers every 1, 2, 3, 5, or 10 increments of unit. The type of markers used in each curve is
automatically selected by the program. Once activated, the markers are enabled for all visible curves of
the active graphics screen.

Font Sizes
This menu provides the option to enlarge the default size of fonts used in plots. The user may optionally
select to enlarge the font by 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, or 4 times of the default size.

Line Width
This menu provides the option to enlarge the default width of lines used in plots. The user may optionally
select to enlarge the width by 2, 4, 6, or 10 times of the default width.

Graph Title
The user may optionally add a title to the active graphics using this command. However, the parameters
selected here are not saved with the output file and must be changed each time the file is opened.

Edit Legend
The user may change the text of the legend in the active graphics using this command. However, the
modified names are not saved with the output file and must be changed each time the file is opened.

Print...
This command is used to produce a hard copy of the active graphics screen. The Print dialog box
includes a drop-down menu that allows the user to select any of the installed Windows printers, allows for
change of printer properties, and allows the selection of the total number of copies to be printed. The
printed graphics is sized according to the margins that the user specifies in the Plot > Page Setup menu.

Page Setup
The user can here specify the printed size of the active-graphics screen. The size of the plot is based on
the specified margins and selection of paper orientation. The parameters selected here are not saved with
the output file and must be changed each time that the graphics is plotted.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 4 – Program Execution and Output Reviews – 4-29

Active Graphs...
This command is used to activate or de-activate the graphs that are displayed on the screen.

Save to Disk...
This command is used to save the active-graphics screen to disk. The format of the saved file is as bmp
graphics (bitmap file), which is the internal-file format used in Microsoft Windows©.

Figure 4.28 Sample Plot menu.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5. Example Problems
CHAPTER 5 – Example Problems – 5-2

5.1 Introduction
This chapter presents several example problems studied using the computer program SHAFT. In order to
ensure accuracy from the computer results, some examples have been compared with results from hand
calculations. The step-by-step hand calculations in this chapter are carried out based on the procedures
described in the Technical Manual. The user can have confidence in their results if hand calculations are
performed for comparison. The studies in this chapter also provide additional guidance for the method of
analyses of axially loaded piles with SHAFT.
Several problems are provided herein as examples of different applications that may be solved using our
computer program SHAFT. Each example focuses on a particular computational feature of the program.
Input files for each example are automatically copied to the SHAFT data directory during installation
(Root Drive\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples).
Example problems provide the user information on input and output of various cases, and present a quick
tutorial for real-world applications. The user is encouraged to study these examples and, with
modifications, may even use them to solve similar problems. However, by no means can these limited
examples explore the full functions and features provided by SHAFT.
The main features of each example included with SHAFT are summarized as follows.

Example 1 ..... Drilled shaft in sand


 varying pile diameter from 3 ft to 6 ft (in 0.5-ft increments),
 method for sand (user-specified values),
 inputted values of blow counts, NSPT, from Standard Penetration Tests for sand properties.

Example 2 ..... Drilled shaft in layers of clay and sand


 top two layers of clay,
 ignored side resistance on top 5 ft,
 internally-generated values of Nc,
 bottom three layers of sand, and
 method for sand (using internally-generated values).

Example 3 ..... Belled shaft in clay


 two layers of clay,
 variable cu on top layer of clay,
 small bell at bottom,
 ignored side resistance at top 5 ft, and
 ignored side resistance at bottom one diameter over bell.

Example 4 ..... Belled shaft in silty sand/clay


 three layers of clay,
 one intermediate layer of sand,
 method for sand (user-specified values),

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problems – 5-3

 large bell at bottom,


 ignored side resistance at top 5 ft, and
 ignored side resistance at bottom one diameter over bell.

Example 5 ..... Drilled shaft in strong rock


 top layer of clay, and
 bottom is dolomite rock (strong rock).

Example 6 ..... Drilled shaft in weak rock


 top layer of sand,
 bottom is a weak rock, and
 example with metric units.

Example 7 ..... Drilled shaft in gravel (decomposed rock)


 top layer of sand with neglected skin friction,
 two bottom layers of decomposed rock,
 internally generated elastic modulus of decomposed rock based on blow counts (NSPT), and
 example with metric units.

Example 8 ..... Drilled shaft in gravelly sand and gravel


 top layer of sand,
 two bottom layers of gravelly sand and gravel strata,
 internally generated Beta values for gravel based on blow counts (NSPT), and
 example with English units.

Example 9 ..... Model using the LRFD method


 top layer of clay,
 bottom layer with sand,
 separate resistance factors used for side resistance and end bearing for each soil layer.

Example 10 ..... Model using Multiple Shaft Lengths


 same shaft (3-ft OD) and soils (sand) as Example 1,
 study of load-vs-settlement for multiple shaft lengths from 42-ft to 60-ft.

Example 11 ..... Model using Design Charts


 same soils (clay/sand) as Example 2,
 checked response for shaft diameters from 3-ft OD to 7-ft OD and multiple lengths from 24-ft
to 60-ft.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-4

5.2 Example Problem 1 – Sand


This is an example of a shaft drilled into sand. The example has been studied in the referenced literature
of Reese and O’Neill, 1988. The example is also modeled after load tests in sand, Owens and Reese,
1982.

5.2.1 Soil Profile


The soil profile is shown in Figure 5.1. The water table is at a depth of 4 ft below the ground surface.

5.2.2 Soil Properties


N-values (blow counts per foot) from the Standard Penetration Test are included in Figure 5.1.

Figure 5.1 General soil description of Example Problem 1.

5.2.3 Construction
High-quality construction is assumed. The contractor will have all the required equipment in good order
and experienced personnel will be on the job.

5.2.4 Loadings
The working-axial load is 170 tons, lateral load is negligible, and no downdrag is expected.

5.2.5 Factor of Safety


It is assumed that a load test has been performed nearby but considering the possible variation in the soil
properties over the site and other factors, an overall factor of safety of 2.5 is selected. The diameter will

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-5

be sufficiently small so that reduced-end bearing will not be required. Consequently, the global factor of
safety can be applied to both components of resistance.

5.2.6 Ultimate Load


The ultimate-axial load is thus established as 2.5 x 170 = 425 tons, since a global factor of safety (of 2.5)
is used.

5.2.7 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft


A straight drilled shaft is selected with a diameter of 3.0 ft and a penetration of 60 feet.

5.2.8 Hand Computations

Side Resistance
Computations are performed assuming a total-unit weight of sand equal to 115 pcf. The hand
computations are as follows:
Depth Interval A Avg. Effective Stress  Qs
ft ft2 Tsf Tons
0-4 37.7 0.115 0.8 3.5
4-30 245.0 0.572 0.8 112.1
30-60 282.7 1.308 0.6 221.9
Qs = 337.5

Base Resistance
Computations for base resistance are performed using the soil at the base of the shaft.
At the 60-ft tip penetration:
NSPT= 21
qB = (0.6) (21) = 12.6 tsf
AB = 7.07 ft2
QB = (7.07) (12.6) = 89.1 tons

Total Resistance
QU = 337.5 + 89.1 = 427 tons QT= 425 tons (OK).

5.2.9 Comparison of Results


Table 5.1 contains a comparison of the results obtained from hand computations against those from
computer run in SHAFT.
Category Manual Calculations Computer Analysis Deviation
(tons) (tons)
Side Resistance 338 343 1.5%
Tip Resistance 89 89 0%
Total Capacity 427 432 1.2%
Table 5.1 Comparison of results for Example Problem 1

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-6

5.2.10 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem1 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 1, Owens and Reese, 1982, Site 3 - Shaft E-2


1
2 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
3 6 0 0 0 0 3500000
5 4 60 2.5 2.5
1 4
0.0 115 0 0 11 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 11 4000 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
1 25
0.0 115 0 0 4 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 4 4000 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
1 33
0.0 115 0 0 14 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 14 4000 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
1 55
0.0 115 0 0 12 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 12 4000 0 1 1
2
0.6 0.6
1 70
0.0 115 0 0 21 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 21 4000 0 1 1
2
0.6 0.6

5.2.11 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


Each of the resulting plots of skin friction, tip resistance, and total capacity versus depth (w/F.S.)
provided by the computer program contains seven curves, as may be seen in Figure 5.2, Figure 5.3 and
Figure 5.4 respectively. These curves correspond to six increments in drilled shaft diameter, since the
data input specified 6 ft as the largest and 3 ft as the smallest diameters for consideration. The program
automatically computed results for the smallest diameter and for each 0.5-ft increase in diameter up to the
largest specified by the user.
Results of combined plots versus depth, shown in Figure 5.5, only contains the curves of skin friction, tip
resistance, and total capacity versus depth for the initial shaft diameter.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-7

Figure 5.2 Curve of Skin Friction vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

Figure 5.3 Curve of Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-8

Figure 5.4 Curve of Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

Figure 5.5 Curve of Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-9

5.2.12 Output Data


Contents of the output-data file for Example Problem 1 is reproduced below in courier typeface, for
distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-1.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-1.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-1.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-1.sf8r

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and Date of Analysis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 01, 2017 Time: 15:05:30

Example Problem 1, Owens and Reese, 1982, Site 3 - Shaft E-2

PROPOSED DEPTH = 60.0 FT


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 5
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 4.0 FT.


-------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE FRICTION CAPACITY = 2.50


-------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.50
------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-10

INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.388E+02 (*)


BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.110E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.378E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.110E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.400E+01

LAYER NO 2----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.334E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.400E+01
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.400E+01

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.318E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.400E+01
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.250E+02

LAYER NO 3----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.371E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.140E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.250E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.360E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.140E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.330E+02

LAYER NO 4----SAND

AT THE TOP

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-11

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.600E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.349E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.120E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.330E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.600E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.327E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.120E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.550E+02

LAYER NO 5----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.600E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.360E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.210E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.550E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.600E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.355E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.210E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.700E+02

(*) ESTIMATED BY THE PROGRAM BASED ON OTHER PARAMETERS

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 3.000 FT.


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 6.000 FT.
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN

COMPUTATION RESULTS

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-12

-------------------

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 3.000 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 3.000 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 10.180 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 60.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 0.26 0.22 3.99 4.21 1.81 1.68 16.06
2.0 0.52 0.87 3.92 4.79 2.44 1.92 9.15
3.0 0.79 1.95 4.13 6.08 3.60 2.43 7.74
4.0 1.05 3.47 4.70 8.16 5.35 3.27 7.80
5.0 1.31 5.30 5.26 10.56 7.41 4.23 8.07
6.0 1.57 7.33 5.83 13.16 9.66 5.26 8.38
7.0 1.83 9.56 6.39 15.96 12.12 6.38 8.71
8.0 2.09 11.99 6.96 18.95 14.78 7.58 9.05
9.0 2.36 14.62 7.52 22.14 17.63 8.86 9.40
10.0 2.62 17.44 8.09 25.53 20.68 10.21 9.75
11.0 2.88 20.47 8.65 29.12 23.93 11.65 10.11
12.0 3.14 23.69 9.22 32.91 27.38 13.16 10.47
13.0 3.40 27.11 9.79 36.90 31.02 14.76 10.84
14.0 3.67 30.73 10.35 41.08 34.87 16.43 11.21
15.0 3.93 34.55 10.92 45.46 38.91 18.19 11.58
16.0 4.19 38.56 11.48 50.04 43.15 20.02 11.95
17.0 4.45 42.77 12.05 54.82 47.59 21.93 12.32
18.0 4.71 47.19 12.61 59.80 52.23 23.92 12.69
19.0 4.97 51.80 13.18 64.98 57.07 25.99 13.06
20.0 5.24 56.60 21.54 78.15 65.22 31.26 14.92
21.0 5.50 61.61 31.32 92.93 74.14 37.17 16.90

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-13

22.0 5.76 66.82 42.55 109.37 83.84 43.75 18.99


23.0 6.02 72.22 50.83 123.05 92.55 49.22 20.43
24.0 6.28 77.82 56.02 133.85 100.23 53.54 21.30
25.0 6.55 83.62 57.58 141.21 106.65 56.48 21.57
26.0 6.81 89.62 58.66 148.28 113.08 59.31 21.78
27.0 7.07 95.82 59.20 155.02 119.50 62.01 21.93
28.0 7.33 102.21 57.58 159.80 125.24 63.92 21.80
29.0 7.59 108.80 55.53 164.33 131.02 65.73 21.64
30.0 7.85 115.60 53.21 168.81 136.88 67.52 21.49
31.0 8.12 122.59 51.67 174.26 143.25 69.70 21.47
32.0 8.38 129.77 50.90 180.67 150.13 72.27 21.56
33.0 8.64 137.16 50.90 188.06 157.52 75.22 21.77
34.0 8.90 142.85 50.90 193.75 163.21 77.50 21.76
35.0 9.16 148.69 50.90 199.59 169.05 79.83 21.78
36.0 9.43 154.67 50.90 205.57 175.03 82.23 21.81
37.0 9.69 160.81 50.90 211.71 181.17 84.68 21.85
38.0 9.95 167.09 50.90 217.99 187.45 87.20 21.91
39.0 10.21 173.52 50.90 224.42 193.88 89.77 21.98
40.0 10.47 180.11 50.90 231.01 200.47 92.40 22.06
41.0 10.74 186.83 50.90 237.74 207.20 95.09 22.15
42.0 11.00 193.71 50.90 244.61 214.07 97.85 22.24
43.0 11.26 200.74 50.90 251.64 221.10 100.66 22.35
44.0 11.52 207.92 50.90 258.82 228.28 103.53 22.47
45.0 11.78 215.24 50.90 266.14 235.60 106.46 22.59
46.0 12.04 222.72 50.90 273.62 243.08 109.45 22.72
47.0 12.31 230.34 50.90 281.24 250.70 112.50 22.85
48.0 12.57 238.11 50.90 289.01 258.47 115.60 23.00
49.0 12.83 246.03 50.90 296.93 266.39 118.77 23.14
50.0 13.09 254.10 59.00 313.10 277.70 125.24 23.92
51.0 13.35 262.31 68.25 330.57 289.62 132.23 24.76
52.0 13.62 270.68 78.66 349.34 302.15 139.74 25.66
53.0 13.88 279.20 85.61 364.80 313.44 145.92 26.29
54.0 14.14 287.86 89.08 376.93 323.49 150.77 26.66
55.0 14.40 296.67 89.08 385.75 332.30 154.30 26.79
56.0 14.66 305.63 89.08 394.71 341.26 157.88 26.92
57.0 14.92 314.74 89.08 403.82 350.37 161.53 27.06
58.0 15.19 324.00 89.08 413.08 359.63 165.23 27.20
59.0 15.45 333.41 89.08 422.48 369.04 168.99 27.35
60.0 15.71 342.96 89.08 432.04 378.59 172.82 27.50

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3869E-01 0.1918E-04 0.8660E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1934E+00 0.9591E-04 0.4330E-02 0.5000E-04
0.3869E+00 0.1918E-03 0.8660E-02 0.1000E-03
0.1944E+02 0.9609E-02 0.4330E+00 0.5000E-02
0.2917E+02 0.1441E-01 0.6495E+00 0.7500E-02
0.3890E+02 0.1922E-01 0.8660E+00 0.1000E-01
0.9669E+02 0.4802E-01 0.2165E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1709E+03 0.9147E-01 0.4330E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2231E+03 0.1303E+00 0.6495E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2553E+03 0.1641E+00 0.8660E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3390E+03 0.3380E+00 0.2148E+02 0.2500E+00
0.3656E+03 0.5978E+00 0.4043E+02 0.5000E+00
0.3709E+03 0.7251E+00 0.4646E+02 0.6250E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-14

0.3812E+03 0.1004E+01 0.5701E+02 0.9000E+00


0.4136E+03 0.1918E+01 0.9041E+02 0.1800E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.5525E-01 0.2283E-04 0.1237E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2762E+00 0.1142E-03 0.6186E-02 0.5000E-04
0.5525E+00 0.2283E-03 0.1237E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2782E+02 0.1145E-01 0.6186E+00 0.5000E-02
0.4173E+02 0.1718E-01 0.9279E+00 0.7500E-02
0.5565E+02 0.2291E-01 0.1237E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1368E+03 0.5708E-01 0.3093E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2325E+03 0.1062E+00 0.6186E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2903E+03 0.1474E+00 0.9279E+01 0.7500E-01
0.3190E+03 0.1809E+00 0.1237E+02 0.1000E+00
0.3683E+03 0.3469E+00 0.3024E+02 0.2500E+00
0.3940E+03 0.6073E+00 0.5592E+02 0.5000E+00
0.3996E+03 0.7346E+00 0.6157E+02 0.6250E+00
0.4058E+03 0.1012E+01 0.6770E+02 0.9000E+00
0.4343E+03 0.1924E+01 0.9620E+02 0.1800E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2382E-01 0.1578E-04 0.4949E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1191E+00 0.7888E-04 0.2474E-02 0.5000E-04
0.2382E+00 0.1578E-03 0.4949E-02 0.1000E-03
0.1195E+02 0.7895E-02 0.2474E+00 0.5000E-02
0.1793E+02 0.1184E-01 0.3711E+00 0.7500E-02
0.2391E+02 0.1579E-01 0.4949E+00 0.1000E-01
0.5975E+02 0.3948E-01 0.1237E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1111E+03 0.7718E-01 0.2474E+01 0.5000E-01
0.1546E+03 0.1131E+00 0.3711E+01 0.7500E-01
0.1893E+03 0.1471E+00 0.4949E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3091E+03 0.3289E+00 0.1272E+02 0.2500E+00
0.3372E+03 0.5884E+00 0.2494E+02 0.5000E+00
0.3422E+03 0.7156E+00 0.3135E+02 0.6250E+00
0.3566E+03 0.9965E+00 0.4632E+02 0.9000E+00
0.3928E+03 0.1911E+01 0.8462E+02 0.1800E+01

- CASE ANALYZED : 2
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 2

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 3.500 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 3.500 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-15

AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 13.856 SQ.IN.


ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 60.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 0.36 0.25 4.73 4.99 2.15 1.99 13.99
2.0 0.71 1.01 4.85 5.87 2.95 2.35 8.23
3.0 1.07 2.28 5.21 7.48 4.36 2.99 7.00
4.0 1.43 4.05 5.87 9.91 6.39 3.96 6.95
5.0 1.78 6.19 6.52 12.71 8.80 5.08 7.13
6.0 2.14 8.56 7.18 15.74 11.43 6.30 7.36
7.0 2.49 11.16 7.84 19.00 14.30 7.60 7.62
8.0 2.85 13.99 8.50 22.50 17.39 9.00 7.89
9.0 3.21 17.06 9.16 26.22 20.72 10.49 8.17
10.0 3.56 20.35 9.82 30.18 24.28 12.07 8.47
11.0 3.92 23.88 10.48 34.36 28.07 13.75 8.77
12.0 4.28 27.64 11.14 38.78 32.10 15.51 9.07
13.0 4.63 31.63 11.80 43.43 36.35 17.37 9.37
14.0 4.99 35.85 12.46 48.31 40.84 19.33 9.68
15.0 5.35 40.30 13.12 53.43 45.55 21.37 9.99
16.0 5.70 44.99 13.78 58.77 50.50 23.51 10.31
17.0 6.06 49.90 14.44 64.35 55.68 25.74 10.62
18.0 6.41 55.05 15.10 70.15 61.09 28.06 10.94
19.0 6.77 60.43 23.39 83.82 69.78 33.53 12.38
20.0 7.13 66.04 32.92 98.96 79.21 39.58 13.88
21.0 7.48 71.88 43.73 115.61 89.37 46.24 15.45
22.0 7.84 77.95 53.96 131.91 99.54 52.76 16.82
23.0 8.20 84.26 61.66 145.91 108.92 58.36 17.80
24.0 8.55 90.79 66.72 157.51 117.48 63.00 18.41
25.0 8.91 97.56 69.02 166.58 125.17 66.63 18.70
26.0 9.27 104.56 71.33 175.89 133.09 70.36 18.98
27.0 9.62 111.79 71.65 183.43 140.44 73.37 19.06
28.0 9.98 119.25 71.66 190.90 147.91 76.36 19.13
29.0 10.34 126.94 71.00 197.93 155.34 79.17 19.15
30.0 10.69 134.86 70.12 204.98 162.91 81.99 19.17
31.0 11.05 143.02 69.48 212.50 170.81 85.00 19.23
32.0 11.40 151.40 69.15 220.55 179.06 88.22 19.34
33.0 11.76 160.02 69.28 229.30 187.73 91.72 19.50
34.0 12.12 166.66 69.28 235.94 194.37 94.38 19.47
35.0 12.47 173.47 69.28 242.75 201.18 97.10 19.46
36.0 12.83 180.45 69.28 249.73 208.16 99.89 19.47
37.0 13.19 187.61 69.28 256.89 215.32 102.76 19.48
38.0 13.54 194.94 69.28 264.22 222.65 105.69 19.51
39.0 13.90 202.44 69.28 271.73 230.16 108.69 19.55
40.0 14.26 210.12 69.28 279.40 237.84 111.76 19.60
41.0 14.61 217.97 69.28 287.26 245.69 114.90 19.66

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-16

42.0 14.97 226.00 69.28 295.28 253.71 118.11 19.73


43.0 15.32 234.20 69.28 303.48 261.91 121.39 19.80
44.0 15.68 242.57 69.28 311.85 270.28 124.74 19.89
45.0 16.04 251.12 69.28 320.40 278.83 128.16 19.98
46.0 16.39 259.83 69.28 329.12 287.55 131.65 20.08
47.0 16.75 268.73 69.28 338.01 296.44 135.20 20.18
48.0 17.11 277.79 69.28 347.07 305.51 138.83 20.29
49.0 17.46 287.03 78.52 365.55 318.44 146.22 20.93
50.0 17.82 296.45 88.91 385.36 332.01 154.14 21.63
51.0 18.18 306.03 100.46 406.49 346.22 162.60 22.36
52.0 18.53 315.79 110.85 426.64 360.13 170.66 23.02
53.0 18.89 325.73 117.78 443.51 372.84 177.40 23.48
54.0 19.24 335.84 121.24 457.08 384.33 182.83 23.75
55.0 19.60 346.12 121.24 467.36 394.61 186.94 23.84
56.0 19.96 356.57 121.24 477.81 405.07 191.13 23.94
57.0 20.31 367.20 121.24 488.44 415.70 195.38 24.04
58.0 20.67 378.00 121.24 499.24 426.50 199.70 24.15
59.0 21.03 388.98 121.24 510.22 437.47 204.09 24.27
60.0 21.38 400.12 121.24 521.37 448.62 208.55 24.38

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3713E-01 0.1661E-04 0.1010E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1857E+00 0.8303E-04 0.5052E-02 0.5000E-04
0.3713E+00 0.1661E-03 0.1010E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1863E+02 0.8312E-02 0.5052E+00 0.5000E-02
0.2796E+02 0.1247E-01 0.7578E+00 0.7500E-02
0.3728E+02 0.1662E-01 0.1010E+01 0.1000E-01
0.9320E+02 0.4156E-01 0.2526E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1723E+03 0.8107E-01 0.5052E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2343E+03 0.1178E+00 0.7578E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2749E+03 0.1507E+00 0.1010E+02 0.1000E+00
0.3871E+03 0.3238E+00 0.2514E+02 0.2500E+00
0.4287E+03 0.5844E+00 0.4829E+02 0.5000E+00
0.4373E+03 0.7121E+00 0.5840E+02 0.6250E+00
0.4558E+03 0.1143E+01 0.7759E+02 0.1050E+01
0.5001E+03 0.2206E+01 0.1231E+03 0.2100E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.5227E-01 0.1915E-04 0.1443E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2614E+00 0.9575E-04 0.7217E-02 0.5000E-04
0.5227E+00 0.1915E-03 0.1443E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2627E+02 0.9593E-02 0.7217E+00 0.5000E-02
0.3941E+02 0.1439E-01 0.1083E+01 0.7500E-02
0.5255E+02 0.1919E-01 0.1443E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1313E+03 0.4797E-01 0.3608E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2365E+03 0.9228E-01 0.7217E+01 0.5000E-01
0.3115E+03 0.1319E+00 0.1083E+02 0.7500E-01
0.3529E+03 0.1655E+00 0.1443E+02 0.1000E+00
0.4300E+03 0.3332E+00 0.3562E+02 0.2500E+00
0.4614E+03 0.5925E+00 0.6697E+02 0.5000E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-17

0.4751E+03 0.7216E+00 0.8068E+02 0.6250E+00


0.4866E+03 0.1150E+01 0.9214E+02 0.1050E+01
0.5254E+03 0.2211E+01 0.1309E+03 0.2100E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2320E-01 0.1419E-04 0.5773E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1160E+00 0.7096E-04 0.2887E-02 0.5000E-04
0.2320E+00 0.1419E-03 0.5773E-02 0.1000E-03
0.1162E+02 0.7099E-02 0.2887E+00 0.5000E-02
0.1744E+02 0.1065E-01 0.4330E+00 0.7500E-02
0.2326E+02 0.1420E-01 0.5773E+00 0.1000E-01
0.5815E+02 0.3550E-01 0.1443E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1112E+03 0.7021E-01 0.2887E+01 0.5000E-01
0.1576E+03 0.1038E+00 0.4330E+01 0.7500E-01
0.1957E+03 0.1359E+00 0.5773E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3431E+03 0.3144E+00 0.1466E+02 0.2500E+00
0.3960E+03 0.5763E+00 0.2962E+02 0.5000E+00
0.3996E+03 0.7027E+00 0.3611E+02 0.6250E+00
0.4250E+03 0.1135E+01 0.6305E+02 0.1050E+01
0.4748E+03 0.2200E+01 0.1152E+03 0.2100E+01

- CASE ANALYZED : 3
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 3

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 4.000 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 4.000 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 18.098 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 60.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-18

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 0.47 0.29 5.60 5.89 2.53 2.36 12.66
2.0 0.93 1.16 5.89 7.05 3.51 2.82 7.57
3.0 1.40 2.60 6.38 8.99 5.16 3.59 6.44
4.0 1.86 4.63 7.14 11.76 7.48 4.71 6.32
5.0 2.33 7.07 7.89 14.96 10.23 5.98 6.43
6.0 2.79 9.78 8.65 18.43 13.24 7.37 6.60
7.0 3.26 12.75 9.40 22.15 16.51 8.86 6.80
8.0 3.72 15.99 10.15 26.15 20.05 10.46 7.02
9.0 4.19 19.49 10.91 30.40 23.86 12.16 7.26
10.0 4.65 23.26 11.66 34.92 27.93 13.97 7.50
11.0 5.12 27.29 12.42 39.71 32.26 15.88 7.76
12.0 5.59 31.59 13.17 44.76 36.86 17.90 8.01
13.0 6.05 36.15 13.93 50.07 41.72 20.03 8.27
14.0 6.52 40.97 14.68 55.65 46.84 22.26 8.54
15.0 6.98 46.06 15.43 61.49 52.23 24.60 8.81
16.0 7.45 51.41 16.19 67.60 57.89 27.04 9.08
17.0 7.91 57.03 16.94 73.97 63.81 29.59 9.35
18.0 8.38 62.91 25.05 87.96 72.93 35.18 10.50
19.0 8.84 69.06 34.25 103.32 82.76 41.33 11.68
20.0 9.31 75.47 44.59 120.06 93.31 48.03 12.90
21.0 9.78 82.15 56.09 138.24 104.58 55.30 14.14
22.0 10.24 89.09 65.52 154.60 115.29 61.84 15.10
23.0 10.71 96.29 72.78 169.07 125.40 67.63 15.79
24.0 11.17 103.76 77.77 181.53 134.87 72.61 16.25
25.0 11.64 111.49 80.41 191.90 143.66 76.76 16.49
26.0 12.10 119.49 81.13 200.62 151.94 80.25 16.58
27.0 12.57 127.75 81.57 209.33 160.38 83.73 16.66
28.0 13.03 136.28 81.74 218.02 168.98 87.21 16.73
29.0 13.50 145.07 81.63 226.70 177.72 90.68 16.79
30.0 13.96 154.13 82.08 236.21 186.96 94.48 16.92
31.0 14.43 163.45 83.12 246.57 196.70 98.63 17.09
32.0 14.90 173.03 84.76 257.79 206.94 103.12 17.31
33.0 15.36 182.88 86.68 269.56 217.55 107.82 17.55
34.0 15.83 190.47 88.23 278.69 225.76 111.48 17.61
35.0 16.29 198.25 89.36 287.61 233.99 115.04 17.65
36.0 16.76 206.23 90.04 296.27 242.25 118.51 17.68
37.0 17.22 214.41 90.38 304.79 250.56 121.91 17.70
38.0 17.69 222.79 90.49 313.28 258.98 125.31 17.71
39.0 18.15 231.37 90.49 321.85 267.56 128.74 17.73
40.0 18.62 240.14 90.49 330.63 276.34 132.25 17.76
41.0 19.08 249.11 90.49 339.60 285.31 135.84 17.79
42.0 19.55 258.28 90.49 348.77 294.48 139.51 17.84
43.0 20.02 267.65 90.49 358.14 303.85 143.26 17.89
44.0 20.48 277.22 90.49 367.71 313.42 147.08 17.95
45.0 20.95 286.99 90.49 377.48 323.19 150.99 18.02
46.0 21.41 296.95 90.49 387.44 333.15 154.98 18.09
47.0 21.88 307.12 90.49 397.61 343.31 159.04 18.17
48.0 22.34 317.48 100.67 418.15 357.75 167.26 18.71
49.0 22.81 328.04 111.98 440.02 372.83 176.01 19.29
50.0 23.27 338.80 124.42 463.22 388.57 185.29 19.90
51.0 23.74 349.75 138.00 487.75 404.95 195.10 20.55
52.0 24.21 360.91 148.18 509.08 420.18 203.63 21.03
53.0 24.67 372.26 154.96 527.22 434.25 210.89 21.37
54.0 25.14 383.81 158.36 542.17 447.15 216.87 21.57
55.0 25.60 395.56 158.36 553.92 458.90 221.57 21.64
56.0 26.07 407.51 158.36 565.87 470.85 226.35 21.71
57.0 26.53 419.66 158.36 578.01 483.00 231.21 21.79
58.0 27.00 432.00 158.36 590.36 495.34 236.14 21.87
59.0 27.46 444.54 158.36 602.90 507.89 241.16 21.95
60.0 27.93 457.29 158.36 615.64 520.63 246.26 22.04

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-19

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3619E-01 0.1500E-04 0.1155E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1809E+00 0.7500E-04 0.5773E-02 0.5000E-04
0.3619E+00 0.1500E-03 0.1155E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1814E+02 0.7505E-02 0.5773E+00 0.5000E-02
0.2722E+02 0.1126E-01 0.8660E+00 0.7500E-02
0.3630E+02 0.1501E-01 0.1155E+01 0.1000E-01
0.9075E+02 0.3753E-01 0.2887E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1746E+03 0.7438E-01 0.5773E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2397E+03 0.1086E+00 0.8660E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2913E+03 0.1413E+00 0.1155E+02 0.1000E+00
0.4282E+03 0.3125E+00 0.2883E+02 0.2500E+00
0.4895E+03 0.5738E+00 0.5648E+02 0.5000E+00
0.5022E+03 0.7017E+00 0.6803E+02 0.6250E+00
0.5336E+03 0.1284E+01 0.1013E+03 0.1200E+01
0.5916E+03 0.2497E+01 0.1607E+03 0.2400E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.5047E-01 0.1689E-04 0.1650E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2523E+00 0.8443E-04 0.8248E-02 0.5000E-04
0.5047E+00 0.1689E-03 0.1650E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2533E+02 0.8453E-02 0.8248E+00 0.5000E-02
0.3800E+02 0.1268E-01 0.1237E+01 0.7500E-02
0.5067E+02 0.1691E-01 0.1650E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1267E+03 0.4227E-01 0.4124E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2396E+03 0.8323E-01 0.8248E+01 0.5000E-01
0.3225E+03 0.1201E+00 0.1237E+02 0.7500E-01
0.3814E+03 0.1543E+00 0.1650E+02 0.1000E+00
0.4878E+03 0.3222E+00 0.4111E+02 0.2500E+00
0.5293E+03 0.5814E+00 0.7852E+02 0.5000E+00
0.5449E+03 0.7100E+00 0.9419E+02 0.6250E+00
0.5711E+03 0.1291E+01 0.1204E+03 0.1200E+01
0.6218E+03 0.2502E+01 0.1710E+03 0.2400E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2283E-01 0.1319E-04 0.6598E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1141E+00 0.6595E-04 0.3299E-02 0.5000E-04
0.2283E+00 0.1319E-03 0.6598E-02 0.1000E-03
0.1143E+02 0.6596E-02 0.3299E+00 0.5000E-02
0.1715E+02 0.9895E-02 0.4949E+00 0.7500E-02
0.2287E+02 0.1319E-01 0.6598E+00 0.1000E-01
0.5718E+02 0.3299E-01 0.1650E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1121E+03 0.6574E-01 0.3299E+01 0.5000E-01
0.1587E+03 0.9730E-01 0.4949E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2010E+03 0.1284E+00 0.6598E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3671E+03 0.3027E+00 0.1656E+02 0.2500E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-20

0.4495E+03 0.5663E+00 0.3444E+02 0.5000E+00


0.4595E+03 0.6934E+00 0.4187E+02 0.6250E+00
0.4960E+03 0.1277E+01 0.8235E+02 0.1200E+01
0.5614E+03 0.2492E+01 0.1504E+03 0.2400E+01

- CASE ANALYZED : 4
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 4

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 4.500 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 4.500 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 22.905 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 60.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 0.59 0.33 6.14 6.46 2.78 2.58 10.97
2.0 1.18 1.30 6.54 7.84 3.92 3.14 6.66
3.0 1.77 2.93 7.11 10.04 5.77 4.02 5.68
4.0 2.36 5.20 7.90 13.10 8.36 5.24 5.56
5.0 2.95 7.95 8.68 16.64 11.43 6.65 5.65
6.0 3.53 11.00 9.47 20.47 14.79 8.19 5.79
7.0 4.12 14.35 10.25 24.60 18.45 9.84 5.97
8.0 4.71 17.99 11.04 29.03 22.40 11.61 6.16
9.0 5.30 21.93 11.82 33.75 26.66 13.50 6.37
10.0 5.89 26.17 12.61 38.78 31.21 15.51 6.58
11.0 6.48 30.70 13.39 44.10 36.06 17.64 6.80
12.0 7.07 35.54 14.18 49.72 41.21 19.89 7.03
13.0 7.66 40.67 14.97 55.63 46.65 22.25 7.26
14.0 8.25 46.09 15.75 61.84 52.39 24.74 7.50
15.0 8.84 51.82 16.54 68.36 58.43 27.34 7.74
16.0 9.43 57.84 17.32 75.16 64.77 30.07 7.97
17.0 10.02 64.16 24.83 88.99 74.09 35.59 8.89
18.0 10.60 70.78 33.26 104.04 84.08 41.62 9.81

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-21

19.0 11.19 77.69 42.65 120.34 94.75 48.14 10.75


20.0 11.78 84.91 53.02 137.93 106.11 55.17 11.71
21.0 12.37 92.42 63.06 155.47 117.64 62.19 12.57
22.0 12.96 100.22 71.39 171.61 128.78 68.64 13.24
23.0 13.55 108.33 77.94 186.26 139.50 74.51 13.75
24.0 14.14 116.73 82.62 199.35 149.78 79.74 14.10
25.0 14.73 125.43 83.61 209.05 158.88 83.62 14.19
26.0 15.32 134.43 84.38 218.81 168.18 87.52 14.29
27.0 15.91 143.72 84.91 228.64 177.69 91.45 14.37
28.0 16.50 153.32 85.21 238.52 187.40 95.41 14.46
29.0 17.08 163.21 85.61 248.82 197.45 99.53 14.56
30.0 17.67 173.39 86.48 259.87 207.98 103.95 14.70
31.0 18.26 183.88 87.83 271.70 219.01 108.68 14.88
32.0 18.85 194.66 89.67 284.33 230.53 113.73 15.08
33.0 19.44 205.74 92.03 297.77 242.55 119.11 15.32
34.0 20.03 214.27 94.38 308.66 252.03 123.46 15.41
35.0 20.62 223.03 96.74 319.77 261.73 127.91 15.51
36.0 21.21 232.01 99.10 331.11 271.65 132.44 15.61
37.0 21.80 241.21 101.14 342.36 281.67 136.94 15.71
38.0 22.39 250.64 102.85 353.49 291.78 141.39 15.79
39.0 22.98 260.29 104.18 364.47 301.96 145.79 15.86
40.0 23.57 270.16 105.11 375.27 312.20 150.11 15.92
41.0 24.15 280.25 105.67 385.92 322.52 154.37 15.98
42.0 24.74 290.57 105.95 396.52 332.95 158.61 16.03
43.0 25.33 301.11 106.04 407.15 343.53 162.86 16.07
44.0 25.92 311.88 106.04 417.92 354.29 167.17 16.12
45.0 26.51 322.86 106.04 428.91 365.28 171.56 16.18
46.0 27.10 334.07 106.04 440.12 376.49 176.05 16.24
47.0 27.69 345.51 116.51 462.01 392.11 184.81 16.69
48.0 28.28 357.16 128.02 485.18 408.37 194.07 17.16
49.0 28.87 369.04 140.58 509.62 425.27 203.85 17.65
50.0 29.46 381.15 154.18 535.33 442.82 214.13 18.17
51.0 30.05 393.47 166.74 560.21 460.17 224.08 18.65
52.0 30.63 406.02 176.16 582.18 476.48 232.87 19.00
53.0 31.22 418.79 182.43 601.23 491.77 240.49 19.26
54.0 31.81 431.79 185.57 617.36 506.02 246.95 19.41
55.0 32.40 445.01 185.57 630.58 519.24 252.23 19.46
56.0 32.99 458.45 185.57 644.02 532.68 257.61 19.52
57.0 33.58 472.11 185.57 657.69 546.34 263.07 19.59
58.0 34.17 486.00 185.57 671.58 560.23 268.63 19.65
59.0 34.76 500.11 185.57 685.69 574.34 274.27 19.73
60.0 35.35 514.45 185.57 700.02 588.68 280.01 19.80

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3548E-01 0.1391E-04 0.1203E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1774E+00 0.6954E-04 0.6014E-02 0.5000E-04
0.3548E+00 0.1391E-03 0.1203E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1777E+02 0.6957E-02 0.6014E+00 0.5000E-02
0.2667E+02 0.1044E-01 0.9021E+00 0.7500E-02
0.3556E+02 0.1392E-01 0.1203E+01 0.1000E-01
0.8891E+02 0.3479E-01 0.3007E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1760E+03 0.6949E-01 0.6014E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2419E+03 0.1019E+00 0.9021E+01 0.7500E-01
0.3031E+03 0.1340E+00 0.1203E+02 0.1000E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-22

0.4611E+03 0.3031E+00 0.3007E+02 0.2500E+00


0.5441E+03 0.5646E+00 0.5935E+02 0.5000E+00
0.5502E+03 0.6056E+00 0.6402E+02 0.5400E+00
0.6050E+03 0.1425E+01 0.1188E+03 0.1350E+01
0.6731E+03 0.2788E+01 0.1884E+03 0.2700E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.4913E-01 0.1536E-04 0.1718E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2457E+00 0.7680E-04 0.8591E-02 0.5000E-04
0.4913E+00 0.1536E-03 0.1718E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2464E+02 0.7686E-02 0.8591E+00 0.5000E-02
0.3696E+02 0.1153E-01 0.1289E+01 0.7500E-02
0.4929E+02 0.1537E-01 0.1718E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1232E+03 0.3844E-01 0.4296E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2417E+03 0.7662E-01 0.8591E+01 0.5000E-01
0.3272E+03 0.1112E+00 0.1289E+02 0.7500E-01
0.4018E+03 0.1451E+00 0.1718E+02 0.1000E+00
0.5374E+03 0.3126E+00 0.4296E+02 0.2500E+00
0.5899E+03 0.5713E+00 0.8275E+02 0.5000E+00
0.5962E+03 0.6125E+00 0.8908E+02 0.5400E+00
0.6481E+03 0.1432E+01 0.1410E+03 0.1350E+01
0.7075E+03 0.2792E+01 0.2004E+03 0.2700E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2254E-01 0.1250E-04 0.6873E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1127E+00 0.6252E-04 0.3437E-02 0.5000E-04
0.2254E+00 0.1250E-03 0.6873E-02 0.1000E-03
0.1128E+02 0.6253E-02 0.3437E+00 0.5000E-02
0.1692E+02 0.9380E-02 0.5155E+00 0.7500E-02
0.2257E+02 0.1251E-01 0.6873E+00 0.1000E-01
0.5643E+02 0.3127E-01 0.1718E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1125E+03 0.6252E-01 0.3437E+01 0.5000E-01
0.1594E+03 0.9279E-01 0.5155E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2049E+03 0.1229E+00 0.6873E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3832E+03 0.2935E+00 0.1718E+02 0.2500E+00
0.4981E+03 0.5579E+00 0.3595E+02 0.5000E+00
0.5040E+03 0.5987E+00 0.3897E+02 0.5400E+00
0.5619E+03 0.1419E+01 0.9650E+02 0.1350E+01
0.6387E+03 0.2783E+01 0.1763E+03 0.2700E+01

- CASE ANALYZED : 5
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 5

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 5.000 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 5.000 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-23

ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.


IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 28.278 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 60.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 0.73 0.36 6.47 6.83 2.95 2.73 9.40
2.0 1.45 1.45 6.95 8.40 4.23 3.36 5.77
3.0 2.18 3.25 7.57 10.82 6.28 4.33 4.96
4.0 2.91 5.78 8.35 14.13 9.12 5.65 4.86
5.0 3.64 8.84 9.14 17.97 12.49 7.19 4.94
6.0 4.36 12.22 9.92 22.15 16.19 8.86 5.07
7.0 5.09 15.94 10.71 26.65 20.22 10.66 5.23
8.0 5.82 19.99 11.49 31.48 24.59 12.59 5.41
9.0 6.55 24.37 12.28 36.64 29.28 14.66 5.60
10.0 7.27 29.07 13.06 42.14 34.30 16.86 5.79
11.0 8.00 34.11 13.85 47.96 39.65 19.19 6.00
12.0 8.73 39.48 14.64 54.12 45.34 21.65 6.20
13.0 9.46 45.18 15.42 60.60 51.35 24.24 6.41
14.0 10.18 51.21 16.21 67.42 57.70 26.97 6.62
15.0 10.91 57.58 16.99 74.57 64.37 29.83 6.83
16.0 11.64 64.27 23.69 87.96 73.74 35.18 7.56
17.0 12.36 71.29 31.15 102.44 83.75 40.98 8.29
18.0 13.09 78.64 39.40 118.04 94.40 47.22 9.02
19.0 13.82 86.33 48.45 134.78 105.71 53.91 9.75
20.0 14.55 94.34 58.33 152.67 117.67 61.07 10.50
21.0 15.27 102.68 66.91 169.60 129.45 67.84 11.10
22.0 16.00 111.36 74.13 185.49 141.01 74.19 11.59
23.0 16.73 120.37 79.91 200.28 152.33 80.11 11.97
24.0 17.46 129.70 82.67 212.37 162.77 84.95 12.17
25.0 18.18 139.37 83.68 223.05 172.84 89.22 12.27
26.0 18.91 149.37 84.51 233.88 183.17 93.55 12.37
27.0 19.64 159.69 85.14 244.84 193.75 97.93 12.47
28.0 20.36 170.35 85.58 255.93 204.58 102.37 12.57
29.0 21.09 181.34 86.37 267.71 215.89 107.08 12.69
30.0 21.82 192.66 87.54 280.20 227.67 112.08 12.84
31.0 22.55 204.31 89.09 293.40 239.94 117.36 13.01
32.0 23.27 216.29 91.04 307.33 252.70 122.93 13.20
33.0 24.00 228.60 93.39 321.99 265.96 128.80 13.42
34.0 24.73 238.08 95.75 333.83 276.38 133.53 13.50
35.0 25.46 247.81 98.10 345.92 287.05 138.37 13.59
36.0 26.18 257.79 100.46 358.25 297.97 143.30 13.68
37.0 26.91 268.01 102.82 370.83 309.14 148.33 13.78
38.0 27.64 278.49 105.17 383.66 320.56 153.46 13.88

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-24

39.0 28.37 289.21 107.53 396.74 332.22 158.69 13.99


40.0 29.09 300.18 109.89 410.06 344.13 164.02 14.10
41.0 29.82 311.39 111.97 423.36 356.18 169.35 14.20
42.0 30.55 322.86 113.76 436.61 368.36 174.65 14.29
43.0 31.27 334.57 115.22 449.79 380.66 179.92 14.38
44.0 32.00 346.53 116.34 462.87 393.06 185.15 14.46
45.0 32.73 358.74 117.08 475.82 405.57 190.33 14.54
46.0 33.46 371.19 127.76 498.95 422.30 199.58 14.91
47.0 34.18 383.90 139.15 523.04 439.55 209.22 15.30
48.0 34.91 396.85 151.31 548.16 457.37 219.26 15.70
49.0 35.64 410.05 164.33 574.38 475.78 229.75 16.12
50.0 36.37 423.50 178.29 601.78 494.81 240.71 16.55
51.0 37.09 437.19 189.45 626.64 512.97 250.66 16.89
52.0 37.82 451.13 197.82 648.96 530.26 259.58 17.16
53.0 38.55 465.33 203.40 668.73 546.69 267.49 17.35
54.0 39.27 479.77 206.19 685.96 562.24 274.38 17.47
55.0 40.00 494.45 206.19 700.65 576.93 280.26 17.52
56.0 40.73 509.39 206.19 715.58 591.86 286.23 17.57
57.0 41.46 524.57 206.19 730.76 607.05 292.31 17.63
58.0 42.18 540.00 206.19 746.19 622.48 298.48 17.69
59.0 42.91 555.68 206.19 761.87 638.16 304.75 17.75

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3390E-01 0.1300E-04 0.1203E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1695E+00 0.6498E-04 0.6014E-02 0.5000E-04
0.3390E+00 0.1300E-03 0.1203E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1697E+02 0.6500E-02 0.6014E+00 0.5000E-02
0.2547E+02 0.9750E-02 0.9021E+00 0.7500E-02
0.3396E+02 0.1300E-01 0.1203E+01 0.1000E-01
0.8490E+02 0.3250E-01 0.3007E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1697E+03 0.6500E-01 0.6014E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2374E+03 0.9615E-01 0.9021E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2992E+03 0.1267E+00 0.1203E+02 0.1000E+00
0.4761E+03 0.2936E+00 0.3007E+02 0.2500E+00
0.5810E+03 0.5547E+00 0.5945E+02 0.5000E+00
0.5961E+03 0.6567E+00 0.7114E+02 0.6000E+00
0.6572E+03 0.1565E+01 0.1320E+03 0.1500E+01
0.7329E+03 0.3076E+01 0.2093E+03 0.3000E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.4666E-01 0.1409E-04 0.1718E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2333E+00 0.7047E-04 0.8591E-02 0.5000E-04
0.4666E+00 0.1409E-03 0.1718E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2338E+02 0.7051E-02 0.8591E+00 0.5000E-02
0.3508E+02 0.1058E-01 0.1289E+01 0.7500E-02
0.4677E+02 0.1410E-01 0.1718E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1169E+03 0.3526E-01 0.4296E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2331E+03 0.7050E-01 0.8591E+01 0.5000E-01
0.3211E+03 0.1035E+00 0.1289E+02 0.7500E-01
0.4000E+03 0.1356E+00 0.1718E+02 0.1000E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-25

0.5663E+03 0.3024E+00 0.4296E+02 0.2500E+00


0.6309E+03 0.5605E+00 0.8316E+02 0.5000E+00
0.6467E+03 0.6627E+00 0.9897E+02 0.6000E+00
0.7045E+03 0.1571E+01 0.1567E+03 0.1500E+01
0.7705E+03 0.3080E+01 0.2227E+03 0.3000E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2167E-01 0.1193E-04 0.6873E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1083E+00 0.5963E-04 0.3437E-02 0.5000E-04
0.2167E+00 0.1193E-03 0.6873E-02 0.1000E-03
0.1084E+02 0.5964E-02 0.3437E+00 0.5000E-02
0.1626E+02 0.8946E-02 0.5155E+00 0.7500E-02
0.2169E+02 0.1193E-01 0.6873E+00 0.1000E-01
0.5423E+02 0.2982E-01 0.1718E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1085E+03 0.5964E-01 0.3437E+01 0.5000E-01
0.1558E+03 0.8890E-01 0.5155E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2001E+03 0.1179E+00 0.6873E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3846E+03 0.2848E+00 0.1718E+02 0.2500E+00
0.5309E+03 0.5490E+00 0.3574E+02 0.5000E+00
0.5454E+03 0.6507E+00 0.4330E+02 0.6000E+00
0.6100E+03 0.1560E+01 0.1072E+03 0.1500E+01
0.6954E+03 0.3072E+01 0.1959E+03 0.3000E+01

- CASE ANALYZED : 6
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 6

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 5.500 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 5.500 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 34.216 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 60.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-26

THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 0.88 0.40 6.85 7.25 3.14 2.90 8.23
2.0 1.76 1.59 7.38 8.97 4.54 3.59 5.10
3.0 2.64 3.58 8.03 11.60 6.79 4.64 4.39
4.0 3.52 6.36 8.81 15.17 9.88 6.07 4.31
5.0 4.40 9.72 9.60 19.32 13.56 7.73 4.39
6.0 5.28 13.45 10.38 23.83 17.60 9.53 4.51
7.0 6.16 17.53 11.17 28.70 22.00 11.48 4.66
8.0 7.04 21.99 11.95 33.94 26.77 13.58 4.82
9.0 7.92 26.80 12.74 39.54 31.90 15.82 4.99
10.0 8.80 31.98 13.52 45.51 37.39 18.20 5.17
11.0 9.68 37.53 14.31 51.84 43.25 20.73 5.35
12.0 10.56 43.43 15.10 58.53 49.47 23.41 5.54
13.0 11.44 49.70 15.88 65.58 56.05 26.23 5.73
14.0 12.32 56.34 16.67 73.00 63.00 29.20 5.93
15.0 13.20 63.33 22.78 86.11 72.45 34.45 6.52
16.0 14.08 70.69 29.54 100.24 82.51 40.09 7.12
17.0 14.96 78.42 36.97 115.39 93.21 46.16 7.71
18.0 15.84 86.51 45.08 131.59 104.54 52.64 8.31
19.0 16.72 94.96 53.89 148.85 116.52 59.54 8.90
20.0 17.60 103.77 62.53 166.31 128.79 66.52 9.45
21.0 18.48 112.95 70.10 183.05 140.99 73.22 9.90
22.0 19.36 122.50 76.54 199.03 153.11 79.61 10.28
23.0 20.24 132.40 80.40 212.80 164.56 85.12 10.51
24.0 21.12 142.67 82.88 225.55 175.82 90.22 10.68
25.0 22.00 153.31 83.92 237.22 186.87 94.89 10.78
26.0 22.88 164.30 84.79 249.10 198.22 99.64 10.89
27.0 23.76 175.66 85.50 261.16 209.86 104.47 10.99
28.0 24.64 187.39 86.27 273.66 221.89 109.46 11.11
29.0 25.52 199.47 87.33 286.81 234.41 114.72 11.24
30.0 26.40 211.93 88.71 300.63 247.41 120.25 11.39
31.0 27.28 224.74 90.40 315.14 260.90 126.06 11.55
32.0 28.16 237.92 92.42 330.33 274.89 132.13 11.73
33.0 29.04 251.46 94.77 346.23 289.37 138.49 11.92
34.0 29.92 261.89 97.13 359.02 300.74 143.61 12.00
35.0 30.80 272.59 99.49 372.08 312.39 148.83 12.08
36.0 31.68 283.57 101.84 385.41 324.30 154.16 12.16
37.0 32.56 294.81 104.20 399.01 336.49 159.61 12.25
38.0 33.44 306.33 106.55 412.89 348.96 165.16 12.35
39.0 34.32 318.13 108.91 427.04 361.69 170.82 12.44
40.0 35.20 330.19 111.27 441.46 374.70 176.58 12.54
41.0 36.08 342.53 113.62 456.16 387.98 182.46 12.64
42.0 36.96 355.14 115.98 471.12 401.53 188.45 12.75
43.0 37.84 368.03 118.34 486.36 415.36 194.54 12.85
44.0 38.72 381.18 120.69 501.88 429.46 200.75 12.96
45.0 39.60 394.61 132.95 527.56 447.79 211.02 13.32
46.0 40.48 408.31 145.78 554.09 466.62 221.64 13.69
47.0 41.36 422.29 159.17 581.46 485.95 232.58 14.06
48.0 42.24 436.53 173.10 609.63 505.77 243.85 14.43
49.0 43.12 451.05 187.55 638.60 526.07 255.44 14.81
50.0 44.00 465.85 200.84 666.69 546.18 266.67 15.15
51.0 44.88 480.91 211.35 692.26 565.45 276.91 15.42
52.0 45.76 496.25 219.14 715.39 583.91 286.16 15.63
53.0 46.64 511.86 224.28 736.14 601.57 294.45 15.78
54.0 47.52 527.74 226.81 754.55 618.47 301.82 15.88
55.0 48.40 543.90 226.81 770.71 634.62 308.28 15.92
56.0 49.28 560.33 226.81 787.14 651.05 314.86 15.97
57.0 50.16 577.03 226.81 803.84 667.75 321.54 16.02
58.0 51.04 594.00 226.81 820.81 684.73 328.33 16.08

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-27

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3252E-01 0.1235E-04 0.1203E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1626E+00 0.6174E-04 0.6014E-02 0.5000E-04
0.3252E+00 0.1235E-03 0.1203E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1628E+02 0.6175E-02 0.6014E+00 0.5000E-02
0.2442E+02 0.9263E-02 0.9021E+00 0.7500E-02
0.3257E+02 0.1235E-01 0.1203E+01 0.1000E-01
0.8143E+02 0.3088E-01 0.3007E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1629E+03 0.6176E-01 0.6014E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2335E+03 0.9196E-01 0.9021E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2931E+03 0.1213E+00 0.1203E+02 0.1000E+00
0.4893E+03 0.2864E+00 0.3007E+02 0.2500E+00
0.6126E+03 0.5467E+00 0.5956E+02 0.5000E+00
0.6391E+03 0.7095E+00 0.7825E+02 0.6600E+00
0.7064E+03 0.1707E+01 0.1452E+03 0.1650E+01
0.7897E+03 0.3367E+01 0.2302E+03 0.3300E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.4457E-01 0.1320E-04 0.1718E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2228E+00 0.6600E-04 0.8591E-02 0.5000E-04
0.4457E+00 0.1320E-03 0.1718E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2232E+02 0.6602E-02 0.8591E+00 0.5000E-02
0.3349E+02 0.9904E-02 0.1289E+01 0.7500E-02
0.4466E+02 0.1321E-01 0.1718E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1117E+03 0.3301E-01 0.4296E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2233E+03 0.6603E-01 0.8591E+01 0.5000E-01
0.3161E+03 0.9790E-01 0.1289E+02 0.7500E-01
0.3928E+03 0.1285E+00 0.1718E+02 0.1000E+00
0.5921E+03 0.2944E+00 0.4296E+02 0.2500E+00
0.6689E+03 0.5518E+00 0.8358E+02 0.5000E+00
0.6942E+03 0.7148E+00 0.1089E+03 0.6600E+00
0.7577E+03 0.1712E+01 0.1724E+03 0.1650E+01
0.8302E+03 0.3371E+01 0.2450E+03 0.3300E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2088E-01 0.1151E-04 0.6873E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1044E+00 0.5757E-04 0.3437E-02 0.5000E-04
0.2088E+00 0.1151E-03 0.6873E-02 0.1000E-03
0.1044E+02 0.5757E-02 0.3437E+00 0.5000E-02
0.1567E+02 0.8636E-02 0.5155E+00 0.7500E-02
0.2090E+02 0.1151E-01 0.6873E+00 0.1000E-01
0.5225E+02 0.2879E-01 0.1718E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1045E+03 0.5758E-01 0.3437E+01 0.5000E-01
0.1525E+03 0.8609E-01 0.5155E+01 0.7500E-01
0.1953E+03 0.1142E+00 0.6873E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3854E+03 0.2783E+00 0.1718E+02 0.2500E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-28

0.5559E+03 0.5415E+00 0.3553E+02 0.5000E+00


0.5839E+03 0.7041E+00 0.4763E+02 0.6600E+00
0.6551E+03 0.1702E+01 0.1179E+03 0.1650E+01
0.7492E+03 0.3363E+01 0.2155E+03 0.3300E+01

- CASE ANALYZED : 7
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 7

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 6.000 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 6.000 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 40.720 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 60.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 1.05 0.43 7.24 7.67 3.33 3.07 7.33
2.0 2.09 1.73 7.82 9.55 4.86 3.82 4.56
3.0 3.14 3.90 8.48 12.38 7.29 4.95 3.94
4.0 4.19 6.94 9.27 16.20 10.64 6.48 3.87
5.0 5.24 10.60 10.05 20.66 14.63 8.26 3.94
6.0 6.28 14.67 10.84 25.51 19.00 10.20 4.06
7.0 7.33 19.13 11.62 30.75 23.78 12.30 4.19
8.0 8.38 23.99 12.41 36.39 28.95 14.56 4.34
9.0 9.43 29.24 13.19 42.43 34.52 16.97 4.50
10.0 10.47 34.89 13.98 48.87 40.48 19.55 4.67
11.0 11.52 40.94 14.77 55.70 46.84 22.28 4.83
12.0 12.57 47.38 15.55 62.93 53.60 25.17 5.01
13.0 13.62 54.22 16.34 70.56 60.76 28.22 5.18
14.0 14.66 61.46 21.93 83.39 70.23 33.36 5.69
15.0 15.71 69.09 28.08 97.17 80.32 38.87 6.19
16.0 16.76 77.12 34.80 111.92 91.04 44.77 6.68
17.0 17.80 85.55 42.10 127.65 102.39 51.06 7.17
18.0 18.85 94.37 50.00 144.38 114.37 57.75 7.66

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-29

19.0 19.90 103.59 58.52 162.11 127.00 64.84 8.15


20.0 20.95 113.21 66.18 179.38 139.68 71.75 8.56
21.0 21.99 123.22 72.94 196.16 152.40 78.46 8.92
22.0 23.04 133.63 77.50 211.13 164.63 84.45 9.16
23.0 24.09 144.44 80.95 225.39 176.82 90.16 9.36
24.0 25.14 155.64 83.24 238.88 188.94 95.55 9.50
25.0 26.18 167.24 84.32 251.56 200.97 100.63 9.61
26.0 27.23 179.24 85.26 264.50 213.34 105.80 9.71
27.0 28.28 191.63 86.05 277.69 226.05 111.07 9.82
28.0 29.33 204.42 87.09 291.51 239.26 116.60 9.94
29.0 30.37 217.61 88.37 305.98 252.96 122.39 10.07
30.0 31.42 231.19 89.91 321.10 267.15 128.44 10.22
31.0 32.47 245.17 91.71 336.88 281.85 134.75 10.38
32.0 33.51 259.55 93.78 353.33 297.06 141.33 10.54
33.0 34.56 274.32 96.14 370.46 312.78 148.18 10.72
34.0 35.61 285.70 98.49 384.19 325.10 153.68 10.79
35.0 36.66 297.37 100.85 398.23 337.71 159.29 10.86
36.0 37.70 309.35 103.21 412.55 350.63 165.02 10.94
37.0 38.75 321.62 105.56 427.18 363.84 170.87 11.02
38.0 39.80 334.18 107.92 442.10 377.35 176.84 11.11
39.0 40.85 347.05 110.28 457.33 391.16 182.93 11.20
40.0 41.89 360.21 112.63 472.84 405.26 189.14 11.29
41.0 42.94 373.67 114.99 488.66 419.67 195.46 11.38
42.0 43.99 387.43 117.35 504.77 434.37 201.91 11.48
43.0 45.04 401.48 119.70 521.19 449.36 208.47 11.57
44.0 46.08 415.83 131.38 547.22 468.39 218.89 11.87
45.0 47.13 430.48 143.95 574.43 488.06 229.77 12.19
46.0 48.18 445.43 157.41 602.84 508.39 241.14 12.51
47.0 49.22 460.68 171.78 632.45 529.39 252.98 12.85
48.0 50.27 476.22 187.07 663.29 551.05 265.31 13.19
49.0 51.32 492.06 202.91 694.96 573.22 277.99 13.54
50.0 52.37 508.19 216.41 724.60 594.76 289.84 13.84
51.0 53.41 524.63 227.50 752.13 615.63 300.85 14.08
52.0 54.46 541.36 236.11 777.47 635.81 310.99 14.28
53.0 55.51 558.39 242.18 800.57 655.26 320.23 14.42
54.0 56.56 575.72 245.64 821.36 673.97 328.54 14.52
55.0 57.60 593.34 246.54 839.88 691.96 335.95 14.58
56.0 58.65 611.26 247.07 858.34 710.09 343.34 14.63
57.0 59.70 629.48 247.34 876.83 728.42 350.73 14.69

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3131E-01 0.1188E-04 0.1202E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1566E+00 0.5938E-04 0.6012E-02 0.5000E-04
0.3131E+00 0.1188E-03 0.1202E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1566E+02 0.5938E-02 0.6012E+00 0.5000E-02
0.2351E+02 0.8907E-02 0.9018E+00 0.7500E-02
0.3135E+02 0.1188E-01 0.1202E+01 0.1000E-01
0.7838E+02 0.2969E-01 0.3006E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1568E+03 0.5938E-01 0.6012E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2301E+03 0.8884E-01 0.9018E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2877E+03 0.1173E+00 0.1202E+02 0.1000E+00
0.5017E+03 0.2808E+00 0.3006E+02 0.2500E+00
0.6375E+03 0.5400E+00 0.5964E+02 0.5000E+00
0.6795E+03 0.7635E+00 0.8533E+02 0.7200E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 1 – 5-30

0.7530E+03 0.1851E+01 0.1583E+03 0.1800E+01


0.8439E+03 0.3659E+01 0.2511E+03 0.3600E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.4277E-01 0.1255E-04 0.1718E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2138E+00 0.6275E-04 0.8588E-02 0.5000E-04
0.4277E+00 0.1255E-03 0.1718E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2141E+02 0.6276E-02 0.8588E+00 0.5000E-02
0.3212E+02 0.9415E-02 0.1288E+01 0.7500E-02
0.4283E+02 0.1255E-01 0.1718E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1071E+03 0.3138E-01 0.4294E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2142E+03 0.6277E-01 0.8588E+01 0.5000E-01
0.3120E+03 0.9373E-01 0.1288E+02 0.7500E-01
0.3859E+03 0.1232E+00 0.1718E+02 0.1000E+00
0.6161E+03 0.2881E+00 0.4294E+02 0.2500E+00
0.7042E+03 0.5449E+00 0.8396E+02 0.5000E+00
0.7389E+03 0.7682E+00 0.1187E+03 0.7200E+00
0.8082E+03 0.1855E+01 0.1880E+03 0.1800E+01
0.8873E+03 0.3662E+01 0.2671E+03 0.3600E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2017E-01 0.1121E-04 0.6871E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1008E+00 0.5605E-04 0.3435E-02 0.5000E-04
0.2017E+00 0.1121E-03 0.6871E-02 0.1000E-03
0.1008E+02 0.5605E-02 0.3435E+00 0.5000E-02
0.1513E+02 0.8408E-02 0.5153E+00 0.7500E-02
0.2018E+02 0.1121E-01 0.6871E+00 0.1000E-01
0.5046E+02 0.2803E-01 0.1718E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1009E+03 0.5606E-01 0.3435E+01 0.5000E-01
0.1496E+03 0.8400E-01 0.5153E+01 0.7500E-01
0.1910E+03 0.1115E+00 0.6871E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3863E+03 0.2735E+00 0.1718E+02 0.2500E+00
0.5703E+03 0.5351E+00 0.3532E+02 0.5000E+00
0.6201E+03 0.7587E+00 0.5194E+02 0.7200E+00
0.6978E+03 0.1846E+01 0.1286E+03 0.1800E+01
0.8005E+03 0.3656E+01 0.2350E+03 0.3600E+01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-31

5.3 Example Problem 2 – Mixed Clay/Sand


This is an example of a shaft drilled into a soil of a mixed profile with layers of clay and sand. The
example is modeled after load tests performed and reported by Touma and Reese, 1972, at the G1 site.

5.3.1 Soil Profile


The soil profile is shown in Figure 5.6. The water table is at a depth of 17 ft below the ground surface.

5.3.2 Soil Properties


Values of undrained shear strength obtained from laboratory tests and N-values (blow counts per foot)
from the Standard Penetration Test are included in Figure 5.6. Top 5 ft of clay is assumed with no
strength for transfers in side resistance (unit weight is considered).

Figure 5.6 General soil description of Example Problem 2.

5.3.3 Construction
High-quality construction, good specifications, and excellent inspection are assumed.

5.3.4 Loadings
Working axial load is 150 tons, no downdrag is expected, and lateral loading is negligible. The depth to
the zone of seasonal moisture change is judged to be about 10 feet.

5.3.5 Factor of Safety


Soil conditions across the site are variable, and the foundation is for a major and complex structure. An
overall factor of safety of 3.0 was selected.

5.3.6 Ultimate Load


Using the factor of safety of 3, the ultimate axial load is computed to be 450 Tons.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-32

5.3.7 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft


A straight shaft is selected with a diameter of 3.0 ft and a penetration of 59 feet.

5.3.8 Hand Computations

Side Resistance
Computations are performed assuming a total unit weight of clay equal to 125 pcf and total unit weight of
sand equal to 115 pcf. For ease of hand computations, an average value of  was selected for the sand
layer. However, the computer program has been instructed to generate internally the values of  and to
interpolate linearly with depth. The hand computations are as follows:
Soil Depth Interval A Avg. effective stress z Qs
Type ft. ft2 tsf or  tons
Clay 0-5 --- (cased) 0 0
Clay 5-32 207.3 0.81 0.55 116.7
Sand 32.59 254.5 1.887 0.6 288.1
Qs = 404.8

Base Resistance
Computations for base resistance are performed using the soil at the base of the shaft.
At the 59-ft location:
NSPT= 25.
qB = (0.6) (25) = 15.0 tsf
AB = 7.07 ft2
QB = (7.07) (15.0) = 106.0 tons

Total Resistance
QU = 404.8 + 106.0 = 510 tons > QT= 450 tons (OK).

5.3.9 Comparison of Results


Table 5.2 contains a comparison of the results obtained from hand computations against those from
computer run in SHAFT.
Category Manual Calculations Computer Analysis Deviation
(tons) (tons)
Side Resistance 405 390(a) -3.7%
(b)
Tip Resistance 106 129 21.7%
Total Capacity 510 519 1.8%
(a)
Values of  were generated at the top and bottom of each sand layer and
were interpolated linearly by the program.
(b)
The computer takes into account soil properties of two diameters below the
bottom of the drilled shaft.
Table 5.2 Comparison of results for Example Problem 2

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-33

5.3.10 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 2 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 2, Touma and Reese, 1972, G1 Site


1
2 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
3 3 0 0 5 0 3500000
5 17 59 3 3
2 5
0 125 0.0 0 0 6400 0 1 1
0 125 0.0 0 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
2 32
0 125 0.0 1600 0 6400 0 1 1
0 125 0.0 1600 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
1 40
0.0 115 0 0 20 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 20 4000 0 1 1
2
0 0
1 64
0.0 115 0 0 25 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 25 4000 0 1 1
2
0 0
1 80
0.0 115 0 0 50 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 50 4000 0 1 1
2
0 0

5.3.11 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


Resulting plots of ultimate skin friction, ultimate tip resistance, and ultimate total capacity versus depth
provided by the computer program may be observed in Figure 5.7, Figure 5.8 and Figure 5.9 respectively.
Results of axial load versus short-term settlement are included in Figure 5.10.
To introduce another program feature, Figure 5.11 shows a graphical display of the shaft and soil layers
along with a plot of ultimate load transfers in side resistance. This type of graph may help to display the
importance of each soil layer for various load transfers selected in the Show 3D View > Combined
Plots menu.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-34

Figure 5.7 Curve of Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth for Example Problem 2.

Figure 5.8 Curve of Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth for Example Problem 2.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-35

Figure 5.9 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 2.

Figure 5.10 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement (averaged) for Example Problem 2.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-36

Figure 5.11 Graphical plot of ultimate skin friction with depth for Example Problem 2.

5.3.12 Output Data


The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem2 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-2.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-2.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-2.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-2.sf8r

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and Date of Analysis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-37

Date: June 01, 2017 Time: 15:29:01

Example Problem 2, Touma and Reese, 1972, G1 Site

PROPOSED DEPTH = 59.0 FT


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 5
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 17.0 FT.


-------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE FRICTION CAPACITY = 3.00


-------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 3.00
------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.600E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.000E+00
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.800E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.000E+00
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.500E+01

LAYER NO 2----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.800E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.160E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.500E+01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-38

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.160E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.320E+02

LAYER NO 3----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.736E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.359E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.200E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.320E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.646E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.356E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.200E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.400E+02

LAYER NO 4----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.646E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.366E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.250E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.400E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.420E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.357E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.250E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.640E+02

LAYER NO 5----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.420E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.408E+02 (*)

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-39

BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.500E+02


SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.640E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.293E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.393E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.500E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.800E+02

(*) ESTIMATED BY THE PROGRAM BASED ON OTHER PARAMETERS

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 3.000 FT.


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 3.000 FT.
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 5.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN

COMPUTATION RESULTS
-------------------

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 3.000 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 3.000 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 5.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 10.180 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 59.000 FT.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-40

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
6.0 1.57 4.15 46.36 50.50 19.60 16.83 32.15
7.0 1.83 8.29 46.57 54.86 23.82 18.29 29.93
8.0 2.09 12.44 46.77 59.22 28.03 19.74 28.27
9.0 2.36 16.59 46.98 63.57 32.25 21.19 26.98
10.0 2.62 20.74 47.19 67.93 36.47 22.64 25.94
11.0 2.88 24.88 47.40 72.29 40.69 24.10 25.10
12.0 3.14 29.03 47.61 76.64 44.90 25.55 24.39
13.0 3.40 33.18 47.82 81.00 49.12 27.00 23.80
14.0 3.67 37.33 48.03 85.36 53.34 28.45 23.29
15.0 3.93 41.47 48.24 89.72 57.55 29.91 22.84
16.0 4.19 45.62 48.45 94.07 61.77 31.36 22.46
17.0 4.45 49.77 48.66 98.43 65.99 32.81 22.11
18.0 4.71 53.92 48.87 102.79 70.21 34.26 21.81
19.0 4.97 58.06 49.08 107.14 74.42 35.71 21.54
20.0 5.24 62.21 49.29 111.50 78.64 37.17 21.29
21.0 5.50 66.36 49.50 115.86 82.86 38.62 21.07
22.0 5.76 70.51 49.71 120.21 87.08 40.07 20.87
23.0 6.02 74.65 49.92 124.57 91.29 41.52 20.69
24.0 6.28 78.80 50.13 128.93 95.51 42.98 20.52
25.0 6.55 82.95 50.34 133.28 99.73 44.43 20.36
26.0 6.81 87.10 50.54 137.64 103.94 45.88 20.22
27.0 7.07 91.24 57.91 149.15 110.55 49.72 21.10
28.0 7.33 95.39 66.25 161.64 117.47 53.88 22.05
29.0 7.59 99.54 75.56 175.10 124.73 58.37 23.06
30.0 7.85 103.69 81.75 185.44 130.94 61.81 23.61
31.0 8.12 107.83 84.83 192.67 136.11 64.22 23.74
32.0 8.38 111.98 84.83 196.81 140.26 65.60 23.49
33.0 8.64 122.53 84.83 207.37 150.81 69.12 24.00
34.0 8.90 133.09 84.83 217.93 161.37 72.64 24.48
35.0 9.16 143.65 89.33 232.99 173.43 77.66 25.42
36.0 9.43 154.22 94.47 248.69 185.71 82.90 26.38
37.0 9.69 164.78 100.26 265.03 198.20 88.34 27.36
38.0 9.95 175.33 104.11 279.44 210.04 93.15 28.09
39.0 10.21 185.88 106.04 291.92 221.22 97.31 28.59
40.0 10.47 196.41 106.04 302.45 231.76 100.82 28.88
41.0 10.74 206.93 106.04 312.97 242.27 104.32 29.15
42.0 11.00 217.42 106.04 323.47 252.77 107.82 29.41
43.0 11.26 227.90 106.04 333.94 263.25 111.31 29.66
44.0 11.52 238.35 106.04 344.40 273.70 114.80 29.89
45.0 11.78 248.78 106.04 354.82 284.13 118.27 30.11
46.0 12.04 259.17 106.04 365.22 294.52 121.74 30.32
47.0 12.31 269.54 106.04 375.58 304.88 125.19 30.52
48.0 12.57 279.86 106.04 385.90 315.21 128.63 30.71
49.0 12.83 290.15 106.04 396.19 325.49 132.06 30.88
50.0 13.09 300.39 106.04 406.43 335.73 135.48 31.04
51.0 13.35 310.58 106.04 416.63 345.93 138.88 31.20
52.0 13.62 320.73 106.04 426.77 356.08 142.26 31.35

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-41

53.0 13.88 330.83 106.04 436.87 366.18 145.62 31.48


54.0 14.14 340.87 106.04 446.91 376.22 148.97 31.61
55.0 14.40 350.86 106.04 456.90 386.20 152.30 31.73
56.0 14.66 360.78 106.04 466.82 396.13 155.61 31.84
57.0 14.92 370.65 106.04 476.69 405.99 158.90 31.94
58.0 15.19 380.44 106.04 486.48 415.79 162.16 32.03
59.0 15.45 390.17 128.54 518.71 433.02 172.90 33.58

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.5372E-01 0.2187E-04 0.1250E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2686E+00 0.1094E-03 0.6248E-02 0.5000E-04
0.5372E+00 0.2187E-03 0.1250E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2706E+02 0.1097E-01 0.6248E+00 0.5000E-02
0.4060E+02 0.1646E-01 0.9372E+00 0.7500E-02
0.5413E+02 0.2194E-01 0.1250E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1312E+03 0.5454E-01 0.3124E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2143E+03 0.1009E+00 0.6248E+01 0.5000E-01
0.2759E+03 0.1424E+00 0.9372E+01 0.7500E-01
0.3090E+03 0.1774E+00 0.1250E+02 0.1000E+00
0.3928E+03 0.3543E+00 0.3099E+02 0.2500E+00
0.4220E+03 0.6168E+00 0.5834E+02 0.5000E+00
0.4241E+03 0.7443E+00 0.6704E+02 0.6250E+00
0.4377E+03 0.1025E+01 0.8226E+02 0.9000E+00
0.4851E+03 0.1944E+01 0.1305E+03 0.1800E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.8127E-01 0.2715E-04 0.1785E-02 0.1000E-04
0.4063E+00 0.1358E-03 0.8926E-02 0.5000E-04
0.8127E+00 0.2715E-03 0.1785E-01 0.1000E-03
0.4107E+02 0.1365E-01 0.8926E+00 0.5000E-02
0.6160E+02 0.2047E-01 0.1339E+01 0.7500E-02
0.8214E+02 0.2729E-01 0.1785E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1882E+03 0.6673E-01 0.4463E+01 0.2500E-01
0.2828E+03 0.1181E+00 0.8926E+01 0.5000E-01
0.3415E+03 0.1611E+00 0.1339E+02 0.7500E-01
0.3732E+03 0.1960E+00 0.1785E+02 0.1000E+00
0.4306E+03 0.3658E+00 0.4363E+02 0.2500E+00
0.4614E+03 0.6297E+00 0.8069E+02 0.5000E+00
0.4657E+03 0.7575E+00 0.8885E+02 0.6250E+00
0.4739E+03 0.1036E+01 0.9769E+02 0.9000E+00
0.5150E+03 0.1952E+01 0.1388E+03 0.1800E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3054E-01 0.1715E-04 0.7141E-03 0.1000E-04
0.1527E+00 0.8574E-04 0.3570E-02 0.5000E-04
0.3054E+00 0.1715E-03 0.7141E-02 0.1000E-03

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 2 – 5-42

0.1534E+02 0.8587E-02 0.3570E+00 0.5000E-02


0.2301E+02 0.1288E-01 0.5356E+00 0.7500E-02
0.3068E+02 0.1717E-01 0.7141E+00 0.1000E-01
0.7659E+02 0.4293E-01 0.1785E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1412E+03 0.8350E-01 0.3570E+01 0.5000E-01
0.1952E+03 0.1219E+00 0.5356E+01 0.7500E-01
0.2343E+03 0.1573E+00 0.7141E+01 0.1000E+00
0.3544E+03 0.3426E+00 0.1835E+02 0.2500E+00
0.3788E+03 0.6034E+00 0.3599E+02 0.5000E+00
0.3818E+03 0.7310E+00 0.4524E+02 0.6250E+00
0.4015E+03 0.1014E+01 0.6684E+02 0.9000E+00
0.4551E+03 0.1936E+01 0.1221E+03 0.1800E+01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-43

5.4 Example Problem 3 – Clay


This is an example of a shaft drilled into clay and with small bell at the tip. The example is modeled after
load tests performed and reported by Whitaker and Cooke, 1966, Pile A.

5.4.1 Soil Profile


The soil profile is shown in Figure 5.12. The clay is overconsolidated. The depth to the water table was
not given and is not needed in capacity calculations (with cohesive soil). However, the water table should
be obtained for construction considerations.

5.4.2 Soil Properties


Values of undrained shear strength obtained from laboratory tests are included in Figure 5.12.

Figure 5.12 General soil description of Example Problem 3.

5.4.3 Construction
High-quality construction, good specifications, and excellent inspection are assumed.

5.4.4 Loadings
Working axial load is 230 tons, no downdrag is expected, expansive clay is not a problem, and lateral
loading is negligible. The depth to the zone of seasonal moisture change is judged to be about 10 feet.

5.4.5 Factor of Safety


It is assumed that a load test has been performed in the area, that the design parameters have been proven,
and that the soil conditions across the site are relatively uniform; therefore, an overall factor of safety of
2.0 was selected.

5.4.6 Ultimate Load


Using a factor of safety of 2, the ultimate axial load was computed to be 460 tons.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-44

5.4.7 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft


An under-reamed shaft was selected to penetrate a total of 40 ft into the clay. The height of the bell is 4.0
ft, making the length of the straight-sided portion 36.0 feet. The diameter of the straight-sided portion of
the shaft is 2.58 ft and the diameter of the bell is 5.5 feet. Since 5.5 ft (66 in) is less than 75 in, reduced
end bearing need not be considered. A rotated graphical representation of this model using the
Computation > 3D View feature along with displayed soil layers and depths is shown in Figure 5.13.

Figure 5.13 3D View of Example Problem 3.

5.4.8 Hand Computations

Side Resistance
For ease of hand computations, it is assumed a constant value of Az equal to 0.55 and an average cu of
2,280 psf. However, the computer program interpolates linearly the top and bottom values of cu with
depth. The hand computations are as follows:
Depth interval A Avg. effective z Qs
ft. ft2 stress, tsf tons
0-5 0 0
5-33.4 230.2 1.14 0.55 144.3
33.4-40 0 0
Qs=144.3

Base Resistance
The average undrained shear strength over one base diameter below the base is 1.48 tsf and the area of the
base is 23.76 ft2.
qB = (1.48) (9) = 13.32 tsf

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-45

AB = 23.76 ft2
QB = (13.32) (23.76) = 316.5 tons

Total Resistance
QU = 144.3 + 316.5 = 461 tons  QT= 460 tons (OK).

5.4.9 Comparison of Results


Table 5.3 contains a comparison of the results obtained from hand computations against those from
computer run in SHAFT.

Category Manual Calculations Computer Analysis Deviation


(tons) (tons)
Side Resistance 144 139* -3.5%
Tip Resistance 317 330 -4.1%
Total Capacity 461 469 1.7%
*values of cu at the top and bottom of the clay layer were interpolated linearly by the
program
Table 5.3 Comparison of results for Example Problem 3

5.4.10 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 3 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 3, Whitaker and Cooke, 1996, Pile A


1
2 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
2.58 0 2.13 20 5 2.58 3500000
2 0 40 2 2
2 50
9 125 0.0 1600 0 6400 0 1 1
9 125 0.0 3200 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
2 80
9 125 0.0 3200 0 6400 0 1 1
9 125 0.0 3200 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55

5.4.11 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The resulting plot of combined ultimate axial capacities versus depth provided by the computer program
may be observed in Figure 5.14. Results of axial load versus short-term settlement are included in Figure
5.15.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-46

Figure 5.14 Curve of Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) for Example Problem 3.

Figure 5.15 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement (combined) for Example Problem 3.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-47

5.4.12 Output Data


The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem 3 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-3.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-3.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-3.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-3.sf8r

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and Date of Analysis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 01, 2017 Time: 15:53:01

Example Problem 3, Whitaker and Cooke, 1996, Pile A

PROPOSED DEPTH = 40.0 FT


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 2
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 0.0 FT.


-------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE FRICTION CAPACITY = 2.00


-------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.00
------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-48

END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01


UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.160E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.320E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.500E+02

LAYER NO 2----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.320E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.500E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.320E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.800E+02

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 2.580 FT.


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 2.580 FT.
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 2.130 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 20.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 5.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 2.580 FT.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN

COMPUTATION RESULTS
-------------------

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-49

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 2.580 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 5.495 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 4.255 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 20.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 5.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 2.580 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 7.529 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 1.943 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 40.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
13.0 3.64 3.99 237.86 241.85 122.92 120.93 66.50
14.0 3.83 8.06 241.27 249.33 128.70 124.67 65.09
15.0 4.02 12.20 244.69 256.89 134.54 128.44 63.83
16.0 4.22 16.41 248.10 264.51 140.46 132.26 62.71
17.0 4.41 20.69 251.52 272.21 146.45 136.10 61.70
18.0 4.61 25.04 254.94 279.97 152.51 139.99 60.80
19.0 4.80 29.46 258.35 287.81 158.64 143.91 59.98
20.0 4.99 33.96 261.77 295.72 164.84 147.86 59.23
21.0 5.19 38.52 265.18 303.70 171.11 151.85 58.56
22.0 5.38 43.16 268.60 311.76 177.46 155.88 57.95
23.0 5.57 47.87 272.01 319.88 183.87 159.94 57.39
24.0 5.77 52.65 275.43 328.08 190.36 164.04 56.89
25.0 5.96 57.50 278.85 336.34 196.92 168.17 56.43
26.0 6.15 62.42 282.26 344.68 203.55 172.34 56.01
27.0 6.35 67.41 285.68 353.09 210.25 176.55 55.62
28.0 6.54 72.48 289.09 361.57 217.02 180.79 55.27
29.0 6.74 77.61 292.51 370.12 223.87 185.06 54.95
30.0 6.93 82.82 295.93 378.75 230.78 189.37 54.66
31.0 7.12 88.10 299.34 387.44 237.77 193.72 54.40
32.0 7.32 93.45 302.76 396.21 244.83 198.10 54.15
33.0 7.51 98.87 306.17 405.05 251.96 202.52 53.93
34.0 7.70 104.36 309.59 413.95 259.16 206.98 53.73

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-50

35.0 7.90 109.93 313.01 422.93 266.43 211.47 53.55


36.0 8.09 115.56 316.42 431.99 273.78 215.99 53.39
37.0 8.28 121.27 319.84 441.11 281.19 220.55 53.24
38.0 8.48 127.05 323.25 450.30 288.68 225.15 53.11
39.0 8.67 132.90 326.67 459.57 296.23 229.78 53.00
40.0 8.87 138.82 330.09 468.91 303.86 234.45 52.89

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.3318E-01 0.1752E-04 0.3954E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1659E+00 0.8759E-04 0.1977E-01 0.5000E-04
0.3318E+00 0.1752E-03 0.3954E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1673E+02 0.8782E-02 0.1977E+01 0.5000E-02
0.2510E+02 0.1317E-01 0.2966E+01 0.7500E-02
0.3346E+02 0.1757E-01 0.3954E+01 0.1000E-01
0.8204E+02 0.4377E-01 0.9886E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1249E+03 0.7948E-01 0.1977E+02 0.5000E-01
0.1591E+03 0.1132E+00 0.2966E+02 0.7500E-01
0.1789E+03 0.1441E+00 0.3954E+02 0.1000E+00
0.2449E+03 0.3152E+00 0.9886E+02 0.2500E+00
0.2946E+03 0.5826E+00 0.1585E+03 0.5000E+00
0.3075E+03 0.7126E+00 0.1792E+03 0.6250E+00
0.3292E+03 0.8687E+00 0.2009E+03 0.7740E+00
0.4055E+03 0.1668E+01 0.2772E+03 0.1548E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.5106E-01 0.2135E-04 0.5906E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2553E+00 0.1067E-03 0.2953E-01 0.5000E-04
0.5106E+00 0.2135E-03 0.5906E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2584E+02 0.1073E-01 0.2953E+01 0.5000E-02
0.3877E+02 0.1609E-01 0.4430E+01 0.7500E-02
0.5170E+02 0.2146E-01 0.5906E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1219E+03 0.5287E-01 0.1477E+02 0.2500E-01
0.1668E+03 0.8999E-01 0.2953E+02 0.5000E-01
0.1914E+03 0.1223E+00 0.4430E+02 0.7500E-01
0.2101E+03 0.1531E+00 0.5906E+02 0.1000E+00
0.3038E+03 0.3335E+00 0.1477E+03 0.2500E+00
0.3678E+03 0.6057E+00 0.2220E+03 0.5000E+00
0.3834E+03 0.7361E+00 0.2420E+03 0.6250E+00
0.4015E+03 0.8911E+00 0.2602E+03 0.7740E+00
0.4532E+03 0.1682E+01 0.3118E+03 0.1548E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.1761E-01 0.1405E-04 0.2002E-02 0.1000E-04
0.8803E-01 0.7025E-04 0.1001E-01 0.5000E-04
0.1761E+00 0.1405E-03 0.2002E-01 0.1000E-03
0.8845E+01 0.7032E-02 0.1001E+01 0.5000E-02

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 3 – 5-51

0.1327E+02 0.1055E-01 0.1502E+01 0.7500E-02


0.1769E+02 0.1406E-01 0.2002E+01 0.1000E-01
0.4420E+02 0.3516E-01 0.5005E+01 0.2500E-01
0.8109E+02 0.6882E-01 0.1001E+02 0.5000E-01
0.1119E+03 0.1012E+00 0.1502E+02 0.7500E-01
0.1326E+03 0.1316E+00 0.2002E+02 0.1000E+00
0.1861E+03 0.2969E+00 0.5005E+02 0.2500E+00
0.2167E+03 0.5585E+00 0.9500E+02 0.5000E+00
0.2315E+03 0.6890E+00 0.1163E+03 0.6250E+00
0.2569E+03 0.8463E+00 0.1416E+03 0.7740E+00
0.3578E+03 0.1653E+01 0.2426E+03 0.1548E+01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-52

5.5 Example Problem 4 – Belled, Silty Sand & Silty Clay


This is an example of a drilled shaft with an enlarged base (belled tip) into layers of silty sand and sandy
clay.

5.5.1 Soil Profile


The soil profile is shown in Figure 5.16. The water table is at a depth of 10 ft during part of the year. The
depth of seasonal moisture change is 5 feet (ignored for transfers in side resistance).

5.5.2 Soil Properties


Values of undrained shear strength obtained from laboratory tests and the N-values from the Standard
Penetration Test are included in Figure 5.16. The N value for the interbedded silt and fine sand is 18.

Figure 5.16 General soil description of Example Problem 4.

5.5.3 Construction
Advantage is to be taken of the strong bearing material below the sand, and a large bell will be installed.
High-quality construction (including elimination of water from the bell), good specifications, and
excellent inspection are assumed. Slurry and casing will be employed to a depth of 24 feet.

5.5.4 Loading
The working axial load is 640 tons, distributed as 500 tons dead load and 140 tons live load. No
downdrag is expected, no lateral loading is to be considered and effects of expansive clays near the
surface are to be considered in a separate analysis.

5.5.5 Factor of Safety


No load test has been conducted but soil conditions are consistent across the site and are familiar to the
designer. A global factor of safety of 2.5 is selected.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-53

5.5.6 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft


A belled shaft with a 12-ft-diameter bell cut at 45 degrees at a depth of 40 feet is initially designed. The
shaft is also designed with a 4-ft diameter straight portion.

5.5.7 Hand Computations

Side Resistance
For ease of hand computations, average values of z and  were selected for the clay and sand layers. In
this model, the computer program has been instructed to use internally the same constant values of z and
 that are used in the hand computations. The hand computations are as follows:
Soil Depth interval A Avg. effective z Qs
Type ft. ft2 stress, tsf or  tons
Clay 0-5 62.8 1.5 0 0
Clay 5-10 62.8 1.5 0.55 51.8
Sand/silt 10-20 125.7 0.744 0.80 74.8
Clay 20-32 150.8 2.5 0.55 207.4
Clay 32-40 - - 0 0
Qs = 334.0

Base Resistance
Computations for base resistance are performed using the soil at the base of the shaft.
Nc = 6.0 [1 + 0.2(40/12)] = 10.0 > 9; use 9.
qb = 9(2.5) = 22.5 tsf
a = 0.0071 + 0.0021 (40/12) = 0.0141
b = 0.45(5)0.5 = 1.01
Fr = 2.5/[0.0141(144) + 2.5 (1.01)] = 0.55
qbr = 0.55 (22.5) = 12.4 tsf
AB = ( p/4 ) ( 122) = 113.1 ft2
QB = 12.4(113.1) = 1402 tons.
Total Resistance
QT = 334 + 1402 = 1736 tons.
Check Structural Capacity of Bell
The ultimate load applied to the base of the bell, using dead load factor of 1.4 and live load factor of 1.7,
is as follows:
Qu = 1.4 (500) + 1.7 (140) - 334 = 604 tons.
It is predicted that the ultimate structural capacity of a 45 degree bell with a 3:1 slope is 15 ksf. A
concrete strength reduction factor of 0.85 is applied to this value; however no other factors are applied.
The ultimate structural capacity, using a material factor of 0.85 is thus the following:
Qu = (15/2)(0.85)(113.1) = 721.0 tons.
Ultimate Load Capacity

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-54

(a) based on the global F.S. = 1736/2.5 = 694.4 tons > 604 tons
(b) based on the structural capacity of the bell and F.S. of 2.5 on side resistance: 334/2.5 + 721.0 = 854.6
tons >> 604 tons
OK both ways, structural capacity of bell does not control.

5.5.8 Comparison of Results


Table 6.4 contains a comparison of the results obtained from hand computations against those from
computer run in SHAFT.
Category Manual Calculations Computer Analysis Deviation
(tons) (tons)
Side Resistance 334 334 0%
Tip Resistance 1402 1361 -2.9%
Total Capacity 1736 1695 -2.4%
Table 5.4 Comparison of results for Example Problem 4

5.5.9 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 4 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 4, Drilled Shaft With Enlarged Base


1
2 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 3 45 5 4 3500000
4 10 40 2.5 2
2 10
0 120 0.0 3000 0 6400 0 1 1
0 120 0.0 3000 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
1 20
0.0 120 0 0 18 4000 0 1 1
0.0 120 0 0 18 4000 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
2 80
9 120 0.0 5000 0 6400 0 1 1
9 120 0.0 5000 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
2 100
9 120 0.0 5000 0 6400 0 1 1
9 120 0.0 5000 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55

5.5.10 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The resulting plots of ultimate skin friction and ultimate tip resistance versus depth provided by the
computer program may be observed in Figure 5.17 and Figure 5.18. Note that the load-transfer curve of
skin friction versus depth in Figure 5.17 starts from about the 14-ft depth. This is because the program
was instructed to ignore skin friction at the top 5 ft and at the bottom 4 ft (one shaft diameter). In

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-55

addition, the program automatically ignores transfers in skin friction for the height of the bell, which is an
additional 4 ft.

Figure 5.17 Curve of Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth for Example Problem 4.

Figure 5.18 Curve of Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth for Example Problem 4.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-56

5.5.11 Output Data


The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem 4 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-4.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-4.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-4.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-4.sf8r

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and Date of Analysis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 01, 2017 Time: 17:34:25

Example Problem 4, Drilled Shaft With Enlarged Base

PROPOSED DEPTH = 40.0 FT


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 4
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 10.0 FT.


-------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE FRICTION CAPACITY = 2.50


-------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.00
------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-57

END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.600E+01 (*)


UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.300E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.300E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.100E+02

LAYER NO 2----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.402E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.180E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.100E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.385E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.180E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.200E+02

LAYER NO 3----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.500E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.200E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.500E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.800E+02

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-58

LAYER NO 4----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.500E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.800E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.500E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.100E+03

(*) ESTIMATED BY THE PROGRAM BASED ON OTHER PARAMETERS

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 4.000 FT.


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 4.000 FT.
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 3.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 45.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 5.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 4.000 FT.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN

COMPUTATION RESULTS
-------------------

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 4.000 FT.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-59

DIAMETER OF BASE = 12.000 FT.


END OF STEM TO BASE = 4.499 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 45.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 5.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 4.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 18.098 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 8.838 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 40.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
14.0 13.26 10.37 1372.51 1382.88 696.62 690.40 104.29
15.0 13.73 20.74 1404.42 1425.15 722.95 710.50 103.83
16.0 14.19 31.11 1428.14 1459.25 745.18 726.51 102.83
17.0 14.66 41.47 1443.75 1485.23 763.35 738.47 101.34
18.0 15.12 51.84 1451.33 1503.17 777.51 746.40 99.40
19.0 15.59 58.02 1450.93 1508.95 783.49 748.67 96.81
20.0 16.05 64.49 1442.63 1507.12 785.80 747.11 93.89
21.0 16.52 71.24 1434.43 1505.67 788.46 745.71 91.15
22.0 16.98 78.29 1426.59 1504.88 791.59 744.61 88.61
23.0 17.45 85.63 1419.18 1504.81 795.22 743.84 86.24
24.0 17.91 93.25 1412.20 1505.45 799.35 743.40 84.03
25.0 18.38 101.17 1405.66 1506.82 804.00 743.30 81.98
26.0 18.85 109.37 1399.56 1508.93 809.15 743.53 80.07
27.0 19.31 117.86 1393.92 1511.79 814.82 744.11 78.29
28.0 19.78 126.65 1388.74 1515.39 821.02 745.03 76.63
29.0 20.24 143.93 1384.03 1527.96 835.94 749.59 75.48
30.0 20.71 161.21 1379.80 1541.01 851.11 754.38 74.42
31.0 21.17 178.49 1376.05 1554.54 866.52 759.42 73.42
32.0 21.64 195.77 1372.79 1568.56 882.17 764.70 72.49
33.0 22.10 213.05 1370.03 1583.09 898.07 770.24 71.62
34.0 22.57 230.33 1367.74 1598.07 914.20 776.00 70.81
35.0 23.03 247.61 1365.86 1613.48 930.55 781.98 70.04
36.0 23.50 264.90 1364.36 1629.26 947.08 788.14 69.33
37.0 23.97 282.18 1363.19 1645.37 963.77 794.47 68.65
38.0 24.43 299.46 1362.31 1661.77 980.61 800.94 68.02
39.0 24.90 316.74 1361.68 1678.42 997.58 807.54 67.41
40.0 25.36 334.02 1361.26 1695.28 1014.65 814.24 66.84

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 4 – 5-60

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.4789E-01 0.1474E-04 0.7468E-02 0.1000E-04
0.2394E+00 0.7371E-04 0.3734E-01 0.5000E-04
0.4789E+00 0.1474E-03 0.7468E-01 0.1000E-03
0.2406E+02 0.7379E-02 0.3734E+01 0.5000E-02
0.3609E+02 0.1107E-01 0.5601E+01 0.7500E-02
0.4813E+02 0.1476E-01 0.7468E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1203E+03 0.3690E-01 0.1867E+02 0.2500E-01
0.2287E+03 0.7294E-01 0.3734E+02 0.5000E-01
0.2936E+03 0.1045E+00 0.5601E+02 0.7500E-01
0.3526E+03 0.1357E+00 0.7468E+02 0.1000E+00
0.5407E+03 0.3071E+00 0.1867E+03 0.2500E+00
0.7340E+03 0.5815E+00 0.3734E+03 0.5000E+00
0.8221E+03 0.7179E+00 0.4668E+03 0.6250E+00
0.1019E+04 0.1319E+01 0.6874E+03 0.1200E+01
0.1321E+04 0.2557E+01 0.9903E+03 0.2400E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.7104E-01 0.1699E-04 0.1115E-01 0.1000E-04
0.3552E+00 0.8494E-04 0.5577E-01 0.5000E-04
0.7104E+00 0.1699E-03 0.1115E+00 0.1000E-03
0.3577E+02 0.8512E-02 0.5577E+01 0.5000E-02
0.5365E+02 0.1277E-01 0.8366E+01 0.7500E-02
0.7154E+02 0.1703E-01 0.1115E+02 0.1000E-01
0.1789E+03 0.4256E-01 0.2789E+02 0.2500E-01
0.3294E+03 0.8319E-01 0.5577E+02 0.5000E-01
0.4020E+03 0.1157E+00 0.8366E+02 0.7500E-01
0.4591E+03 0.1470E+00 0.1115E+03 0.1000E+00
0.6657E+03 0.3220E+00 0.2789E+03 0.2500E+00
0.9425E+03 0.6075E+00 0.5577E+03 0.5000E+00
0.1076E+04 0.7497E+00 0.6972E+03 0.6250E+00
0.1308E+04 0.1355E+01 0.9483E+03 0.1200E+01
0.1553E+04 0.2586E+01 0.1193E+04 0.2400E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2660E-01 0.1263E-04 0.3781E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1330E+00 0.6314E-04 0.1891E-01 0.5000E-04
0.2660E+00 0.1263E-03 0.3781E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1334E+02 0.6317E-02 0.1891E+01 0.5000E-02
0.2001E+02 0.9476E-02 0.2836E+01 0.7500E-02
0.2668E+02 0.1263E-01 0.3781E+01 0.1000E-01
0.6670E+02 0.3159E-01 0.9453E+01 0.2500E-01
0.1314E+03 0.6302E-01 0.1891E+02 0.5000E-01
0.1862E+03 0.9350E-01 0.2836E+02 0.7500E-01
0.2376E+03 0.1237E+00 0.3781E+02 0.1000E+00
0.4143E+03 0.2922E+00 0.9453E+02 0.2500E+00
0.5255E+03 0.5555E+00 0.1891E+03 0.5000E+00
0.5646E+03 0.6857E+00 0.2363E+03 0.6250E+00
0.7295E+03 0.1282E+01 0.4265E+03 0.1200E+01
0.1090E+04 0.2529E+01 0.7873E+03 0.2400E+01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 5 – 5-61

5.6 Example Problem 5 – Strong Rock


This is an example of a drilled shaft into strong rock.

5.6.1 Soil Profile


The soil profile is shown in Figure 5.19. Only a small amount of water was encountered at the site during
the geotechnical investigation.

Figure 5.19 General soil description of Example Problem5.

5.6.2 Soil Properties


The dolomite rock found at the site has a compressive strength of 8,000 psi and the RQD was 100
percent. The Young’s modulus of the intact rock was estimated as 2.0 x 106 psi and the modulus of the
rock mass was identical to this value. Assume the spacing of discontinuities is about 7 ft and that the
thickness of the discontinuities is negligible.

5.6.3 Construction
The excavation can be made dry. A socket can be drilled into the strong rock and inspected carefully
before concrete is poured.

5.6.4 Loading
The lateral load is negligible. The working axial load is 300 tons. No downdrag or uplift is expected.

5.6.5 Factor of Safety


An overall factor of safety of 3.0 is selected.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 5 – 5-62

5.6.6 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft


A diameter of 3.5 ft is selected, and a socket of 3.5 ft into the dolomite is specified.

5.6.7 Hand Computations


Assuming all load is transferred in end bearing and using the method proposed by the Canadian
Geotechnical Society (1978):
qa = Ksp qu
3  cs / Bb
K sp   0.5
10 1  300  / cs
qa = (0.5) (8000) = 4,000 psi
QB = (4,000) (/4) (42)2 = 5.54 x 106 lb = 2,771 tons
The value of end bearing includes a factor of safety of 3.

5.6.8 Comparison of Results


Table 5.5 contains a comparison of the results obtained from hand computations against those from
computer run in SHAFT.
Category Manual Calculations Computer Analysis Deviation
(tons) (tons)
Side Resistance ---- 90* ----
Tip Resistance 2771 2765 -0.2%
Total Capacity ---- 2795 ----
* Transfer in side friction is computed by the program for the upper clay layer
Table 5.5 Comparison of results for Example Problem 5

5.6.9 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 5 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 5, Drilled Shaft in Strong Rock


1
2 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
3.5 0 0 0 0 0 3800000
2 50 20 3 3
2 15
0 120 0.0 2000 0 6400 0 1 1
0 120 0.0 2000 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
4 50
1152000 1152000 7 0.0001 3.5 1152000 2000000 100 0 1 1
1152000 1152000 7 0.0001 3.5 1152000 2000000 100 0 1 1

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 5 – 5-63

5.6.10 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The resulting plots of ultimate total capacity versus depth provided by the computer program may be
observed in Figure 5.20 (for example of program features, this plot was created from the Computation >
3D View and using the additional Show 3D View menu. A large increase in total capacity can be
observed in Figure 5.20 due to the larger end bearing in the strong rock.
Figure 5.21 includes a plot of axial load versus settlement. As expected, the linear curve indicates that
most settlement is due to the elastic compression of the shaft.

Figure 5.20 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 5.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 5 – 5-64

Figure 5.21 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 5.

5.6.11 Output Data


The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem 5 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-5.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-5.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-5.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-5.sf8r

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and Date of Analysis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 5 – 5-65

Date: June 01, 2017 Time: 17:41:56

Example Problem 5, Drilled Shaft in Strong Rock

PROPOSED DEPTH = 20.0 FT


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 2
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 50.0 FT.


-------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE FRICTION CAPACITY = 3.00


-------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 3.00
------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.600E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.200E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.200E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.640E+04
DEPTH, FT = 0.150E+02

LAYER NO 2----STRONG ROCK

AT THE TOP

DIAMETER OF SOCKET, FT = 0.350E+01


SPACING OF DISCONTINUITIES,FT = 0.700E+01
THICKNESS OF INDIVIDUAL DISCONTINUITIES,FT = 0.100E-03
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF ROCK,LB/SQ FT = 0.115E+07
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF CONCRETE,LB/SQ FT = 0.115E+07
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR THE INTACT ROCK, LB/SQ IN. = 0.200E+07
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) % = 0.100E+03
DEPTH, FT = 0.150E+02

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 5 – 5-66

AT THE BOTTOM

DIAMETER OF SOCKET, FT = 0.350E+01


SPACING OF DISCONTINUITIES,FT = 0.700E+01
THICKNESS OF INDIVIDUAL DISCONTINUITIES,FT = 0.100E-03
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF ROCK,LB/SQ FT = 0.115E+07
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF CONCRETE,LB/SQ FT = 0.115E+07
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR THE INTACT ROCK, LB/SQ IN. = 0.200E+07
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) % = 0.100E+03
DEPTH, FT = 0.500E+02

(*) ESTIMATED BY THE PROGRAM BASED ON OTHER PARAMETERS

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 3.500 FT.


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 3.500 FT.
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.380E+07 LB/SQ IN

COMPUTATION RESULTS
-------------------

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 3.500 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 3.500 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 13.856 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.380E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 20.000 FT.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 5 – 5-67

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 0.36 6.05 69.07 75.12 29.07 25.04 210.77
2.0 0.71 12.10 70.99 83.09 35.76 27.70 116.57
3.0 1.07 18.15 72.92 91.06 42.45 30.35 85.17
4.0 1.43 24.19 74.84 99.03 49.14 33.01 69.47
5.0 1.78 30.24 76.77 107.01 55.83 35.67 60.05
6.0 2.14 36.29 78.69 114.98 62.52 38.33 53.77
7.0 2.49 42.34 80.61 122.95 69.21 40.98 49.29
8.0 2.85 48.39 82.54 130.93 75.90 43.64 45.92
9.0 3.21 54.44 84.12 138.56 82.48 46.19 43.20
10.0 3.56 60.48 85.32 145.80 88.92 48.60 40.91
11.0 3.92 66.53 86.09 152.62 95.23 50.87 38.93
12.0 4.28 72.58 86.47 159.05 101.40 53.02 37.19
13.0 4.63 78.63 86.60 165.23 107.50 55.08 35.66
14.0 4.99 84.68 86.60 171.28 113.54 57.09 34.33
15.0 5.35 90.73 8294.92 8385.64 2855.70 2795.21 1568.65
16.0 5.70 90.73 8294.92 8385.64 2855.70 2795.21 1470.61
17.0 6.06 90.73 8294.92 8385.64 2855.70 2795.21 1384.10
18.0 6.41 90.73 8294.92 8385.64 2855.70 2795.21 1307.21
19.0 6.77 90.73 8294.92 8385.64 2855.70 2795.21 1238.41
20.0 7.13 90.73 8294.92 8385.64 2855.70 2795.21 1176.49

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

LOAD SETTLEMENT RELATIONSHIP


------------------------------------------

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT


TONS IN.
0.7183E+03 0.6860E-01
0.1077E+04 0.1029E+00
0.1591E+04 0.1543E+00
0.2344E+04 0.2315E+00
0.3474E+04 0.3473E+00
0.5168E+04 0.5209E+00
0.7710E+04 0.7814E+00
0.8386E+04 0.8506E+00
0.8386E+04 0.8506E+00
0.8386E+04 0.8506E+00
0.8386E+04 0.8506E+00
0.8386E+04 0.8506E+00
0.8386E+04 0.8506E+00
0.8386E+04 0.8506E+00
0.8386E+04 0.8506E+00

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-68

5.7 Example Problem 6 – Weak Rock


This is an example of a drilled shaft in weak rock.

5.7.1 Description of the Problem – Rough Socket


Consider the shaft and soil profile shown in Figure 5.22. The user is asked to compute the load-
settlement relation for the socket, and to estimate the ultimate resistance at a settlement of = 25mm.
The socket is assumed to be rough. The RQD for the sample is 100%.

Figure 5.22 General pile and soil description for Example Problem 6.

5.7.2 Hand Computations – Rough Socket


1. Since the core recovery and RQD are high, assume that: Em= 115 qu. Note that Ec/Em= 100%.
2. faa = fa = 2.4/2 = 1.2 MPa, or 1200 kPa (Technical Manual, Eq. 7-3).
3. zc = 6.1 m (depth from top of concrete to middle of socket). Considering concrete placement
specifications:
from figure 3.15, or

4. n = 115 kPa / 2400 kPa = 0.048 (Technical Manual, Eq. 7-7).


5. L/D = 6.1 / 0.61 = 10.
6. (Technical Manual, Eq. 7-12)
7. or
(Technical Manual, Eq. 7-13)
8.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-69

(Technical Manual, Eq. 7-10).


9.
(Technical Manual, Eq.
7-11).
10. At the end of the elastic stage, (implied by Technical Manual, Eq. 7-8). Therefore,

where signifies wt at the end of the elastic stage. (Note that elastic response occurs only up
to a very small settlement in this example.)
11. (Technical Manual, Eqs. 7-14 and 7--15)

. Note that = 383.7.

12. ;
13. Compute Qt corresponding to , signified by :

(Technical Manual, Eq. 7-8).


Note that at this point, 670 kN is transferred to the weak rock in side resistance and 103 kN is
transferred in base resistance. ( , ) is a point on the load-settlement curve, and a straight
line can be drawn from ( = 0, = 0) to this point.
14. Compute the values of for selected values of on the nonlinear portion of the load-
settlement curve. Numerical evaluations are made in the following table.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)


Kf(Step 9)
(mm) (kPa)
(kN)
(kN)
5 0.271 0.229 3210 1128 330 3540
10 0.542 0.373 5232 1795 524 5756
15 0.813 0.472 6621 2355 688 7309
25 1.355 0.599 8402 3316 969 9371
Note that:

Which is OK for definition of ultimate resistance. Based on base resistance, working load should
be limited to = or should be limited to about 12 mm at working load. Note also that the
compressive stress in the shaft at = 15 mm is 25,000 kPa (7309 kN/cross-sectional area),
which may be approaching the structural failure load in the drilled shaft.

15. The numerical values from steps 13 and 14 are graphed in Figure 5.23. Also shown in Figure
5.23 is the case with smooth socket for the same problem. Hand computations for the case of
smooth socket are included in the next section.

The physical significance of the parameters and Kf is evident from the numerical solution.
is a proportionality constant for elastic resistance for side shear, and Kf is a proportionality
parameter for actual side shear, including elastic, plastic and interface slip effects.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-70

5.7.3 Description of the Problem – Smooth Socket


Consider the same example as before (shaft and soil profile shown in Figure 5.22). The rock socket is
now assumed to be smooth. Estimate that rc = 30 degrees. The user is asked to compute the load-
settlement relation for the socket, and to estimate the ultimate resistance at a settlement of wt = 25 mm.

5.7.4 Hand Computations – Smooth Socket


1.
2. Referring to Technical Manual, Figure 7-1, for , and q = 2.4 MPa, we have α = 0.12.
u

3.
4. qu/ p= 2400 / 101.3 = 24, and Em/ n = 115 (2.4) (1000) / 115 = 2400
5. From Technical Manual, Figure 7-2, n = 0.11.
6. = 2.94 (unchanged); = 0.651 (unchanged)
7.
(Technical Manual, Eq. 7-10).
8. Kf = 0.11+[(0.226 wt - 0.11)(1- 0.11)]/[0.226 wt -2(0.11)+1];
Kf = 0.11+(0.226 wt - 0.11)(0. 89)/(0.226 wt + 0.78).
9. At = n, wte = 0. 11/0.226 = 0.487 mm.
10. qb = 383.7 (wt)0.67, where wt is in mm. and qb in kPa. From Technical Manual, Eqs. 7-14 and 7-
15 (unchanged).
11. Qte = 11.7 (0.226) (0.487) (288) + (0.2922) (383.7) (0.487) 0.67;
Qte = 371 + 103 = 474 kN (Technical Manual, Eq. 7-8).
12. Qte = 474 kN, wte = 0.487 mm is the point at the end of the linear portion of the load settlement
curve.
13. Compute the values of Qt for selected values of wt on the nonlinear portion of the load-
settlement curve. Numerical evaluations are made in the table below.

14. The numerical values for smooth socket are graphed in Figure 5.23 in comparison with the
values from rough socket to illustrate the effect of borehole roughness in this problem. Note
again that qb< 2.5 qu

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-71

Figure 5.23 Curves of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6 (rough and
smooth sockets). Obtained from hand computations (O’Neill et al., 1975)

5.7.5 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 6 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

5.7.6 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The resulting plots of axial load versus settlement provided by the computer program for the cases of a
rough socket with closed joints and a smooth socket with closed joints may be observed in Figure 5.24
and Figure 5.25 respectively.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-72

Figure 5.24 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6 using rough
socket with closed joints.

Figure 5.25 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6 using smooth
socket with closed joints.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-73

5.7.7 Output Data


The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem 6 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-6.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-6.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-6.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-6.sf8r

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and Date of Analysis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 02, 2017 Time: 11:34:11

Example Problem 6, Drilled Shaft in Weak Rock

PROPOSED DEPTH = 9.1 M


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 2
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 9.1 M


-------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE FRICTION CAPACITY = 3.00


-------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 3.00
------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-74

SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00


INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.350E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M = 0.189E+02
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M = 0.240E+03
DEPTH, M = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.350E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M = 0.189E+02
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M = 0.240E+03
DEPTH, M = 0.305E+01

LAYER NO 2----WEAK ROCK

AT THE TOP

DIAMETER OF SOCKET, M = 0.610E+00


SLUMP OF CONCRETE, M = 0.175E+00
ANGLE OF INTERFACE FRICTION, DEG. = 0.300E+02
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF ROCK,KN/SQ M = 0.240E+04
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR THE INTACT ROCK, KN/SQ M = 0.276E+06
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) % = 0.100E+03
DEPTH, M = 0.305E+01

AT THE BOTTOM

DIAMETER OF SOCKET, M = 0.610E+00


SLUMP OF CONCRETE, M = 0.175E+00
ANGLE OF INTERFACE FRICTION, DEG. = 0.300E+02
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF ROCK,KN/SQ M = 0.240E+04
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR THE INTACT ROCK, KN/SQ M = 0.276E+06
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) % = 0.100E+03
DEPTH, M = 0.120E+02

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.610 M


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.610 M
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.000 M
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 M
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 M
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.276E+08 KN/SQ M

COMPUTATION RESULTS
-------------------

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-75

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 0.610 M


DIAMETER OF BASE = 0.610 M
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 M
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 M
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 M
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 0.003 SQ. M
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.276E+08 KN/SQ M
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU. M
SHAFT LENGTH = 9.150 M

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


( M ) (CU.M ) ( KN ) ( KN ) ( KN ) ( KN ) ( KN ) ( KN /CU.M)
0.3 0.1 1.3 77.0 78.3 26.9 26.1 887.22
0.6 0.2 5.2 95.3 100.6 37.0 33.5 578.30
0.9 0.3 11.8 113.7 125.4 49.7 41.8 478.30
1.2 0.4 20.9 132.0 152.9 64.9 51.0 436.58
1.5 0.4 32.6 150.4 183.0 82.7 61.0 417.65
1.8 0.5 46.9 168.8 215.7 103.2 71.9 410.04
2.1 0.6 63.9 543.0 606.8 244.8 202.3 979.43
2.4 0.7 83.4 1019.1 1102.5 423.1 367.5 1563.29
2.7 0.8 105.5 1298.3 1403.8 538.3 467.9 1776.47
3.0 0.9 130.2 1343.4 1473.7 578.1 491.2 1682.38
3.3 1.0 627.0 1346.6 1973.7 1075.9 657.9 2039.98
3.6 1.1 1213.7 1338.8 2552.6 1660.0 850.9 2420.88
3.9 1.1 1789.4 1324.8 3114.2 2231.0 1038.1 2727.99
4.2 1.2 2352.7 1307.9 3660.6 2788.7 1220.2 2978.65
4.5 1.3 2904.8 1289.6 4194.4 3334.7 1398.1 3186.29
4.8 1.4 3446.8 1270.8 4717.6 3870.4 1572.5 3360.30
5.1 1.5 3979.4 1251.9 5231.3 4396.7 1743.8 3507.46
5.4 1.6 4503.3 1233.1 5736.5 4914.4 1912.2 3632.83
5.7 1.7 5019.2 1214.7 6233.8 5424.0 2077.9 3740.27
6.0 1.8 5527.3 1196.5 6723.9 5926.2 2241.3 3832.81
6.3 1.8 6028.3 1178.8 7207.2 6421.3 2402.4 3912.83
6.6 1.9 6522.4 1161.6 7684.0 6909.6 2561.3 3982.23
6.9 2.0 7010.0 1144.7 8154.8 7391.6 2718.3 4042.58
7.2 2.1 7491.4 1128.3 8619.7 7867.5 2873.2 4095.13

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 6 – 5-76

7.5 2.2 7966.9 1112.3 9079.2 8337.7 3026.4 4140.95


7.8 2.3 8436.7 1096.6 9533.3 8802.2 3177.8 4180.91
8.1 2.4 8900.9 1081.4 9982.3 9261.4 3327.4 4215.75
8.4 2.5 9359.9 1066.5 10426.4 9715.4 3475.5 4246.10
8.7 2.5 9813.8 1052.0 10865.8 10164.5 3621.9 4272.49
9.0 2.6 10262.8 1037.8 11300.6 10608.8 3766.9 4295.38

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

LOAD SETTLEMENT RELATIONSHIP


------------------------------------------

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT


kN M
0.7877E+03 0.3526E-03
0.8135E+03 0.3898E-03
0.8513E+03 0.4452E-03
0.9067E+03 0.5279E-03
0.9883E+03 0.6514E-03
0.1109E+04 0.8358E-03
0.1286E+04 0.1111E-02
0.1549E+04 0.1524E-02
0.1930E+04 0.2136E-02
0.2462E+04 0.3041E-02
0.3186E+04 0.4370E-02
0.4138E+04 0.6312E-02
0.5554E+04 0.9724E-02
0.8116E+04 0.1832E-01
0.1089E+05 0.3462E-01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 7 – 5-77

5.8 Example Problem 7 – Gravel


This is an example of a drilled shaft in gravel/decomposed rock.

5.8.1 Description of the Problem


Consider the shaft and soil profile shown in Figure 5.26. The user is asked to compute the load-
settlement relation and to estimate the ultimate resistance.

Figure 5.26 General pile and soil description for Example Problem 7.

5.8.2 Hand Computations


1.
, (Technical Manual, Eqs. 6-6 and 6-7)
2. Assessment of moduli:

(Technical Manual, Eq. 6-9).

(Technical Manual, Eq. 6-9).

(Technical Manual, Eq. 6-9).


.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 7 – 5-78

The numerical computation for load-transfer factors are included in Table 5.6.

Table 5.6 Numerical computation of load-transfer factors for Example Problem 7

3. Compute the influence coefficient, I, according to Technical Manual, Eq. 6-10:

4.
5. (Technical Manual, Eq. 6-11, segmentally)
6. (Technical Manual, Eq. 6-34).

7.
(Technical Manual, Eq. 6-14).

8.

9. The numerical values obtained from hand computations for versus , are graphed in Figure 5.27

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 7 – 5-79

Figure 5.27 Curves of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 7. Obtained from
hand computations (O’Neill et al., 1975).

5.8.3 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 7 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 7, Drilled Shaft in Gravel


2
2 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
0.915 0 0 0 6.1 0 27600000
3 6.1 15.25 3 3
1 6.1
0.0 21 35 0 0 240 0 1 1
0.0 21 35 0 0 240 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
5 12.2
21 75 0.4 0 0.915 4000 0 1 1
21 75 0.4 0 0.915 4000 0 1 1
5 18.5
21 80 0.4 0 0.915 4000 0 1 1
21 100 0.4 0 0.915 4000 0 1 1

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 7 – 5-80

5.8.4 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The resulting plots of axial load versus settlement provided by the computer program may be observed in
Figure 5.28.

Figure 5.28 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 7.

5.8.5 Output Data


The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem 7 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-7.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-7.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-7.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-7.sf8r

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 7 – 5-81

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and Date of Analysis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 02, 2017 Time: 11:39:40

Example Problem 7, Drilled Shaft in Gravel

PROPOSED DEPTH = 15.2 M


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 3
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 6.1 M


-------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE FRICTION CAPACITY = 3.00


-------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 3.00
------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.350E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M = 0.210E+02
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M = 0.240E+03
DEPTH, M = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.350E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M = 0.210E+02
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M = 0.240E+03
DEPTH, M = 0.610E+01

LAYER NO 2----DECOMPOSED ROCK

AT THE TOP

ELASTIC MODULUS OF GRAVEL, KN/SQ M = 0.000E+00


POISSION RATIO OF GRAVEL = 0.400E+00
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.750E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M = 0.210E+02

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 7 – 5-82

MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M = 0.400E+04


DEPTH, M = 0.610E+01

AT THE BOTTOM

ELASTIC MODULUS OF GRAVEL, KN/SQ M = 0.000E+00


POISSION RATIO OF GRAVEL = 0.400E+00
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.750E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M = 0.210E+02
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, M = 0.122E+02

LAYER NO 3----DECOMPOSED ROCK

AT THE TOP

ELASTIC MODULUS OF GRAVEL, KN/SQ M = 0.000E+00


POISSION RATIO OF GRAVEL = 0.400E+00
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.800E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M = 0.210E+02
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, M = 0.122E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

ELASTIC MODULUS OF GRAVEL, KN/SQ M = 0.000E+00


POISSION RATIO OF GRAVEL = 0.400E+00
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.100E+03
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M = 0.210E+02
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M = 0.400E+04
DEPTH, M = 0.185E+02

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.915 M


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.915 M
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.000 M
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 6.100 M
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 M
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.276E+08 KN/SQ M

COMPUTATION RESULTS
-------------------

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 7 – 5-83

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 0.915 M


DIAMETER OF BASE = 0.915 M
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 M
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 6.100 M
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 M
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 0.007 SQ. M
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.276E+08 KN/SQ M
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU. M
SHAFT LENGTH = 15.250 M

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


( M ) (CU.M ) ( KN ) ( KN ) ( KN ) ( KN ) ( KN ) ( KN /CU.M)
7.0 4.6 404.8 1354.3 1759.1 856.2 586.4 382.07
8.0 5.3 859.4 1373.6 2233.0 1317.2 744.3 424.32
9.0 5.9 1320.8 1391.9 2712.7 1784.7 904.2 458.20
10.0 6.6 1788.7 1409.3 3197.9 2258.4 1066.0 486.20
11.0 7.2 2262.9 1469.4 3732.4 2752.7 1244.1 515.88
12.0 7.9 2743.2 1565.7 4309.0 3265.1 1436.3 545.93
13.0 8.5 3255.9 1629.7 4885.6 3799.1 1628.5 571.37
14.0 9.2 3795.2 1693.5 5488.7 4359.7 1829.6 596.08
15.0 9.9 4356.7 1757.3 6113.9 4942.4 2038.0 619.71

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

LOAD SETTLEMENT RELATIONSHIP


------------------------------------------

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT


kN M
0.4906E+03 0.6309E-03
0.9812E+03 0.1262E-02
0.1472E+04 0.1893E-02
0.1962E+04 0.2523E-02
0.2453E+04 0.3154E-02
0.2943E+04 0.3785E-02
0.3434E+04 0.4416E-02
0.3925E+04 0.5047E-02

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 7 – 5-84

0.4415E+04 0.5678E-02
0.4906E+04 0.6309E-02
0.5310E+04 0.1586E-01
0.5715E+04 0.2540E-01
0.6120E+04 0.3495E-01
0.6525E+04 0.4450E-01
0.6525E+04 0.5340E-01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 8 – 5-85

5.9 Example Problem 8 – Gravelly Sand & Gravel


This is an example of a shaft drilled installed in gravelly sand and gravel strata. The example used the
values recommended by Rollins et al (2005) for computing the side friction in gravelly sand and gravel.
The blow counts (SPT-N) in gravelly layers have to be greater than 5 in order to use the recommended
criteria for gravelly soils.

5.9.1 Soil Profile


The soil profile is shown in Figure 5.29. The water table is at a depth of 4 ft below the ground surface.

5.9.2 Soil Properties


N-values (blow counts per foot) from the Standard Penetration Test are included in Figure 5.29.

Figure 5.29 General soil description of Example Problem

5.9.3 Construction
High-quality construction is assumed. For gravelly soils, the contractor may start with the slurry method
with a good control of slurry quality. In some case the contractor may experience lost of the slurry in the
hole. The contractor needs to be very careful to avoid the hole cave-in or collapse during operation in
gravelly strata. The contractor may need to use the casing method if the slurry method cannot work for a
particular condition. The contractor will have all the required equipment in good order and experienced
personnel will be on the job for drilling holes in gravelly soils.

5.9.4 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 8 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 8, Drilled shaft in gravelly sand and gravel strata


1
2 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0
4 4 0 0 0 0 3500000
3 4 60 2.5 2.5

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 8 – 5-86

1 4
0.0 115 0 0 11 0 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 11 0 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
8 30
130 40 0 0 0 1 1
130 50 0 0 0 1 1
9 80
130 60 0 0 0 1 1
130 80 0 0 0 1 1

5.9.5 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The results of skin friction, tip resistance, and total capacity versus depth provided by the computer
program were plotted together in Figure 5.30. Figure 5.31 includes a plot of axial load versus settlement.
As expected, the full capacity can be fully mobilized at settlement of 0.6 inches.

Figure 5.30 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 8.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 8 – 5-87

Figure 5.31 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 8.

5.9.6 Output Data


The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem 8 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-8.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-8.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-8.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-8.sf8r

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time and Date of Analysis
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 8 – 5-88

Date: May 19, 2017 Time: 11:49:59

Example Problem 8, Drilled shaft in gravelly sand and gravel strata

PROPOSED DEPTH = 60.0 FT


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 3
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 4.0 FT.


-------------------

FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE FRICTION CAPACITY = 2.50


-------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.50
------------------------------------------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.388E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.110E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.800E+00
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.378E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.110E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.115E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.400E+01

LAYER NO 2----GRAVELLEY SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.180E+01
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.400E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.130E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.400E+01

AT THE BOTTOM

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 8 – 5-89

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.121E+01
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.500E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.130E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.300E+02

LAYER NO 3----GRAVEL

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.156E+01
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.600E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.130E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.300E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.428E+00
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.800E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.130E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.800E+02

WARNING MESSAGE
-----------------------------------------------------------
BLOWS PER FOOT IS = 60.00 AT TOP
BLOWS PER FOOT IS = 80.00 AT BOTTOM
UNIT TIP RESISTANCE IS LIMITED TO 30 TSF IF SPT-N IS OVER 50
LOADING TEST IS RECOMMENDED FOR USING HIGHER VALUE.

(*) ESTIMATED BY THE PROGRAM BASED ON OTHER PARAMETERS

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 4.000 FT.


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 4.000 FT.
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN

COMPUTATION RESULTS
-------------------

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 8 – 5-90

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 4.000 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 4.000 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 0.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 18.098 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 60.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS = ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;


QB = ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT = WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU = TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
QBD = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
QDN = TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU QBD QDN QU/VOLUME


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS/CU.YDS)
1.0 0.47 0.29 47.14 47.43 19.15 18.97 101.89
2.0 0.93 1.16 57.30 58.46 24.08 23.38 62.80
3.0 1.40 2.60 66.80 69.41 29.32 27.76 49.70
4.0 1.86 4.63 75.35 79.98 34.77 31.99 42.96
5.0 2.33 10.19 84.05 94.24 43.81 37.70 40.49
6.0 2.79 16.42 92.89 109.31 53.57 43.72 39.14
7.0 3.26 23.27 101.88 125.15 64.03 50.06 38.41
8.0 3.72 30.75 111.01 141.76 75.15 56.70 38.07
9.0 4.19 38.82 120.29 159.10 86.93 63.64 37.98
10.0 4.65 47.46 129.71 177.17 99.35 70.87 38.06
11.0 5.12 56.67 139.27 195.94 112.37 78.38 38.27
12.0 5.59 66.41 148.98 215.39 126.00 86.16 38.56
13.0 6.05 76.67 158.84 235.51 140.21 94.21 38.92
14.0 6.52 87.44 168.84 256.28 154.98 102.51 39.33
15.0 6.98 98.69 178.99 277.68 170.29 111.07 39.77
16.0 7.45 110.42 189.28 299.70 186.13 119.88 40.24
17.0 7.91 122.60 199.72 322.31 202.48 128.92 40.73
18.0 8.38 135.21 210.30 345.50 219.33 138.20 41.24
19.0 8.84 148.24 221.02 369.26 236.65 147.71 41.75
20.0 9.31 161.68 231.89 393.57 254.43 157.43 42.28
21.0 9.78 175.50 242.91 418.41 272.66 167.36 42.80
22.0 10.24 189.70 254.07 443.77 291.33 177.51 43.33
23.0 10.71 204.25 265.04 469.29 310.26 187.72 43.83

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 8 – 5-91

24.0 11.17 219.14 275.76 494.90 329.44 197.96 44.30


25.0 11.64 234.36 286.16 520.52 348.83 208.21 44.73
26.0 12.10 249.89 296.19 546.08 368.37 218.43 45.12
27.0 12.57 265.71 305.93 571.64 388.08 228.66 45.48
28.0 13.03 281.82 315.46 597.27 408.00 238.91 45.83
29.0 13.50 298.19 324.88 623.07 428.14 249.23 46.16
30.0 13.96 314.81 334.31 649.12 448.53 259.65 46.48
31.0 14.43 336.36 343.73 680.09 473.85 272.04 47.13
32.0 14.90 357.98 353.16 711.14 499.25 284.46 47.74
33.0 15.36 379.67 361.17 740.84 524.14 296.34 48.23
34.0 15.83 401.40 367.61 769.01 548.44 307.60 48.59
35.0 16.29 423.16 372.33 795.48 572.09 318.19 48.83
36.0 16.76 444.93 375.15 820.08 594.99 328.03 48.94
37.0 17.22 466.69 376.57 843.26 617.32 337.30 48.96
38.0 17.69 488.44 377.04 865.48 639.26 346.19 48.93
39.0 18.15 510.16 377.04 887.20 660.98 354.88 48.87
40.0 18.62 531.84 377.04 908.88 682.65 363.55 48.81
41.0 19.08 553.46 377.04 930.50 704.27 372.20 48.76
42.0 19.55 575.01 377.04 952.05 725.83 380.82 48.70
43.0 20.02 596.49 377.04 973.53 747.31 389.41 48.64
44.0 20.48 617.88 377.04 994.92 768.70 397.97 48.58
45.0 20.95 639.17 377.04 1016.21 789.99 406.49 48.51
46.0 21.41 660.36 377.04 1037.40 811.18 414.96 48.45
47.0 21.88 681.43 377.04 1058.47 832.25 423.39 48.38
48.0 22.34 702.38 377.04 1079.42 853.20 431.77 48.31
49.0 22.81 723.20 377.04 1100.24 874.02 440.10 48.24
50.0 23.27 743.89 377.04 1120.93 894.70 448.37 48.16
51.0 23.74 764.43 377.04 1141.47 915.24 456.59 48.08
52.0 24.21 784.82 377.04 1161.86 935.63 464.74 48.00
53.0 24.67 805.05 377.04 1182.09 955.87 472.84 47.92
54.0 25.14 825.12 377.04 1202.16 975.94 480.87 47.83
55.0 25.60 845.03 377.04 1222.07 995.85 488.83 47.73
56.0 26.07 864.77 377.04 1241.81 1015.58 496.72 47.64
57.0 26.53 884.33 377.04 1261.37 1035.15 504.55 47.54
58.0 27.00 903.71 377.04 1280.75 1054.53 512.30 47.44
59.0 27.46 922.91 377.04 1299.95 1073.73 519.98 47.33
60.0 27.93 941.93 377.04 1318.97 1092.74 527.59 47.23

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.1367E+00 0.2717E-04 0.2749E-02 0.1000E-04
0.6834E+00 0.1358E-03 0.1375E-01 0.5000E-04
0.1367E+01 0.2717E-03 0.2749E-01 0.1000E-03
0.6898E+02 0.1365E-01 0.1375E+01 0.5000E-02
0.1035E+03 0.2047E-01 0.2062E+01 0.7500E-02
0.1380E+03 0.2730E-01 0.2749E+01 0.1000E-01
0.3408E+03 0.6810E-01 0.6873E+01 0.2500E-01
0.5646E+03 0.1254E+00 0.1375E+02 0.5000E-01
0.6840E+03 0.1671E+00 0.2062E+02 0.7500E-01
0.7826E+03 0.2071E+00 0.2749E+02 0.1000E+00
0.9418E+03 0.3854E+00 0.6865E+02 0.2500E+00
0.9997E+03 0.6499E+00 0.1345E+03 0.5000E+00
0.1011E+04 0.7789E+00 0.1620E+03 0.6250E+00
0.1018E+04 0.1362E+01 0.2413E+03 0.1200E+01
0.1159E+04 0.2594E+01 0.3827E+03 0.2400E+01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 8 – 5-92

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2244E+00 0.3702E-04 0.3928E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1122E+01 0.1851E-03 0.1964E-01 0.5000E-04
0.2244E+01 0.3702E-03 0.3928E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1138E+03 0.1866E-01 0.1964E+01 0.5000E-02
0.1706E+03 0.2799E-01 0.2946E+01 0.7500E-02
0.2275E+03 0.3732E-01 0.3928E+01 0.1000E-01
0.5339E+03 0.9171E-01 0.9819E+01 0.2500E-01
0.7898E+03 0.1570E+00 0.1964E+02 0.5000E-01
0.8722E+03 0.1954E+00 0.2946E+02 0.7500E-01
0.9233E+03 0.2295E+00 0.3928E+02 0.1000E+00
0.1043E+04 0.4022E+00 0.9787E+02 0.2500E+00
0.1118E+04 0.6710E+00 0.1869E+03 0.5000E+00
0.1135E+04 0.8017E+00 0.2243E+03 0.6250E+00
0.1142E+04 0.1383E+01 0.2866E+03 0.1200E+01
0.1263E+04 0.2610E+01 0.4072E+03 0.2400E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.6864E-01 0.1901E-04 0.1571E-02 0.1000E-04
0.3432E+00 0.9506E-04 0.7855E-02 0.5000E-04
0.6864E+00 0.1901E-03 0.1571E-01 0.1000E-03
0.3450E+02 0.9523E-02 0.7855E+00 0.5000E-02
0.5176E+02 0.1429E-01 0.1178E+01 0.7500E-02
0.6901E+02 0.1905E-01 0.1571E+01 0.1000E-01
0.1725E+03 0.4762E-01 0.3928E+01 0.2500E-01
0.3301E+03 0.9387E-01 0.7855E+01 0.5000E-01
0.4599E+03 0.1365E+00 0.1178E+02 0.7500E-01
0.5716E+03 0.1772E+00 0.1571E+02 0.1000E+00
0.8393E+03 0.3685E+00 0.3943E+02 0.2500E+00
0.8806E+03 0.6288E+00 0.8201E+02 0.5000E+00
0.8701E+03 0.7540E+00 0.9968E+02 0.6250E+00
0.8938E+03 0.1341E+01 0.1961E+03 0.1200E+01
0.1056E+04 0.2577E+01 0.3582E+03 0.2400E+01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-93

5.10 Example Problem 9 – LRFD


An example is presented in Appendix A of the NHI Drilled Shaft Manual (2010) to illustrate design of
drilled shafts as foundations for a proposed replacement bridge. This case study is included in Example 9
for demonstrating the accuracy and convenience of using SHAFT in design of drilled shafts under axial
loads based on the LRFD design procedures. The proposed shaft is 8-ft in diameter and the total length
(penetration) below the original grade (without scouring) is 192 ft.
The factored axial, lateral, and moment forces at the foundation level were derived through a separate
comprehensive structural modeling based on the LRFD design requirement. The summary of factored
loads on the proposed drilled shaft at the existing mudline is presented in Table 5.7.

Table 5.7 Summary of factored loads for Example Problem 9.

5.10.1 Soil Profile


A generalized subsurface profile along the alignment of the bridge is shown in Figure 5.32. Soils
subdivided into general strata with identified layer thickness (Table 5.8) can be used in analysis. The
water table is at the existing ground surface. Based on hydrologic studies at this location a scour depth of
38 ft is recommended for the design flood (100 year flood).

Table 5.8 Summary of subsurface profile for Example Problem 9

5.10.2 Soil Properties


Soil properties for use in analysis including unit weight, internal friction angle (sand layers), undrained
shear strength (clay layers), and others can be found in Figure 5.32. Corrected N-value, (N1)60, for the
sand layer at the tip of the drilled shaft is 41.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-94

Figure 5.32 General soil description of Example Problem 9

5.10.3 Hand Computations


Calculations of nominal side and base resistance were carried out using a spreadsheet tool. Table 5.9
shows the calculation results for the Strength I limit state of this example. The table is divided into three
areas: (A) side resistance in cohesionless soil layers; (B) side resistance in cohesive soil layers, and (C)
base resistance.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-95

Table 5.9 Calculations for Axial Compressive Resistance and Strength I Limit State for
Example Problem 9.

Computations for base resistance are performed using the soil at the base of the shaft.
At the depth of 192 ft:
NSPT= 41
qB = (0.6) (41) = 24.6 tsf
AB = 50.27 ft2
QB = (50.27) (24.6) = 1,236.6 tons = 2,474 kips
Total Nominal Resistance
QU = 2469 + 2922 + 2474 = 7865 kips

5.10.4 Comparison of Results


Table 5.10 contains a comparison of the results obtained from hand computations against those from
computer run in SHAFT.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-96

Category Manual Calculations Computer Analysis Deviation


(kips) (kips)
Factored Side Resistance 2673 2643 -1.1%
Factored Tip Resistance 1237 1237 0%
Factored Total Capacity 3910 3880 -0.8%
Table 5.10 Comparison of results for Example Problem 9

5.10.5 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 9 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example 9 with LRFD Method


1
2 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
8 0 0 0 38 0 3600000
7 0 192 2.5 3
1 25
0.0 125 41 0 0 0 0 0.55 0.5
0.0 125 41 0 0 0 0 0.55 0.5
2
0 0
1 65
0.0 125 44 0 0 0 0 0.55 0.5
0.0 125 44 0 0 0 0 0.55 0.5
2
0 0
1 85
0.0 120 40 0 0 0 0 0.55 0.5
0.0 120 40 0 0 0 0 0.55 0.5
2
0 0
2 100
0 110 0.0 1750 0 0 0 0.45 0.5
0 110 0.0 1750 0 0 0 0.45 0.5
0.55 0.55
1 110
0.0 120 40 0 0 0 0 0.55 0.5
0.0 120 40 0 0 0 0 0.55 0.5
2
0 0
2 190.5
0 110 0.0 2300 0 0 0 0.45 0.5
0 110 0.0 2300 0 0 0 0.45 0.5
0.55 0.55
1 212.5
0.0 120 0 0 41 0 0 0.55 0.5
0.0 120 0 0 41 0 0 0.55 0.5
2
0 0

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-97

5.10.6 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The results of skin friction, tip resistance, and total capacity versus depth provided by the computer
program were plotted together in Figure 5.33. Figure 5.34 includes a plot of axial load versus settlement.
As expected, the full capacity can be fully mobilized at settlement of 0.6 inches.

Figure 5.33 Curves of LRFD Geotechnical Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 9.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-98

Figure 5.34 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 9.

5.10.7 Output Data


The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem 8 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

=========================================================================

SHAFT for Windows, Version 2017.8.1

Serial Number : 158112091

VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS


(c) Copyright ENSOFT, Inc., 1987-2017
All Rights Reserved

=========================================================================

Path to file locations : C:\Ensoft\Shaft2017-Examples\


Name of input data file : Examplev8-9-LRFD.sf8d
Name of output file : Examplev8-9-LRFD.sf8o
Name of plot output file : Examplev8-9-LRFD.sf8p
Name of runtime file : Examplev8-9-LRFD.sf8r

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-99

Time and Date of Analysis


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 02, 2017 Time: 12:10:45

Example 9 with LRFD Method

PROPOSED DEPTH = 192.0 FT


----------------

NUMBER OF LAYERS = 7
------------------

WATER TABLE DEPTH = 0.0 FT.


-------------------

SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

LAYER NO 1----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.120E+01 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.410E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.000E+00

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.825E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.410E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.250E+02

LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (SIDE FRICTION) = 0.550E+00


LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (TIP RESISTANCE) = 0.500E+00

LAYER NO 2----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.825E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.440E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.250E+02

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-100

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.412E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.440E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.125E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.650E+02

LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (SIDE FRICTION) = 0.550E+00


LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (TIP RESISTANCE) = 0.500E+00

LAYER NO 3----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.412E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.400E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.650E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.255E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.400E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.850E+02

LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (SIDE FRICTION) = 0.550E+00


LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (TIP RESISTANCE) = 0.500E+00

LAYER NO 4----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.175E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.110E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.850E+02

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.175E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.110E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.100E+03

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-101

LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (SIDE FRICTION) = 0.450E+00


LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (TIP RESISTANCE) = 0.500E+00

LAYER NO 5----SAND

AT THE TOP

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.250E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.400E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.100E+03

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.250E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.400E+02
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.110E+03

LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (SIDE FRICTION) = 0.550E+00


LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (TIP RESISTANCE) = 0.500E+00

LAYER NO 6----CLAY

AT THE TOP

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.230E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.110E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.110E+03

AT THE BOTTOM

STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA = 0.550E+00


END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc = 0.900E+01 (*)
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT = 0.230E+04
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.000E+00
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.110E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.190E+03

LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (SIDE FRICTION) = 0.450E+00


LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (TIP RESISTANCE) = 0.500E+00

LAYER NO 7----SAND

AT THE TOP

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-102

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.250E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.372E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.410E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.190E+03

AT THE BOTTOM

SIDE FRICTION PROCEDURE, BETA METHOD


SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA = 0.250E+00 (*)
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG. = 0.372E+02 (*)
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST = 0.410E+02
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT = 0.120E+03
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT = 0.100E+11
DEPTH, FT = 0.212E+03

LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (SIDE FRICTION) = 0.550E+00


LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (TIP RESISTANCE) = 0.500E+00

(*) ESTIMATED BY THE PROGRAM BASED ON OTHER PARAMETERS

INPUT DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION


------------------------------

MINIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 8.000 FT.


MAXIMUM SHAFT DIAMETER = 8.000 FT.
RATIO BASE/SHAFT DIAMETER = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 38.000 FT.
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.360E+07 LB/SQ IN

COMPUTATION RESULTS
-------------------

- CASE ANALYZED : 1
VARIATION LENGTH : 1
VARIATION DIAMETER : 1

DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

-------------------------

DIAMETER OF STEM = 8.000 FT.


DIAMETER OF BASE = 8.000 FT.
END OF STEM TO BASE = 0.000 FT.
ANGLE OF BELL = 0.000 DEG.
IGNORED TOP PORTION = 38.000 FT.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-103

IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION = 0.000 FT.


AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL = 72.392 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec = 0.360E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM = 0.000 CU.YDS.
SHAFT LENGTH = 192.000 FT.

PREDICTED RESULTS
-----------------

QS =
ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;
QB =
ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WT =
WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
QU =
TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
LRFD QS =
TOTAL SIDE FRICTION USING LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR
TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;
LRFD QB = TOTAL BASE BEARING USING LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR
TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE
LRFD QU = TOTAL CAPACITY WITH LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR.

LENGTH VOLUME QS QB QU LRFD QS LRFD QB LRFD QU


(FT) (CU.YDS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS) (TONS)
39.0 72.62 19.90 1508.16 1528.06 10.94 754.08 765.02
40.0 74.48 39.98 1508.16 1548.14 21.99 754.08 776.07
41.0 76.34 60.23 1508.16 1568.39 33.13 754.08 787.21
42.0 78.20 80.64 1508.16 1588.80 44.35 754.08 798.43
43.0 80.06 101.20 1508.16 1609.36 55.66 754.08 809.74
44.0 81.92 121.89 1508.16 1630.05 67.04 754.08 821.12
45.0 83.79 142.70 1508.16 1650.86 78.48 754.08 832.56
46.0 85.65 163.62 1508.16 1671.78 89.99 754.08 844.07
47.0 87.51 184.63 1508.16 1692.79 101.55 754.08 855.63
48.0 89.37 205.74 1508.16 1713.90 113.15 754.08 867.23
49.0 91.23 226.91 1508.16 1735.07 124.80 754.08 878.88
50.0 93.10 248.15 1498.51 1746.66 136.48 749.26 885.74
51.0 94.96 269.45 1488.29 1757.74 148.20 744.15 892.34
52.0 96.82 290.78 1477.51 1768.29 159.93 738.76 898.68
53.0 98.68 312.14 1466.16 1778.30 171.68 733.08 904.76
54.0 100.54 333.52 1454.24 1787.76 183.44 727.12 910.56
55.0 102.41 354.91 1441.75 1796.66 195.20 720.88 916.08
56.0 104.27 376.29 1428.70 1804.99 206.96 714.35 921.31
57.0 106.13 397.67 1415.08 1812.74 218.72 707.54 926.25
58.0 107.99 419.01 1403.16 1822.17 230.46 701.58 932.04
59.0 109.85 440.32 1392.94 1833.26 242.18 696.47 938.65
60.0 111.72 461.59 1384.43 1846.02 253.87 692.21 946.09
61.0 113.58 482.80 1377.62 1860.42 265.54 688.81 954.35
62.0 115.44 503.95 1372.51 1876.45 277.17 686.25 963.42
63.0 117.30 525.02 1369.10 1894.12 288.76 684.55 973.31
64.0 119.16 546.00 1367.40 1913.40 300.30 683.70 984.00
65.0 121.03 566.88 1367.40 1934.28 311.79 683.70 995.49
66.0 122.89 587.65 1367.40 1955.05 323.21 683.70 1006.91
67.0 124.75 608.28 1367.40 1975.68 334.55 683.70 1018.25
68.0 126.61 628.76 1367.40 1996.16 345.82 683.70 1029.52
69.0 128.47 649.08 1367.40 2016.48 356.99 683.70 1040.69
70.0 130.33 669.23 1296.83 1966.07 368.08 648.42 1016.50
71.0 132.20 689.21 1222.12 1911.33 379.07 611.06 990.13
72.0 134.06 709.01 1143.25 1852.26 389.96 571.63 961.58
73.0 135.92 728.61 1060.24 1788.85 400.74 530.12 930.86
74.0 137.78 748.02 973.07 1721.09 411.41 486.54 897.95
75.0 139.64 767.21 881.75 1648.97 421.97 440.88 862.84
76.0 141.51 786.19 786.28 1572.48 432.41 393.14 825.55
77.0 143.37 804.95 686.66 1491.61 442.72 343.33 786.05
78.0 145.23 823.47 599.50 1422.96 452.91 299.75 752.66
79.0 147.09 841.75 524.78 1366.53 462.96 262.39 725.35

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-104

80.0 148.95 859.78 462.52 1322.30 472.88 231.26 704.14


81.0 150.82 877.55 412.71 1290.26 482.65 206.36 689.01
82.0 152.68 895.06 375.35 1270.41 492.28 187.68 679.96
83.0 154.54 912.29 350.45 1262.74 501.76 175.22 676.98
84.0 156.40 929.24 338.00 1267.24 511.08 169.00 680.08
85.0 158.26 945.91 408.56 1354.47 520.25 204.28 724.53
86.0 160.13 958.00 483.27 1441.28 525.69 241.64 767.33
87.0 161.99 970.10 562.14 1532.24 531.14 281.07 812.21
88.0 163.85 982.20 645.16 1627.35 536.58 322.58 859.16
89.0 165.71 994.29 732.32 1726.62 542.02 366.16 908.19
90.0 167.57 1006.39 823.64 1830.03 547.47 411.82 959.29
91.0 169.44 1018.49 919.11 1937.60 552.91 459.56 1012.47
92.0 171.30 1030.58 1018.73 2049.31 558.35 509.36 1067.72
93.0 173.16 1042.68 1105.90 2148.58 563.80 552.95 1116.75
94.0 175.02 1054.78 1180.61 2235.39 569.24 590.31 1159.55
95.0 176.88 1066.87 1177.48 2244.36 574.68 588.74 1163.43
96.0 178.74 1078.97 1158.05 2237.03 580.13 579.03 1159.16
97.0 180.61 1091.07 1122.33 2213.40 585.57 561.16 1146.74
98.0 182.47 1103.16 1070.30 2173.47 591.02 535.15 1126.17
99.0 184.33 1115.26 1001.98 2117.24 596.46 500.99 1097.45
100.0 186.19 1127.36 917.35 2044.71 601.90 458.68 1060.58
101.0 188.05 1146.10 828.88 1974.98 612.21 414.44 1026.65
102.0 189.92 1165.02 736.56 1901.58 622.61 368.28 990.90
103.0 191.78 1184.12 655.79 1839.90 633.12 327.89 961.01
104.0 193.64 1203.40 586.55 1789.95 643.72 293.27 937.00
105.0 195.50 1222.86 528.85 1751.71 654.43 264.43 918.85
106.0 197.36 1242.50 482.69 1725.19 665.23 241.35 906.58
107.0 199.23 1262.33 448.07 1710.40 676.14 224.04 900.17
108.0 201.09 1282.33 424.99 1707.33 687.14 212.50 899.63
109.0 202.95 1302.52 413.45 1715.97 698.24 206.73 904.97
110.0 204.81 1322.88 413.45 1736.34 709.44 206.73 916.17
111.0 206.67 1338.78 413.45 1752.24 716.60 206.73 923.32
112.0 208.54 1354.68 413.45 1768.14 723.75 206.73 930.48
113.0 210.40 1370.58 413.45 1784.03 730.91 206.73 937.63
114.0 212.26 1386.48 413.45 1799.93 738.06 206.73 944.79
115.0 214.12 1402.38 413.45 1815.83 745.21 206.73 951.94
116.0 215.98 1418.28 413.45 1831.73 752.37 206.73 959.10
117.0 217.85 1434.17 413.45 1847.63 759.52 206.73 966.25
118.0 219.71 1450.07 413.45 1863.53 766.68 206.73 973.40
119.0 221.57 1465.97 413.45 1879.43 773.83 206.73 980.56
120.0 223.43 1481.87 413.45 1895.32 780.99 206.73 987.71
121.0 225.29 1497.77 413.45 1911.22 788.14 206.73 994.87
122.0 227.15 1513.67 413.45 1927.12 795.29 206.73 1002.02
123.0 229.02 1529.57 413.45 1943.02 802.45 206.73 1009.18
124.0 230.88 1545.46 413.45 1958.92 809.60 206.73 1016.33
125.0 232.74 1561.36 413.45 1974.82 816.76 206.73 1023.48
126.0 234.60 1577.26 413.45 1990.72 823.91 206.73 1030.64
127.0 236.46 1593.16 413.45 2006.61 831.07 206.73 1037.79
128.0 238.33 1609.06 413.45 2022.51 838.22 206.73 1044.95
129.0 240.19 1624.96 413.45 2038.41 845.38 206.73 1052.10
130.0 242.05 1640.86 413.45 2054.31 852.53 206.73 1059.26
131.0 243.91 1656.75 413.45 2070.21 859.68 206.73 1066.41
132.0 245.77 1672.65 413.45 2086.11 866.84 206.73 1073.57
133.0 247.64 1688.55 413.45 2102.01 873.99 206.73 1080.72
134.0 249.50 1704.45 413.45 2117.90 881.15 206.73 1087.87
135.0 251.36 1720.35 413.45 2133.80 888.30 206.73 1095.03
136.0 253.22 1736.25 413.45 2149.70 895.46 206.73 1102.18
137.0 255.08 1752.15 413.45 2165.60 902.61 206.73 1109.34
138.0 256.95 1768.04 413.45 2181.50 909.76 206.73 1116.49
139.0 258.81 1783.94 413.45 2197.40 916.92 206.73 1123.65
140.0 260.67 1799.84 413.45 2213.30 924.07 206.73 1130.80
141.0 262.53 1815.74 413.45 2229.19 931.23 206.73 1137.95
142.0 264.39 1831.64 413.45 2245.09 938.38 206.73 1145.11

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-105

143.0 266.26 1847.54 413.45 2260.99 945.54 206.73 1152.26


144.0 268.12 1863.44 413.45 2276.89 952.69 206.73 1159.42
145.0 269.98 1879.33 413.45 2292.79 959.84 206.73 1166.57
146.0 271.84 1895.23 413.45 2308.69 967.00 206.73 1173.73
147.0 273.70 1911.13 413.45 2324.59 974.15 206.73 1180.88
148.0 275.57 1927.03 413.45 2340.48 981.31 206.73 1188.03
149.0 277.43 1942.93 413.45 2356.38 988.46 206.73 1195.19
150.0 279.29 1958.83 413.45 2372.28 995.62 206.73 1202.34
151.0 281.15 1974.73 413.45 2388.18 1002.77 206.73 1209.50
152.0 283.01 1990.62 413.45 2404.08 1009.93 206.73 1216.65
153.0 284.87 2006.52 413.45 2419.98 1017.08 206.73 1223.81
154.0 286.74 2022.42 413.45 2435.88 1024.23 206.73 1230.96
155.0 288.60 2038.32 413.45 2451.77 1031.39 206.73 1238.12
156.0 290.46 2054.22 413.45 2467.67 1038.54 206.73 1245.27
157.0 292.32 2070.12 413.45 2483.57 1045.70 206.73 1252.42
158.0 294.18 2086.02 413.45 2499.47 1052.85 206.73 1259.58
159.0 296.05 2101.91 413.45 2515.37 1060.01 206.73 1266.73
160.0 297.91 2117.81 413.45 2531.27 1067.16 206.73 1273.89
161.0 299.77 2133.71 413.45 2547.16 1074.31 206.73 1281.04
162.0 301.63 2149.61 413.45 2563.06 1081.47 206.73 1288.20
163.0 303.49 2165.51 413.45 2578.96 1088.62 206.73 1295.35
164.0 305.36 2181.41 413.45 2594.86 1095.78 206.73 1302.50
165.0 307.22 2197.30 413.45 2610.76 1102.93 206.73 1309.66
166.0 309.08 2213.20 413.45 2626.66 1110.09 206.73 1316.81
167.0 310.94 2229.10 413.45 2642.56 1117.24 206.73 1323.97
168.0 312.80 2245.00 413.45 2658.45 1124.39 206.73 1331.12
169.0 314.67 2260.90 413.45 2674.35 1131.55 206.73 1338.28
170.0 316.53 2276.80 413.45 2690.25 1138.70 206.73 1345.43
171.0 318.39 2292.69 413.45 2706.15 1145.86 206.73 1352.58
172.0 320.25 2308.59 413.45 2722.05 1153.01 206.73 1359.74
173.0 322.11 2324.49 413.45 2737.95 1160.17 206.73 1366.89
174.0 323.98 2340.39 413.45 2753.84 1167.32 206.73 1374.05
175.0 325.84 2356.29 413.45 2769.74 1174.47 206.73 1381.20
176.0 327.70 2372.19 469.89 2842.07 1181.63 234.94 1416.57
177.0 329.56 2388.09 529.64 2917.72 1188.78 264.82 1453.60
178.0 331.42 2403.98 592.71 2996.69 1195.94 296.35 1492.29
179.0 333.28 2419.88 659.10 3078.98 1203.09 329.55 1532.64
180.0 335.15 2435.78 728.81 3164.59 1210.25 364.40 1574.65
181.0 337.01 2451.68 801.84 3253.52 1217.40 400.92 1618.32
182.0 338.87 2467.58 878.18 3345.76 1224.55 439.09 1663.65
183.0 340.73 2483.48 957.85 3441.33 1231.71 478.93 1710.63
184.0 342.59 2499.37 1027.56 3526.94 1238.86 513.78 1752.64
185.0 344.46 2515.27 1087.31 3602.59 1246.02 543.66 1789.67
186.0 346.32 2531.17 1137.11 3668.28 1253.17 568.55 1821.72
187.0 348.18 2547.07 1176.94 3724.01 1260.33 588.47 1848.80
188.0 350.04 2562.97 1206.82 3769.78 1267.48 603.41 1870.89
189.0 351.90 2578.87 1226.73 3805.60 1274.63 613.37 1888.00
190.0 353.77 2594.77 1236.69 3831.46 1281.79 618.35 1900.13
191.0 355.63 2610.66 1236.69 3847.35 1288.94 618.35 1907.29
192.0 357.49 2643.33 1236.69 3880.02 1306.91 618.35 1925.25

AXIAL LOAD VS SETTLEMENT CURVES


-------------------------------

RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.1636E+00 0.2665E-04 0.4509E-02 0.1000E-04
0.8180E+00 0.1333E-03 0.2254E-01 0.5000E-04

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 9 – 5-106

0.1636E+01 0.2665E-03 0.4509E-01 0.1000E-03


0.8206E+02 0.1335E-01 0.2254E+01 0.5000E-02
0.1231E+03 0.2002E-01 0.3382E+01 0.7500E-02
0.1642E+03 0.2670E-01 0.4509E+01 0.1000E-01
0.4105E+03 0.6674E-01 0.1127E+02 0.2500E-01
0.8198E+03 0.1334E+00 0.2254E+02 0.5000E-01
0.1187E+04 0.1976E+00 0.3382E+02 0.7500E-01
0.1454E+04 0.2513E+00 0.4509E+02 0.1000E+00
0.2291E+04 0.4953E+00 0.1127E+03 0.2500E+00
0.2679E+04 0.7912E+00 0.2252E+03 0.5000E+00
0.2932E+04 0.1291E+01 0.4267E+03 0.9600E+00
0.3142E+04 0.2775E+01 0.7915E+03 0.2400E+01
0.3602E+04 0.5257E+01 0.1255E+04 0.4800E+01

RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.2572E+00 0.3563E-04 0.6441E-02 0.1000E-04
0.1286E+01 0.1781E-03 0.3221E-01 0.5000E-04
0.2572E+01 0.3563E-03 0.6441E-01 0.1000E-03
0.1292E+03 0.1786E-01 0.3221E+01 0.5000E-02
0.1938E+03 0.2680E-01 0.4831E+01 0.7500E-02
0.2584E+03 0.3573E-01 0.6441E+01 0.1000E-01
0.6461E+03 0.8933E-01 0.1610E+02 0.2500E-01
0.1271E+04 0.1777E+00 0.3221E+02 0.5000E-01
0.1788E+04 0.2583E+00 0.4831E+02 0.7500E-01
0.2090E+04 0.3172E+00 0.6441E+02 0.1000E+00
0.2674E+04 0.5360E+00 0.1610E+03 0.2500E+00
0.2985E+04 0.8300E+00 0.3210E+03 0.5000E+00
0.3246E+04 0.1337E+01 0.5936E+03 0.9600E+00
0.3464E+04 0.2821E+01 0.9399E+03 0.2400E+01
0.3860E+04 0.5291E+01 0.1336E+04 0.4800E+01

RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP LOAD TOP MOVEMENT TIP LOAD TIP MOVEMENT


TON IN. TON IN.
0.8786E-01 0.1906E-04 0.2576E-02 0.1000E-04
0.4393E+00 0.9529E-04 0.1288E-01 0.5000E-04
0.8786E+00 0.1906E-03 0.2576E-01 0.1000E-03
0.4400E+02 0.9534E-02 0.1288E+01 0.5000E-02
0.6602E+02 0.1430E-01 0.1932E+01 0.7500E-02
0.8803E+02 0.1907E-01 0.2576E+01 0.1000E-01
0.2201E+03 0.4768E-01 0.6441E+01 0.2500E-01
0.4402E+03 0.9536E-01 0.1288E+02 0.5000E-01
0.6556E+03 0.1428E+00 0.1932E+02 0.7500E-01
0.8459E+03 0.1881E+00 0.2576E+02 0.1000E+00
0.1719E+04 0.4323E+00 0.6441E+02 0.2500E+00
0.2361E+04 0.7514E+00 0.1293E+03 0.5000E+00
0.2618E+04 0.1245E+01 0.2597E+03 0.9600E+00
0.2820E+04 0.2729E+01 0.6431E+03 0.2400E+01
0.3345E+04 0.5223E+01 0.1175E+04 0.4800E+01

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 10 – 5-107

5.11 Example Problem 10 – Multiple Shaft Lengths


This example is provided to investigate the SHAFT feature of multiple automatic computations with
varying shaft penetrations. For simplicity, this model uses the same shaft and soil example that were
previously defined in Example Problem 1 of this manual (see Section 5.2).

5.11.1 Soil and Shaft Properties


The background information on soil strata, loads and shaft geometry are the same as those in Section 5.2
of this manual. For a combined view of the graphs of load-vs-settlement for multiple shaft lengths the
original Example Problem 1 model was modified with the selection of Data > Evaluate Multiple Shaft
Lengths with the information in Figure 5.35.

Figure 5.35 Data > Evaluate Multiple Shaft Lengths for Example Problem 10.

The specified parameters Figure 5.35 indicate to start with the maximum shaft length of 60 ft and
calculate axial responses with 3-ft shorter penetrations to a final 42 ft shaft length (70% of the maximum).

5.11.2 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 10 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 10, Owens and Reese, 1982, Shaft E-2 - Multiple Shaft Lengths
1
2 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 0 0
3 3 0 0 0 0 3500000
5 4 60 2.5 2.5
0 0
1 4
0.0 115 0 0 11 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 11 4000 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
1 25
0.0 115 0 0 4 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 4 4000 0 1 1

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 10 – 5-108

2
0.8 0.8
1 33
0.0 115 0 0 14 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 14 4000 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
1 55
0.0 115 0 0 12 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 12 4000 0 1 1
2
0.6 0.6
1 80
0.0 115 0 0 21 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 21 4000 0 1 1
2
0.6 0.6

5.11.3 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The interesting result plot in this example is obtained from the Graphics > Axial Load vs Settlement
(averaged) menu that is shown in Figure 5.36. The resulting graph is helpful for a designer that is trying
to determine the optimum length for a shaft of a defined diameter.

Figure 5.36 Axial Load vs Settlement (averaged) for Example Problem 10.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 11 – 5-109

5.12 Example Problem 11 – Use of Design Charts


This example is provided to investigate the SHAFT feature of ASD/LRFD Design Charts that provide
responses for multiple shaft diameters as well as varying shaft penetrations. For simplicity, this model
uses the same shaft and soil example that were previously defined in Example Problem 2 of this manual
(see Section 5.3).

5.12.1 Soil and Shaft Properties


The background information on soil strata, loads and shaft geometry are the same as those in Section 5.3
of this manual. For the generation of the Design Charts, the original Example Problem 2 model was
modified with the selection of Data > ASD/LRFD Design Charts with the information in Figure 5.37.

Figure 5.37 Data > ASD/LRFD Design Charts for Example Problem 11.

The specified parameters Figure 5.37 indicate to start with the maximum shaft length of 60 ft and
calculate axial responses with 3-ft shorter penetrations to a final 24-ft shaft length (controlled by the
minimum limitation of 6-3 ft pile diameters plus 5-ft length of exclusion zones). Default increments of 3-

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 11 – 5-110

ft are used in shaft length and 1-ft increments specified for shaft diameters. The user may define any pile-
head movements (settlements), the ones in the example were chosen at random.
The variations of shaft diameters are specified under Data > Drilled-Shaft Properties where the it is
defined to use a minimum of 3-ft OD and maximum of 7-ft OD. The default increase of 6-in increments
in shaft diameters is replaced by the value specified in the ASD/LRFD Design Charts menu.

5.12.2 Input Data for Computer Analysis


The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 11 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.

Example Problem 11, Touma and Reese, 1972, G1 Site w/Design Charts
1
2 1 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 0
3 7 0 0 5 0 3500000
5 17 60 3 3
0 0 1 8
0.1 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.2 1.4 2
2 5
0 125 0.0 0 0 6400 0 1 1
0 125 0.0 0 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
2 32
0 125 0.0 1600 0 6400 0 1 1
0 125 0.0 1600 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
1 40
0.0 115 0 0 20 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 20 4000 0 1 1
2
0 0
1 64
0.0 115 0 0 25 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 25 4000 0 1 1
2
0 0
1 80
0.0 115 0 0 50 4000 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0 50 4000 0 1 1
2
0 0

5.12.3 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis


The interesting results in this example are obtained from the Graphics > Design Chart (xx movement)
plots. One sample plot for 0.5-in movement at the top of shaft is shown in Figure 5.38. The graph is
helpful for a designer that is trying to determine the optimum diameter and length for a defined axial
capacity.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


CHAPTER 5 – Example Problem 11 – 5-111

Figure 5.38 Design Chart for 0.5-in Movement for Example Problem 11.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


List of Technical References
List of Technical References – R-2

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), “AASHTO Guide
Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design.” Prepared by R.A. Imbsen, 2007.

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), “AASHTO LRFD Bridge
Design Specifications, Customary U.S. Units, 4th Ed., Section 10.” Washington, D.C. 2007.

Aurora, Ravi and L. C. Reese, “Field Tests of Drilled Shafts in Clay-Shales.” Ninth International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, July, 1977.

Bernal, J. and L. C. Reese, “Study of the Lateral Pressure of Fresh Concrete as Related to the Design of
Drilled Shaft.” A Research Report No. 308-1F, conducted for the Texas Highway Department, in
cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, November, 1983.

Bieniawski, Z. T., Rock Mechanics Design in Mining and Tunneling, A. A. Balkema: Rotterdam/Boston,
1984, 272 pages.

Brown, D.A., J.P. Turner, and R.J. Castelli, “Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and LRFD Design
Methods,” prepared for U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
Publication No. FHWA-NHI-10-016, 2010

Canadian Geotechnical Society, Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual, Part 2, Shallow Foundations,
Canadian Geotechnical Society, Montreal, 1978, 99 pages.

Chuang J. W. and L. C. Reese, “Studies of Shearing Resistance between Cement Mortar and Soil,”
Research Report No. 89-3, Project 3-5-65-89, conducted for the Texas Highway Department, in
cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, October, 1968, 71 pages.

Deere, D. V., “Geological Considerations,” Chapter l in Rock Mechanics in Engineering Practice by K. G.


Stagg and O. C. Zienkiewicz, Wiley, New York, 1968, pp.1-20.

Donald, I. B., S.W. Sloan, and H. K. Chiu, “Theoretical Analyses of Rock-socketed Piles,” Proceedings,
International Conference on Structural Foundations on Rock, Sydney, Balkema: Rotterdam,
1980.

Engeling, D. and L. C. Reese, “Behavior of Three Instrumented Drilled Shafts Under Short Term Axial
Loading.” Research Report No. 176-3, Project 3-5-72-176, conducted for the Texas Highway
Department, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, May, 1974, 116
pages.

Horvath, R.G., and T.C. Kenney, “Shaft Resistance of Rock-Socketed Drilled Piers,” Proceedings,
Symposium on Deep Foundations, ASCE, Atlanta, Georgia, 1979, pp.182-214.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


List of Technical References – R-3

Johnston, I. W., I. B. Donald, A. B. Bennet, and J. W. Edwards, “The Testing of Large Diameter Pile Rock
Sockets with a Retrievable Test Rig,” Proceedings, Third Australian-New Zealand Conference on
Geomechanics,Wellington, 1980a.

Johnston, I.W.,A. F. Williams, and H. K. Chiu, “Properties of Soft Rock Relevant to Socketed Pile Design,”
Proceedings, International Conference on Structural Foundations on Rock, Sydney, Balkema:
Rotterdam, l980b.

Kulhawy, F. H., ”Transmission Line Structures Foundations for Uplift-Compression Loading,”


Geotechnical Group, Cornell University, Report No. EL-2870, Report to Electrical Power Research
Institute, Geotechnical Group, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, February, 1983.

LCPC (le Laboratoire Centraldes Ponts et Chaussees,) “Bored Piles,” English Translation of Les Pieux
Fores, (FHWA TS-86-206, March, 1986).

Mayne, P.W. and D.E. Harris, “Axial Load-Displacement Behavior of Drilled Shaft Foundations in
Piedmont Residuum”. , Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Geotechnical Engineering Division,
Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Civil Engineering, Atlanta, GA, February, 1993.

Meyerhof, G. G., “Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations,” Journal of the SoilMechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Proceedings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 102, No.
GT3, March, 1976, pp. 197-228.

Mogenstern, N. R. and K. D. Eigenbrod, “Classification of Argillaceous Soils and Rocks,” Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, Proceedings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 100,
No. GT10, October, 1974, pp. 1137- 1156.

O’Neill M.W. and L.C. Reese, “Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and Design Methods,” prepared
for U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of
Implementation McLean, Virginia, 1999

O’Neill M.W. and L. C. Reese, “Behavior of Axially Loaded Drilled Shafts in Beaumont Clay.” Research
Report No. 89-8,Project 3-5-65-89, conducted for the Texas Highway Department, in
cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, December, 1970.

O’Neill, M.W. and S.A. Sheikh, “Geotechnical Behavior of Underreams in Pleistocene Clay,” Drilled Piers
and Caissons II, Ed. by C. N. Baker, Jr., ASCE, May, 1985, pp. 57-75.

O’Neill, M. W., F.C. Townsend, K.M. Hassan, A. Buller, and P.S. Chan, “Load Transfer for Drilled Shafts in
Intermediate Geomaterials”, Report No. FHWA-RD-95-172, Federal Highway Administration,
McLean, VA, November, 1996.

Owens,M. J. and L. C. Reese, “The Influence of a Steel Casing on the Axial Capacity of A Drilled Shaft,” A
report to the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, Research Report

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


List of Technical References – R-4

255-1F, Center for Transportation Research, Bureau of Engineering Research, The University of
Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, July, 1982, 204 pages.

Peck, R. B., “Rock Foundations for Structures,” Proceedings, Specialty Conference on Rock Engineering
for Foundations and Slopes, Boulder, Colorado, ASCE, 1976.

Quiros, G. W. and L. C. Reese, “Design Procedures for Axially Loaded Drilled Shafts,” Research Report
176-5F, Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, 1977.

Randolph, M.F. and C.P. Wroth, “Analysis of Deformation of Vertically Loaded Piles, Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering Division , ASCE, Vol. 104, No. 12, December, 1978.

Reese, L. C., “Analysis of Data from Mustran Cells, Axial-Load Test of Caisson CS1, Eugene Talmadge
Memorial Bridge, Chatham Country, Georgia,” an unpublished report to Dames & Moore, Boca
Raton, Florida, 1985.

Reese, L. C. and T. Bowman, “Report on Testing of a Drilled Shaft at Georgetown Steel Company in
Beaumont,” an unpublished report to Tracor, 1975.

Reese, L. C. and K. J. Nyman, “Field Load Tests of Instrumented Drilled Shafts at Islamorada, Florida,” a
report to Girdler Foundation and Exploration Corporation, Clearwater, Florida, February, 1978.

Reese, L. C. and M.W. O’Neill “Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and Design Methods,” prepared
for U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of
Implementation McLean, Virginia, 1988

Reese, L. C., M. W. O’Neill, and S. T. Wang, “Drilled Shaft Tests, Interchange of West Belt Toll Road and
US 290 Harris County, Texas,” an unpublished report to Harris County Toll Road Authority,
Houston, Texas, 1988.

Rollins, K.M.,R. J. Clayton, R.C. Mikesell, and B.C. Bradford, “Drilled Shaft Side Friction in Gravelly Soils,”
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers,
Vol. 131, No. 8, August, 2005, pp. 987-1003.

Schmertmann, J.H., “Report on Development of a Keys Limerock Shear Test for Drilled Shaft Design,” A
Report to Girdler Foundation and Exploration Company, Clearwater, Florida, December, 1977.

Sheikh, S. A., M. W. O’Neill, and K. Kapasi, “Behavior of 45- Degree Underream Footing in Eagle Ford
Shale,” Research Report No. 85-12, University of Houston, University Park, December, 1985.

Skempton,A.W., “The Bearing Capacity of Clays,” Proceedings, Building Research Congress, Division I,
Building Research Congress, London, 1951.

Williams, A. F., “Principles of Side Resistance Development in Rock Socketed Piles,” Proceedings, Third
Australian-New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, Wellington, 1980.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


List of Technical References – R-5

Williams, A. F., I. B.Donald, and H.K. Chiu, “Stress Distributions in Rock Socketed Piles,” Proceedings,
International Conference on Structural Foundations on Rock, Sydney, Balkema: Rotterdam,
1980a.

Williams, A. F, I. W. Johnston, and I. B. Donald, “The Design of Socketed Piles in Weak Rock,”
Proceedings, International Conference on Structural Foundations on Rock, Sydney, Balkema:
Rotterdam, 1980b.

Williams,A. F., and M. C. Erwin, “The Design and Performance of Cast-in-situ Piles in Extensively Jointed
Silurian Mudstone,” Proceedings, Third Australian-New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics,
Wellington, 1980.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


License Agreement & Disclaimer
License Agreement & Disclaimer – EULA-2

PROGRAM LICENSE AGREEMENT & DISCLAIMER


IMPORTANT NOTICE: This License Agreement & Disclaimer ("LICENSE") is a legal agreement between you
(either an individual or a single entity) and Ensoft Incorporated (ENSOFT) for the ENSOFT product (“PRODUCT”)
identified on the current installation screen. The PRODUCT collectively includes computer software and associated
media, printed materials, hardware key (dongle), and electronic documentation. The PRODUCT also includes any
updates and supplements to the original PRODUCT that may have been produced by ENSOFT. By installing,
copying, downloading, accessing or otherwise using the PRODUCT, you agree to be bound by the terms of this
LICENSE. If you do not agree to the terms of this LICENSE, do not install or use the PRODUCT.

SOFTWARE LICENSE & DISCLAIMER


The PRODUCT is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties, as well as other intellectual
property laws and treaties. The PRODUCT is licensed, not sold.

1. GRANT OF LICENSE
This LICENSE grants you the following rights:
1.1 INSTALLATION AND USE
1.1.1 Single-User Licenses
This software is licensed only to the user (company or individual) whose name is registered with ENSOFT and for
one specific physical site (“SITE”) registered with ENSOFT. You may install and use the PRODUCT on any
number of computers at the licensed SITE. However, the PRODUCT is fully operational only in the licensed site
computer that carries the appropriate PRODUCT’s hardware key (“KEY”) that is used as software protection
device.
1.1.2 Network Licenses
This software is licensed only to the user (company or individual) whose name is registered with ENSOFT and for
the specific physical site(s) (“SITE(S)”) and IP range registered with ENSOFT. Each network seat that is purchased
is provided with access for SITE clients located within up to 2 subnets with unique third octets (“CLIENT
SUBNETS”). The minimum two-seat network license can be associated to a maximum of 4 CLIENT SUBNETS
(within up to 4 unique third octets). Purchase of additional network seats can extend the allowable range of
CLIENT SUBNETS.
COMPANY may install and use the PRODUCT on any computer in the licensed SITE(S) that is within the
allowable CLIENT SUBNETS registered with ENSOFT. Any one computer in the network can be designated as
software server for the PRODUCT by carrying the appropriate PRODUCT’s hardware key (“KEY”) that is used as
software protection device.
This Network License strictly prohibits the PRODUCT to be used in or from computers located in office locations
that are different than the licensed SITE(S) or outside the registered CLIENT SUBNETS. Users in physical office
locations other than the registered SITE(S) with ENSOFT are required to purchase additional licenses of the
PRODUCT, even if the COMPANY is the same and/or if the additional offices are located in the same city.

2. OTHER RIGHTS AND LIMITATIONS


2.1 EDUCATIONAL VERSION
If the PRODUCT was sold with educational discounts, the use of the PRODUCT is strictly limited to academic or
research activities of educators and/or students. Any other usage voids all the rights under this LICENSE. If in
doubt, please contact ENSOFT to determine if you have a PRODUCT version that was sold for educational
purposes.
2.2 LIMITATIONS ON REVERSE ENGINEERING, DECOMPILATION, AND DISASSEMBLY

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


License Agreement & Disclaimer – EULA-3

You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the PRODUCT, except and only to the extent that such
activity is expressly permitted by applicable law notwithstanding this limitation.
2.3 RENTAL
You may not rent, lease or lend the PRODUCT.
2.4 TRADEMARKS
This LICENSE does not grant you any rights in connection with any trademarks or service marks of ENSOFT.
2.5 SUPPORT SERVICES
ENSOFT shall provide you with limited support and maintenance services (“SUPPORT”) related to the PRODUCT
during the initial year after purchase and for any additional SUPPORT term COMPANY elects to purchase for
PRODUCT after the initial warranty period expires.
Use of SUPPORT is limited to the ENSOFT policies and programs described in the PRODUCT’s User’s Manual, in
documentation on the ENSOFT web site, and/or in other materials provided by ENSOFT.
Any supplemental software code that may be provided to you as part of the SUPPORT or that is downloaded from
the ENSOFT web site shall be considered part of the PRODUCT and subject to the terms and conditions of this
LICENSE. With respect to technical information you provide to ENSOFT as part of the SUPPORT, ENSOFT may
use such information for its business purposes, including for product support, development or advertisements.
However, ENSOFT will not utilize such technical information in a form that personally identifies the user.
2.6 SOFTWARE TRANSFER
The initial user of the PRODUCT may make a permanent transfer of this LICENSE and PRODUCT and only
directly to an end user. This transfer must include all of the PRODUCT (including all component parts, the media
and printed materials, any upgrades, this LICENSE, and the PRODUCT’s appropriate hardware KEY). Such
transfer may not be by way of consignment or any other indirect transfer. The transferee of such one-time transfer
must agree to comply with the terms of this LICENSE, including the obligation not to further transfer this LICENSE
and PRODUCT.
2.7 TERMINATION
Without prejudice to any other rights, ENSOFT may terminate this LICENSE if you fail to comply with the terms
and conditions of this LICENSE. In such event, you must destroy all copies of the PRODUCT and all of its
component parts.

3. COPYRIGHT
All title and intellectual property rights in and to the PRODUCT (including but not limited to any images,
photographs, animations, video, audio, music, and text that may be incorporated into the PRODUCT), the
accompanying printed materials, and any copies of the PRODUCT are owned by ENSOFT. All title and intellectual
property rights in and to the content which may be accessed through use of the PRODUCT is the property of the
respective content owner and may be protected by applicable copyright or other intellectual property laws and
treaties. This LICENSE grants you no rights to use such content. All rights not expressly granted are reserved by
ENSOFT. This PRODUCT is protected by the United States Copyright Law and International Copyright Treaty.

4. SOFTWARE DISCLAIMER
Although the PRODUCT has been used with apparent success in many analyses, new information is developed
continuously and new or updated PRODUCT releases may be written from time to time. All users are requested to
inform ENSOFT immediately if any errors are found in the PRODUCT. As modifications, updates, or new versions
are produced, the latest codes are posted on ENSOFT’s web site and made available to all visitors for free
downloading.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017


License Agreement & Disclaimer – EULA-4

No warranty, expressed or implied, is offered as to the accuracy of results from ENSOFT’s PRODUCT. The
PRODUCT should not be used for design unless caution is exercised in interpreting the results and independent
calculations are available to verify the general correctness of the results. Users are assumed to be knowledgeable of
the information in the printed documentation that is distributed with the digital media. Users are assumed to
recognize that the input parameters, eg., soil properties, increment length, tolerance on solution convergence, and
many others, can have a significant effect on the solution and must be chosen carefully. Users should have a
thorough understanding of the relevant theoretical criteria (appropriate references are suggested in the software
documentation).

5. GOVERNING LAW
This LICENSE is governed by the laws of the State of Texas.

6. CONTACT INFORMATION
Should you have any questions concerning this LICENSE or if you desire to contact ENSOFT for any reason, please
use the following:
Ensoft Incorporated
3003 West Howard Lane
Austin, Texas 78728
United States of America

NO OTHER WARRANTIES
TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, ENSOFT DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER
WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED
TO, IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE, TITLE AND NON-INFRINGEMENT, WITH REGARD TO THE PRODUCT, AND THE
PROVISION OF SUPPORT SERVICES. THIS LIMITED WARRANTY GIVES YOU SPECIFIC LEGAL
RIGHTS. YOU MAY HAVE OTHERS, WHICH VARY FROM STATE/JURISDICTION TO
STATE/JURISDICTION.

LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, IN NO EVENT SHALL ENSOFT BE
LIABLE FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS,
BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, OR ANY OTHER PECUNIARY LOSS)
ARISING OUT OF THE USE OF OR INABILITY TO USE THE SOFTWARE PRODUCT OR THE FAILURE
TO PROVIDE SUPPORT, EVEN IF ENSOFT HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGES. IN ANY CASE, ENSOFT’S ENTIRE LIABILITY UNDER ANY PROVISION OF THIS LICENSE
AGREEMENT SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE GREATER OF THE AMOUNT ACTUALLY PAID BY YOU
FOR THE PRODUCT OR U.S.$1.00.

User’s Manual (Rel. Aug/2018) SHAFT v2017