25.12.2012 Views

Pile Design and Construction Practice, Fifth edition

Pile Design and Construction Practice, Fifth edition

Pile Design and Construction Practice, Fifth edition

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

7.3 <strong>Design</strong>ing piles to resist driving stresses<br />

Structural design of piles <strong>and</strong> pile groups 379<br />

Table 7.2 Maximum lengths of square section precast concrete piles for given reinforcement<br />

<strong>Pile</strong> Main Maximum length in metres for pick up at Transverse reinforcement<br />

size (mm) reinforcement Head 0.33 � length 0.2 � length from Head Body<br />

(mm)<br />

<strong>and</strong> toe from head head <strong>and</strong> toe <strong>and</strong> toe of pile<br />

300 � 300 4 � 20 9.0 13.5 20.5 6 mm at 6 mm at<br />

4 � 25 11.0 16.5 25.0 40 mm crs 130 mm crs<br />

350 � 350 4 � 20 8.5 13.0 19.5 8 mm at 8 mm at<br />

4 � 25 10.5 16.0 24.0 70 mm crs 175 mm crs<br />

4 � 32 13.0 20.0 30.0<br />

400 � 400 4 � 25 10.0 15.0 22.5 8 mm at 8 mm at<br />

4 � 32 12.5 19.0 28.0 60 mm crs 200 mm crs<br />

4 � 40 15.5 23.0 34.5 or<br />

10 mm at<br />

100 mm crs<br />

450 � 450 4 � 25 a 9.5 14.5 22.0 8 mm at 8 mm at<br />

4 � 32 a 12.0 18.0 27.0 60 mm crs 180 mm crs<br />

4 � 40 a 15.0 22.5 33.5 or or<br />

10 mm at 10 mm at<br />

90 mm crs 225 mm crs<br />

Notes<br />

<strong>Pile</strong>s designed in accordance with BS 8110 <strong>and</strong> BS 8004.<br />

Characteristic strength of reinforcement limited to 250 N/mm 2 .<br />

Cover to link steel � 40 mm.<br />

Characteristic strength of concrete � 40 N/mm 2 .<br />

a Alternatively, use a larger number of smaller diameter bars.<br />

It is necessary to check the adequacy of the designed strength of a pile to resist the stresses<br />

caused by the impact of the piling hammer. Much useful data to aid the estimation of driving<br />

stresses came from the research of Glanville et al. (7.1) They embedded stress recorders<br />

in piles to measure the magnitude <strong>and</strong> velocity of the stress wave induced in the pile by<br />

blows from the hammer. The tests showed that the stress wave travels from the head to the<br />

toe of the pile <strong>and</strong> is partly reflected from there to return to the head. If the pile is driven<br />

onto a hard rock, the sharp reflection of the wave at the toe can cause a compressive stress<br />

at the point which is twice that at the head, but when long piles are driven into soil of low<br />

resistance, the tensile stress wave is reflected, causing tension to develop in the pile. It can<br />

be shown from simple impact theory that the magnitude of the stress wave depends mainly<br />

on the height of the drop. This is true for a perfectly elastic pile rebounding from an elastic<br />

material at the toe. In practice there is plastic yielding of the soil beneath the toe, <strong>and</strong> the<br />

pile penetrates the soil by the amount described as the ‘permanent set’. The weight of the<br />

hammer is then important in governing the length of the stress wave <strong>and</strong> hence the efficiency<br />

of the blow in maintaining the downward movement of the pile.<br />

The simplest approach to ensuring that driving stresses are within safe limits is to adopt<br />

working stresses under static loading such that heavy driving is not required to achieve the<br />

depth of penetration required for the calculated ultimate bearing capacity. The usual practice<br />

is to assume that the dynamic resistance of a pile to its penetration into the soil is equal to its<br />

ultimate static load-bearing capacity, <strong>and</strong> then to calculate the ‘permanent set’ in terms of

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!