Smart questions
Smart answers
Smart people
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Member Login




Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Join Us!

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips now!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

Join Eng-Tips
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Donate Today!

Do you enjoy these
technical forums?
Donate Today! Click Here

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.
Jobs from Indeed

Link To This Forum!

Partner Button
Add Stickiness To Your Site By Linking To This Professionally Managed Technical Forum.
Just copy and paste the
code below into your site.

WideMike (Structural) (OP)
19 Oct 03 10:55
A client (a heavy/highway contractor) in Eastern Pennsylvania (U.S.A.) wants to use a (steel) soldier pile and (heavy timber) lagging system to retain (about 10'-0") fill for a temporary roadway embankment.  The soldiers will be set into shale, so they can't be driven.  I've searched rather extensively for design examples, methodology, criteria, etc. in order to design rock sockets, but I've been unsuccessful.  Any input appreciated.  Thanks very much.  WideMike.
ishvaaag (Structural)
19 Oct 03 13:10
The lateral pressure will cause shear and bending at the interface, and friction will add some compression. Also, part of the tip will be likely damaged by the driving procedure. So what said, with the minimum strengths of the shale will mark a limit to both the soldier pile sizing and its embedment, for which I would select a safety factor bigger for the steel than usual, and about 3 for the limit strength of the shale. Shale is directionally anisotropic, hence a good determination of the strength would be very important if you plan to stay around minimum embedment lengths. Since the top of the embedment will be likely somewhat distroyed, at least 3 depths deep shouldn't be an unreasonable minimum embedment, except if unworkable and strong enough. The situation is --from a structural design standpoint -- not much unlike that of cantilever embedments on masonry.

VAD (Geotechnical)
19 Oct 03 23:30
Hello WideMike:

Is the plan to drill into the shale and set the pile into the shale and then concrete to the top of the embedment depth. Check Tomlinson "Pile Design and Construction Practice".

How strong is the shale. Generally, one can drive and embed pile as least one to 2m in depth as the top of shale is normally weathered.

You can also consder driving and use of inclined screw anchors/piles to provide for lateral resistance.

  
Helpful Member!  PEinc (Geotechnical)
20 Oct 03 9:07
WideMike,

Forget about the above responses; they will not help you very much. To design soldier beams socketed into rock, you can check the earth pressure loading diagrams in AASHTO's Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges. There are diagrams for cantilevered beams in cohesionless and cohesive soils, for mixed soils, and for soils over rock, for both permanent and temporary applications, for soldier beams (discrete elements) and continuous steel sheeting. Make sure you chose the correct diagram. Due to the nature of shale bedrock in Eastern PA and NJ, I will often treat the shale as a stiff clay. Frequently the shale bedrock is very mixed with clay. Some shale is very fractured and drills easily; some drills hard and is more competent.

How high is your cantilevered excavation?  Is there sloping behind the sheeting wall? Are there surcharges to be added? Where is excavation subgrade with respect to the top of the shale bedrock?  If top of rock is below subgrade, then you will also have to consider the pssive resistance of the dirt above the shale. If subgrade is below top of rock, you will have to consider the stability of the exposed rock bench.

Make sure you specify the entire drill hole to be filled with lean concrete or flowable fill after the soldier beam is set.
cap4000 (Civil/Environmental)
26 Oct 03 15:01
I would think if the rock was intact with excellent quality (80%+RQD)and the H Pile socket was filled solid with concrete, the encased portion design loads would like perhaps a typical "fixed end" connection. Basically, Uniform Varying Triangular Intensities. The sloping high points would of course would be on the opposite sides from each other. Sum up the forces and moments for equilibrium. I never looked at AASHTO, but I would interested myself as to their encased loading diagram for a rock socket and its pile embedment criteria. GOOD LUCK.
sfric (Geotechnical)
13 Nov 03 22:11
Pells et al (1998), Foundations on sandstones and shale in Sydney region, Australian Geomechanics, Dec., 1998
gives details for "rock socketed" piles.

For lateral capacity analysis, you may try using the
"modulus of subgrade reaction approach", setting
some spring constants for the rock socketed portion.
BigH (Geotechnical)
16 Nov 03 3:25
WideMike:  Greetings from Bangkok.  I suggest you might want to read Dr. Jorj Osterberg's article in July 2000 Geo-Strata Magazine but out by the Geo-Institute.  He also had an erratum in the October 2000 issue.  Interesting read.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close