Probably a stretch, but...

atrizzy · Sep 7, 2018

I'm having trouble designing concrete piles in very poor soil, namely, I'm chasing my tail with increasing the load on the pile using the dead weight of the pile itself.

Question: Is there any justification for removing the dead load factor (1.25 for Canadian designs) for the pile dead weight alone?

My (albeit weak) justification is based on having a very good idea of the dead load of the pile, and that it is very consistent.

Any thoughts?

My client is fairly adamant about making concrete piles work...

jayrod12 · Sep 7, 2018

I've always been told we can neglect the weight of the pile, due to 150 PCF Concrete ~= 125 PCF Soil

atrizzy · Sep 7, 2018

jayrod, that's interesting. I've never considered this.

On a potentially related note, the geotech has insisted that we not use end bearing in our calculations. Wonder if this is why.

Sounds like I need to give him a call.

JAE · Sep 7, 2018

We use the net difference between the pile density (150 pcf) and soil (100 pcf or actual amount).

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

jayrod12 · Sep 7, 2018

Regarding not using end bearing and friction at the same time. I believe that's due to the amount of movement required to mobilize the different resistances. In order to fully movilize the end bearing resistance, the entire skin friction resistance needs to be overcome.

atrizzy · Sep 7, 2018

Thanks JAE, this makes a lot of sense. I've approached the geotech with the idea.

dik · Sep 7, 2018

Jayrod... common practice, here, too...

Dik

Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

Probably a stretch, but...

atrizzy

Structural

jayrod12

Structural

atrizzy

Structural

JAE

Structural

jayrod12

Structural

atrizzy

Structural

dik

Structural

Similar threads

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor