**1.**The determination of the ultimate load bearing capacity of the group Qgu.

**2.**Determination of the settlement of the group, S , under an allowable load Qga

The ultimate load of the group is generally different from the sum of the ultimate loads of individual piles Qu.

The factor

is called group efficiency which depends on parameters such as type of soil in which the piles are embedded, method of installation of piles i.e. either driven or cast-in-situ piles, and spacing of piles.

There is no acceptable "efficiency formula" for group bearing capacity. There are a few formulae such as the Converse-Labarre formula that are sometimes used by engineers. These formulae are empirical and give efficiency factors less than unity. But when piles are installed in sand, efficiency factors greater than unity can be obtained as shown by Vesic (1967) by his experimental investigation on groups of piles in sand. There is not sufficient experimental evidence to determine group efficiency for piles embedded in clay soils.

**Efficiency of Pile Groups in Sand**

Vesic (1967) carried out tests on 4 and 9 pile groups driven into sand under controlled conditions.

Piles with spacings 2, 3,4, and 6 times the diameter were used in the tests. The tests were conducted in homogeneous, medium dense sand. His findings are given in

**Fig. 15.26**. The figure gives the following:

**1.**The efficiencies of 4 and 9 pile groups when the pile caps do not rest on the surface.

**2.**The efficiencies of 4 and 9 pile groups when the pile caps rest on the surface.

**3.**The skin efficiency of 4 and 9 pile groups.

**4.**The average point efficiency of all the pile groups.

**Figure 15.26**Efficiency of pile groups in sand (Vesic, 1967)

It may be mentioned here that a pile group with the pile cap resting on the surface takes more load than one with free standing piles above the surface. In the former case, a part of the load is taken by the soil directly under the cap and the rest is taken by the piles. The pile cap behaves the same way as a shallow foundation of the same size. Though the percentage of load taken by the group is quite considerable, building codes have not so far considered the contribution made by the cap.

It may be seen from the Fig. 15.26 that the overall efficiency of a four pile group with a cap resting on the surface increases to a maximum of about 1.7 at pile spacings of 3 to 4 pile diameters, becoming somewhat lower with a further increase in spacing. A sizable part of the increased bearing capacity comes from the caps. If the loads transmitted by the caps are reduced, the group efficiency drops to a maximum of about 1.3.

Very similar results are indicated from tests with 9 pile groups. Since the tests in this case were carried out only up to a spacing of 3 pile diameters, the full picture of the curve is not available. However, it may be seen that the contribution of the cap for the bearing capacity is relatively smaller.

Vesic measured the skin loads of all the piles. The skin efficiencies for both the 4 and 9-pile groups indicate an increasing trend. For the 4-pile group the efficiency increases from about 1.8 at 2 pile diameters to a maximum of about 3 at 5 pile diameters and beyond. In contrast to this, the average point load efficiency for the groups is about 1.01. Vesic showed for the first time that the increasing bearing capacity of a pile group for piles driven in sand comes primarily from an increase in skin loads. The point loads seem to be virtually unaffected by group action.

**Pile Group Efficiency Equation**

There are many pile group equations. These equations are to be used very cautiously, and may in many cases be no better than a good guess. The Converse-Labarre Formula is one of the most widely used group-efficiency equations which is expressed as

## No comments:

## Post a Comment