49238035-jkr(spec si)

Pile Design Report

FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY

Sample Design Calculations For Micropiles in Kenny Hill Formation Generalized Subsoil Profile -

Generally flat terrain

-

Subsoil profile: 0-3m, silty SAND, SPT=1- 5 3-6m, silty SAND, SPT= 15 - 50 6-20m, highly weathered sandstone

Schematic Detail

Soil becoming weathered rock

Mild Steel Capping Plate L = 350mm B = 350mm Thickness = 10mm Mild Steel Stiffeners Thickness = 10mm Pile Boring Diameter = 200mm

L = 20.0m

API Pipe O.D. Thickness fy (min) Grade

= = = =

127.0mm 9.2mm 552 Mpa N-80

Cementitious Grout W/c = 0.45 Fcu = 25 Mpa Safe Working Load Pa = 80 tonnes Lsocket = 20m

Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Page 1

Pile Design Report


Subject : Micropile Design 1.0

Material Properties

1.1

Basic Dimensions and Properties

1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3

Micropile Diameter, D Pile Composite Modulus Ep Moment of Inertia, Ip

1.2

Cementitious Grout

1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.2.4 1.2.5 1.2.6

Max. water/cement ratio Anti-shrink / Additives Grout Area. Ac 28 day Comp. Strength, Fcu' Density Elastic Modulus. Ec

1.3

API Pipe Reinforcement

1.3.1 1.3.2 1.3.3 1.3.4 1.3.5 1.3.6 1.3.7 1.3.8 1.3.9

Source Outer Diameter, OD Wall Thickness. t Inner Diameter. ID Cross Sectional Area, As API Specification Grade Designation Mm. Yield Strength, fy Elastic Modulus. Es

1.4

Compliance with British Standards Designed

1.4.1 1.4.2 1.4.3 1.4.4

Working Grout/API Pipe Bond (MPa) 0.8 12 Grout Characteristic Strength, fcu (MPa) 25 20 Cement content (kg/m"3) 400 00 Grout working compressive stress,0.4fcu/FoS 0.2 x fcu 0.25 x fcu

1.5

Minimum Factors of Safety

1.5.1 1.5.2 1.5.3 1.5.4

Against Structural Failure Against Buckling Failure Against Geotech. Failure Against Geotech. Failure

2.0

Structural Design Assuming that the applied vertical load is carried by the API Pipe alone. Ultimate Load Capacity Pu = 0.87 x fy x As = 1633450 N = 1633.5 kN = 163.3 tonnes Use the Factor of Safety prescribed in Section 1.5 on Plate 2 Allowable Load Capacity Pa = 82 tonnes

2.1

2.2


= 200mm = 41 GPa = 7.85E+07 mm^4

= = = = = =

0.45 Adogroud 100g 150kg bag 45686 mm"2 25 MPa 2000 kg /M^3 28 GPa

= = = = = = = = =

127 9.19 108.62 3401 5A-80 N-80 552 210

= = = =

2.00 1.60 2.00 2.50

mm mm mm mm^2

MPa GPa Req. Min. (Max)

Source

BS8110 BS8004 BS8004 BS8004

Skin Friction End Bearing

Page 2

Pile Design Report


2.3

Design Safe Working Load SWL

= 80 tonnes

3.0

Geotechnical Design Refer Piler Analysis for derivation of Geotechnical Safe Working Load -Appendix ......

3.1

Design Length

3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3

Safe Working Load per Pile Nominal Diameter Embedment

3.2

Grout l API Pipe Bond

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4

Ultimate Grout Pipe - Bond Stress, t (u) Factor of Safety Working Bond Stress, t (w) Req'd API Pipe Embedment in Grout

P D Ls

Therefore, adopted socket length is

= 800 = 200 = 20.0 m

kN mm

= 2.0 = 2.5 = 0.8 = 2.5 < 20.0 m OK

MPa MPa m

4.0

Buckling (Pile Slenderness)

4.1

Pile End Conditions (Unfilled Cavities)

4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4

Pile Top (at Pilecap Level) Pile Base (at Rock Head Level) Ass. length in unfilled cavity L assumed Effective Length - 0.7 x L L eff.

4.2

Eucler's Buckling Load (Unfilled Cavities)

4.2.1 4.2.2

Effective radius Euler Critical Load

4.3

Elastic Buckling Load of Pile embedded in Overburden (ie Winkler Medium)

4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4

Average SPT in Overburden soils, N Est. Und. Cohesion Overburden soils, Cu Modulus of Horiz. Subgrade Reaction, kh'c 20100 kPa Elastic Buckling Load, Pcr

4.3.5

FOS available

5.0

Rate of Corrosion of Reinforcement

5.1

Ex Oil Drill API Pipe Reinforcement

5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4 5.1.5 5.1.6 5.1.7

Outer Diameter Wall Thickness Internal Diameter Cross sectional Area API Specification Grade Designation Min Yield Strength


Analysis not appropriate for Kenny Hill Formation

r Pe FOS available

O.D. t I.D. As

fy

= = = =

Fixed Fixed 1m 0.7 m

=41.8 =@pi^2 - Ep l(Lelr)^2 = 1428 kN =9.78 OK

= = = = = = =

50 6 ' N kPa 300 kPa 67*Cu 20.1 MPa 2 x @sgrt (Ep x Ip x kh x d) 16014 kN 20.02 OK

= = = = = = =

127.0 9.2 108.6 3401 5A-80 N-80 552

mm mm mm mm^2

MPa Page 3

Pile Design Report


5.1.8 5.1.9

Elastic Modulus Es = 210 GPa Allowable Axial Working Stress (Clause 7.4.6.3.1 BS8004) Fa = 50% of Yield Strength = 276 MPa

5.2

Design for allowable corrosion as for sheetpiles w/o grout/ concrete protection

5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 5.2.4 5.2.5

Allowable corrosion rate Max. pile axial load Pa Req'd Steel Area Min. OD of API Pipe Allowable Corrosion Period

= = = = =

Asc O.D. Tc

0.01 800 2899 124.5 255

mm/year kN mm^2 mm years

Summary

No additional reinforcement required, Tc > Design Life of 50 years. 6.0

Pilehead Capping Details Safe Working Load

=

800

kN

= = = x

25 6.85 116800 350

MPa MPa mm^2 OK

155

MPa

6.1

Capping Plate Size

6.1.1 6.1.2 6.1 3

Assume characteristic strength of pileca f cu Permissible direct compressive stress fcu13.65 Req'd bearing area of capping plate Adopt plate of dimmensions (mm) 350

6.2

Thickness of Stiffners

6.2.1

Allowable Axial Compressive Stress = (Table 17 (a). BS449 : Part 2: 1969) Contact Area of API Pipe on Capping Plate = Stiffener projection beyond API pipe OD = Required thickness of MS Stiffeners t(s) = Adopt

6.2.2 6.2.3 6.2.4

6.3

Thickness of Capping Plate

6.3.1 6.3.2

Allow Shear Stress on Capping Plate (Table 10. BS449:Part 2:1969) Effect. Punching Shear Shear Perimeter

6.3.3

Required Thickness of Capping Plate

=

125

=

OD of API Pipe + Perimeter - 8 x thickness of stiffeners 1599 mm 4.0 mm 10 mm

= = Adopt

6.4

Allowable Bearing Stress on Capping Plate

6.4.1

Allow. Bearing Stress on Capping Plate (Table 9. BS449:Part 2:1969) Proj. Bearing Area (API + Stiffeners) Actual Bearing Stress

6.4.2 6.4.3


3401 mm^2 184 mm 2.4 mm 10 mm (4No. MS Stiffeners)

MPa

=

210

MPa

= =

10761 mm^2 74 MPa < All. Bearing Stress, OK Page 4

Pile Design Report


6.5

Check Stiffeners for Buckling

6.5.1 6.5.2

Bearing Area of API Pile = 3401 mm^2 Bearing Area of 4No. Stiffeners = 7359 mm^2 Assume uniform distribution of Pile Axial Load, Compressive Load per Stiffener = 136.8 kN Pile head Embedment into Pilecap = 150 mm Assume Stiffener Depth, d = 140 mm (Conservative Estimate) Slenderness Ratio of Stiffener d ' @sgrt(3)1 thickness of stiffener = 24.2 Allow. Compressive Stress = 146 MPa (Table 17(a). BS449) Allow. Buckling Load on Stiffener = 268.6 kN ' > Compressive Load of Stiffener, OK

6.5.3 6.5.4 6.5.5 6.5.6 6.5.7 6.5.8

6.6

Check Bearing on API Pipe

6.6.1 6.6.2 6.6.3 6.6.4

Moment equilibrium about intersection of Capping Plate and API Pipe, Bearing Force on API Pipe = 180 kN Assume material for API Pipe to be equivalent to G55 steel, Allow. Bearing Stress = 320 MPa Allow Bearing Load = 448 kN > Actual Bearing Force, OK

6.7

Fillet Weld Design (Stiffener to API Pipe)

6.7.1

Weld Length per Stiffener

6.7.2

Req'd Shear Load Capacity for weld


= = = Adopt

2xd 280 0.49 7

mm per stiffener kN/mm mm Fillet Weld

Page 5

Pile Design Report


Design Report 1.

Introduction This report presents the design criteria and design calculations for pile foundation for Interchange 3 of Project B 15 Road Upgrading Works. Interchange 3 is a cloverleaf interchange with arch shaped R.C bridge as shown below

From structural analysis the compression load coming over the piles from one half of the bridge is 12600 ton while the other half is 2800 ton in tension. 2.

Site Condition The topograph of the site is rolling to undulating. The subsoil condition is generalized as shown above. The top 12m to 16m from the OGL of the residual soil is clayey silt with SPT 6-39 (aver age SPT=20): This is underlain by hard clayey silt sith SPT exceeding 50 up to 28m bgi.

3.

4.

Analysis Shallow foundation is not suitable because part of the formation is on filled ground and also part of the foundation is in tension or high compression. Driven spun piles cannot or not practical to provide adequate tension required. Large diam eter bored piles are suitable for high compression and tension required. Design Calculations 4.1

Compression piles

The allowable compression load carrying capacity of the single pile has been cal culated based on the SPT 'N" values, using the following formula.


Page 6

Pile Design Report


Allowable load

:

Ab

=

Ab, af + As,fs 3 2 2 base area (m )

qf

= =

unit base resistance 400 Nb (in SI-unit), Meyerhof's Empirical Formula

Nb

=

average 'N' over 5m above and 3m below depth being considered (< 50)

As

=

Pile circumference area (m2)

fs

= =

unit skin friction 2 Nave (in SI-unit)

Nave

= Average SPT value with depth

Factor of safety of base resistance = 3 to control settlement Factor of safety of friction resistance = 2 The detailed pile calculations are given in Appendix B. 4.2

Tension piles

The allowable tension load carrying capacity of single pile has been calculated based on SPT 'N' values, using following formula Allowable load = As . fs 2 As

=

Pile circumference area

fs

= =

Unit skin friction 2 Nave (in SI-unit)

Nave

=

Average SPT 'N' value with depth

Factory of safety against friction resistance = 2 The detailed pile calculations are given in Appendix B. 5.

Design Calculations

5.1

General

Diameter of Compression pile : 1500 mm with design load of 900 ton Diameter of Tension piles : 1200m with design load of 400 ton Estimated pile length = 19m socketing 3 times diameter into hard stratum of SPT> 50

5.2

Preliminary Load Tests Analysis

Compression load tests and pull out tests were carried out at the Interchange bridge site to assess the performance of the piles installed to the design lengths.


Page 7

Pile Design Report


(a)

West Abutment

The tension Test Piles (No.81) located on the west abutments satisfied the per formance criteria. Based on Prof Chin's Stability Plot: Ultimate load : 1141 tonne Average Unit Shaft Friction

:

16 tonne/m2

The compression Test Pile No. 15 located ont the west abutments satisfied crite ria at work load and 2 x work load but just failed to satisfy the recovery criteria. Based on stability plot. Ultimate capacity : 2,490 tonne Ultimate Shaft capacity

:

1,945 tonne

Mobilised Toe capacity

:

548 tonne

Ultimate Unit Shaft Resistance

:

39 tonne/m2

Mobilised Unit Toe Resistance

:

310 tonne/m2

Based on these assessment, piles were constructed to following toe elevations: Compression Piles : RL 33.00 (5m longer than Test Piles) Tension Piles (same length as Test Pile) (b)

:

RL 31.00

East Abutment

Tension Pile No. 71 was tested. Pile satisfy the deflection criteria at working load but however failed to attain the 2 x working load without excessive movement. Based on Stability Plot, the following capacitities can be estimated: Ultimate Shaft capacity

:

624 tonne

Unit Shaft Resistance

:

9 tonne/m2

This is much less than the 16.0 tonne/m2 value of tension pile No. 81. Based on the evaluated value of 9.0 tonne/m2, all remaining working tension piles are installed to RL 21.00 toe level, l O.Om longer than the test pile. Compression pile No. 65 was first tested. It failed to satisfy the performance cri teria. Estimated capacities are: Ultimate capacity : 1600 tonne Ultimate Shaft capacity

:

625 tonne

Ultimate Toe capacity

:

1041 tonne


Page 8

Pile Design Report


Unit Shaft Resistance

:

12 tonne/m2

Mobilised Unit Toe Resistance589 tonne/m2 Based on above results, Test Pile No. 2 (Pile No.66) located 4.50m from P65 was installed to toe level RL 33.00 (5.Om longer). Theoretical ultimate capacity should be of the order of 1,900 tonnes. The test showed the following: Ultimate capacity : 1520 tonne Ultimate Shaft capacity

:

730 tonne

Mobilised Toe capacity

:

790 tonne

Ultimate Unit Shaft Resistance

:

10 tonne/m2

Mobilised Unit Shaft Resistance

:

447 tonne/m2

These are less than values obtained from P65, indicating significant variation in the sub soil strength. Concreting procedures are satisfactory and concrete batch records and test indicate supplied concrete complied with the requirements of the specification. Concreting volume of pile does not indicate occurrence of collapse of borehole or neck ing. Since the pile was concrete immediately after boring, strength relaxation due to aging should not occured. Based on above, all remaining piles are to be installed to toe levels 23. Pile No. P52 will be test to assess amount of pile head movement at working load and 2 x working load. Estimated ultimate capacity of piles to toe level RL 23.00 is order 2,100 tonnes. (c)

Results of loads tests carried out at Interchange No. 3 are shown in Figure T1 to T.


Page 9

Road B -15

= 2*Nave (SI-Unit s)

fs


3

4

5

6

7

8

62

61

60

59

58

57

26

27

28

29

30

39

38

37

36

35

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

47

47

32

32

28

28

31

31

29

29

23

23

17

17

16

16

16

0

N

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

31

31

23.5

23.5

21.5

21.5

23

23

22

22

19

19

16

16

15.5

15.5

15.5

0

N

C o r r ect ed

37.53

36.28

34.95

33.52

31.98

30.33

28.54

26.6

24.5

22.2

21.71

21.18

20.58

19.92

19.26

18.53

18.2

17.82

17.54

17.21

16.68

16.05

15.39

14.56

13.93

13.08

12.5

11.63

10.33

7.75

0

N ave

A ver ag e

75.06

72.57

69.9

67.04

63.96

60.65

57.08

53.21

49

44.41

43.43

42.35

41.16

39.83

38.53

37.06

36.4

35.64

35.08

34.42

33.36

32.1

30.78

29.13

27.86

26.17

25

23.25

20.67

15.5

0

f s=2 N

141.37

136.66

131.95

127.23

122.52

117.81

113.1

108.38

103.67

98.96

94.25

89.54

84.82

80.11

75.4

70.69

65.97

61.26

58.55

51.84

47.12

42.41

37.7

32.99

28.27

23.56

18.85

14.14

9.42

4.71

0

As

10612

9917

9223

8529

7837

7146

8456

5767

5080

4395

4093

3792

3491

3191

2905

2620

2401

2184

1984

1784

1572

1361

1160

961

788

817

471

329

195

73

0

Qs

U LT I M A T E S HA F T R E S I S T A N C E

1. Correct ed N = 15 + 0.5 (N-15), f or N up t o and equal t o 4 t imes N=50

25

Not e:

24

20

45

41

19

40

18

47

46

23

17

48

42

16

49

21

15

51

50

22

14

52

43

13

53

44

11

12

54

9

2

63

10

1

64

55

0

65

56

D ep t h

Level ( m)

SPT

B ored pile diamet er

Db

2.00

1.20 met ers

FS f or f rict ional res

FS f or base resist ain 3.00

A llowable load = A b*qf / 3 + A s*f s/ 2

A llowable load = Ult imat e load along base/ 3.0 + Ult imat e load along shaf t / 2.0

Nave = average spt value wit h dept h

= SPT value at base

= pile circumf erence (m^2)

As

= 400*Nb(SI-Unit s)

qf

Nb

= base area (m^2)

Ab

R ed uced

where

(WEST SIDE OF THE CENTRE LINE OF THE ROA D)

P ILE LE N G T H E S T IM A T IO N A LO N G T H E IN T E R C H A N G E # 3

75

75

75

75

70

64

59

54

48

43

36

30

29

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

21

20

19

18

17

15

14

13

13

12

10

Nb

30000

30000

30000

30000

27875

25750

23625

21500

19300

17100

14525

11950

11400

10850

10375

9900

9450

9000

8775

8550

8275

8000

7625

7250

6925

5825

5571

5233

5000

4650

4133

q f =4 0 0 N b

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

1.767

Ab

53014

53014

53014

53014

49259

45504

41749

37994

34106

30218

25668

21117

20145

19174

18334

17495

16700

15904

15507

15109

14623

14137

13474

12812

12237

10294

9846

9248

8836

8217

7304

Qb

U LT I M A T E E N D B E A R I N G R E S I S T A N C E

17671

17671

17671

17671

16420

15168

13916

12665

11369

10073

8556

7039

6715

6391

6111

5832

5567

5301

5169

5036

4874

4712

4491

4271

4079

3431

3282

3083

2945

2739

2435

B ase

5306

4958

4611

4265

3918

3573

3228

2883

2540

2197

2047

1896

1746

1596

1453

1310

1201

1092

992

892

786

681

580

480

394

308

236

164

97

37

0

S haf t

22977

22630

22283

21936

20338

18741

17144

15548

13909

12270

10602

8935

8461

7987

7564

7141

6767

6393

6161

5928

5660

5393

5072

4751

4473

3739

3517

3247

3043

2776

2435

T o t al ( kN )

A LLO W A B LE LO A D

B oring B H-11(West side)

Hard clayey silt SPT 50







V .Sof t clayey silt SPT 2



St if f clayey silt SPT 29


M ed clayey silt SPT 17


B oring

B H-13(Eest side)

24 26

2 0

22

20

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0







V .St if f clayey silt SPT







Dept h(m) RD Level 25.75m

6 4










V .St if f clayey silt SPT 39





Soil Invest igat ion Ph:l

28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

RD Level 66.50m

B H-13(West side) Dept h(m)

B oring

18

Soil Invest igat ion Ph:ll

28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0


8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

50

52

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

68

Level(m)

Reduced

S UB S O IL P R O F ILE A LO N G T H E B R ID G E LO C A T IO N

A ppe ndix B


Pile Design Report

Page 10

Road B -15


fs


26

27

28

29

30

0

-1

-2

-3

-4

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

38

38

32

31

21

21

11

11

11

9

9

6

8

8

0

N

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

26.5

26.5

23.5

23

18

18

11

11

11

9

9

6

6

6

0

N

C o r r ect ed

39.82

38.65

37.4

36.05

34.61

33.06

31.38

29.56

27.59

25.43

23.07

20.48

17.61

16.78

15.85

14.81

13.63

12.71

11.65

10.67

9.55

8.7

7.67

7.25

6.71

6

5.4

4.5

4

3

0

N ave

A ver ag e

79.65

77.3

74.79

72.11

69.22

66.12

62.76

59.13

55.17

50.86

46.14

40.95

35.21

33.56

31.71

29.63

27.27

25.43

23.31

21.33

19.09

17.4

15.33

14.5

13.43

12

10.8

9

8

6

0

f s=2 N

113.1

109.33

105.56

101.79

98.02

94.25

90.48

86.71

82.94

79.17

75.4

71.63

67.86

64.09

60.32

58.55

52.78

49.01

45.24

41.47

37.7

33.93

30.16

26.39

22.62

18.85

15.08

11.31

7.54

3.77

0

As

9008

8451

7895

7340

6785

6231

5678

5127

4576

4027

3479

2933

2389

2151

1912

1675

1439

1246

1054

885

720

590

462

383

304

226

163

102

60

23

0

Qs



25

Not e:

24

20

6

1

19

7

2

18

8

23

17

9

3

16

10

21

15

11

22

14

12

4

13

13

5

11

12

15

14

9

10

17

8

18

16

7

4

22

19

3

23

5

2

24

6

1

25

21

0

26

20

D ep t h

Level ( m)

SPT


Db

2.00

1.20 met ers






= SPT value at base


As

= 400*Nb(SI-Unit s)

qf

Nb

= base area (m^2)

Ab

R ed uced

where



75

75

75

75

75

75

75

70

64

59

54

48

42

35

29

27

25

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

9

7

7

6

5

5

4

Nb

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

27875

25750

23625

21500

19075

16650

14075

11475

10750

10025

8950

7875

7100

6225

5500

4650

4050

3450

2900

2686

2400

2160

1800

1600

q f =4 0 0 N b

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

Ab

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

31528

29123

26719

24316

21573

18831

15918

12978

12158

11338

10122

8906

8030

7040

6220

5259

4580

3902

3280

3037

2714

2443

2036

1810

Qb


11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

10509

9708

8906

8105

7191

6277

5306

4326

4053

3779

3374

2969

2677

2347

2073

1753

1527

1301

1093

1012

905

814

679

603

B ase

4504

4226

3947

3670

3393

3116

2839

2563

2288

2013

1740

1467

1195

1075

956

838

720

623

527

442

360

295

231

191

152

113

81

51

30

11

0

S haf t

15814

15535

15257

14980

14702

14425

14149

13072

11996

10920

9845

8658

7472

6381

5282

4890

4499

3997

3496

3119

2707

2369

1984

1718

1452

1206

1094

956

844

690

603

T o t al ( kN )


B oring B H-11(West side)



























B oring

B H-13(Eest side)

24 26

2 0

22

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0















20 4

M ed clayey silt SPT 10 M ed clayey silt SPT 11


28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

RD Level 66.50m

B H-13(West side) Dept h(m)

B oring

6


28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0


8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

50

52

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

68

Level(m)

Reduced


A ppe ndix B


Pile Design Report

Page 11

Road B -15


fs


29

30

19

18

N

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

50

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

N

C o r r ect ed

68.15

67.92

67.67

67.41

67.13

66.83

66.5

66.15

65.76

65.34

64.88

64.38

6..82

63.19

62.5

61.72

60.83

59.82

58.65

57.29

55.68

53.75

51.39

48.44

44.64

39.58

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

32.5

N ave

A ver ag e

136.29

135.83

135.34

134.82

134.26

133.65

133

132.29

131.52

130.68

129.76

128.75

127.63

126.39

125

123.44

121.67

119.64

117.31

114.58

111.36

107.5

102.78

96.88

89.29

79.17

65

65

65

65

65

f s=2 N

113.1

109.33

105.56

101.79

98.02

94.25

90.48

86.71

82.94

79.17

75.4

71.63

67.86

64.09

60.32

56.55

52.78

49.01

45.24

41.47

37.7

33.93

30.16

26.39

22.62

18.85

15.08

11.31

7.54

3.77

0

As

15414

14850

14287

13723

13160

12597

12034

11471

10908

10346

9784

9222

8661

8100

7540

6980

6421

5864

5307

4752

4198

3647

3100

2558

2020

1492

980

735

490

245

0

Qs



28

20

Not e:

26

27

21

25

22

24

23

20

28

24

19

29

23

18

30

25

17

31

21

16

32

22

15

33

27

14

34

26

12

13

35

11

37

36

9

10

38

8

40

39

7

4

41

3

45

44

5

2

46

6

1

47

42

0

48

43

D ep t h

Level ( m)

SPT


Db

2.00

1.20 met ers






= SPT value at base


As

= 400*Nb(SI-Unit s)

qf

Nb

= base area (m^2)

Ab

R ed uced

where



75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

75

70

64

59

54

48

45

40

33

33

33

Nb

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

30000

27875

25750

23625

21500

19375

17857

15833

13000

13000

13000

q f =4 0 0 N b

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

1.131

Ab

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

33929

31526

29123

26719

24316

21913

20196

17907

14703

14703

14703

Qb


11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

11310

10509

9708

8906

8105

7304

6732

5969

4901

4901

4901

B ase

7707

7425

7143

6662

6580

6298

6017

5735

5454

5173

4892

4611

4330

4050

3770

3490

3211

2932

2653

2376

2099

1824

1550

1278

1010

746

490

368

245

123

0

S haf t

19017

18735

18453

18171

17890

17608

17327

17045

16764

16483

16202

15921

15640

15360

15080

14800

14520

14242

13963

13686

13409

12332

11257

10185

9115

8050

7222

6337

5146

5023

4901

T o t al ( kN )
















B oring

B H-13(Eest side)

24 26

2 0

22

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0















20 4















RD Level 66.50m


28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

6


28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Dept h(m)

B H-13(West side) B oring

B oring B H-11(West side) Dept h(m) RD Level 64.89m

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

50

52

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

68

Level(m)

Reduced


A ppe ndix B


Pile Design Report

Page 12



Pile Design Report

Page 13



Pile Design Report

Page 14



Pile Design Report

Page 15



Pile Design Report

Page 16

Pile Design Report


5)

Check for buckling load Qub

=

Where

=

Qub

Allowable Qb

λ√Cu El λ CU

= =

10 15 kPa

E

=

I

=

210 kN/mm2 1/64 B (d14 - d24)

√15 x 210 x

B (101.64 - 85.444) 64 106

=

10

=

907 kN

=

907 ___ 2

=

454 kN > 300 kN OK

6) Check for elastic compression e

=

=

PL

P L

= =

300 kN 10m

EP

A

=

31416 mm2

Ep

= 35.3 kN/mm2

300 x10 x103 31416 x 35.3

=

3 mm


Page 17

Pile Design Report


Sample Pile Design Calculations 1.

Project :

KKS Road Project Piled Embankment for the approaches to Sg. Likas Bridge.

2.

Generalized subsoil profile.

Piled embankment

Sand Lenses

C L Bridge

V.soft to soft clay

Stiff to hard Sandstone/shale

3.

*

Flat alluvial formation

*

Top 24m consists of soft to very soft alluvium with few localized sandy lenses (Cu = 10-20 kPa with an average of about 15 kPa except at lenses of sand). Stiff to hard strata of about 2 - 4m thick overlying on highly to moderately weathered sandstone/shale bedrock. WT is near the ground surface.

Analysis Stability and settlement analysis have concluded that simple ground treatments by partial sand replacement with high strength woven polyester geotextile reinforcement or vertical drains are not possible to achieve FOS = 1.5 and or post construction settlement to be less than 200mm for the first 5 years of service if height of embankment exceeds 4.2m. Piled raft embankment is adopted in preference to EPS, elevated structure and stone column treatment because: a) EPS embankment is technically not acceptable because the site is subject to flooding & the cost is high.

4.

b)

Elevated structure is about 30% more expensive (separate analysis)

c)

Though treatment by stone columns is cheaper, it requires longer time to consolidate and technically less superior

Design calculation

Analysis has shown that driven R.C piles will be the most cost effective. The site has no vibration or noise or ground heave constraints. Pile capacity of about 600 kN is chosen to get optimum pile spacing of 2 to 3m and raft thickness of 350 450mm for pile depth of about 30m.

Use 250X250 R.C piles at spacing "x" bothways Max design capacity - 625 kN.


Page 18

Pile Design Report


Load on each pile = x2.d.h, where

625

= x2.20.h

x For h For h For h For h For h

= = = = = =

x d

= =

h

= =

spacing soil density 20kN/m3 h embankment height

(31.25/h)1/2 6.5m, x = 2.19m, say 2.0m 6.0m, x = 2.2m, say 2.0m 5.5m, x = 2.38m, say 2.25m 5.0m, x = 2.50m, say 2.25m 4.5m, x = 2.64m, say 2.25m (allow some traffic load of 10 kPa)

Conclusion:

Use 250x250 R.C x 30m long at 2.0m spacing for h=6.5 - 6.0m & 2.25m spacing for h = 4-6m (Pile capacity calculations enclosed). R.C piles (MS 1314, Class 1) are designed as end bearing piles driven to set.


Page 19



Pile Design Report

Page 20

Pile Design Report


Design of Micropile a) Design load per pile b) Diameter of micropile c) Main reinforcement

= 800kN = 200mm = 3 Nos of 50mm diam. deformed bars of yield stress fy = 410N/mm2.

d) Factor of safety

= 2.5 (min) = 20N/mm2.

e) Grout characteristic strength, fcu Check Structural Capacity

= B/4 x 502 x 3 = 5892mm2 = 20N/mm2

Area of reinf, Asc fcu

= B /4 x 2002 = 31,416mm2 = 31,416 - 5892 = 25,524mm2

Area of grout, Ag ..Area of net grout

According to BS 8110, clause 3.8. 4.3 Ultimate axial load, Pu = 0.4 fcu Ac + 0.75Asc fy = 0.4x20x25,524 + 0.75x5892x410 = 2,016kN. .. Factor of safety = Pu/800 = 2.53 > 2.5 O.K. Check Bond Length Required - Depth of micropile = 20m At least l0m will be embedded in very hard decomposed granite SPT, N > 50. -

Bond between grout & hard formation = 0.4N/mm2

..

Min required bond length in hard formation, Ib = 800 x 2.5 x l 000N B x 200 x 0.4 = 7958mm = 8.0m. < 10m provided O.K.

Design of M.S. Plate for Pile Head Use 250mm x 250mm x 20mm M.S. plate Stress on plate = 800 x l03N 250 x 250 = 12.8N/mm2 < 155N/mm2 O.K. (allowable stress BS449) Details of Micropiles & works specification are encl


Page 21


Pile Design Report

Works Specification for Design and Installation of 200mm Diameter Micropiles 1. Scope of work shall include design & installation of 200mm diam micropiles of 20m provi sional length. The micropiles shall be reinforced with 3 Nos. of 50mm diam deformed bars (fy = 410N/mm2) The working load of the micropile is 800KN. 2.

Drilling

Initial drilling involves installation of 242mm diam conductor casing through loose soil (about 1.5m) by means of rotary boring or equivalent. Upon reaching hard/stiff formation down the hole hammer will be used to advance the borehole till a minimum penetration of 10m in very hard decomposed granite. The drilled hole will be flush clean by compressed air before the reinforcement bars are inserted into the hole. Suitable coupling device will be used. During drilling, a complete record of soil strata will, be taken for Engineer's inspec tion. 3.

Grout Mix

Ordinary Postland cement with water cement ratio of 0.5 will be used Non-shrink cement admixture will be added to improve bonding. 4.

Grouting Procedure

A high speed Koken grout mixer is used for the mixing of the cement grout. The capacity of the grout mixer is about 25-0 litres. For grout mixing, 100 litres of water with some non shrink admixture is poured into the mixer follow by 4 bags of 50 kg. ordinary Portland cement then allow to mix throughly, normally a few minutes. After mixing, the cement grout, a pressure hose is connected to the grouting pipe which acts as tremie pipe for grouting. The other end of the pressure hose is connected to a diesel engine high pressure pump.


Page 22



Pile Design Report

Page 23

Pile Design Report


Micropile Design Calculations Micropile design for underpinning works for an old building is shown as follows. The subsoil consists of about 3m of very soft clay, 5m to 8m of stiff to hard sandy clay with gravels (SPT = 11 to 42). The bedrock generally consists of highly weathered and fractured sandstone/shale (RQD = 0 25%, UCS = 7.5 Mpa). 1)

Micropile details Diameter of micropile Design load of micropile Pipe diameter Pipe wall thickness Steel grade (API pipe)

= = = = =

Yield strength

= 500 N/mm2

(a)

200 mm 300 kN 101.6 mm 8.08 mm N80

Check for structural capacity Ultimate structural capacity PU = B (101.62 -85.44 2) X 500 kN 4 1000 = 1187 kN Applying factor of safety of 2.5. Allowable structural capacity. PA

= 1187 2.5 = 475 kN > 300 kN OK

(b)

Check for geotechnical capacity Based on boreholes BH1 and BI-12, the depth of bedrock (sandstone/shale) varies from 8.7 m to 11.0 m b.g.l. Since the overburden soil consists of about 3.0 m of very soft soil, the shaft friction on the remaining overburden soil (5 to 8 m) with N value of 11 to 42 should be ignored and the micropiles are designed to be socketed into the bedrock. The socketing length in rock, L, is worked out as follows: FS Qa

=

0.05 qa B D x L + 0.5qa B D2 4

where FS is the factor of safety = 2.5 Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Page 24

Pile Design Report


Qa qa

= Allowable geotechnical capacity = Unconfined compressive strength of rock = 7.5 Mpa for sandstone/shale

Bond stress D 2.5 x 300

= 5% of UCS of rock = Diameter of micropile hole = 0.05 x 7.5 x 103 x B x0.2 L + 0.5 x 7.5 x 103 x B x 0.22 4

750 L

= 235.6 L + 117.8 = 2.68 m

Designed socketing length of pile = 3.0 m 2)

Check overall underpinning pile support Estimated total load of the whole building (3 storey). = 2,000 tons No. of micropile points Load on each pile

= 95 = 2,000 95 = 21 tons

Working load for each micropile provided = 30 tons OK 3)

Check for anchorage bond between underpinning pile and the existing foundatic Since epoxy grout is used to fill the hole formed by the micropile in the existir foundation and the strength of epoxy grout is much higher than the concrete strength, it can be consid ered as monolithic for the whole foundation.


Page 25

Pile Design Report


Critical section for shear check Existing Column Stump 650mm

Proposed 200mm Ø micropile 100 mm

1900mm

4)

Check for shear failure of existing foundation. Perimeter for shear check, p

= 1900 mm

Effective depth of foundation, d = 1050-50-10 = 990 mm Maximum reaction load, Shear stress, V

V

= 300 kN = V Pd = 300 x 103 1900 x 990 = 0.16 N/mm2

From Table 3.9, BS 8110 for d > 400 mm and 100As/bd = 0.25 (nominal reinforcement), allowable shear stress Vc = 0.40 N/mm2 V
OK

In grouting operation, the cement grout is pumped into the borehole through the pipe by tremie method. All loose material, cuttings and water in the borehole are displaced by the cement grout. Pressure applied should be just adequate to displace the cutting and water from the borehole. Temporary casings should be withdrawn where cement grout overflow from the casing and top up cement grout if necessary.


Page 26

Pile Design Report


Item No. A.

Description

Quantity Unit

Rate

$

¢

Design and install cast in-situ 800kN working capacity micropiles complete with reinforcement as shown on the drawings in provisional lengths 20.0m and pressuregrouted with and including approved grouting material, drilling in all types of soils and rock and all coring casings, linings, plugs, etc. and disposal of all excavated material and debris from site. Design information:a) b) c) d)

Diameter of piles: 200mm Main bars: 3Y50 Links: R05 helical link @ 100mm c/c Steel casings: 292mm O.D x 9mm thick

e) Grout: Cement grout, w/c = 0.5, fcu = 20N/m2 f) Grout additives: Non shrink admixture g) Factor of safety : 2.5 h) Bond strength: 0.9N/mm2 i) Bond length: 10m j) Ultimate load: 2016kN k) Capacity: 800kN l) Working load: 800kN m) etc Design and install all capping plates and starter bars Design information:-

B.

Plate size: 250 x 250mm Plate thickness: 25mm Starter bar size: 3Y50 or 8Y25


Page 27

Pile Design Report


Projek :

Cadangan Blok Tambahan pada Hospital Bersalin di Hospital Besar, K.Lumpur.

1.0

Tujuan Laporan ini bertujuan untuk menyampaikan laporan penyiasatan tanah dan syor-syor asas yang sesuai bagi:Projek blok tambahan pada hospital bersalin, Kuala Lumpur.

2.0

Skop Projek Perlaksanaan projek ini melibatkan pembinaan blok tambahan 2 tingkat di Hospital Bersalin. Blok yang dicadangkan ini dikelilingi oleh bangunan sedia ada.

3.0

Keadaan Tanah 3.1 Sebanyak 3 ujian gerekan dalam telah dijalankan. Hasil ujian menunjukkan keadaan lapisan tanah seperti berikut :Jenis Tanah SPT (blows/ft.) Ukurdalam(m) 0 - 4.5 Very soft CLAY 0-4 4.5 - 9/10.5 Loose SAND 1-7 9/10.5-13.5/16.0 Stiff silt or CLAY 1-9 13.5/16.0 Limestone RQD = 73 - 100%. >16.0 Limestone 3.2

4.0

Kedudukan aras air bawah tanah ialah 1.45m.

syor-syor Asas 4.1 Penapak konkrit tetulang adalah tidak sesuai kerana keupayaan galas yang rendah dan jugs paras air bawah-tanah adalah tinggi. "Driven R.C. or steel piles" adalah juga tidak sesuai kerana masalah "noise & vibration" dikawasan Hospital sukar diterima. "Inclined bedrock" juga mungkin mengakibat "excessive pile deviations". Syor-syor asas yang dicadangkan adalah seperti berikut :-

Jenis Bangunan

Jenis Asas

Saiz Panjang Keupayaan (mm) (m) galas yg dibenarkan

Blok Tambahan Cerucuk 200Ø 16.5-19 200kN mikro with 102 (micropile) API paip (4”Ø)

Geseran Kulit negatif

Beba Ujian

400kN

4.2

Cerucuk mikro hendaklah digerudi sehingga ke paras batukapur dan dikunci (key) minima 3m ke dalam batukapur.

4.3

Sekurang-kurangnya 2 bilangan cerucuk digunakan untuk setiap tiang.

4.4

Jack pile (200x200xl5m) juga boleh diterima sebagai cerucuk gantian.


Page 28


5.0

Syor-syor Tambahan 5.1 Jika rongga (cavity) ditemui, cerucuk hendaklah dipanjangkan melebihi rongga dan dikunci (keyed) minima 3m ke dalam batukapur tanpa rongga. (rujuk Fig. 1). 5.2

6.0

Pile Design Report

Untuk mengatasi masalah penanaman micropile dirongga, penender mestilah diarah mengemukakan cadangan sistem 'micropile installation' dan teknik-teknik 'grouting' dirongga semasa tawaran dibuat.

Hal-hal lain Satu set rekod penanaman cerucuk-cerucuk yang diuji berserta ujian beban hendaklah dihantar ke Unit Makmal bagi tujuan dokumentasi.


Page 29

Pile Design Report


Lampiran ‘A’

Micropile Specfication 1.

General The work involves the construction of 200mm (8") diameter micropile. The micropile shall be fabricated using steel tube and the bond length of micropile shall be 16m or directed by the S.O. The working load of micropile is 200 kN and factor of safety used in design is 2.0. The whole of work and materials shall be in, accordance with curreht Malaysian or British Standard or other National Standards approved by the S.O.

2.

Reinforcement Steel grade - HFS 16 (BS: 1775 - 1964) External diameter 139mm (51/2”) Thickness - 9.5mm (3/8") 2 Yield strength - 250 N/mm (16 Tsi)

3.

Grout The grout shall be thcFoughly mixed with Ordinary Portland Cement (MS522) and water (MS28). The grout shall be Antishrink cement grout. The water cement ratio shall be 0245 0.50. The 28 days. Strength for cement grout shall be 25N/mm (3570 psi). The representa tive cubes shall be collected on each day of grouting works for testing on the 28th days. Details of admixture shall be submitted to the S.O. for approval before commencement of works. The use of the admixture shall comply with instruction by the manufacturer & MS 922. The grout shall be free from segregation, slumping, & bleeding of water and fine materials during and after placing.

4.

Installation a)

Drilling

The drilling for installation of micropile shall guarantee the absence of Vibration which may cause damage to the existing building. Adequate precaution must be taken to ensure boreholes for micropile do not collapse during drilling. If necessary, temporary casing shall be used. During drilling of borehole, the con tractor shall maintain complete record of soil profile. The logging shall include depth of soil and water table. This drilled hole Viand! soil bore log shall be signed by contractor's site representative and a copy of which shall be deposited with the S.O. The contractor shall be required to keep representative sample of soil for each soil profil in plastic bag for inspection by.the S.O. Sample may only be disposed after the S.O. is satisfied that the logging has been properly done. The type-of drilling equipment shall be approved by the S.O. The drilled hole shall be flushed ckean.with air or water. b)

Fabrication of micro pile

Method of splicing of bars or pipes shall be approved by the S.O. Centralisers at about 3m centre must be used to ensure a minimum cover of 25mm or directed by the S.O.


Page 30


c)

Pile Design Report

Grouting

The contractor shall also provide details on method and equipment used in grout mixing. Further information such as grouting pressure, grouting procedure, grout ing equipment and techniques employed in grouting under water shall also be furnished and approved by the S.O. 'To prevent deterioration of strength of soil, soil coring, installation of reinforce ment and cement grouting shall be carried out in one continous operation. 5.

Load Testing Micro-pile shall be load tested to 2 times design load using the Maintain Load Test. Minimum of one (1) load test shall be carried out. The contractor shall also specify and pro vide details of the method of load testing. Micropile shall be constructed only after the pre liminary pile pass the load test requirements of JKR standard specification for building Works.


Page 31

Pile Design Report


Contoh Jadual Sebut Harga Bil. 1

Description

Unit

Quantity

Rate

$

MICROPILES (ALL PROVISIONAL)

A. B.

Allow for Preliminaries

Item

Provide all necessary piling equipment on site, maintain on site, dismantle and remove from site on completion, allow for all standing or idling time and cost of operation for the whole of piling works.

C.

Item

Installation of 200mm diameter Micropiles in soil, including coring, 4" diameter pipe, steel plate head, jointing and extension and grouting

MR

in cement, all as specified (50 positions) D.

Provide all necessary pile testing equipment on site, dismantle and remove from site on completion. T est 200mm diameter Micropiles in soil as specified.


NO

Page 32

Pile Design Report


Lampiran E1

Pile Design for SMK (Perempuan Raja Zarina) Kelang 1.

This project consists of construction of one additional 3-storey school block.

2.

Max column load = 57 ton

3.

This is a typical coastal alluvium site where first 60ft to 100 ft consists of very soft clay

4.

Deep Sounding is very suitable and 4 nos of D/S results give consistent results as shown in Lampiran E-1

5.

The site is a flat land and the first 4 ft is imported fill (about 5 years ago) Negative friction has to be checked.

6.

Selection of piles (Refer to Fig. 1) 6.1 Non displacement piles not suitable because of low column load and very soft clay near the first 100 ft.

7.

6.2

Timber pile also not suitable bacause its max length is about 40 ft. only.

6.3

Use 12" x 12" x 100 ft R.C. piles Design load = 30 Ton/pile (max)

Check Pile Capacity (Refer to Lampiran E-1) From D/S results Qu

= Qs + Qp

where Qu

= ultimate capacity

Qs

= skin friction

Qp

= end resistance


Page 33

Pile Design Report


7.1

Skin friction, Qs Based on total friction (remoulded) At 30m (100ft), total friction = 3,000 kg. Qs

= tube friction x-pile perimeter tube perimeter = 3,000 x (12" x 2.54 x 4) 11.3 = 32,300 kg = 30 Ton.

Based on local friction (undisturbed) Qs

= (8.5 x 0.05 + 7.5 x 0.13 + 13 x 0.27 + 0.9) x 3.28 x 4 x 0.92 = 70 Ton

Sensitivity = Qs (undisturbed) Qs (remoulded) = 70 30 = 2.3, within usual range Q's = " Qs, where " = 0.7 (Bjerrum) = 0.7 x 70 = 49 Ton 7.2

End Resistance, Qp, Qp = 80 (kg/cm2) x 1 ft2 x 0.92 = 73.6 Ton Qu = 49 + 73.6 = 122.6 Ton


Page 34

Pile Design Report


7.3

Negative friction Negative friction for piles at spacing more than 3 x diameters is fn

=

0.2 Po (Bjerrum) where Po

= effective overburden = γ h = 100' (100psf - 62.4 psf) = 3760 psf

Max. fn

= 0.2 Po = 0.2 x 3760 = 752 psf

Average fn

= (0 + 752)/2 = 376 psf

Total negative friction

7.4

= = = =

fn x As 376 x (100 x 4) 150,400 lb 67 Ton

Allowable load, Qs The negative skin friction, QN should only considered in combination with dead load because QN acts mainly at the lower portion of the pile and would only affect the settlement. 2.5 QD.L = Qu - QN QD.L = 70% Qa 2.5 x 0.7Qa = Qu - QN Qa = (Qu - QN) /1.75 = (122.6 - 67)/1.75 = 31 Ton say 30 Ton/pile Notes :

The filling is done about 5 years ago. At least 60 - 70% consolidation com pleted. fn used is about the same as the undrained shear strength. Hence QN estimated is on the light side. To prevent tensile stress and buckling during driving, free drop hammers is preferred. 8.

Recommendation Use 12" x 12" x 100 ft R.C. piles Friction piles, driven to the required pene:,tration and load test to verify the capacity. (No "set" required).# Load tests after 4 weeks of driving.


Page 35



Pile Design Report

Page 36

Pile Design Report


Memo Daripada:

Penolong Pengarah Makmal,Caw. Rekabentuk & Penyelidikan, IP. JKR

Kepada:

Penolong Pengarah(Binaan), Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L.

Bil surat:

(X) dlm. PKR.RB 4112

Tarikh :

26.3.1983

Per: Cadangan Masjid Baru di Batu 31/2, Jalan Cheras, K.L. Berhubung dengan perkara yang tersebut di atas, sukacita dimaklumkan bahawa cadan gan asas yang disyorkan adalah seperti berikut:1.

Keputusan penyiasatan tanah Sebanyak 28 Nos. Proba JKR dan 5 Nos. “Deep Boring” telah dijalankan ditapak projek itu. Keputusan - keputusan yang diterima menunjukkan bahawa kawasan projek ini adalah terdiri daripada batu kapur. Paras batu kapur adalah daripada 2.5m hingga 14m daripada paras permukaan tanah sedia ada. Oleh kerana keadaan batu dasar yang susah untuk diramalkan, langkah-langkah pengawasan dan faktor keselamatan yang lebih tinggi perlu diambil di dalam rekabentuk asas.

2. 2.1

Syor-syor asas Jenis - jenis asas yang disyorkan adalah seperti dicatitkan di dalam Lampiran A. Sebelum kerja - kerja ‘piling’ dimulakan sekurang - kurangnya satu ujian Proba JKR perlu dijalankan di setiap kedudukan tiang untuk menentukan paras batu dasar (>400 blows/kaki). Sekiranya paras batu dasar didapati kurang daripada 4.5m dibawah per mukaan bumi, adalah dicadangkan supaya menggunakan “R.C.cylinder foundation” (sila lihat Lampiran A & B)

2.2

Sekurang - kurangnya 2 cerucuk perlulah digunakan ditiap-tiap kedudukan tiang kecuali jika ‘R.C.cylinder foundation’ digunakan. Tiap - tiap tiang hendaklah diikat den gan rasak bawah dikedua - dua arah. Ini adalah sebagai langkah awas oleh kerana terda pat rongga - rongga dan kemungkinan masalah surutan.

2.3

Untuk memperolehi pengawasan yang lebih baik semasa memacu cerucuk tukul jatuh bebas(free drop hammer) dicadangkan supaya digunakan. Ini ialah supaya cerucuk tidak menerima hentaman dan menyimpang berlebihan (overdriving and excessive deviation) oleh kerana keadaan batu dasar yang mencerun (inclined bedrock surfaces).

2.4

Hujung cerucuk keluli hendaklah dikelulikan dengan plat yang lebih. Ini adalah perlu untuk menahan tegasan yang berlebihan (withstand overstressing) apabila cerucuk sam pai ke paras batu dasar.

2.5

Sekurang - kurangnya 2 nos. kumpulan cerucuk (pile group, NCT single pile) perlulah dipilih untuk ujian beban. Satu set “driving records” dan keputusan ujian beban hendak lah dihantar kepada Unit Makmal ini untuk analisa dan sebagai rekod di Unit Makmal.

2.6

Perhatian hendaklah diberi kepada pengalaman yang lepas iaitu cerucuk - cerucuk tam bahan mungkin diperlukan untuk menggantikan cerucuk - cerucuk yang menyimpang


Page 37


Pile Design Report

berlebihan dan cerucuk - cerucuk yang masih tidak ‘set’ diparas yang dalam (>10m). Adalah dicadangan supaya tambahan sebanyak 25m disertakan didalam “B.Q.” 2.7

Oleh kerana keadaan tanah yang rumit (tricky) jurutera tapak bina hendaklah selalu rujuk kepada keputusan penyelidikan tapak semasa menyelia kerja - kerja pembinaan asas. Apabila cerucuk dijangka sampai paras batu dasar, kejatuhan pemukul (drop of hammer) hendaklah dikurangkan. Tujuan langkah ini ialah untuk “better keying & bed ding effect on rock surface”. Langkah ini juga akan mengurangkan cerucuk daripada menyimpang berlebihan.

Sekian disampaikan ulasan kami untuk tindakan tuan selanjutnya. ‘Berkhidmat Untuk Negara’

...................................................... (Ir. Neoh Cheng Aik), Jurutera Kerja Kanan (R1), bp. Penolong Pengarah (Makmal), Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L.


Page 38

Pile Design Report


Lampiran A

Cadangan Asas Untuk Pro jek Mas jid Batu 31/2, Jalan Cheras,K.L.

1.

Bangunan Masjid (13T - 105T) Sila gunakan cerucul; keluli 203mm x 203mm x 45kg/m (Grade 43A9 BS 4360) den gan beban keupayaan 210 0/eerucuk. Untuk tujuan tawaran, panjang cerucuk ialah 8.5m (27ft) ATAU "R-C- cylinder foundation".Sila lihat Para 2.1

2.

Bangunan Quarters Kelas G(9T - 16T) Sila gunakan eerucuk I-,yu berubat (treated timber pile) 125m x 125m dengan beban keupayaan 5W/oerucuk. Untuk tujuan taviarany panjang cerucuk ialah 8.5m (27 ft).


Page 39



Pile Design Report

Page 40


Pile Design Report Lampiran E 5

Extension of Terminal Building, Subang Airport 1.

General The project consists of extension of International and Domestic Transper Corridor for Subang International Airport. The proposed-site is situated approximately 13 miles west of Kuala Lumpur. Due to the close proximity of the proposed site to the existing terminal building v where the Control Tower for the airport is located, severe vibration such as driving piles is unaccept abldo Bored and Cast-in-situ piles were considered most suitable.

2.

Soil Condition The site consists of residual soils of granite. Lampiran E5-1 represents the generalised poil profile. The top layer of the soil consists of brown firm sandy silty clay with some organic matters. The depth of this top soil varies from 6" to 2ft. Beneath this top soil underlies the yellowish with patches of grey medium sandy clayey silt with some gravelse This medium sandy clayey silt extend to a depth of 40 to 85 ft. below R.L. 86.00'. Between these layers of medium sandy clayey silt and the frac tured or slightly weathered granite bedrocksq lies the greyish very stiff decomposed granite residual soil. The thickness of this decomposed granite residual soil varies. Water table is about Oft. b.g.l.

3.

Load Settlement Criteria The system of piling to be designed shall meet the followings:a) Safety Factor

The factor of safety for the purpose of computing the working load shall be taken as 2.5. b) Working Load

The working load adopted for single pile shall not be greater than the ultimate load divided by the safety factor of 2.5 and the ultimate load is defined as: (i) Load at which the gross settlement continues to increase without any further increase in load. (ii)

Load at which gross settlement is 10% of the pile diameter.

c) Settlement Criteria

(i)

Gross settlement of the pile at working load during the first cycle of load ing, loading to one time working load, shall not exceed 0.5".

(ii)

The residual settlement of the pile at the end of the first cycle of loading shall not exceed 0.10".

(iii)

The gross settlement of the pile at twice the working load shall not exceed 1.5"


Page 41

Pile Design Report


d) Group Effect

Negligible because of small group (2 or 3 pile per group) & large spacing 2.5 Ø. 4.

Structural Capacity of Piles Since piles are not fully reinforced, the structural capacity of the piles will be solely depend on the concrete section of the piles* In this case, the pile is reinforced for the top 40ft. only for the dispersion of the possible slight bending moment elperienced at the pile top. The piles will be designed as short columns. According to CP 2004, the structural carrying capacity of Cast-in-situ concrete pile, that is, the safe working load per pile, W W - 1/4 (Acc.Uw)

5.

Where Acc Uw

= = =

Gross cross section of the area of concrete Specified cube crushing strength at 28 days. 3000 psi.

For d d d

= = =

18”Ø, max. structural load = 24”Ø, max. structural load = 30”Ø, max structural load =

80 Ton. 150 Ton 230 Ton.

Check Pile Capacity Use 18" Ø bored piles x85 ft max. Meyerhofs’ formula (modified) is applicable for bored piles in residual soil Qu Qs + Qp = =

fs As.+ Op Ap

=

N As + N. Ap 50

where N =

average SPT along pile shaft

N

=

average SPT near pile base (4Ø above pile base & 2Ø below pile base).

As

=

pile shaft area (ft2)

As

=

pile base area (ft2)


Page 42

Pile Design Report


Based on DB12

18"Ø x 75' = 0.32 TSF

N

=

16

fs = N 50

N

=

50

qp = 50 TSB

Qs

= =

fs As 0.32 x (1.5' x 3.1416 x 75) = 113 Ton

Qp

=

50 x (1/4 x 1.52 x 3.1416) = 88 Ton

Qa

= Qs/20 + Qp/3.0 = 56.5 + 29.3 = 85.8 Ton say 80 Ton

Based on DB 10

18"Ø x 55ft N

=

20

fs

= 0.4 TSF

N

= =

80 qp = 80 TSF 0-4 x (1o5 x 301416 x 55)

Qp

=

80 x (1/4 x 1o5 x 1o5 x 3o1416) = 141 Ton

Qa

=

Qs/2.0 + Op/3.0 = 52 + 47

=104 Ton

= 99 Ton say 80 Ton.

Based on DB 13

18”Ø x 80ft. N

=

23

fs

= 0.46 TSF

N

=

35

qp

= 35 TSF

Qs

=

0.46 x (1.5 x 3.1416 x 80)

Qp

=

35 x (1/4 x 3o1416 x 1o5 x 145) =62 Ton

Qa

=

Qs / 2.0 + Qp / 3.0


=173 Ton

=173/2 + 62/3.0 = 86 + 31 = 117 Ton > 80 Ton. Page 43


Pile Design Report

6.

Founding Level Founding level should be determined by observing the soil type from the boring. Suitable founding soil should be weathered granite bedrock or oompacted/cemented clayey silt with gravels, or up to a max depth of eft'. In case of dou7gt, SPT should be carried in the bored base.

7.

Recommendation Use 18”Ø bored pile Vrith max capacity 80 Ton per pile. Site engineer should use the DB results to determine the founding level. Para 6 above can be used as a guide. 4 Nos load tests should be carried out to verify the capacity.


Page 44

DB 13

DB 12

Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L DB 10 DB 9

Loose clayey, silty sand

Hard, Fractured, Weathered granite

Stiff sandy clayey silt with gravels Compact clayey silty sand with gravels

Sandy silty clay

Hard surface tarmac

DB 11 DB 8

Scale: Horizontal 3/16” to 48’0”

Fig. 1 Soil Profile

DB 7

DB 6 DB 5

DB 4

DB 3

DB 2

DB 1


Pile Design Report

Page 45

Pile Design Report


Lampiran E 6

1.

Objective To design the foundation system for the proposed Dewan Orang Ramai in Kampung Cheras Baru

2.

Introduction 2.1 The proposed.structure is a one-storey assembly-hall'situated on Lot 405 in Kampung Ceras Baru, M11rim Ampang, Daerah Hulu Langat 2.2

Column loads

Maximum Minimum 3.

- 68T - 30T

Site Condition 3.1

Surface Condition

The terrain is generally flat. It was formerly an old building site that has been cleared. Springs of water are visible which suggest the ground water table is very near the ground surface. The only visible form of undergrowth are bushes and shrubs. 3.2

Subsurface Condition

3.2.1

Referring to the geological map of Kuala Lumpur District (after Ting and Ooi 1972)2, Kampung Cheras Baru is located in the Granite region. Hence the soil is residual Gradite soil.

3.2.2

Scope of Site Investigation. Initially 6 Nos of JKR Probes were performed by the district office of JKR Hulu Langat. Due to the inconsistency of the probe results, a more elaborate method of sub-soil exploration in the form of 3 Nos. Deep Boring was done by the Unit Makmal Ibu Pejabat JKR. Borehole positions are as indicated in Appendix B. From the borelog results (APPENDIX C) the soil profile is not consistent along the three boreholes. Generally) though, the sub-soil eonsists of interlayer between sand, clay and stilt. The first 9 metres Appears to be com prised of loose to medium dense sand and very soft-to firm clays (the variation occuring with depth). Below 9m the soil seems to improve from medium dense to very dense silts and sands as well as stiff to very hard clays. The groundwater is very near to the surface and the subsoil is assumed to be fully saturated.

3.2.3

Other Relevant Information. Near to the proposed site of the hall, in a north, easterly direction is sit uated a quarry. There is an access-road leading to the intended site but it is in a bad state.


Page 46

Pile Design Report


4.

Foundation Analysis and Recommendation 4.1

Selection of type of foundation

With reference-to the results obtained from the S.I. done the first 5 metres com prises of compressible material which is of insufficient strength to sustain the intended imposed loads. Hence an ordinary shallow foundation in the form of a pad footing would not suffice. A piled foundation system is warranted here in order to transfer the loads to the stronger material found below 15m of the ground-level. In selecting the particular type of pile'to be used, particular consid eration has been made to (a) Cost. (b)

Driving lengths

(c)

Resistance to hard driving.

(d)

Strength mf pile as structural member

(e)

Effectiveness in mobilising friction and end-bearing

(see T able 1)

Table 1 : Selection of Pile Type T ype

Max. length

Resistance

Structural

Merit as

Merit as

Cost

of

of

to Hard

Capacity

frictional

end

(per m run)

pile

Driving possible

Driving

pile

bearing

(18m) R.C. Steel

pile

v

2

v

2

v

2

v

1

v

2

v

2

v

1

v

1

v

1

v

2

v

1

X

3

3

X

3

X

3

X

3

X

3

v

1

T imber X

Figures in box represents order of choise e.g. 3 third choice

From Table 1, the most apparent' choice would be to use steel piles. However, based on the soil variation (profile) and the intended loading system which is rel atively small, the .use of steel' piles is overly conservative. Furthermore hard driving is not expected.RC piles would be more appropriate in this case because; (a) it is more economical (b)

RC piles would be able to mobilise sufficient safe end-bearing resistance at a much shallower depth than would be necessary fdv its steel counter part.

(c)

Due to its rougher surface texture RC piles can mobilise frictional resist ance better than steel piles


Page 47

Pile Design Report


Hence RC Piles would serve better and cheaper than-steel piles as both a friction al and end-bearing pile in this particular sub-soil condition. 4.2

Estimation of Ultimate Loads

4.2.1 Design Assumptions (a) The soil is fully saturated. In calculating the effective overburden pressure, Pd, the values of X sat for the various soil categories are obtained from Appendix B in Ref. 1 (Pg. 397). (b)

For an SPT value of N 11p the undrained cohesion Cu, is assumed approximately to be 125 lbs/ft ,

(c)

Due to the inconsistency in the soil variation for the three boreholes, the piles were designed based on each individual borehole result and the worst (or lowest)' calculated working load per pile was adopted for use.

(d)

The criteria for design was only to consider both frictional and end-bear ing piles. Totally frictional or totally end-bearing-piles were not consid ered.

(e)

Assumed that piles would achieve safe and bearing resistance in soil lay ers with SPT values of N-~ 15 i.e. in medium dense coesionless soils or stiff cohesive layers.

(f)

Factor of safety adopted is 2.5 (para 4.6 pg. 149 of. ref. 1)

(g)

Lower values of Ø were assumed for silts as compared to sands.Generally,

(h)

Type of Silts

N

Øº

V.loose to loose

0 - 10

27 - 29

Medium Dense

10 - 30

29 - 34

Dense to V.Dense

30

34 - 39

In obtaining the end-bearing resistance in cohesion soils, the bearing capacity factor No is taken to be 9 (Para 2 Pg. 122 Ref. 1)

4.2.2 Formulae Used in the Estimation of the Ultimate Loads 4.2.2.1 In Cohesionless Soil. For frictional resistance *Qs Avg. uni akin friction = is (1.) Ref. 1 Pg. 137 Para 4)


Page 48

Pile Design Report


where Qs a Ultimate akin resistance As = .Area, of shaft . Avg. unit skin friction is obtained from Fig. 4.19 Pg. 139 of Ref. 1) *The foriaula (Ref. 1 Pg. 136 Eln. 4.13)

.

Qs = 1/2 K, Pd tan As is not applicable in this particular case because it becomes invalid for penetration depths/width ratios 10-20 for straight sided piles (Ref. 1 Pg. 137) For End-Bearing Qb = Pd Nq Ab

(2) (Ref. 1 Pg. 135 Eqn.4.12)

where Qs = Ultimate End,-Bearing Resistance. Pd = Effective Overburden Pressure Nq = Bearing Capacity Factor (obtained from Berezantsevs' Curves in Ref. 1 Pg 134 Fig. 4.14 (b) ) Ab = Area of pile base It should be noted that value of Qb at penetration depths of 20 diameters is taken as the peak value for ultimate end bearing resistance but shall not exceed 100 tons/ft2. 4.2.2.2

In Cohesive Soil For frictional resistance Qs = α Cu As

- (3) (Ref. 1 Pg. 123 Eqn. 4o5) ,

where Qs = Ultimate skin resistance

α

= adhesion factor (taken - 1)

Cu = Average undisturbed undrained cohesion of soil surrounding pile shaft As = Area of shaft For End-bearing resistance Qs = No Cb Ab - (4)(Ref. 1 Pg. 122 Eqn. 4.2)


Page 49

Pile Design Report


where No = Bearing Capacity factor (taken = 9) Cb = Undisturbed undrained cohesion of soil at pile toe Ab = Area of pile base 4.2.3 Recommendation Scope of work done on S.I. were 6 Nos. JO -Probes and 3 Nos. Deep Boring. On compilation of the results, the soil profile was generalized as Table 2 : Generalized Soil Profile Soil Type and Condition

Depth (m) 0-9

Loose sand and soft clay

9 - 13

M. Dense Silts and firm clay

> 13

Dense/V.Dense silts and firm /stiff/v.stiff clays

follows:A piled foundation system was selected instead. of shallow foundation in order to transfer the loads onto the stronger layers at the lower depths. RC piles were chosen and- designed to be partly frictional and partly endr bearing. Trids were done with 15" s 15", 12" z 12" and 10" = 10" RC Pile size

Penetration

Working loads (Tons/pile)

Depth (m)

BH 1

BH 2

BH 3

15" x 15"

21.5

101

-

-

12" x 12"

20

69

37

42

21.5

70

40

52

16.5

32

28

31

19.5

42

26

31

10" x 10"

Table 3 : Summary of Analysis

piles. The results are summarised in the table below. It should be noted that due. to the inconsistency of the soil variation of the three boreholes done, the design was based on each individual borehole. From the analysis done, it was decided to use a combined system of RC piles driven to a depth of 2090m below formation level in order to opti mise the cost of pile installation and prevent the problem of eccentricity between columns and single pile foundation system during construction.


Page 50

Pile Design Report


Hence the recommended system is as follows:For the-loading range of (a) 30T - 40T - Use 10" _ .10" RC pile with a working load of 20T/pile driven to a depth of 20m below forma tion level. (b)

4.3

40T - 70T

- Use a minimum of 2 Nose 12" = 12" piles with a working load of 35T/pile driven to a depth of 20m below formation level.

Settlement Analysis

In this particular project, the concern for settlement would be over (a) settlement of the pile toe (b) settlement of the sub-soil due 'to the surcharge weight of the fill material. 4-3.1

In the case of (a), settlement checks were not done as the piles are not totally fric tional and generally the recommended foundation system would result in only 2 Nos* of piles to a . group. Furthermore, work done by X.Je Tomlinson have shown that for piles of small to medium (up to 600mm) diameter the settlement under the working load will not exceed 10mm or 3/8" if the safety factor is not lower than 2.500..-00.00. (Ref- 1 Pg. 149)

4.3.2

Settlement. of tho sub-soil due to the surcharge weight of the fill material 4.3.2.1 Essumptions made (a) Soil layers with an SPT value of N48 were taken as compressible lay ers (b)

Depth of compressible layer = 12m,

.

(c)

Effective area of fill was approximated to be the same as the plan area of the proposed Dewan Orang Ramai i.e. B - 17m and L . 321x.

(d)

Depth of fill was not constant throughout the site. This is because the original ground level is not the same over the intended site. 0.3m

Plane DB 2 qf2 DB 2

Plane DB 3

0.6m

qf3

Formation Level

DB 3

1m O.G.L

qf1 DB 1

Fill Material 12m


Compressible Layer

Page 51

Pile Design Report


Below is a schematic presentation of the fill depth and area. (e)

The bulk density of the fill material was assumed to be 18 bulk

(f)

The borehole positions were taken as the points of consideration in estimating the settlement of the soft layer due to the surcharge weight of the fill, i.e. Points DB1,'DB2 and DB3

(g)

With regards to (e), the generalized surcharge weights over the'respeo tive points in a plane orientation (see Fig. 1) areaPlane DB1; qf1 - 18 kN/m2 Plane DB2; qf2 - 6 kN,/m2 Plane DB3; qf3 - 12 kN/m2

(h)

The compressible soil was classified as type CL under the Casagrande classification system

(i)

Liquid Limit of the soil was assumed to be 35%

(j)

Voids ratio assumed to be 0.7

(k)

The Compression Inde= Cc was obtained from the relationship cc o 0.009 (Lw - 10%) where Lw = liquid limit-of the clay (Eqn. 2.24 Ref. 3 Pg. 128)

4.3.2.2

Estimation of settlement To obtain the average immediate _settlement the method of Janbu, Jerrum and Kjaernsli was adopted where Average settlement = p1 = U1 U1 of B ....(5) E U1 Uo are obtained from Refs 1 Pg. 180 Fig. 5.10 qf = net surcharge of the fill B = width of fill area E = Modulus of Elasticity of clay Values of E were obtained from Ref. 1 Pg. 186 BU- 5 .17 For Consolidation Settlement, Terzaghils conventional 1-D consolidation theory was used. So = Co 1 t e,


H. Log Po +σz ......(6) Po

Page 52

Pile Design Report


where, Co = Compression Index Eo = Initial voids ratio H = Thickness of compressible layer (m) Po = Effective overburden pressure (kN/m2)

σz =

Value of vertical stress at depth considered (kN/m2)

Values of were obtained from

σz = qfI o

.... (7) (Ref. 4 Pg. 223)

Where qf = surcharge of fill Io = Influence factors obtained from Padumts Chart (Ref. 4 .Fgi 224 Fig. 7.2) 4.3.2.3

From the settlement analysis. done on the effect of the surcharge weight of the fill material, the following were obtained settlement under plane DB1 - 92mm (3.6") settlement under plane DB2 - 30am (1.2") settlement under plane DB3 - 232 am (9") (centre of fill) Obviously, there is substantial total and differential settlement of the soft layer due to the effect of the fill surcharge. In the light. of this estimation, it is advisable to design a suspended floor for the proposed structure and to use tie-beams (ground beams) for the foundation sys tem (tied in two cUreotions) in order to have a more rigid structure.

4.4

Load Testing Requirement

4.4.1

2 nos. of load tests are recommended in accordance with JKt siandard specificationsiUnit Malarial are to be advised of the date the loading tests are to be done and copies of the results are to be cent to Unit Makmal for purposes of monitoring and records.

4.4.2

The test loadings should be done at least 4 weeks after the test piles are driven, to fully mobilise frictional resistance between soil and pile interface.


Page 53

Pile Design Report


4.5

Associated Designs

4.5.1

Requirements of fill material and its commotion Soil should be of suit able selected fill material. The H.S. 1377 s 1972 method shall be used as the standard compaction test for determining the moisture density relationship of the soil. The selected material should have liquid limit values less than 35 (LL 35) and values of plasticity index less than 55 (Pole L 55)-The -field density after compaction shall be determined in accordance with the "Band Replacement Method" or AASHO T205-64 (Rubber Balloon Method). The fill shall be compacted to a density of not less than 95% of the ma3d!m,m dry density as determined by the Standard Compaction Test. The type of compacting equipment to be used shall be subject to the approval of the Superintending Officer.

4.5.2

Structural Recommendations In order to deal with the expected settlement of the soft sub-soil due to the surcharge of the fill material, it is advisable to design a suspended floor system for the structure. Further precautions should be taken in the form of tying the columns in two-directions with ground beams so as to' haves. more rigid struc ture.

5.

Conclusion From the-analysis done based on assumptions laid down in Clause ~4.2.1, the recommen dations are i) For the load range of 30T - 40T Use 10'1 x 10" RC piles with a working load of 20T/pile 40T - 702'

Use a minimum of 2 Nos 12" x 12" piles with a working load of 35T/pile:

ii) The piles shall function as partly frictional and partly end-bearing. iii) Piles are to be driven to set below the formation level iv) Specify tender lengths to be 20m and an additional 10% should be added to the number of piles specified in the BQ or summary of tender to cater for pile deviations during driving. v) Use suspended floor and tie beams are to be provided in two directions between the col umn positions. 6.

Appendices Appendix A : Location Plan Appendix B :

Layout plan showing locations of site investigation


Page 54

Pile Design Report


Appendix C : 7.

Generalized soil profile Borelog Results

Bibliography Ref. 1 :

PILE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICE M. J. TOAIIINSON VIEWPOINT PUBLICATION

Ref. 2

:

MALAYSIAN SOILS AND ASSOCIATED PROBLEKS - DR. 001 TECK AUN

Ref. 3

:

FOUNDATION RESIGN AND CONS'T'RUCTION - M.J. TOMLINSON PITMAN INTEMATIONAL TEXT 3rd Edition

Ref. 4

:

ELEMENT OF SOIL MECHANICS - G. N. SMITH CROSBY LOW00D STAPLES 4th Edition '


Page 55


33.05

28.5

22.5

13.5

9.0

6.0

4.0 5.0

Hard silty clayey Basalt(Boulder) Hard clayey silt -32.1

-30.6

Hard clayey silt N=50

V.Stiff clayey silt N=35

Stiff clayey silt N=18

Firm silty clay N=8

Soft silty clay N=4

Med. dense silty sand N=21

Loose silty sand N=2

V.soft silty clay N=1

25.50

19.50

15.00

13.50

12.00

9.00

7.50

5.00 6.00

2.45 3.15

29.45

Med. dense to loose silty sand

Proposed Pile

Granite

V.dense silty sand N>50

Hard clayey silt N=40

Hard silty clay N=30

Stiff silty clay N=15

Firm silty clay N=7

Firm silty clay N=14

Firm silty clay N=5

Sofy sandy silt N=4

V.Loose silty sandy N=2

Loose silty sand N=2 V.soft silty clay N=2


V.Loose silty sandy N=2

-34.25

-21.6

28.70

27.00

18.00

18.00

4.50

2.00 3.00

Granite

Sandy silt N>50

Quartzite and decomposed granite

Hard clayey silt N>50

V.stiff clayey silt N=24

Stiff clayey silt N=15

Firm clayey silt N=4

V.loose silty sand N=1

Loose silty sand N=5



Pile Design Report

Page 56


Pile Design Report

Cadangan Syor asas untuk Projek Rumah Kediaman Kelas 'G' Penjara Penor, Kuantan, Pahang. 1.

Introduction The project site is located off the Pekan - Kuantan trunk road. From the site plan an earth filling of 1' to 5' is proposed for the whole site. The project consists of construction of 6 Blocks of JKR Standard 5-storey Class G Quarters.

2.

Site Conditions 6 nos of boreholes were carried out to determine the subsoil conditions. The sub soil con sists of soft silty clay with organic matters from ground level to 6m below ground level. From 6m to 12m below ground level the soil consists of loose silty sand with decayed mat ters and from 12m to 28m the soil is of loose to medium stiff sandy clay with SPT N aver ages from 6 to 12. From 28m_to,36m the soil strata consists of dense sandy'silt with traces of gravel. SPT N ranges from 18 to 50.

3.

Geotechnical Evaluation Due to the 1' to 5' of fill, consolidation settlement may occur for the compressible layers of soil. Hence negative skin friction on piles is to be accounted for. 12" x 12" r.c. piles are evaluated for the bearing capacities. It is found that the founding depths of the piles varies from 28.5m to 36m. The following table is abstracted from the calculations for which the estimated founding depths Ultimate loads (Qu) and allowable loads (Qa) are tabulated. A factor of safety of 2.5 and negative skin friction of 16 tons are used in the calculations. BH nos. Estimated depths Ultimate load Allowable load (m) Qu (tons) Qa = Qu/2.5 - Qn 1 33 197.54 65.59 2 31.5 178.65 55.03 3 28.5 166.84 50.31 4 28.5 183.87 57.12 5 36 208.56 67.00 6 35 204.62 65.42 From the above it is noted that the calculated bearing capacities of the 12" x 12" r.c. piles ranges from 50.00 to 67 tons. Hence it is proposed that 12" x 12" JKR r.c: piles of Grade 40 concrete be used. The allowable working load of the 12" x 12" JKR r.c. piles shall be 49 tons per pile. Calculations for the geotechnical evaluations for the 6 boreholes are attached.

4.

Conclusion 12" x 12" JKR Standard R.C. piles grade 40 with tender length of 36m shall be used. Allowable load per pile is 49 tons.The estimated negative friction load is 16 Ton per pile. Hence the test load shall 2 x (49 + 16) = 130 Tons. At least 4 piles shall be selected for load tests. All piles are designed as end bearing piles. All piles shall be driven to set which can be achieved at about 28.5m to 36m below ground level.


Page 57

Pile Design Report

FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY Cadangan Kelas ‘G’, Penjara Penoh, Kuantan, Pahang. Evaluation of 12” x 12” reinforced concrete pile. Borehole 1 Depth (m)

Soil Description

0

Top soi l, soft clayey silt

0

1.5

Loose clayey silt

0

3

Ditto

4.5 6

S.P.T (Na)

Fs

Ap (ft)

Qs (Tons)

Qs’ (tons)

Fb

Ab (sq ft)

Qb’ (tons)

Qu (tons)

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

Loose clayey silt

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

7.5

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

9

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

10.5

Soft silty clay, traces of sand

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

12

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

13.5

Ditto

5

2.5

0.05

4

0.98

0.98

20

1

20.00

20.98

8.39

15

Stiff silty clay, traces of sand

6

5.5

0.11

4

2.16

3.15

24

1

24.00

27.15

10.86

16.5

Ditto

8

7

0.14

4

2.76

5.90

32

1

32.00

37.90

15.16

N

Qa (tons)

18

Ditto

7

7.5

0.15

4

2.95

8.86

28

1

28.00

36.86

14.74

19.5

Ditto

7

7

0.14

4

2.76

11.61

28

1

28.00

39.61

15.84

21

Ditto

6

6.5

0.13

4

2.56

14.17

24

1

24.00

38.17

15.27

22.5

Ditto

9

7.5

0.15

4

2.95

17.12

36

1

36.00

53.12

21.25

24

Ditto

18

13.5

0.27

4

5.31

22.44

72

1

72.00

94.44

37.77

25.5

Ditto

16

17

0.34

4

6.69

29.13

64

1

64.00

93.13

37.25

27

Ditto

30

23

0.46

4

9.05

38.18

120

1

120.00

158.18

63.27

28.5

Dense silty sandy gravel

25

27.5

0.55

4

10.82

49.00

100

1

100.00

149.00

59.60

30

Ditto

24

24.5

0.49

4

9.64

58.65

96

1

96.00

154.65

61.86

31.5

Ditto

21

22.5

0.45

4

8.86

67.50

84

1

84.00

151.50

60.60

33*** *

Ditto

30

25.5

0.51

4

10.04

77.54

120

1

120.00

197.54

79.02

34.5

Ditto

50

40

0.80

4

15.74

93.28

200

1

200.00

293.28

117.31

36

Ditto

50

50

1.00

4

19.68

112.96

200

1

200.00

312.96

125.19

To calc. negative skin friction (Qn) Qn = fn x As, where fn = 0.25 x Po /2 Po = (110 -62.5) x H x 3.28, where H = 12m = Qn = 0.25 x Po /2 x As x H x 3.28/2240

1869.6

Allowable load Qa’ = (Qu/2.5 – Qn) =

79.02

16.43

62.59

*** from borelog N = 50, use N = 3D only


Page 58

Pile Design Report


Cadangan Kelas ‘G’, Penjara Penoh, Kuantan, Pahang. Evaluation of 12” x 12” reinforced concrete pile. Borehole 2 Fs

Ap (ft)

Qs (Tons)

Qs’ (tons)

Fb

Ab (sq ft)

Qb’ (tons)

Qu (tons)

Qa (tons)

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

Depth (m)

Soil Description

0


0

1.5

Loose clayey silt

N

S.P.T (Na)

3

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

4.5

Loose clayey silt

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

6

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

7.5

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

9

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

10.5


0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

12

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

13.5

Ditto

4

2

0.04

4

0.79

0.79

16

1

16.00

16.79

6.71

15


11

7.5

0.15

4

2.95

3.74

44

1

44.00

47.74

19.10

16.5

Ditto

12

11.5

0.23

4

4.53

8.27

48

1

48.00

56.27

22.51

18

Ditto

7

9.5

0.19

4

3.74

12.00

28

1

28.00

40.00

16.00

19.5

Ditto

5

6

0.12

4

2.36

14.37

20

1

20.00

34.37

13.75

21

Ditto

4

4.5

0.09

4

1.77

16.14

16

1

16.00

32.14

12.86

22.5

Ditto

6

5

0.10

4

1.97

18.11

24

1

24.00

42.11

16.84

24

Ditto

6

6

0.12

4

2.36

20.47

24

1

24.00

44.47

17.79

25.5

Ditto

5

5.5

0.11

4

2.16

22.63

20

1

20.00

42.63

17.05

27

Ditto

24

14.5

0.29

4

5.71

28.34

96

1

96.00

124.34

49.74

28.5


26

25

0.50

4

9.84

38.18

104

1

104.00

142.18

56.87

30

Ditto

24

25

0.50

4

9.84

48.02

96

1

96.00

144.02

57.61

31.5

Ditto

30

27

0.54

4

10.63

58.65

120

1

120.00

178.65

71.46

33****

Ditto

50

40

0.80

4

15.74

74.39

200

1

200.00

274.39

109.76

34.5

Ditto

50

50

1.00

4

19.68

94.07

200

1

200.00

294.07

117.63

36

Ditto

50

50

1.00

4

19.68

113.75

200

1

200.00

313.75

125.50

To calc. negative skin friction (Qn) Qn = fn x As, where fn = 0.25 x Po /2 Po = (110 -62.5) x H x 3.28, where H = 12m = 1869.6 Qn = 0.25 x Po /2 x As x H x 3.28/2240 Allowable load Qa’ = (Qu/2.5 – Qn) =

71.46

16.43

55.03



Page 59

Pile Design Report

FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY Cadangan Kelas ‘G’, Penjara Penoh, Kuantan, Pahang. Evaluation of 12” x 12” reinforced concrete pile. Borehole 3 S.P.T

Depth (m)

Soil Description

0 1.5

Fs

Ap (ft )

Qs (Tons)

Qs’ (tons)

Fb

Ab (sq ft)

Qb’ (tons)

Qu (tons)

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

N

(Na)

Top soil , soft clayey silt

0

Loose clayey silt

0

Qa (tons)

3

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

4.5

Loose clayey s and

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

6

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

7.5

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

9

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

10.5


0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

12

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

13.5

Ditto

8

4

0.08

4

1.57

1.57

32

1

32.00

33.57

13.43

15


9

8.5

0.17

4

3.35

4.92

36

1

36.00

40.92

16.37

16.5

Ditto

12

10.5

0.21

4

4.13

9.05

48

1

48.00

57.05

22.82

18

Ditto

9

10.5

0.21

4

4.13

13.19

36

1

36.00

49.19

19.67

19.5

Ditto

11

10

0.20

4

3.94

17.12

44

1

44.00

61.12

24.45

21

Ditto

8

9.5

0.19

4

3.74

20.86

32

1

32.00

52.86

21.14

22.5

Ditto

6

7

0.14

4

2.76

23.62

24

1

24.00

47.62

19.05

24

Ditto

5

5.5

0.11

4

2.16

25.78

20

1

20.00

45.78

18.31

25.5

Ditto

6

5.5

0.11

4

2.16

27.95

24

1

24.00

51.95

20.78

27

Ditto

30

18

0.36

4

7.08

35.03

120

1

120.00

155.03

62.01

28.5


30

30

0.60

4

11.81

46.84

120

1

120.00

166.84

66.74

30

Ditto

50

40

0.80

4

15.74

62.58

200

1

200.00

262.58

105.03

31.5

Ditto

50

50

1.00

4

19.68

82.26

200

1

200.00

282.26

112.90

33

Ditto

50

50

1.00

4

19.68

101.94

200

1

200.00

301.94

120.78

34.5

Ditto

50

50

1.00

4

19.68

121.62

200

1

200.00

321.62

128.65

36

Ditto

50

50

1.00

4

19.68

141.30

200

1

200.00

341.3 0

136.52


66.74

16.43

50.31

*** from borelog N = 50, use N = 3D only ddedit


Page 60

Pile Design Report


Soil Description

0


0

1.5

Loose clayey silt

9

N

S.P.T (Na)

Fs

Ap (ft)

Qs (Tons)

Qs’ (tons)

Fb

Ab (sq ft)

Qb’ (tons)

Qu (tons)

Qa (tons)

4.5

0.08

4

1.51

1.51

36

1

36.00

37.51

15.00

3

Ditto

15

12

0.20

4

4.01

5.52

60

1

60.00

65.52

26.21

4.5

Loose clayey sand

7

11

0.19

4

3.68

9.20

28

1

28.00

37.20

14.88

6

Ditto

3

5

0.09

4

1.67

10.87

12

1

12.00

22.87

9.15

7.5

Ditto

4

3.5

0.06

4

1.17

12.04

16

1

16.00

28.04

11.22

9

Ditto

0

2

0.00

4

0.67

12.71

0

1

0.00

12.71

5.09

10.5


0

0

0.03

4

0.00

12.71

0

1

0.00

12.71

5.09

12

Ditto

5

2.5

0.00

4

0.84

13.55

20

1

20.00

33.55

13.42

13.5

Ditto

6

5.5

0.04

4

1.84

15.39

24

1

24.00

39.39

15.76

15


6

6

0.09

4

2.01

17.40

24

1

24.00

41.40

16.56

16.5

Ditto

8

7

0.10

4

2.34

19.74

32

1

32.00

51.74

20.70

18

Ditto

6

7

0.12

4

2.34

22.08

24

1

24.00

46.08

18.43

19.5

Ditto

10

8

0.12

4

2.68

24.76

40

1

40.00

64.76

25.90

21

Ditto

11

10.5

0.14

4

3.51

28.27

44

1

44.00

72.27

28.91

22.5

Ditto

10

10.5

0.18

4

3.51

31.78

40

1

40.00

71.78

28.71

24

Ditto

8

9

0.18

4

3.01

34.79

32

1

32.00

66.79

26.72

25.5

Ditto

8

8

0.15

4

2.68

37.47

32

1

32.00

69.47

27.79

27

Ditto

35

21.5

0.14

4

7.19

44.66

140

1

140.00

184.66

73.87

28.5


32

33.5

0.37

4

11.21

55.87

128

1

128.00

183.87

73.55

30

Ditto

50

41

0.57

4

13.72

69.59

200

1

200.00

269.59

107.84

31.5

Ditto

50

50

0.70

4

16.73

86.32

200

1

200.00

286.32

114.53

33

Ditto

50

50

0.85

4

16.73

103.04

200

1

200.00

303.04

121.22

34.5

Ditto

50

50

0.85

4

16.73

119.77

200

1

200.00

319.77

127.91

36

Ditto

50

50

0.85

4

16.73

136.50

200

1

200.00

336.50

134.60


73.55

16.43

57.12



Page 61

Pile Design Report


Soil Description

0


0

1.5

Loose clayey silt

0

N

S.P.T (Na)

Fs

Ap (ft)

Qs (Tons)

Qs’ (tons)

Fb

Ab (sq ft)

Qb’ (tons)

Qu (tons)

Qa (tons)

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

3

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

4.5

Loose clayey sand

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

6

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

7.5

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

9

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

10.5


0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

12

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

13.5

Ditto

8

4

0.08

4

1.57

1.57

32

1

32.00

33.57

13.43

15


7

7.5

0.15

4

2.95

4.53

28

1

28.00

32.53

13.01

16.5

Ditto

6

6.5

0.13

4

2.56

7.08

24

1

24.00

31.08

12.43

18

Ditto

6

6

0.12

4

2.36

9.45

24

1

24.00

33.45

13.38

19.5

Ditto

7

6.5

0.13

4

2.56

12.00

28

1

28.00

40.00

16.00

21

Ditto

6

6.5

0.13

4

2.56

14.56

24

1

24.00

38.56

15.43

22.5

Ditto

6

6

0.12

4

2.36

16.92

24

1

24.00

40.92

16.37

24

Ditto

10

8

0.16

4

3.15

20.07

40

1

40.00

60.07

24.03

25.5

Ditto

13

11.5

0.23

4

4.53

24.60

52

1

52.00

76.60

30.64

27

Ditto

28

20.5

0.41

4

8.07

32.67

112

1

112.00

144.67

57.87

28.5


32

30

0.60

4

11.81

44.48

128

1

128.00

172.48

68.99

30

Ditto

18

25

0.50

4

9.84

54.32

72

1

72.00

126.32

50.53

31.5

Ditto

22

20

0.40

4

7.87

62.19

88

1

88.00

150.19

60.08

33

Ditto

20

21

0.42

4

8.27

70.45

80

1

80.00

150.45

60.18

34.5

Ditto

21

20.5

0.41

4

8.07

78.52

84

1

84.00

162.52

65.01

36

Ditto

30

25.5

0.51

4

10.04

88.56

120

1

120.00

208.56

83.42

To calc. negative skin friction (Qn ) Qn = fn x As, where fn = 0.25 x Po /2 Po = (110 -62.5) x H x 3.28, where H = 12m = 1869.6 Qn = 0.25 x Po /2 x As x H x 3.28/2240 Allowable load Qa’ = (Qu/2.5 – Qn) =

83.42

16.43

67 .00

*** from borelog N = 50, use N = 3D on ly


Page 62

Pile Design Report


Soil Description

0


0

1.5

Loose clayey silt

0

N

S.P.T (Na)

Fs

Ap (ft)

Qs (Tons)

Qs’ (tons)

Fb

Ab (sq ft)

Qb’ (tons)

Qu (tons)

Qa (tons)

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

3

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

4.5

Loose clayey sand

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

6

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

7.5

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

9

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

10.5


0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

12

Ditto

0

0

0.00

4

0.00

0.00

0

1

0.00

0.00

0.00

13.5

Ditto

10

5

0.10

4

1.97

1.97

40

1

40.00

41.97

16.79

15


7

8.5

0.17

4

3.35

5.31

28

1

28.00

33.31

13.33

16.5

Ditto

6

6.5

0.13

4

2.56

7.87

24

1

24.00

31.87

12.75

18

Ditto

7

6.5

0.13

4

2.56

10.43

28

1

28.00

38.43

15.37

19.5

Ditto

5

6

0.12

4

2.36

12.79

20

1

20.00

32.79

13.12

21

Ditto

4

4.5

0.09

4

1.77

14.56

16

1

16.00

30.56

12.23

22.5

Ditto

5

4.5

0.09

4

1.77

16.33

20

1

20.00

36.33

14.53

24

Ditto

11

8

0.16

4

3.15

19.48

44

1

44.00

63.48

25.39

25.5

Ditto

15

13

0.26

4

5.12

24.60

60

1

60.00

84.60

33.84

27

Ditto

27

21

0.42

4

8.27

32.87

108

1

108.00

140.87

56.35

28.5


26

26.5

0.53

4

10.43

43.30

104

1

104.00

147.30

58.92

30

Ditto

16

21

0.42

4

8.27

51.56

64

1

64.00

115.56

46.22

31.5

Ditto

20

18

0.36

4

7.08

58.65

80

1

80.00

138.65

55.46

33

Ditto

18

19

0.38

4

7.48

66.12

72

1

72.00

138.12

55.25

34.5

Ditto

23

20.5

0.41

4

8.07

74.19

92

1

92.00

166.19

66.48

36

Ditto

30

26.5

0.53

4

10.43

84.62

120

1

120.00

204.62

81.85


81.85

16.43

65.42



Page 63

Pile Design Report


Design Calculations of Bored Piles & Pile Caps for Proposed SK Taman Segar Cheras 1.

Introduction The project consists of construction of 2 blocks. of 4-storey JKR Std. School buildings. The site is generally flat with about 2½m fill some 5 years ago. The generalized subsoil proper ties are as follows:0 - 12m : loose clayey sand with localized very dense layer. Average SPT, N = 5. 12m - 17m :

medium to dense silty clayey sand, N = 16

17m - 27m :

very dense grey spotted yellowish fine to coarse silty sand with gravel (N = 40 - 50). Water table 15m bgl.

No of colums per block is 44 and the columnload is about 78 Ton (max.) Due to presence of localized very. dense cemented clayey sand with gravels at shallow depth, very hard driving will encountered at shallow depth if driven piles are used. Bored piles are considered more cost effective piling system in this case when compared with other suitable piling system such as H piles (R.C. piles are Not suitable). Though the site consists of sandy soil, the bored piles are considered suitable because water.table is low and the residual soil is usually quite impermeable. 2.

Design Calculations 460mm diameter bored piles are proposed. 2.1

Design Criteria

2.2

Concrete Grade 25 for piles & caps Design compressive stress = 4.8N/mm sq. < fcu/4. Longitudinal reinf provided is 1.0% for full bored shaft, i.e. 6Y20 & R9 @ 300mm c/c as helical reinforcement. Installation procedure according to JKR spec (KPKR 6/1989). max design load = 80 Ton. max test load = 2 X design load.

Geotechnical Capacity

Use modified Meyerhof’ s equation: Ultimate capacity, Qu = N1 As + K2 Ab K1 K2 Where

N1 K1 K2 N2 As Ab


= = = =

average SPT value for shaft 50 1 average SPT valug at base = surface area(ft2) = base area (ft2) Page 64

Pile Design Report


Generalised Design SPT

0 - 17m, average SPT = 8 17m - 24m,average SPT = 40 Average SPT @ 24M = 50 .'. Total ultimate frictional resistance Qs- Spx52x1.5xi1 +540 0 x22 x1.5xi1 = 39.2 + 82.9 = 122.1 Ton Total ultimate end bearing Qb = 50 x 1.52 x 11 /4 = 88.3 Ton :. Qu =12.2.1+88.3 = 210.4 Ton .'. Safe load Qa = 210.4/2.5 = 84.1 Ton Say 80 Ton per bored pile (18" diam x 24m) 3.

Pilecap Design Single Pilecap for Pile Diameter 460mm (18" Diam x 24m Bored Pile)

No. of Pile Pile Diameter

= 1 = 460mm

Size of Pilecap

= 660 x 660 x 900mm

Steel Reinforcement

Main Bars = 0.15% x b x d = 792mm2 .. Provide 4 Y 16 Bothways Horizontal Links .: Provide 3 Y 10

= 0.25% OF Main Steel Area = 100mm2

Quantities Per Cap

Excavation Volume of Concrete

= 0.41 m3 = 0.39 m3

WT. of Reinforcement = 26.6 kg. (Y 16) = 4.8 kg. (Y 10) Lean Concrete = .44 m2 Formwork = 2.38 m2 Steel Content

= 134 lb/yd3


Page 65



Pile Design Report

Page 66


Pile Design Report

LAPORAN GEOTEKNIK MAKTAB PER GUR UAN SRI PIN ANG , BUKIT MIER TAJAM, SEBERANG PERA1, PULAU PIN ANG

DISEDIAKAH OLEH : IR. ANNIES MD. ARIFF EH. AHMAD AZLAN AHMAD (INSTITUT LATIHAN & PENYELIDIKAN JKR) Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Page 67

Pile Design Report


Pendahuluan Laporan ini adalah 'bertujuan untuk menyampaikan keterangan ringkas sumbangan yang telah diberi oleh Pusat ini di dalam menentukan pemilihan asas-asas yang sesuai bagi bangunan-bangunan yang dicadangkan untuk projek yang disebut di atas. Sumbangan ini. adalah bersesuaian dengan peranan utama pusat ini sebagai satu organisasi.sokongan kepada semua cawangan di dalam JKR dalam hal- hal yang bersangkut-paut dengan bidang geoteknikal. Laporan ini akan' ketengahkan juga masalahmasalah parancangan yang dihadapi semasa pusat ini menjalankan kerja penyiasatan -tapak dan kerja merekabentuk asas yang sesuai bagi bangunan bangunan yang terlibat Bagi 'projek ini permintaan untuk menjalankan penyiasatan tapak dan seterusnya'pen gesyoran syor-syor asas telah dikemukakan oleh Cawangan Kerja Pendidikan melalui surat PKR(KP)MP/PP/87/17(102) bertarikh 27/02/1989. Skop Projek Pelaksanaan projek ini melibatkan pembinaan 32 bush bangunan dengan ketinggian bangunan-bangunan di antara 1-tingkat hingga 4tingkat. Lingkungan beban-beban tiang pula adalah dari serendah-rendah 50.0 kN sehingga setinggi 1800.0 kN. Penyediaan tapak melibatkan kerja-kerja pemotongan se dalam di antara 0.0 hingga 6.Om dan penimbusan setinggi di antara 0.0 hingga 6.0m. Butiran bangunan mengikut bilangan tingkat adalah seperti berikut:1-tingkat - 16 unit 2-tingkat - 7 unit 4-tingkat - 8 unit Tangki Air - 1 unit Skop Penyiasatan Tapak/Tanah Berpandukan lukisan punca tatatur yang dikemukakan, satu skop kerja penyiasatan tapak, berupa 33 bil. ujian gerekan dalam, 3 bil. ujian gerimit tangan dan 89 bil. ujian proba Mckintosh, telah dirancangkan. Perancangan


skop kerja penyiasatan tersebut dibuat mengambilkira faktor-faktor berikut:i) Jenis bangunan serta beban-beban tiang yang terlibat, ii) Kegunaan bangunan, iii) Ciri-ciri geology kawasan, iv) Keadaan kawasan tapak, v) Kerja-kerja tanah - potongan dan penimbu san. Selain dari perancangan skop kerja penyiasatan kedudukan lokasi ujian-ujian juga dibuat dengan mengambilkira faktor-faktor yang disebutkan di atas. Adalah dimaklumkan bahawa perkara (v) di atas hanya dapat dibuat andaian sahaja semasa perancangan skop penyiasatan tapak kerana paras formasi tidak dinyatakan di dalam lukisan tatatur tersebut. Oleh kerana projek ini telah dikelaskan sebagai projek SEGERA dan memandangkan beban kerja semasa unit penyiasatan tapak pusat ini pada masa itu adalah terlalu banyak maka keputusan telah dibuat supaya kerja-kerja penyiasatan tapak ini dijalankan secara kontrak. Juga bagi menjimatkan masa telah dipersetujui bahawa tender kerja ini dilakukan secara lantikan terus. Kontraktor yang telah dilantik' untuk menjalankan kerja-kerja ini adalah Sekata Bina Sdn. Bhd. dengan kos kontrak kerja terhad tidak melebihi $50,000-00. Oleh yang demikian, kawalan kos yang ketat telah dilakukan semasa kerja-.kerja penyiasatan sedan& dijalankan bagi memastikan kos keseluruhan kontrak ini tidak melebihi $50,000-00. Keputusan Penyiasatan Tapak Berpandukan kepada peta Hydrogeologi Semenanjung Malaysia tapak projek ini, iaitu daerah Bukit Mertajam, adalah terletak di atas formasi batu GRANIT yang diselubungi oleh tanah jenis KELODAK/BERLIAT. Ini adalah Page 68


berpadanan dengan keputusan penyiasatan tapak/tanah yang diperolehi di mana tanah bawahan adalah jenis tanah LIAT/KELODAK dan berpasir. Tanah adalah dalam keadaan sederhana kental hingga sangat kental di antara paras dalaman 0.0 hingga 35.0m, dan keras sehingga sangat keras pada -dalaman lebih dari 18.0m. Kedudukan paras air bawah tanah semasa kerja penyiasatan dijalankan (bulan Mac, 1989) adalah di antara 1.55m hingga kering. Rekabentuk Syor Asas Pada amnya pemilihan jenis sistem asas adalah berdasarkan kepada faktor-faktor berikut:a) kemampuan tanah bawahan menanggung beban yang akan ditanggung berdasarkan keupayaan galas yang dibenarkan yang ' dikira bersesuaian dengan keadaan tanah bawahan dan juga ciri-ciri geologi kawasan. b) beban tiang dan jarak antara tiang c) faktor keselamatan terhadap kegagalan dan enapan yang dapat diterima pada beban kerja struktur bagi memenuhi kehendak 'servicibilty limit state' d) Kawalan mutu semasa pembinaan

Pile Design Report tusan ujian-ujian tanah yang dibuat ditempat kedudukan atau berdekatan dengan bangunan yang terlibat. Walaubagaimanapun disebabkan pindaan ke atas pelan punca projek ini, di mana lokasi kebanyakan bangunan telah dialihkan, maka terdapat bebarap ujian gerekan dalam berada diluar kawasan tapak bangunan, malahan terdapat juga beberapa bangunan yang tidak ada sebarang ujian penyiasatan tapak dijalankan. Dalam hal demikian, pusat ini telah membuat ekstrapolasi kepada keputusan-keputusan ujian tanah yang paling berdekatan dengan bangunan yang tiada sebarang ujian tanah, dan mengunakan maklumat tersebut berserta pengetahuan geologi kawasan bagi membuat penganalisa geoteknik. Berpandukan faktor-faktor di atas dan juga keputusan penyiasatan tapak yang telah dibuat, dua (2) jenis sistem asas telah direkabentuk bagi projek ini. Dua (2) jenis sistem asas yang dimaksudkan itu ialah asas penapak konkrit dan alas cerucuk. Bagi sistem asas cerucuk dua jenis cerucuk telah direkabentuk iaitu cerucuk konkrit tetulang dan cerucuk kayu berubat. Bagi sistem asas cerucuk daya tanggung cerucuk-cerucuk yang direkabentuk adalah dari separa geseran badan (frictional) dan separa tangouno hujung (end bearing) dan faktor keselamatan yang telah digunakan di dalam perkiraan adalah.2.0 serta menggunakan kekuatan tanah dalam lingkungan batasan rendah.

e) Jenis struktur f) tapak timbusan atau potongan g) ekonomik Oleh yang demikian sebelum menentukan sebarang sistem asas yang hendak digunakan, faktor-faktor di atas perlu diteliti terlebih dahulu bagi setiap bangunan supaya satu sistem asas yang sesuai dan ekonomik dapat ditentukan. Perlu dinyatakan disini bahawa di dalam hal membuat perkiraan rekabentuk geoteknik adalah mustahak ciri-ciri jenis tanah serta butiran kekuatan tanah-tanah yang dipilih di dalam perkiraan rekabentuk diperolehi daripada kepuCawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Apa yang dimaksudkan dengan geseran badan ialah beban yang ditanggung oleh cerucuk berkenaan akan dipindahkan ke tanah melalui rintangan geseran (frictional resistance) di antara permukaan badan cerucuk dan tanah, dan ini akan hanya terjadi sekiranya cerucul: tersebut mengalami mendapan lebih dari mendapan tanah (relative settlement of pile is greater than that of the soil). Maksud tanggung hujung pula ialah beban yang ditanggung oleh cerucuk akan dipindahkan ke tanah melalui penghujung cerucuk (base of pile). Contoh-contoh perkiraan rekabentuk kedua-dua jenis sistem, asas ada seperti di dalam lampiran-lampiran 'A' dan 'B'. Page 69


Pile Design Report

Bagi bangunan-bangunan yang mana telah disyorkan lantai gantung keputusan-ini adalah berdasarkan kepada beberapa faktor yang mana adalah seperti di bawah:a) timbusan Yang akan dilakukan adalah ter lalu tinggi, b) Kegunaan bangunan. Contoh perkiraan anggaran enapan tanah timbusan adalah seperti di dalam -Lampiran 'E'. Senarai Lampiran

Lampiran 'A' - CONTOH PERKIRAAN REKABENTUK GEOT EKNIK BAGI CERU CUK KONKRIT TETU LANG Lampiran 'B' - CONTOH PERKIRAAN REKABENTUK GEOT EKNIK BAGI PENAPAK Lampiran 'C' -

SURAT SYOR ASAS YANG TELAH DIKE MUKAKAN KEPADA CAW. KERJA PEN DIDIKAN

Lampiran 'D'-

LAPURAN PENYIASA TAN TAPAK YANG TELAH DIJALANKAN

Lampiran 'E' - CONTOH PERKIRAAN ANGGARAN ENAPAN TANAH TIMBUSAN


Page 70

Pile Design Report


Lampiran 'A'

Pile Foundation Design for Administration Blocks (4-Storey) Northern Block :

F.F.L. = 16.0m;

Fill = 0.5 to 1.0m

Central Block

:

F.F.L. = 17.5m;

Fill = 0.0 to 1.5m Cut = 0.0 to 1.0m

Southern Block :

F.F.L. = 19.0m;

Fill = 0.0 to 2.0m Cut = 0.0 to 1.5m

Column Load

:

755.OkN (83 numbers); 700.OkN (83 numbers)

Deep Boring

:

DB/3, DB/4 and DB/G (Refer sketch attached)

Shaft Resistance Formulae a) CLAY

:

Q =

α*Cu*A. where α = adhesion factor Cu = undisturbed undrained cohesion ' A. = surface area of pile

b) SILT

:

Q = N/60*A. where N = Standard Penetration Test

c) SAND

:

Q. = N/50*A.

Base Resistance Formulae: a) CLAYQb, = N*Ab where Ab = base area of pile b) SILT

=

2. 5iN*Ab

c) SAND Qb,

=

4N*Ab

Design Analysis Adopt DB/4 since worst case and assume.height of fill = 2.0m Try R.C. Pile of size B" x B" Shaft Resistance For depth 0 - 2.0m b. F. F. L. : FILL For depth 2 - 5.0m ; CLAY ; assume N = 13 take Cu = 82.0 kN/m2 (Terzaghi)

α α

adopt

= 1.0 (Tomlinson) = 0.4 (McClalland)

α

= 0.7 Q = 0.7*82.0*4*B*3.0 39.37*9.81

= 1.783B tonnes

For depth 5 - 9.0m : SAND ; assume N = 7 Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Page 71

Pile Design Report


Q. = 7*4*B*4.0*3.281 50* 12

= 0.612B tonnes

For depth 9 - 11.0m: SILT ; assume N = 6 Q. = 6*4*B*2.0*3.281 60*12

= 0.219B tonnes

For depth 11 - 18.0m: CLAY ; assume N = 13 take α = 82.0 kN/m2 a. = 0. 65 = 3.864B tonnes

Q = 0.65*82.0*4*B*7.0 39.37*9.81 Q

= 6.478B tonnes

Base Resistance At depth 21.Om b.F.F.L. take N = 13 and since proportion of SAND is quite high (> 30%) adopt Qb = 2.0*N*Ab (i.e. between CLAY & SILT). Qb = 2.0*13*B*B = 0.130B2 144 Ultimate Resistance Qa

If B = 12 inches;

= Qp + Qb = G.478B-+ 0.180B2

Q, = 77.7 + 26.0 = 103.7 tonnes

Take overall Factor of Safety = 2.0 Allowable Resistance Q11, = 103.7/2.0 = 51.8 tonnes (say 52.0) To allow for erratic nature of underlying soil and also as per para 3.0 of report allow for '15% increase. Hence adopt 12" x 12" R.C.Piles @ 21.0m with Q~,s = 450.0 kH/pile Although the bulk of the carrying capacity of pile is mainly frictional set might be achieved before depth design. Hence set readings to be taken during driving and if set not achieve drive to design depth.


Page 72



Pile Design Report

Page 73

Pile Design Report


Lampiran `B'

Shallow Foundation Design For Pre-School Block (1-Storey) Proposed F.F.L. = 26.0m; Cut = 4.5 to 5.0m Column Load

128.OkN (22 numbers); 167.OkN (23 numbers)

Deep Boring DB/14-(R.L. = 30.74m) At depth 1.Om b. F. F. L. take N *= 9 ( lower bound) and at this depth soil is COHESIVE (silty CLAY), Try pad footing of size B (m) x L -(m) @ depth 1.0m b.F.F.L. From NAVFAC DM-7.2; q*No*(1+0.08/L) + (D

where c = undrained cohesion Na = bearing capacity factor D = depth of footing below original grd. level.

(

= bulk density of soil

Take c = 55.0 kn/m2. Assume 0 = 0° and (=18..0 kN/m3 Consider case when ground water table is 1.0m b.F.F.L. Therefore for square footing, B/L = 1, and for 0 = 0°, Na = 5.53 55.0*5.53*1.3 + 18.0*5.74 = 395.4 + 103.3 = 498.7 kN/mz Adopt Factor of Safety = 3.0 q~ " = 498.7/3.0 = 166.2 kN/mx (say 166.0) If ignoring depth contribution i.e. XD, q"lro = 395.4 kN/mz Applying same F.o.S.; gall = 131.8 kN/mz Therefore adopt square footing with gall = 94.0 kN/mo (2000 p.s.f.) 0 1.0m b.F.F.L. (i.e. to follow standard drawing).


Page 74


Pile Design Report

Lampiran ‘C’

( )dlm. PKR.RPM. 85/ 173/GO5/03 30hb. Jun. 1989 Pengarah, Cawangan Kerja Pendidikan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, Jalan Sultan Salahuddin, 50582 KUALA LUMPUR.(u.p: Ir. Lam Yok Lon) Tuan, Perkara : CadanganMaktab Perguruan Sri Pinang, Bukit Mertajam, Pulau Pinang. Merujuk perkara di atas dengan segala hormatnya disampaikan keputusan penyiasatan tapak dan syor-syor asas untuk tindakan tuan selanjutnya. 2.0

Selaras dengan penguatkuasaan surat pekeliling KPKR 2/88, sistem cerucuk alternatif oleh pentender boleh diterima.

3.0

Dimaklumkan juga bahawa seperti perbincangan yang telah diadakan dengan pegawai tuan Ir. Lam Yok Lon pada 15/06/1989, pusat ini bersetuju bahawa kos anggaran asas bagi pro jek ini ditambah lebih kurang 15% atas sebab desakan untuk melaksanakan projek ini secepat mungkin. Pertambahan ini adalah untuk menyesuaikan perkara yang mungkin be rlaku semasa pembinaan atas langkah-langkah yang dibuat semasa perancangan untuk menyingkatkan tempoh masa perancangan dan rekabentuk seperti berikut:a)

Penyiasatan tapak telah dilakukan secara 'appointed - contractor' dan dengan ini kos kontrak tidak boleh melebihi $50,000.00. Ini telah menghadkan skop penyiasatan tapak yang perlu dijalankan.

b)

Lokasi-lokasi bangunan telah diubah daripada lokasi cadangan asal yang mengaki batkan ada beberapa bangunan tidak terdapat ujian gerekan dalam dijalankan.

c)

Ketidak seragaman keadaan tanah bawahan ditapak projek ini yang mana masalah (a) telah menyulitkan lagi keadaan ini. 4.0 Perlu dimaklumkan bahawa pusat ini mendapati bahawa tidak terdapat apa-apa sistem perparitan yang telah disediakan bagi projek ini. pleh yang demikian pihak tuan perlulah mengkaji akan hal ini dan membuat pengesyoran yang sewajarnya. Sekian, harap maklum 'BERKHIDMAT UNTUK HEGARA' 'CINTAILAH BAHASA KITA' Saya yang menurut perintah,

( IR. NEON CHENG AIK ) Penolong Pengarah Kanan (Pusat Penyelidikan) b.p. Pengarah, Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Page 75

Pile Design Report


Institut Latihan & Penyelidikan JKR, Jalan Serdang,43000 KAJANG, Selangor DarulEhsan.

Projek :

Cadangan Maktab Perguruan Sri Pinang, Bukit Mertajam, Pulau Pinang.

1.0

Tujuan Laporan ini adalah bertujuan untuk menyampaikan keputusan penyiasatan tapak dan syorsyor asas yang sesuai bagi projek di atas.

2.0

Skop Projek Perlaksanaan projek ini akan melibatkan pembinaan blok-blok bangunan seperti yang tert era di dalam lukisan pelan tatatur BKP 187/89/1 (PRE) A dan penyediaan tapak akan melibatkan kerja-kerja pemotongan sedalam di antara 0.0 hingga b.Om dan penimbusan di antara 0.0 hingga 5.0m.

3.0

Skop Kerja Penyiasatan Dalam menialankan kerja-kerja penyiasatan, sebanyak 30 bil. ujian gerekan dalam, 85 bil. ujian proba Mackintosh dan bil. ujian gerimit tangan telah dijalankan dan lot:asi-lokasi ujian-ujian ini adalah berdasarkan kepada lukisan tatatur asal BKP 187/89/1(PRE). Kerjakerja penyiasatan tapat: ini telah dijalankan oleh Sekata Bina Sdn. Bhd. Disamping ujianujian di tapak, ujian-ujian makmal juga telah diIakukan ke atas contoh-contoh tanah yang diperolehi bagi mengetahui jenis dan sifat-sifat tanah yang terdapat di tapak.

4.0

Syor-syor Asas

Keupayaan galas yg. Dibenarkan (kN/cerucuk)

Beban Ujian (kN/cerucuk)

305 x 305 @ 21.0

450.0

900.0

Keupayaan tanggung yg. Dibenarkan (kN/m 2) -

"

305 x 305 @ 18.0

"

"

-

Penapak Konkrit Tetulang

-

-

-

95.0(2000 psf) @ 1.5m b.F.L. (JKR probes > 40 blows/foot).

(A)

"

-

-

-

"

(B)

"

-

-

-

71.0 (1500 psf) @ 1.5m b.o.g.l. (JKR probes > 40 blows/foot).

"

-

-

-

71.0 (1500 psf) @ 1.5m b.F.L. (JKR probes > 30 blows/foot) .

Jenis Bangunan

Jenis Asas

Saiz & Panjang

‘A’

Cerucuk Konkrit Tetulang

‘B’

‘C’

‘D’

‘E’


Page 76

Pile Design Report


‘F’

(A)

Cerucuk Kayu Berubat

152 x 152 @ 9.0

100.0

200.0

-

(B)


-

-

-

71.0 (1500 psf) @ 1.5m b.F.L. (JKR probes > 30 blows/foot).

‘G’

"

-

-

-


‘H’


305 x 305 @ 18.0

500.0

1000.0

-

‘J’

"

"

"

"

-

‘K’


-

-

-

‘L’


305 x 305 @ 15.0

430.0

860.0

71.0 (1500 psf) @ 1.5m b.o.g.l. (JKR probes > 40 blows/foot). -

‘M’


-

-

-

‘N’


254 x 254 @ 6.0

160.0

320.0

95.0 (2000 psf) @ 1.5m b.F.L. (JKR probes > 40 blows/foot). -

‘P’

"

305 x 305 @ 15.0

500.0

1000.0

-

‘Q’


-

-

-


‘R’

"

-

-

-

"

‘S’

"

-

-

-

"


Page 77

Pile Design Report


‘U1’

‘U2’

(A)


381 x 381 @ 18.0

650.0

1300.0

-

(C)

"

381 x 381 @ 18.0

650.0

1300.0

-

atau

"

305 x 305 @ 18.0

450.0

900.0

-

(B)


-

-

-


(A)

"

-

-

-


(B)


381 x 381 @ 15.0

650.0

1300.0

-

atau

"

305 x 305 @ 18.0 381 x 381

450.0

900.0

-

650.0

1300.0

-

305 x 305

450.0

900.0

-

254 x 254 @ 15.0

300.0

600.0

-

‘V’

" atau atau

‘T’

"

381 x 381 @ 18.0

900.0

1800.0

-

‘X’


-

-

-



Page 78


Pile Design Report

Syor-syor asas adalah seperti berikut:Nota:

i) Cerucuk Konkrit Tetulang a) Daya tanggung beban kebanyakan cerucuk-cerucuF: yang direkabentuk adalah dari separa geseran badan dan separ.a tanggung huiung dan keupayaan galas yang disy orkan adalah berdasarkan kekuatan tanah dalam lingi:ungan batasan rendah serta menggunakan faktor keselamatan 2.0. b) Sekurang-Wrangnya 5 bilangan cerucuk permulaan perlu ditanam bagi setiap bangu nan yang dicadangi;an yang memerlukan asas cerucuk dan 1 bilangan cerucuk ini perlu dijalankan ujian beban (ini bermakna bahawa sekurang-kurangnya satu ujian beban dibuat bagi setiap bangunan yang melibatkan asas cerucuF:). Ujian beban ini boleh dijalankan selepas 3 minggu cerucuk-cerucuk berkenaan ditanam. ii) Penapak Konkrit Tetulang a) Fenapak-penapak E:onkrit hendaklah ditanam ke paras dalaman yang telah ditetap kan di dalam jadual di atas (b. F. L. - below formation, atau b.o.g.l. - below original ground level), dan lobang-lobang asas yang dikorek hendaklah jangan dibiarkan ter dedah terlalu lama. Kerja-kerja 'concrete sdreeding' dan konkriting hendaklah dilakukan secepat mungkin selepas penggalian lobang asas. b) Walaubagaimanapun ujian pengesahan proba-proba JKR perlu dijalankan terlebih dahulu bagi setiap kedudukan tiang bangunan-bangunan yang-dicadangkan bagi memastikan hentaman proba-proba ini tidak kurang dari apa yang dicatitkan di dal am jadual di atas dari dasar lobang asas kebawah dan ujian-ujian ini hendaklah dibu at sebelum kerja-kerja pergorekkan lobang-lobang asas. iii) Cerucuk Kayu Berubat a) Daya tanggung cerucuk yang direkabentuh adalah separa geseran badan dan sep ara tanggung hujung dan faktor keselamatan yang digunakan di dalam perkiraan adalah 2.0 serta menggunakan kekuatan tanah- dalam lingkungan batasan rendah. b) Cerucuk hendaklah ditanam sehingga mencapai set yang sesuai dan ini dijangka akan ditemui di paras dalaman lebih dari 6.0m. c) Cerucuk !:ayu KEMFAS Berubat yang diluluskan oleh SIRIM hendaklah digu nakan dan perlu mematuhi keperluan-keperluan yang terkandung di dalam surat pekeliling KF*:R 7/1984. d) Sekurang-kurangnya 3 bil. cerucuk permulaan perlu ditanam terlebih dahulu dan 2 bil. cerucuk ini hendaklah dijalankan ujian beban. Ujian beban ini boleh dilakukan selepas 3 minggu cerucuk-cerucul: berkenaan ditanam. 5.0

Syor-syor Tambahan a) Kerja-kerja penimbusan dan pemotongan hendaklah dijalankan pada perinakat permu laan kerja-kerja pembinaan dan tanah yang ditimbus hendaklah di dalam lapisan tidak melebihi 300mm dan setiap lapisan dipadat ke tahap 95% mengikut Piawaian Kepadatan British dengan penentuan JKR. b)

Bagi bangunan-bangunan di mana lantai-lantai tingkat bawah akan diletakkan di atas


Page 79


Pile Design Report

tanah timbus melebihi 2.50m kegunaan lantai gantung adalah diperakukan, dan untuk bangunan-bangunan lain yang mana lantai-lantai tingkat bawah akan dilekakan di atas tanah timbus tidak melebihi 2.50m lantai-lantai ini hendaklah diperkuatakan dengan 2 lapisan BRC dan sambungan bebas disediakan di anatara lanatai dan rasuk/dinding bangunan. c)

Penyediaan penyambung bagi setiap jarak 6.0m adalah wajar bagi lantai-lantai apron kesemua bangunan yang dicadangkan dan mana-mana lantai apron yang akan diletakkan di atas timbus melebihi -1.0m lantai apron ini perlu dipisahkan daripada tiang/rasuk/dinding bangunan dengan bitumen.

d)

Bagi blok-blok bangunan di mana pusat ini telah mengesyorkan lebih dari satu saiz cerucuk, pihak tuan . bolehlah memilih mana-mana saiz.yang didapati lebih ekonomik tetapi HANYA SATU SAIZ CERUCUK DIBENARKAN bagi satu ban gunan.

e)

Pusat ini juga mengesyorkan agar. kecuraman cerun-cerun yang akan didirikan tidak melebihi IM: 1(H) bagi cerun-cerun potong (cut slopes) dan, IM: 1.5(H) bagi cerungerun timbud (filled slopes).

6.0

Hal-hal Lain Satu set rekod penanaman cerucuk-cerucuk yang diuji berserta dengan keputusan ujianujian bebannya hendaklah dikemukakan kepada pusat ini untuk tujuan dokumentasi.

7.0

Penutup Dikemukakan syor-syor dan ulasan pusat ini untuk tindakan tuan selanjutnya.

Pusat Penyelidikan,Institut Latihan & Penyelidikan JKR.


Page 80

Pile Design Report


Lampiran 'E'

Settlement Estimation of Fill From classification results underlying soil is of the COHESIVE type with a fair proportion of sandy materials. It is most probable that the fill material to be used would be obtained from the cut-areas. Hence for settlement analysis it is assume that the fill material is of the cohesive type. In the estimation of soil settlement it is assume that the - original underlying soil where the fill would be place experience negligible settlement and whatever settlement that would occur is solely from consolidation of the fill under its own weight. It is also assume that the fill is uncompacted since it is most common now that the control exercised in placing fill and compaction has frequently been insufficient to ensure an adequate and uniform support for structures immediately after placement.

Hence for estimation of settlement of fill, fig. 1.0 below would be used. From fig. 1.0 graph 5, cohesive material would settle around 11% of its thickness. Suppose that construction period is 2 years and construction of ground floor would be carried out after a period of 1.5 years after placement of fill.. Take case where height of fill = 2.50m Therefore settlement of fill = 0.11 x 2.50 = .275m Settlement (': of height of fill) = 0.08 x. 2.50 = 0.200m after period of 1.5 yrs. Hence remaining settlement after = 0.275 - 0.200 = 0.075m period of 1.5 yrs. Therefore for those buildings placed on fill ground of height >> 2.50m suspended floor is recommended and for the others . place on fill < 2.50m independent floor with 2 layers of BRC. Cawangan Jalan, Ibu Pejabat JKR, K.L

Page 81

Pile Design Report


Projek : Pakej :

SM. Kebangsaan Sungai Besar,Sabak Bernam, Selangor. KBSM.

1.0. Tujuan. Lapuran ini adalah bertujuan untuk menyampaikan keputusan penyiasatan tapak dan syor asas yang sesuai bagi.projek diatas. 2.0. Skop Kerja Perlaksanaan projek ini akan melibatkan pembinaan 1 Blok, 2 Tingkat (6BD,) bangunan sekolah seperti yang tertera didalam pelan tatatur JKR/SB:765/81A. Aras tanah sediada adalah merupakan cadangan aras formasi tapakbina ini,dan tidak-melibatkan sebarang penambunan. 3.0. Skop Kerja Penyiasatan Tapak Sebanyak 8 bilangan ujian proba JKR telah dijalankan oleh JKR Sabak Bernam, dan-2 bilangan ujian gerekan dalam telah dijalankan oleh Unit Makmal dilokasi-lokasi yang bertanda didalam pelan tatatur. 4.0. Syor-syor Asas Berdasarkan kira-kira rekabentuk, syor asas adalah seperti berikut:Jenis Asas


4.1.

4.2. 4.3.

Saiz Asas (mm)

Panjang Asas (mm)

254 x 254

30.0

Keupayaan galas Beban yg. Dibenarkan Ujian (kN/cerucuk) 300

600

Daya tanggung beban cerucuk konkrit tetulang yang direkabentuk adalah kebanyakannya dari geseran badang, Perkiraan adalah menggunakan kekuatan tanah di dalam lingkungan batasan rendah. Ini bermakna hanya 1 cerucuk sahaja diper lukan bagi setiap tiang. Bacaan set tidaklah perlu semasa penanaman cerucuk, dan cerucuk bolihlah ditanamkan diparas dalaman 30.0m. Sekurang-kurangnya 6 (enam) bilangan cerucuk permulaan hendaklah ditanam dan 1 (satu) bilangan cerucuk yang berdekatan dengan.lokasi ujian gerekan dalam hendak lah dijalankan ujian.beban selepas 4 (empat) minggu cerucuk. berkenaan ditanam.

5.0. Syor-syor Tambahan Bagi mengelakkan keretakan lantai apron unit ini berpend.apat penyed.iaan penyambung bagi setiap jarak 6.Om adalah wajar. Lantai apron juga perlulah dipisahkan daripada dind ing dan tiang bangunan supaya pergerakan berlainan sekiranya berlaku akan tersekat. 6.0. Hal-hal Lain Satu set rekod penanaman cerucuk-cerucuk berserta dengan' keputusan ujian-ujian beban nya hendaklah dikemukakan kepada unit ini bagi tujuan kaiian lanjut dan rekod. 7.0. Penutup. Dikemukakan syor-syor dan ulasan unit ini untuk tindakan tuan selanjutnya.


Page 82

Pile Design Report


DATAS OBTAINED FORM : EN. BAHARUDIN LOKMAN JKR(O) S B

PROJEK : SMK SUNGAI BESAR DAERAH : SABAK BERNAM

NEGERI : SELANGOR

1. HISTORY OF SITES *

Any Cut / Fill ?

NO

- If there’s fill – when ? - What is the depth of fill? *

Is there a slope ?

NO

- How far from the proposed building ? - What is the height of the slope ? 2.

HISTORY OF EXISTING NEARBY BUILDINGS *

What is the type of foundation ? If Pile - What Type ? - What Size ? If Pad - What Depth ?

PILE RC 305 x 305 -

- What Bearing Capacity ? *

When Constructed ?

80’s

*

How is the present conditions ?

OK

*

- Any apron / floor cracks ?

SIGN OF

- Other sign of distress ?

CRACKS

How far is the nearest building ?

30’

3. SOIL CONDITIONS * What type of soils ?

* What is the water level ?

SOFT CLAY

HIGH

HBB /hbb


Page 83



Pile Design Report

Page 84

Pile Design Report


UNIT MAKMAL

NO. HELAI …………… 1…………

KIRA – KIRA REKABENTUK REKABENTUK OLEH ……… ….… CAWANGAN REKABENTUK DAN PENYELIDIKAN IBU PEJABAT, JKR.

NO. FAIL ……………………… …...

PROJEK : SMK SUNGAI BESAR. DAERAH : SABAK BERNAM. PAKEJ : KBSM

TARIKH ………4.10.89…………

RUJUKAN

KIRA – KIRA

CATATAN

Lukisan

1. Blok / 2 tct. (GBD) sekolah

RL : 29.54

JKR/SB: 765/81A

FL : 30.00 Column Loadings(T)

Lukisan

Frame Front

Back

F1

20

18

F2

29

25

F3

25

21

Datas & Assumptions

MAX 29T

No fitting included

Level

Geological Section

SPT

(m)

(ft)

(N)

0

0

v/s

12

40

-

Cu kN/m

x 2

v/s α

(0.03)

v.soft

v/s 25

to

(0.23)

Cu

Stiff

1.0

0.9

-

Silty Clay

Qu = Qs + Qb Clay: Qs = As x Cu Qb = Ab 9 Cb Sand : Qs = ASN 50

Qb = Ab 4 N

Qa = Qu f.o.s. E96


Page 85

Pile Design Report


UNIT MAKMAL

NO. HELAI ……… 2…………….….

KIRA – KIRA REKABENTUK REKABENTUK OLEH ……… …..… CAWANGAN REKABENTUK DAN PENYELIDIKAN IBU PEJABAT, JKR.

PROJEK : SMK SUNGAI BESAR. DAERAH : SABAK BERNAM. PAKEJ : KBSM

NO. FAIL ……………………… .…... TARIKH ………4.10.89……….…

RUJUKAN

KIRA – KIRA

CATATAN

Try RC Piles

Level (m)

(ft)

30

100

BXB

Qs

Qb

Qa

Qa

(in)

(T)

(T)

(T)

(T)

61 B

3.5 B 2

10 x 10

51

2.4

35

27

12 x 12

61

3.5

42

32

15 x 15

76

5.5

53

41

67B

40B2

10 x 10

56

28

47

42

12 x 12

67

40

58

54

15 x 15

84

63

77

74

Remarks

* quite close

Cost comperison

F2

F1

F3

F2

F3

F3

F2

F3

F3

F3

F1

Frames

Front

Back

Col

F1

2

2

4

F2

3

3

6

F3

6

6

12

E96


Page 86

Pile Design Report


UNIT MAKMAL

NO. HELAI …… 3..…………….……

KIRA – KIRA REKABENTUK REKABENTUK OLEH ……… …..… CAWANGAN REKABENTUK DAN PENYELIDIKAN IBU PEJABAT, JKR.

PROJEK : SMK SUNGAI BESAR. DAERAH : SABAK BERNAM. PAKEJ : KBSM RUJUKAN Frames

NO. FAIL ……………………… .…... TARIKH ……4.10.89………….…

KIRA – KIRA Column

CATATAN

No of Piles 10” x 10” @ 30T(30m)

12” x 12” @ 30T(30m)

15” x 15” @ 30T(30m)

at 100

at 100

at 100

Total

22

22

22

Rate

$0.32/m 2

$0.30/m 2

$0.28/m 2

Per m

Per m

Per m

Materials

$960/-

$1296/-

$1890/-

10%

96/-

129.6/-

189/-

Total Cost

$23,232/-

$31,363/-

$45738/-

Loads(T)

F1

20 18

F2

29 25

F3

25 21

Recommended

R.C. Piles Size : 10” x 10” (254 x 254) Length : 1 00’ (30m) Qa : 30T/Pile (300kN Pile) f.o.s. : 1.5 skin 3.0 bearing Pile is of mainly friction

E96


Page 87

Pile Design Report


Project :

SM.KEB.SUNGAI BESAR, SABAK BERNAM, SELANGOR.

BD SC BDS SCS

Bangunan : 2 tingkat Jenis (BD/SC/BDS/SCS) : BD Pile dim. : 254 mm sq. piles Length : 30 m W.Load : 30 Tonnes No. of Frames F1 2 /////////////////////////////// F2 3 /////////////////////////////// F3 6 ///////////////////////// ////// Frames

Column Position Front Back Front Back Front Back

Column Load 20.0 18.0 29.0 25.0 25.0 21.0

= = = =

Piles/ Column 1 1 1 1 1 1 TOTAL :

$35.20 /m. length

Cost :

Bilik Da Makmal S Bilik D Makmal

Piles Req’d. 2 2 3 3 6 6 22 $23,232.00

ALTERNATIVELY : -

Pile dim. Length W.Load

: : :

305 mm sq. piles 30 m 45 Tonnes

No. of Frames F1 2 /////////////////////////////// F2 3 /////////////////////////////// F3 6 /////////////////////////////// Frames


Column Load 20.0 18.0 29.0 25.0 25.0 21.0


$47.52 /m. length


Cost :

Piles Req’d. 2 2 3 3 6 6 22 $31,363.20

Page 88

Pile Design Report


Project :

SM.KEB.SUNGAI BESAR, SABAK BERNAM, SELANGOR.

BD SC BDS SCS

Bangunan : 2 tingkat Jenis (BD/SC/BDS/SCS) : BD Pile dim. : 381 mm sq. piles Length : 30 m W.Load : 30 Tonnes No. of Frames F1 2 /////////////////////////////// F2 3 /////////////////////////////// F3 6 ///////////////////////// ////// Frames


Column Load 20.0 18.0 29.0 25.0 25.0 21.0

= = = =


$69.30 /m. length

Cost :

Bilik Da Makmal S Bilik D Makmal

Piles Req’d. 2 2 3 3 6 6 22 $45,738.00

ALTERNATIVELY : -

Pile dim. Length W.Load

: : :

305 mm sq. piles 30 m 45 Tonnes

No. of Frames F1 2 /////////////////////////////// F2 3 /////////////////////////////// F3 6 /////////////////////////////// Frames


Column Load 20.0 18.0 29.0 25.0 25.0 21.0


$47.52 /m. length


Cost :

Piles Req’d. 2 2 3 3 6 6 22 $31,363.20

Page 89

49238035-jkr(spec si)

Recommend Documents