structural COMPONENTS

Pile Structural Capacity

A Comparison of Three Design Codes
By H.Y. Ng, MSc, P.E. , C.Eng, MIStructE

F oundations for a building are required to support the structure

so that it remains safe and functional, and so that they meet
serviceability limits. Buildings with excessive cracking and movement
Table 1. Codes and design method.

Code Type of Design

ACI-318 LRFD (ASD is also allowed)
(e.g. total settlement, differential settlement, tilt, etc.) are alarming
and not acceptable. EC2 Limit state design
When column loads are heavy, as in high-rise buildings for example, CP4 Allowable stress design
large piles or groups of piles are usually required to carry the loads
down to a competent stratum. Bored piles, also referred to as auger- designers may want to exercise extra caution when selecting end
cast piles, are large-diameter, cast-in-place concrete piles, usually bearing values in design. Codes typically impose a higher factor of
lightly reinforced by steel reinforcing bars (0.5%) under gravity loads. safety for end-bearing as compared to shaft friction.
Circular boreholes are drilled in the ground before placing concrete The different partial safety factors applied to the calculated shaft friction
into the borehole. The reinforcing steel can be set in the holes before and end bearing may also depend on conditions such as whether load
the concrete is placed or “wet-set” before the concrete is allowed to tests were carried out and the type of loading (compression or tension).
set. Common bored-pile sizes range from 30 inches to 60 inches (750 To illustrate, Table 4 shows the different factors used in the dif-
mm to 1,500mm) in increments of 4 inches (100mm). ferent codes.
This article compares the structural capacity calculation of bored Designers need to be mindful of the different factors that are required
piles in compression using three design codes: ACI-318, Building Code on shaft friction and end bearing, and the appropriate corresponding
Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary; the Eurocode factors to be applied to the loadings, depending on the code and type
(EC2); and CP4:2003 (Singapore CP4). of design adopted.
Due to the uncertainties of pile design and construction, load tests
are desirable to verify that piles can meet settlement criteria under
Design Codes the design loads. For example, the governing code may specify that,
There are generally two types of design methods: allowable stress when a test pile is loaded to 1.5 times the unfactored column load,
design (ASD) and load and resistance factor design (LRFD). In many the pile settlement should not exceed 0.6 inches (15 mm) (from CP4).
parts of the world, ASD and LRFD are known as working stress
(permissible stress) design and limit-state design, respectively. ASD
compares capacities derived from the allowable stress (factored down
Structural Design
from ultimate) against the service loads without any load factors, Bored piles are usually designed to carry compression loads, similar to
while limit-state design has factors for loadings and partial factors columns in a building. The main difference is that columns are cast
for materials (Table 1). above the ground while piles are cast underground. Other differences
In the design of piles, both the geotechnical (soil strength) capacity are summarized in Table 5, page 16. Because of these differences, the
and structural (material strength) capacity must be checked. For an structural capacity of a pile determined from code equations usually
economical design, the structural capacity and geotechnical capacity is lower than column capacity of a similar size and reinforcement.
should be as close as possible.

Table 2. Unit shaft friction and end bearing.

Geotechnical Design
Total Stress (Clay) Effective Stress (Sand)
The geotechnical capacity of piles can be calculated based on site
Unit shaft friction αcu βσv'
investigation data. For piles founded in soil, unit shaft friction and
end-bearing are summarized in Table 2. Unit end bearing 9cu Nqσv'
In some parts of the world, where there is prior pile design experi- cu = undrained shear strength
ence in similar ground conditions, it is possible to correlate the shaft σv' = average vertical effective stress
friction and end-bearing to standard penetration test (SPT) N values. α = coefficient to reduce shear strength (usually 0.5 to 1.0, depending on
the strength of clay)
For example, bored piles in a specific locality may have the values β = coefficient related to interface friction between pile and soil and Ks
shown in Table 3. (Example: A soil with SPT value of 100 may have which is the ratio of horizontal stress to vertical stress
unit shaft friction of 3x100 = 300 kPa = 44 psi) Nq = bearing capacity factor based on soil friction angle
In design, it is often prudent to impose an upper bound on shaft
friction and end-bearing as a safety precaution to avoid using values Table 3. Example of shaft friction and end bearing based on SPT.
that are not achievable or come with excessive settlement. Coefficient Maximum (kPa)
Designers need to recognize that end-bearing requires much more Unit shaft friction 1.5 – 3 150 – 300
pile settlement to mobilize as compared to shaft friction. The con-
dition of the pile toe is difficult to ascertain. For these reasons, Unit end bearing 40 – 120 10,000

14 STRUCTURE magazine
 Under gravity loads, bored piles in compression can be nominally Table 4. Partial factors on shaft friction and end bearing.
reinforced (using minimum reinforcement). Usually, it is more eco- Shaft Friction Safety End Bearing Safety
nomical to use a larger pile with nominal reinforcements compared to Factor Factor
a smaller pile that is heavily reinforced. However, smaller diameter piles
with heavier reinforcements may be adopted in certain situations such ACI-336^ 1.5 to 5 1.5 to 5
as space constraints or low headroom. For comparison in this article, EC2* 1.68 2.04
only nominally reinforced bored piles founded in soil are discussed. CP4 1.5 to 2 3
^ LRFD is denoted as strength design method, ASD is denoted as alternate design method
Structural Capacity Based on ACI-318 * The 1.68 and 2.04 factors for EC2 were calculated based on Design Approach 1 –
Combination 2 (usually governing for pile design) where there is a 1.3 factor on live
In the U.S., ACI-318 is a commonly used standard for the design of loads and 1.2 model factor applied to 1.4 and 1.7 for shaft and base, respectively.
reinforced concrete structures. ACI-318 is primarily an LRFD code, These factors assume that appropriate load tests were carried out.
but ASD is also allowed. Bored piles are known as drilled shafts, drilled
piers, or auger-cast piles. The structural design of drilled piers is similar A strength reduction factor, φ, of 0.75 is used for spirally reinforced
to a beam-column. However, in most practical cases, the design can columns and 0.65 for tied columns. There is a further reduction factor
be simplified to a short column by assuming the bending moment of 0.85 and 0.8 for spiral and tied columns, respectively, to account
is negligible (gravity loads only) and the pier is laterally restrained, for eccentricities.
unless in the case of very soft soil (for example, less than 1.5 psi (10 Ignoring the contribution of steel (for a nominally reinforced pile),
kPa) shear strength). U.S. practice also includes seismic considerations the ultimate capacity for a tied column is:
in certain areas, which may require special detailing requirements, φPn = (0.65)(0.8)(0.85)fckAc = 0.442 fckAc = 0.35 fcuAc
such as spiral hoops (for added shear strength) and more stringent This gives a working load of 0.25fcuAc after dividing by a combined
reinforcement spacing and limits. For column design, ACI-318 pro- load factor of 1.4.
vides the following well-established equation for column capacity: Note that ACI-336.3R for drilled piers specifies load factors of 1.4
and 1.7 for dead load and live load, respectively, whereas ACI-318
φPn = φ(0.85f´c Ac + fyAst)
specifies load factors of 1.2 and 1.6. The difference in load factors for
ACI’s strength reduction factor, φ, is an overall factor to reduce drilled piers and columns suggest that underground concrete is more
nominal strength, similar to the partial safety factor for materials in uncertain and requires a higher factor of safety compared to concrete
the Eurocodes (e.g., 1.5 for concrete). columns in a superstructure.
continued on next page

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

Reduce Thermal Transfer

with Hohmann & Barnard
TBS THERMAL BRICK
SUPPORT SYSTEM BENEFITS
+ Our Thermal Brick Support System is a
groundbreaking brick veneer support system that
reduces thermal bridging in shelf angles.

+ It allows for the installation of continuous insulation

behind the support angle.

+ Each job is designed and engineered in-house to meet

your specific project needs.

+ A recent study shows that attached shelf angles

will create an effective reduction of the R-Value by
between 46% and 63%. The same study shows that
offset angles minimize that reduction to between 15%
and 16.5%.

800-645-0616 | www.h-b.com

M A R C H 2 02 0 15
 Table 5. Difference between a column and a bored pile.

Columns Bored Piles

Superstructure – above ground (better quality control) Sub-structure – below ground (harder to control quality)
Unrestrained between adjacent story levels Supported by soil along the shaft (unless soil is very soft)
Can be easily inspected after construction Cannot be easily inspected after construction
Usually rectangular with heavy reinforcements Circular with light reinforcements
Higher concrete strength, e.g., fcu = 5,800 psi (40 MPa) Lower concrete strength, e.g., fcu = 4,350 psi (30 MPa)
Less concrete cover Greater concrete cover
(fck = 0.8fcu, where fck = fc´ = cylinder strength and fcu = cube strength)

The U.S. model building code is the International Building Code to bring it down to working load capacity). Because bored piles are
(IBC). In IBC (allowable stress design), the allowable stress in concrete lightly reinforced, the contribution from steel can be ignored. This
is 0.33fc´ (0.26fcu). This is in line with a general rule of thumb that means the ultimate pile structural capacity reduces to:
design stress is a third of material strength for piling. N = 0.45fcuAc
The coefficient 0.45 is further reduced by 10% to 0.4 to account
for eccentricity and tolerances in construction. To bring the ultimate
Structural Capacity Based on CP4 capacity to working load capacity, 0.4 is divided by 1.5 (equivalent
For rock-socketed piles with full-length reinforcement, using a short to a combined load factor) to obtain a coefficient of 0.267 (note:
column formula, CP4 states that the ultimate structural capacity is 1.4 and 1.6 were load factors for dead and live load, respectively,
given by the sum of stress multiplied by area for both concrete and based on British Standards). Therefore, CP4 recommended the pile
steel components: structural capacity (working stress) to be 0.25fcu. This capacity is to
Pu = 0.4fcuAc + 0.75fyAs be compared to column loads (serviceability limit state) acting on
where fcu and fy are concrete and steel strength, respectively, and A is the pile, without any load factors.
area. To derive the working load, using a minimum safety factor of When CP4 was in use, the common concrete strength for bored piles
two, the equation becomes: was C30 (fcu = 4,350 psi or 30MPa), which means that the allowable
Pu = 0.2fcuAc + 0.375fyAs stress was 1,088 psi (7.5 MPa). Also, CP4 limits concrete strength
In CP4, structural capacity (working stress) of nominally reinforced to 1,088 psi (7.5 MPa) to account for quality control issues when
bored piles is calculated using 0.25fcu (ultimate cube strength) but pouring concrete into a hole underground. Even with higher concrete
limited to a maximum of 1,088 psi (7.5 MPa). Some engineers are strengths, there is a need to be mindful that such a high strength of
tempted to view 0.25 as a “safety factor” for structural capacity using concrete may not be adequately compacted and subjected to issues
a permissible stress perspective, giving a false sense of safety. However, associated with bored pile construction, such as mixing with water
this is not strictly correct because the 0.25 is a value obtained after and soil, necking, etc. For this reason, 1,088 psi (7.5 MPa) was the
accounting for several aspects of cube strength which are different maximum working stress allowed in concrete, even if much higher
compared to actual concrete cast-in piles. strength of concrete was used.
The derivation of 0.25 was strongly influenced by BS8110 (or local
Singapore CP65), which was the corresponding reinforced concrete
design code used in conjunction with CP4. When a column is loaded
Structural Capacity Based on EC2
to failure in compression, the ultimate capacity is the sum of concrete Using Eurocodes, the structural design of reinforced concrete is in
and steel components, and it is given by an empirical formula: accordance with EC2. EC2 provides the following equation for pre-
N = 0.67fcuAc + fyAs (Note that 0.67fcu = 0.85fck, using fck = 0.8fcu) dicting the ultimate capacity of reinforced concrete piles:
where fck = fć = cylinder strength and fcu = cube strength. NRd,p = Acfcd,p where fcd,p = αcc,p fck/γc,f
This is the maximum load, independent of creep and shrinkage According to EC2, αcc “is the coefficient taking account of long-
effects. The 0.67 factor applied to cube compression strength of term effects on the compressive strength and of unfavorable effects
concrete is to account for differences such as size (actual structural resulting from the way the load is applied” and 0.85. γc,f is the partial
element is much larger than cube), boundary conditions (actual safety factor for concrete (1.5 x 1.1; 1.1 being required for casting
building load on column versus loading using compression testing piles without a permanent casing).
machine), rate of loading (much faster rate in cube test), and quality With all these factors, the ultimate stress in concrete becomes:
of compaction (cube test is properly compacted). fcd,p = αcc,pfck/γc,f = 0.85 x (0.8fcu)/(1.5x1.1) = 0.412fcu
An additional “partial safety factor” of 1.5 needs to be applied for Under Eurocodes, the load factors for permanent (dead load) and
design against ultimate collapse (note that this factor is not meant variable action (live load) are 1.35 and 1.5, respectively. Because
Table 6. Construction tolerances for bored piles. permanent loads are much higher than variable
loads for most structures, a combined load factor
Code Tolerance can be assumed to be approximately 1.4.
ACI-336 4% of the diameter or 3 inches (75mm), whichever is less The working stress of concrete then becomes
EN1536 (execution 4 inches (100 mm) (≤40 inches diameter) 0.29fcu (higher than 0.25fcu using ACI-318 or
standard for bored piles) 0.1D (40<D≤60 inches diameter) 0.25fcu using CP4).
6 inches (150mm) (>60inches diameter) By comparing the working stress allowed for
concrete, it appears that EC2 allowed a 16%
CP4 3 inches (75mm) higher value as compared to ACI-318 and CP4.

16 STRUCTURE magazine
Table 7. Allowable concrete stress in bored piles in compression. and specify higher strength concrete for bored piles. However, design-
Code Allowable Concrete Stress (psi or MPa) ers should be cautioned on the need to ensure stringent
quality control measures during pile construction and verify
ACI-318 0.25fcu that concrete strength can be achieved on-site.■
EC2 0.26fcu
CP4 0.25fcu and not greater than 1088 psi (7.5 MPa) The online version of this article contains references.
INFO
Please visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org.
SPECS
However, in EC2, it is necessary to reduce the design diameter of a
bored pile by 2 inches (50mm) for diameters greater than or equal FileName:19-1670_Ad_1/2IslandStructure_July_BridgeRepairSolutions Page Size: 5w" x 7.5h" bleed
to 40 inches (1,000mm) when there is no permanent casing. Job#: This 19-1670 H. Y. Ng isPR#: N/A
a Principal Engineer with a localNumber authorityofinvolved
Pages: 1in reviewing
design diameter reduction is on 1 1 4top
4 E of. Nthe
e w p1.1o r t factor
C e n t e applied
r Dr.
Artist:
to the Georgina Morra Email: gmorra@mapei.com
and granting approval for structural and geotechnical design. Bleed: Yes Amount: .125"
Deerfield Beach, FL 33442
concrete partial factor of 1.5. Such a reduction in capacity using Date: June 7, 2019 10:29
(xyhng@hotmail.com) AM Colors: CMYK Process, 4/0
EC2 equations is to allow for greater uncertainties in casting con-
N O T E : C O L O R S V I E W E D O N - S C R E E N A R E I N T E N D E D F O R V I S U A L R E F E R E N C E O N L Y A N D M A Y N O T M A T C H T H E F I N A L P R I N T E D P R O D U C T.

crete underground without a permanent

casing. With these two explicit provisions
addressing uncertainties in the construc-
tion process, EC2 uses a slightly higher
allowable concrete stress of 0.29fcu. If the MAPEI bridges the
gap with concrete
2-inch (50mm) reduction in design diam-
eter is accounted for, the concrete stress
in EC2 reduces by another 10% (using
382/402 = 0.9) to 0.26fcu.
repair solutions
Construction Tolerances
Column loads are usually transferred to
bored piles through a pile cap. Pile caps
help to distribute loads to piles in a group
and minimize the effects of eccentricity,
that is, variation in the individual pile posi-
tions. Pile caps may need to be redesigned
if there are piles constructed exceeding the

ADVERTISEMENT–For Advertiser Information, visit STRUCTUREmag.org

allowable tolerances. Construction toler-
ances allowed by the codes are summarized
in Table 6.

Conclusion Carroll Avenue Bridge

Takoma Park, MD Corrosion protection
Although there is no upper limit on con-
crete stress in ACI-318 and EC2, designers Bear Cut Bridge
Key Biscayne, FL
may not want to use the maximum stress
allowed. For example, a concrete with fcu
= 5,800 psi (40 MPa) has allowable stress
of 1,711 psi (11.8 MPa) designed with
EC2. In practice, the designer may choose
I-80 Verdi Bridge
to limit the stress to 1,450 psi (10 MPa) as
an additional safety precaution. Concrete repair mortars Verdi, NV

Allowable compressive stress in concrete

for bored piles appears to be consistent
across the three different codes (Table 7).
Most codes recognize that concrete cast
underground is more uncertain compared
to a column cast in a superstructure and,
therefore, a safety factor that accounts for
this is required. CP4 uses a 1,088 psi (7.5
MPa) stress limit to guard against quality JEA Northside Generating Station
Jackonville, FL Products for structural strengthening
issues and therefore places a disincentive
for using higher strength concrete, while
the other codes do not prescribe concrete
strength limits. Designers can take full
advantage of the higher concrete stress

19-1670_Ad_1/2Island Structure_July_Bridge Repair Solutions.indd 1 6/7/19 10:30 AM

M A R C H 2 02 0 17
 References
ACI 318-14, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete and Commentary, 2nd printing. Farmington Hills, MI: American
Concrete Institute, 2014.
ACI-336.3R-93, Design and construction of drilled piers, Farmington Hills, MI: American Concrete Institute, 2014.
SS CP4:2003, Code of practice for foundation, Singapore Standard, SPRING Singapore, 2 Bukit Merah Central, Singapore 159835.
EN 1992-1-1:2004, Design of concrete structures – General rules and rules for buildings, European Committee for Standardization,
rue de Stassart, 36 B-1050 Brussels.
EN 1997-1, Geotechnical design – General rules, European Committee for Standardization, rue de Stassart, 36 B-1050 Brussels.
EN 1536:2010, Execution of special geotechnical works – Bored piles, European Committee for Standardization, rue de Stassart,
36 B-1050 Brussels.

M A R C H 2 02 0 18