Design of Caissons

35.1 Introduction

The term "caisson" is normally used to identify large bored concrete

piles. Caissons are constructed by drilling a hole in the ground and fill-
ing it with concrete. A reinforcement cage is placed prior to concreting.
The diameter of caissons could be as high as 15 ft.
The following is a list of other c o m m o n l y used names to identify
caissons.

1. Drilled shafts.
2. Drilled caissons.
3. Bored concrete piers.
4. Drilled piers.

A bell can be constructed at the bottom to increase the capacity.

Caissons with a bell at the bottom are known as belled piers, belled
caissons, or underreamed piers

35.2 Brief History of Caissons

It was clear to m a n y engineers that large-diameter piles were required
to transfer heavy loads to deep bearing strata. The obvious problem was
the inability of piling rigs to drive these large-diameter piles.
462 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

The concept of excavating a hole and filling it with concrete was the
next progression. The end bearing of the caisson was further improved
by constructing a bell at the bottom of the hole.
Early excavations were constructed using steel rings and timber
lagging. This was an idea borrowed from the tunneling industry.
See Fig. 35.1.

Plan view
Rings are inserted into the hole

Figure 35.1 Ring structures

35.2.1 Machine Digging

With time, hand digging was replaced by machine digging. Two types
of machines are in use.

9 Auger types.
9 Bucket types.

Auguring is the most popular method to excavate for caissons.

35.3 Caisson Design in Clay Soil

The equations for caissons in clay soils are similar to those of piles.

35.3.1 Different Methods

Reese et al. (1976) developed the relationship

ultimate caisson capacity = ultimate end bearing capacity

+ ultimate skin friction
Pu = Qu + Su
Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 463

where

P u - u l t i m a t e capacity of the caisson

Q u - u l t i m a t e e n d b e a r i n g capacity
S u - u l t i m a t e skin friction

The e n d b e a r i n g capacity, Qu, is f o u n d by

Qu-9xcxA
where

c - cohesion
A - cross-sectional area

The skin friction is

skin friction - a x c x Ap

where

is o b t a i n e d from Table 35.1.

c-cohesion
A p - p e r i m e t e r surface area

The following notes apply to Table 35.1.

Table 35.1 ~ value and limiting skin friction

Caisson construction m e t h o d (for soil Limiting unit skin

to concrete) friction (f, kPa)

Uncased caissons
1. Dry or using lightweight drilling slurry 0.5 90
2. Using drilling mud where filter cake 0.3 40
removal is uncertain (see Note 1 in
text)
3. Belled piers on about same soil as on
shaft sides
3.1. By dry method 0.3 40
3.2. Using drilling mud where filter 0.15 25
cake removal is uncertain
4. Straight or belled piers resting on 0.0 0
much firmer soil than around shaft
5. Cased caissons (see Note 2 in text) 0.1 to 0.25

Source:Reese et al. (1976).

464 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

9 Note l ~ F i l t e r Cake W h e n drilling m u d is used, a layer of m u d gets

attached to the soil. This layer of mud is known as the filter cake.
In some soils, this filter cake gets washed away during concreting. In
some situations, it is not clear whether the filter cake will be removed
during concreting. If the filter cake does not get removed during con-
creting, the bond between the concrete and the soil will be inferior.
Hence, a low ~ value is expected.
9 Note 2 ~ C a s e d Caissons In the case of cased caissons, the skin fric-
tion is between the soil and the steel casing, c~ is significantly low for
the steel-soil bond compared to the concrete-soil bond.

35.3.2 Factor of Safety

Due to the uncertainties of the soil parameters such as cohesion and
friction angle, a factor of safety should be included. Suggested factor of
safety (F.O.S.) values in the literature range from 1.5 to 3.0. The factor of
safety of a caisson affects the economy of a caisson significantly. Assume
that the ultimate capacity was found to be 3,000 kN and a factor of
safety of 3.0 is used. In this case, the allowable caisson capacity would
be 1,000 kN. On the other hand, a factor of safety of 2.0 would give an
allowable caisson capacity of 1,500 kN, or a 50% increase in the design
capacity. A lower factor of safety value would result in a m u c h more
economical design. Yet on the other hand, the failure of a caisson can
never be tolerated. In the case of a pile group, the failure of one pile
will probably not have a significant effect on the group. Caissons stand
alone and typically are not used as a group.
W h e n selecting the factor of safety, the following procedure is
suggested.

9 Make sure enough borings are conducted so that soil conditions are
well known in the vicinity of the caisson.
9 Sufficient unconfined strength tests should be conducted on all
different clay layers to obtain an accurate value for cohesion.
9 Sufficient borings with SPT (N)values must be made to obtain the
friction angle of sandy soils.

If the subsurface investigation program is extensive, the lower factor

of safety of 2.0 could be justified. If not, the factor of safety of 3.0 may
Chapter35 Designof Caissons 465

be the safe bet. On the other hand, as a middle ground, a factor of safety
3.0 for skin friction and a factor of safety of 2.0 for end bearing can be
used.

35.3.3 Weight o f t h e Caisson

Unlike the case for piles, the weight of the caisson is significant and
needs to be considered for the design capacity.

Pallowable = Qu/F.O.S. + Su/F.O.S.- W + Ws

where

Qu = ultimate end bearing capacity

Su = ultimate skin friction
Pallowable - - a l l o w a b l e column load
W = weight of the caisson
Ws = weight of soil removed

See Fig. 35.2.

Logically, the weight of the soil removed during construction of the
caisson should be subtracted from the weight of the caisson.

mallowable -- a l l o w a b l e c o l u m n load

Su/F.O.S.

mallowable 4- W (weight of the caisson) - weight of soil removed

I Ou/F.O.S.

Figure 35.2 Forces on caissons

466 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

Research by Reese and O'Neill (1988) suggests ignoring the skin

friction at the top 5 ft (1.5 m) of the caisson in clay since load tests
suggested that the skin friction in this region is negligible. For the skin
friction to mobilize, there must be a slight relative movement between
the caisson and the surrounding soil. The top 5 ft of the caisson does not
have enough relative movement between the caisson and the surround-
ing soil. It has been reported that clay at the top 5 ft could desiccate
and crack and result in negligible skin friction. At the same time, the
bottom of the shaft would undergo very little relative displacement in
relation to the soil as well. Hence Reese and O'Neill suggest ignoring
the skin friction at the bottom distance equal to the diameter of the
caisson as well.
See Fig. 35.3. In Figure 35.3, D is the diameter of the shaft. Also,
ignore the skin friction in the top 5 ft (1.5 m) and the bottom distance
equal to the diameter of the shaft D.

Figure 35.3 Desiccations on top of the caisson

35.3.4 AASHTO Method

AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials) proposes the following method for caisson design in clay soils.

Pu = Qu + Su

where

Pu = ultimate capacity of the caisson

Qu = ultimate end bearing capacity
Su = ultimate skin friction
Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 467

The end bearing capacity, Qu, is calculated as

Qu-9xcxA

where

c - cohesion
A = cross-sectional area

The skin friction is calculated as

skin friction - ~ x c x Ap

where the adhesion factor, u, is obtained from Table 35.2, and where

c -- cohesion
A p - perimeter surface area

Table 35.2 Adhesion factor and maximum allowable skin friction

Location along drilled shaft Value of ~ M a x i m u m allowable

unit skin friction

From ground surface to depth along 0

drilled shaft of 5 ft
Bottom 1 diameter of the drilled shaft 0 0
All other portions along the sides of 0.55 5.5 ksf (253 kPa)
the drilled shaft
Source: AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials).

It should be m e n t i o n e d t h a t the AASHTO m e t h o d has only one value

for ~.

Design Example 35.1

This example explores caisson design in a single clay layer. Find the
allowable capacity of a 2 m diameter caisson placed 1 0 m below the
surface. The soil was found to be clay with a cohesion of 50 kPa.
The caisson was constructed using the dry m e t h o d . The density of
the soil is 17 kN/rn 3. The g r o u n d w a t e r level is 2 m below the surface.
See Fig. 35.4.
468 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

Figure 35.4 Caisson in clay

Solution

STEP 1: Find the e n d bearing capacity.

Pu= 0u+Su
e n d bearing capacity, Qu = 9 x c x A

= 9 x 50 x (Jr x d2)/4

= 9 x 50 x (Jr x 22)/4 - 1,413.8 kN (318 kip)

STEP 2: Find the skin friction.

The c o h e s i o n of soil a n d the a d h e s i o n factors m a y be different above
the g r o u n d w a t e r level in the u n s a t u r a t e d zone. Unless the c o h e s i o n
of the soil is significantly different above the g r o u n d w a t e r level, such
differences are ignored.
skin f r i c t i o n - c ~ x c x Ap

where

= 0.5 (from Table 35.1)

The caisson was constructed using the dry m e t h o d .

Ap=Jr xd x L =rr x 2 x L

The total l e n g t h of the shaft is 10 m. Ignore the top 1.5 m of the

shaft a n d the b o t t o m D of the shaft for skin friction. The d i a m e t e r of
the shaft is 2 m.
Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 469

effective l e n g t h of the shaft - 10 - 1.5 - 2 - 6.5 m (21.3 ft)

Ap - rr x d x L = Jr x 2 x 6.5 - 40.8 m 2
cohesion, c - 50 kPa
skin f r i c t i o n - - 0 . 5 x 50 x 40.8 kN
= 1,020 kN (229 kip)

STEP 3" Find the allowable caisson capacity.

Pallowable -- Su/F.O.S. + Qu/F.O.S. - w e i g h t of the caisson

+ w e i g h t of soil r e m o v e d w e i g h t of the caisson
W - v o l u m e of the caisson x density of concrete

Assume the density of concrete to be 23.5 k N / m 3.

w e i g h t of the caisson, W - (Jr x D2/4x L) x 23.5 kN

= (rr x 22/4 x 10) x 23.5 kN
= 738.3 kN (166 kip)

Assume a factor of safety of 3.0 for skin friction a n d 2.0 for e n d

bearing load.

/>allowable - - Su/F.O.S. + Qu/F.O.S. - w e i g h t of the caisson

+ w e i g h t of soil r e m o v e d
Pallowable = 1,413.8/2.0 + 1,020/3.0 -- 738.3 = 308 kN

In this example, the w e i g h t of the r e m o v e d soil was ignored.

Note t h a t the P a l l o w a b l e o b t a i n e d in this case is fairly low. Piles m a y
be m o r e suitable for this situation. If there is stiffer soil available at a
lower depth, the caisson can be placed in a m u c h stronger soil. A n o t h e r
o p t i o n is to consider a bell.

Design Example 35.2

This e x a m p l e explores a caisson design in multiple clay layers. Find
the allowable capacity of a 1.5 m diameter caisson placed at 15 m below
the surface. The top layer was f o u n d to be clay w i t h a cohesion of 60 kPa
470 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

and the b o t t o m layer was f o u n d to have a cohesion of 75 kPa. The top

clay layer has a thickness of 5 m. The caisson was constructed using
drilling m u d where it is not certain that the filter cake will be removed
during concreting. The density of soil is 17 k N / m 3 for b o t h layers and
the g r o u n d w a t e r level is 2 m below the surface. See Fig. 35.5.

Figure 35.5 Caisson in multiple clay layers

Solution

STEP 1" Find the end bearing capacity.

Pu - Qu + Su

end bearing capacity, Qu - 9 x c x A

= 9 x 75 x (Jr x d2)/4

= 9 x 75 x (rr x 1.52)/4
= 1,192.8 kN (268 kip)

STEP 2: Find the skin friction in clay layer 1.

skin friction = ~ x c x Ap

where

u - 0.3 (from Table 35.1)

Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 471

A s s u m e t h a t t h e filter cake will n o t be r e m o v e d .

Ap-rrxdxL=Jrx 1.5 x L

I g n o r e t h e t o p 1.5 m of t h e s h a f t a n d t h e b o t t o m D of t h e s h a f t for
skin friction. F i n d t h e effective l e n g t h of t h e s h a f t in clay layer 1

5 - 1.5 - 3 . 5 m

Ap - zr • d x L - Jr x 1.5 x 3.5 - 16.5 m 2

c o h e s i o n , c - 60 kPa

skin f r i c t i o n - 0.3 x 60 x 16.5 k N

= 297 k N (67 kip)

STEP 3: F i n d t h e skin f r i c t i o n in clay layer 2.

skin f r i c t i o n - a x c x Ap

where

- 0.3 ( f r o m Table 35.1)

A s s u m e t h a t t h e filter cake will n o t be r e m o v e d .

Ap-JrxdxL=zrx 1.5 x L

I g n o r e t h e b o t t o m D of t h e shaft. T h e effective l e n g t h of t h e s h a f t in
clay layer 2 is

10- D- 10- 1.5 - 8 . 5 m

Ap - Jr x d x L - Jr x 1.5 x 8.5 - 40.1 m 2

c o h e s i o n , c - 75 kPa

skin f r i c t i o n - 0.3 x 75 x 40.1 k N

= 9 0 2 . 2 k N (203 kip)

t o t a l skin f r i c t i o n - 297 + 9 0 2 . 2 - 1,199.2 kN

472 GeotechnicalEngineering Calculations and Rulesof Thumb

STEP 4" Find the allowable caisson capacity.

P a l l o w a b l e -" S u / F . O . S . -+- Q u / F . O . S . - weight of the caisson

+ weight of soil removed
weight of the caisson, W - volume of the caisson
x density of concrete

Assume density of concrete to be 23.5 kN/m 3.

weight of the caisson, W - (Jr x D2/4 x L) x 23.5 kN

= (Jr x 1.52/4 x 15) x 23.5 kN
- 622.9 kN

Assume a factor of safety of 3.0 for skin friction and 2.0 for the end
bearing load.

Pallowable -- S u / E O . S . -I- Q u / E O . S . - weight of the caisson

Pallowable -- 1,199.2/3.0 + 1,192.8/2.0 - 622.9 - 373.2 kN (84 kip)

The weight of the soil removed is ignored in this example.

35.4 Meyerhoff Equation for Caissons

35.4.1 End Bearing Capacity
Meyerhoff proposed the following equation based on the SPT (N) value
to compute the ultimate end bearing capacity of caissons. The Meyer-
hoff equation was adopted by DM 7.2 as an alternative m e t h o d to static
analysis.

qult -- 0.13 CN • N x D/B

where
qult- ultimate point resistance of caissons (tsf)
N - standard penetration resistance (blows/R) near pile tip

CN -- 0.77 log 20/p

Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 473

where

p - effective overburden stress at pile tip (tsf)

Note that p should be more than 500psf. It is very rare for the
effective overburden stress at the pile tip to be less than 500 psf.

D = depth driven into granular (sandy) bearing stratum (ft)

B = width or diameter of the pile (ft)
ql = limiting point resistance (tsf), equal to 4N for sand and 3N for silt

35.4.2 Modified Meyerhoff Equation

Meyerhoff developed the above equation using m a n y available load test
data and obtaining average N values. Pile tip resistance is a function of
the friction angle. For a given SPT (N) value, different friction angles
are obtained for different soils.
For a given SPT (N) value, the friction angle for coarse sand is 7 to
8% higher compared to medium sand. At the same time, for a given
SPT (N) value, the friction angle is 7 to 8% lower in fine sand com-
pared to medium sand. Hence, the following modified equations are
proposed.

for coarse sand, quit - - 0.15 CN x N x D/B tsf

for medium sand, qult -- O. 13 CN x N x D/B tsf

for fine sand, quit = 0.12 CN x N x D/Btsf

Design Example 35.3

Find the tip resistance of the 4 ft diameter caisson shown in Fig. 35.6
using the modified Meyerhoff equation. The SPT (N) value at the
caisson tip is 15 blows per foot.

Solution
Pile capacity comes from tip resistance and skin friction. In this
example, only the tip resistance is calculated.
474 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

Figure 35.6 Caisson in fine sand

Find t h e u l t i m a t e p o i n t resistance for d r i v e n piles for fine sand.

qtip - 0.12 CN x N x D/B tsf (for fine sand)

CN ---- 0.77 log 20/p
p - effective o v e r b u r d e n stress at pile tip (tsf)
p = 5 x 110 + 22 x 115 = 3 , 0 8 0 psf = 1.54 tsf (147 kPa)
CN = 0.77 l o g ( 2 0 / 1 . 5 4 ) = 0.86
D = d e p t h i n t o b e a r i n g s t r a t u m = 22 ft (6.7 m)

Fill m a t e r i a l is n o t c o n s i d e r e d to be a b e a r i n g s t r a t u m .

B = 4 ft ( w i d t h or d i a m e t e r of t h e pile)
qtip -- 0.12 CN x N x D/B (fine sand)
qtip --0.12 x 0.86 x 15 x 2 2 / 4 - 8.5 tsf (814 kPa)

m a x i m u m allowable p o i n t resistance - 4N tsf for s a n d y soils

4xN=4x15=60tsf

Hence

qtip -- 8.5 tsf

allowable p o i n t b e a r i n g c a p a c i t y = 8.5/F.O.S.
Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 475

Assume a factor of safety of 3.0. Hence, the total allowable point

bearing capacity can be determined.

qtipallowable -- 2.84 tsf (272 kPa)

Qtipallowable • tip a r e a - qtipallowable • 7r • (42)/4
-- 36 tons (320 kN)

Only the tip resistance was computed in this example.

35.4.3 Meyerhoff Equation for Skin Friction

Meyerhoff proposes the following equation for skin friction for
caissons.
f - N/100 tsf

where
f - unit skin friction (tsf)
N - average SPT (N) value along the pile

Note that as per Meyerhoff, the unit skin friction f should not exceed
I tsf.
The author has modified the Meyerhoff equations to account for soil
gradation.
for coarse sand, f = N/92 tsf
for medium sand, f = N/100 tsf
for fine sand, f = N~108 tsf

Design Example 35.4

Find the skin friction of the 4 ft diameter caisson shown in Fig. 35.7
using the Meyerhoff equation. The average SPT (N) value along the
shaft is 15 blows per foot. Ignore the skin friction in the fill material.

Solution
Only the skin friction is calculated in this example.
476 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

Figure 35.7 Caisson design using Meyerhoff method

Calculate the skin friction.

For fine sand the u n i t skin friction can be calculated as

f - N/108 tsf
= 15/108 tsf
= 0.14 tsf
total skin friction = u n i t skin friction • perimeter surface area
=0.14 xyrx D• L
= 0.14 • n x 4 x 3 2 - 56 tons (498 kN)
allowable skin friction - 56/F.O.S.

Assume a factor of safety (F.O.S.) of 3.0.

allowable skin friction - 56/3.0 - 18.7 tons (166 kN)

35.4.4 AASHTO Method for Calculating End Bearing Capacity

AASHTO adopts the m e t h o d proposed by Reese a n d O'Neill (1988).
The ultimate e n d bearing capacity in caissons placed in s a n d y soils is
given by:

Qu - qt x A
qt - 1.20 N ksf (0 < N < 75)
Chapter 35 Design of Caissons 477

where

N -- standard penetration test value (blows/ft)

Alternately, in metric units

qt = 57.5 N kPa (0 < N < 75)

A = cross-sectional area at the bottom of the shaft

For all N values above 75,

qt -- 4,310 kPa (in metric units)

qt = 90 ksf (in psf units)

35.5 Belled Caisson Design

Belled caissons are used to increase the end bearing capacity. Unfortu-
nately, one loses the skin friction in the bell area since experiments have
shown that the skin friction in the bell to be negligible (Reese 1976).
In addition Reese and O'Neill (1988) and AASHTO suggest excluding
the skin friction in a length equal to the shaft diameter above the bell.
See Fig. 35.8.

Figure 35.8 Belled caisson

478 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

Belled caissons are usually placed in clay soils. It is almost impossible

to create a bell in sandy soils. On rare occasions, with special equip-
ment, belled caissons can be constructed in sandy soils.
To restate, the skin friction in the bell and one diameter of the shaft,
D, above the bell is ignored. The ultimate capacity of belled caissons is
given by the following equation.

ultimate capacity of the belled caisson = ultimate end bearing capacity

+ ultimate skin friction

Pu = Qu + Su

Qu = 9 x c x b o t t o m cross-sectional area of the bell

where

c - cohesion

area of the bell - Jr x d 2 / 4

where

db -- b o t t o m diameter of the bell

Su = u x c x perimeter surface area of the shaft (ignoring the bell)

Su = o t x c x (rc x d x L )

d --diameter of the shaft

L = length of the shaft portion
= 0.55 for all soil conditions unless determined otherwise
by experiment (AASHTO)

Design Example 35.5

Find the allowable capacity of the belled caisson shown in Fig. 35.9.
The diameter of the b o t t o m of the bell is 4 m and the height of the bell
is 2 m. The diameter of the shaft is 1.8 m and the height of the shaft
is 10 rn. The cohesion of the clay layer is 100 kN/m 2. The adhesion
Chapter 35 Design of Caissons 479

/\

8.2 m

\l ,

1.8m
(Ignore the skin friction)
\i

2m
(Ignore the skin friction)

4m

Figure 35.9 Skin friction in belled caisson

factor, c~ was f o u n d to be 0.55. Ignore the skin friction in the bell a n d

o n e d i a m e t e r of the shaft above the bell.

Solution

STEP 1" Find the u l t i m a t e caisson capacity, Pu.

Pu - Q u + Su - W

Qu - u l t i m a t e e n d b e a r i n g capacity
= 9 x c x (area of the b o t t o m of the bell)

= 9 x 100 x (Jr x 42/4) - 1 1 , 3 1 0 k N (2,543 kip)

Su = u l t i m a t e skin friction
W - w e i g h t of the caisson

STEP 2: Find the u l t i m a t e skin friction, Su.

Su = u X C X (~r x d x L )

= 0.55 x 100 x (Jr x 1.8 x 8.2)

= 2,550 kN (573 kip)
480 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

The h e i g h t of the shaft is 10 m, a n d a l e n g t h equal to o n e d i a m e t e r

of the shaft above the bell is ignored. Hence, t h e effective l e n g t h of the
shaft is 8.2 m.
STEP 3" Find the w e i g h t of the caisson.
Assume the density of concrete to be 23 k N / m 3.

w e i g h t of t h e shaft, W - (rr x d2/4) x 10 x 23

= (rr x 1.82/4) x 10 x 23 k N - 585.3 kN (131 kip)

Find the w e i g h t of the bell.

average d i a m e t e r of the bell, da - (1.8 + 4)/2 - 2.9 m

Use the average d i a m e t e r of the bell, da, to find the v o l u m e of t h e bell.

v o l u m e of t h e bell - rr x d2/4 • h

where

h - h e i g h t of the bell
rr x 2.92/4 x 2 - 13.21 m 3
w e i g h t of the bell, W - v o l u m e • density of concrete - 13.21 x 23
= 303.8 kN (68.3 kip)

STEP 4: Find the u l t i m a t e caisson capacity a n d t h e allowable caisson

capacity.

u l t i m a t e caisson capacity, Pu - Qu + Su - w e i g h t of the caisson

+ w e i g h t of soil r e m o v e d

allowable caisson capacity - 11,310/F.O.S. + 2 , 5 5 0 / F . O . S . - 585.3

- 303.8

Assume a factor of safety of 2.0 for the e n d bearing a n d 3.0 for skin
friction. Since the w e i g h t of t h e caisson is k n o w n fairly accurately, n o
safety factor is needed. The w e i g h t of the r e m o v e d soil is ignored in
this example.
Chapter 35 Design of Caissons 481

allowable caisson c a p a c i t y - 11,310/2.0 + 2 , 5 5 0 / 3 . 0 - 585.3 - 303.8

= 5,615 kN (1,262 kip)

Design E x a m p l e 35.6

Find the allowable capacity of the shaft in the previous example, assum-
ing a bell was not constructed. Assume the skin friction is mobilized
over the full length of the shaft. See Fig. 35.10.

I
1.8m J (
(5.9ft)
I
9 12 m (39.4 ft)
I

I
I
I

Figure :]5.10 Caisson without a bell

Solution
STEP 1" Find the ultimate end bearing capacity, Qu.

Qu = 9 x c x (Jr x 1.82/4)

Since there is no bell, the new diameter at the b o t t o m is 1.8 m.

Qu = 9 x 100 x (Jr x 1.82/4) - 2,290 kN (515 kip)

STEP 2: Find the ultimate skin friction, Su.

Su = e x r x (Jr x 1.8) x 12

The new height of the shaft is 12 m, since a bell is not constructed.

Su - 0 . 5 5 x 100 x (rr x 1.8) x 12 - 3,732 kN (839 kip)

Note that an assumption is made that the skin friction of the shaft
is mobilized along the full length of the shaft for 12 m.
482 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

STEP 3" Find the weight of the shaft.

W = weight of the shaft - (Jr x d2/4) x L x density of concrete

W = weight of the s h a f t - (rr x 1.82/4) x 12 x 23 - 702.3 kN (158 kip)

STEP 4: Find the allowable caisson capacity.

allowable caisson capacity - Qu/F.O.S. + Su/F.O.S. - weight of caisson

+ weight of soil removed

Assume a factor of safety of 2.0 for the end bearing and 3.0 for skin
friction. Since the weight of the caisson is k n o w n fairly accurately, no
safety factor is needed.

allowable caisson capacity - 2,290/2.0 + 3,732/3.0 - 702.3 kN

= 1,686.7 kN

Note that the weight of the removed soil is ignored in this example.
In the previous example, we found the allowable capacity with the
bell to be 5,615 kN, significantly higher t h a n the straight shaft.

Design Example 35.7

Find the allowable capacity of the belled caisson shown in Fig. 35.11.
The diameter of the b o t t o m of the bell is 4 m and the height of the bell
is 2 m. The diameter of the shaft is 1.8 m and the height of the shaft
is 11.8 m. The cohesion of the clay layer is 100 kN/m 2. The adhesion
factor, ~, was found to be 0.5. Ignore the skin friction in the bell and
one diameter above the bell.

Solution
STEP 1" Find the ultimate caisson capacity, Pu.

Pu - Qu + Su - weight of caisson + weight of soil removed

Qu - ultimate end bearing capacity
= 9 x c x (area of the b o t t o m of the bell)
= 9 x 100 x (n x 42/4)
= 11,310 kN (2,542 kip)
Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 483

1.8m
(5.9ft) 10 m (32.08 ft)

Clay
Cohesion = 100 kPa
(2.09 ksf) 1.8m
(no skin friction)

/ 4 m (13.2 ft)
2 m (6.6 ft) (no skin friction)

Figure 35.11 Belled caisson in clay

where

Su - u l t i m a t e skin friction

STEP 2: Find the u l t i m a t e skin friction, Su.

Su - a X C X (zr x d x L )

= 0.5 x 100 x (Jr x 1.8 x 10)

= 2,827 kN (636 kip)

The skin friction for 1.8 m (length equal to diameter of the shaft) is
ignored.

STEP 3" Find the w e i g h t of the caisson.

Assume the density of concrete is 23 k N / m 3.

w e i g h t of the shaft = (Jr x d2/4) x 11.8 x 23

= (Jr x 1.82/4) x 11.8 x 23 k N - 690.6 kN (155 kip)

Find the w e i g h t of the bell.

average diameter of the bell, da - (1.8 + 4)/2 - 2.9 rn (9.5 ft)

Use the average diameter of the bell, da to find the v o l u m e of the bell.

v o l u m e of the bell - rr x d2a/4 x h

484 GeotechnicalEngineeringCalculationsand Rulesof Thumb

where
h - height of the bell

r~ x 2.92/4 x 2 - 13.21 m 3
weight of the bell - volume x density of concrete
= 13.21 x 23 - 303.8 kN
STEP 4" Find the ultimate caisson capacity, Pu, and the allowable caisson
capacity.
Pu = Qu + Su - weight of caisson + weight of soil removed
allowable caisson capacity = 11,310/F.O.S. + 2,827/F.O.S.
- 6 9 0 . 6 - 303.8
Note that the weight of the removed soil was ignored in this example.
Assume a factor of safety of 2.0 for the end bearing and 3.0 for skin
friction. Since the weight of the caisson is k n o w n fairly accurately, no
safety factor is needed.
allowable caisson capacity - 11,310/2.0 + 2,827/3.0 - 690.6 - 303.8
= 5,602kN (1,259 kip)

35.6 Caisson Design in Rock

35.6.1 CaissonsUnder Compression

See Fig. 35.12.
Note that most of the load is taken by skin friction in rock. In
most cases, the end bearing load is less t h a n 5% of the total load. In
other words, 95% or more of the load will be carried by skin friction,
developed in rock.

35.6.2 Simplified Design Procedure

In the next example, the simplified design procedure is first explained.
In this procedure, the composite nature of the section is ignored.

Design Example 35.8

Design a concrete caisson with a W-section (steel) at the core to carry
a load of 1,000 tons. Assume the skin friction to be 150 psi and the
Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 485

Figure 35.12 Caisson in rock

end bearing to be 200 psi. See Fig. 35.13. The following parameters are
given. The ultimate steel compressive strength is 36,000 psi, and the
ultimate concrete compressive strength is 3,000 psi.

Figure 35.13 Concrete caisson with a W-section

STEP 1: Structural design of the caisson.

Assume a diameter of 30 in. for the concrete caisson. Since E (the
elastic modulus) of steel is much higher than for concrete, the major
portion of the load is taken by the steel. Assume 90% of the load is
carried by the steel.
load carried by steel = 0.9 x 1,000 tons -- 900 tons
allowable steel compressive strength = 0.5 • 36,000 -- 18,000 psi
486 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

(It should be noted that in the New York City Building Code,
Table 11.3 of that code recommends a factor of safety of 0.5. Check
your local building code for the factor of safety value.)
(900 x 2,000)
steel area r e q u i r e d - = 100sq in.
18,000
Check the manual of steel construction for an appropriate W-section.
Use W 14 x 342. This section has an area of 101 sq in. The dimen-
sions of this section are given in Fig. 35.14.

17.54 in.

< >
16.36 in.

Figure 35.14 I-beam

STEP 2: Check whether this section will fit inside a 30 in. hole.
The distance along the diagonal can be calculated using the
Pythagorean theorem.

(16.362 + 17.542) 1/2 _ _ 23.98 in.

This value is smaller t h a n 30 in. Hence the section can easily fit inside
a 30 in. hole.

STEP 3" Compute the load carried by concrete.

concrete area - area of the hole - area of steel

= 7 0 6 . 8 - 101 --605.8
allowable concrete compressive s t r e n g t h - 0.25
x ultimate compressive strength
= 0.25 x 3,000 - 750 psi
(It should be noted that in the New York City Building Code,
Table 11.3 of that code recommends a factor of safety of 0.25. Engi-
neers should refer to local building codes for the relevant factor of
safety values.)
Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 487

load carried by concrete - concrete area x 750 psi

= 605.8 x 7501b
- 227.6 tons
load carried by s t e e l - 900 tons ( c o m p u t e d earlier)
total capacity of the caisson = 900 + 227.6 - 1,127.6 tons > 1,000 tons

Note t h a t the designer can start with a smaller steel section to

optimize the above value.

STEP 4: C o m p u t e the required length, L, of the caisson.

The skin friction is developed along the perimeter of the caisson.

total perimeter of the caisson - Jr x (diameter) x (length) - Jr x D x L

total skin friction - Jr x 30 x L x u n i t skin friction of rock
(in this case 150 psi)
total skin friction - ~r x 30 x L x 150 lb
(L should be in units of inches)

Design the caisson so t h a t 95% of the load is carried by skin friction.

0.95 x 1 , 0 0 0 t o n s - 9 5 0 t o n s

Hence, the total load carried t h r o u g h skin friction is 950 tons.

total skin friction =Jr x 30 x L x 150 - 9 5 0 t o n s - 950 x 2,0001b

length of the caisson required, L - 134 in. - 11.1 ft

Design Example 35.9

The following parameters are given. See Fig. 35.15. The caisson diame-
ter is 4 ft. The compressive strength of steel is 36,000 psi.

Er/Ec = 0 . 5
where
Er = elastic m o d u l u s of rock
Ec --elastic m o d u l u s of concrete
488 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

Figure 35.15 Caisson in rock (example)

c o h e s i o n of the b e d r o c k = 24,000 psf

a d h e s i o n coefficient, ct, for rock - 0.5
a d h e s i o n coefficient, ct, for clay = 1.0

Solution

STEP 1: C o m p u t e t h e u l t i m a t e e n d b e a r i n g capacity.
qu - u l t i m a t e e n d b e a r i n g s t r e n g t h of the b e d r o c k - Nc x c o h e s i o n
where

Nc=9
Hence

qu = 9 x c o h e s i o n = 216,000 psf

u l t i m a t e e n d b e a r i n g capacity, Qu = area x qu

Qu - (Jr x 42/4) x 2 1 6 , 0 0 0 - 1,357 t o n s

allowable e n d b e a r i n g capacity, a a l l o w a b l e = 1,357/3 = 452 t o n s

STEP 2: C o m p u t e the u l t i m a t e skin friction.

u l t i m a t e u n i t skin friction per u n i t area w i t h i n t h e rock mass,
f = ct x c = c~ x 2 4 , 0 0 0
Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 489

where

a d h e s i o n coefficient, ~ = 0.5
Hence

u l t i m a t e u n i t skin friction, f = 0.5 x 24,000 = 1 2 , 0 0 0 p s f

A s s u m i n g a factor of safety of 3.0, the allowable u n i t skin friction

per u n i t area w i t h i n the rock mass is

fallowable = 12,000/3.0 = 4 , 0 0 0 p s f = 2 tsf

STEP 3" Find the skin friction w i t h i n the soil layer.

The skin friction g e n e r a t e d w i t h i n the soil layer can be calculated as
in a pile.

soil skin friction, fsoil -- ~ X C

where

- a d h e s i o n factor

fsoil = 1.0 x 2 5 0 - 250 psf

skin friction mobilized along the pile shaft w i t h i n the clay layer
= fsoil x p e r i m e t e r
=250x0rxd)x20=62,8001b
allowable skin friction - 6 2 , 8 0 0 / 3 . 0 - 20,900 lb - 10 tons

A factor of safety of 3.0 is assumed.

load transferred to the rock, F - P - 20,900 - 6 0 0 , 0 0 0 - 20,900

= 579,100 lb

Note t h a t it is a s s u m e d t h a t the allowable skin friction w i t h i n the

soil is fully mobilized.
STEP 4: D e t e r m i n e the load transferred to t h e rock.
The load transferred to the rock is divided b e t w e e n the total skin
f r i c t i o n , Fskin , a n d the e n d bearing at the b o t t o m of the caisson, Q b a s e .

fskin = u n i t skin friction mobilized w i t h i n t h e rock mass

Fskin = total skin friction - f s k i n x p e r i m e t e r area w i t h i n the rock mass

490 Geotechnical Engineering Calculations and Rules of Thumb

qbase -- end bearing stress mobilized at the base of the caisson

Qbase -- qbase • area of the caisson at the base

STEP 5: Find the end bearing, Qbase, a n d skin friction, Fskin , w i t h i n the
rock mass.
The e n d bearing ratio, n, is defined as the ratio b e t w e e n the e n d bear-
ing load of the rock mass, Qbase, a n d the total resistive force mobilized,
Qbase + Fskin, w i t h i n the rock mass.

e n d bearing ratio, n = Qbase/(Qbase + Fskin)

where n is o b t a i n e d from Table 35.3.

Qbase " - e n d bearing load generated at the base

Fskin = total skin friction generated w i t h i n the rock mass
L = l e n g t h of the caisson w i t h i n the rock mass
a = radius of the caisson = 2 ft
Er/Ec -- elastic m o d u l u s of rock/elastic m o d u l u s of concrete = 0.5
(given)

total load transferred to the rock mass - 579,100 lb

= Qbase d- Fskin (see step 3)
L -- 12 ft a n d L / a -- 12/2 - 6.
The highest value in Table 35.3 for L / a - 4. Hence, use L / a - 4.
From Table 35.3 for L / a of 4 a n d Er/Ec of 0.5, the e n d bearing ratio,
n =0.12.

n --0.12- Qbase/(Qbase +- Fskin)

O. 12 -- Qbase/5 79,100

Table 35.3 End bearing ratio (n)

Er/Ec = 0.5 Er/Ec = 1.0 Er/Ec = 2.0 Er/Ec = 4.0

L/a n L/a n L/a n L/a n

1 0.5 1 0.48 1 0.45 1 0.44

2 0.28 2 0.23 2 0.20 2 0.16
3 0.17 3 0.14 3 0.12 3 0.08
4 0.12 4 0.08 4 0.06 4 0.03

Source: Osterberg and Gill (1973).

Chapter 35 Designof Caissons 491

Hence

Qbase "- 579,100 x 0.12 = 69,4921b = 35 tons

Qallowable -- 452 tons (see step 1)

Oallowable is greater t h a n the end bearing load, 0base, generated at

the base.
Fskin = load transferred to the rock - end bearing load
Fskin -- 5 79,100 -- 69,492 = 509,608 lb = 255 tons

Fskin should be less t h a n F a l l o w a b l e.

Fallowable -- fallowable x perimeter of the caisson w i t h i n the rock mass

fallowable -- 2 tsf (see Step 2)

Since a length, L, of 8 ft was assumed w i t h i n the rock mass

Fallowabl e -- 2 tsf x (rr x 4) x 8 = 201 tons

/?skin - - skin friction generated = 255 tons (see above)

Fallowabl e is less t h a n the skin friction generated. Hence, it will be

necessary to increase the pile diameter or length of the pile.

References

Osterberg, J. O., and Gill, S. A. 1973. Load transfer mechanism for piers
socketed in hard soils or rock. Proceedings of the Canadian Rock Mechanics
Symposium (pp. 235-261).
Reese, et al. 1976. Behaviour of drilled piers under axial loading. JGED,
ASCE, 102(5), May.
Reese, L. C., and O'Neill, M. W. 1988. Drilled shaft, construction procedures
and design methods. Publication for FHWA-HI-88-042. FHWA, U.S. Depart-
ment of Transportation.