International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 7, No.

1, February 2018

Comparison between Theoretical and Practical

Compression Capacities of Deep / Long Piles in
Dubai
Mohamed Nabil Omar and Abid Abu Tair
British University in Dubai/Engineering Department, Dubai, U.A.E
Email: [email protected], [email protected]

Abstract — In most standards and codes of practice, the

piles specifications and recommendations are stated for II. LITERATURE REVIEW
short piles which has a maximum depth range between 18.0
to 20.0 m [708.66 to 787.40 in]. In addition, the theoretical
A. Ultimate Load Capacity of Single Piles
equations for pile design, charts and different soil
parameters are based on old practical studies of short piles The principle approach used to calculate the piles
behavior. In this research, a comparison was conducted capacities to resist the compressive loads is the static or
between the theoretical pile compression capacity, the soil mechanics approach. During the past years, more
practical pile compression capacity which is derived from research work done to express a method based on the
the results of pile’s static load test and the numerical pile practical soil mechanics theory. For example, the
capacity by using PLAXIS 2D software.
calculation of skin friction on a pile shaft was based on a
The study covered one case of bored piles constructed in
Dubai, that pile depth is equal to 34 m [1338.58 in].
simple relationship between the effective overburden
Moreover, a finite element model done by using PLAXIS 2D pressure, the drained angle of shearing resistance of the
software, to judge between the practical and theoretical pile soil and the coefficient of earth pressure at rest, but they
capacities. As a result of the research, the theoretical realized through the results of the practical tests and
compression pile capacity was almost 70% of the practical researches that the coefficient of earth pressure must be
and numerical pile capacity with the same specifications. modified by a factor takes into consideration the
installation meth-od of the pile.
Index Terms — High-raise buildings, piles, long piles, In the same way, the calculation of the pile end bearing
PLAXIS 2D, piling equipment resistance was based on the undisturbed shearing
resistance of the soil at the pile toe level, but they
recognized the importance of the pile settlement at the
I. INTRODUCTION
working load and methods have been evolved to calculate
Piles are a structural element its function is to transfer this settlement, based on elastic theory and considering
the superstructure loads through the weak soil layers to the transfer of load in shaft friction from the pile to the
the hard soil strata or the rock soil. The piles may be soil.
required to resist the uplift force when it's used to support A pile is subjected to a progressively increasing
a high rise building subjected to overturning force or to compressive load at a steady rate of application, the
support a structure subjected to uplift force from the resulting load - settlement relationship plotted in Fig. 1.
water table more than the structure’s weight. This type of There is a straight-line relationship up to point A on the
piles is called tension piles. As well as, the piles may be curve, this is mean if the load released at any stage up to
used to resist a compression force from the superstructure point ‘A’ the deformation or settlement of the pile head
and in this case the piles are classified as a comparison will return to its original condition. when the loading
piles [1]. increased beyond point ‘A’ the relationship will have
In terms of constructability and due to the significant changed from linear to nonlinear relationship, and there
development of the piling machines, the concrete piles will be yielding at the pile - soil interface till reaching the
nowadays can be reached to depth equal to 60 to 70 m [2]. maximum shaft friction 'point ‘B’. In case of load
Generally, these types of deep piles are used in the releasing at this stage the pile head will have reached to
construction of high-rise buildings. This research will point ‘C’. and the distance ‘OC’ will be the movement
compare between the theoretical and practical required to mobilize the maximum pile shaft resistance,
compression capacities of deep concrete piles. In addition, usually this distance is equal to 0.3% to 1% of the pile
a finite element software PLAXIS 2D will be used to diameter. The pile base resistance requires more
model the pile and to judge between the theoretical and downward movement to full mobilization, point 'D', that
practical capacities. movement is based on the pile diameter, and it is ranged
between 10% to 20% of the pile diameter. after point 'D'
Manuscript received April 13, 2017; revised December 13, 2017.

© 2018 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 76

doi: 10.18178/ijscer.7.1.76-82
 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2018

the pile will move downward without any increase in the Berezantzev et al. (1961) and it has been found that this
load "failure point" [3]-[5]. coefficient is based on the drained angle of shearing
resistance  and the ratio between the pile penetration
depth over the pile width (diameter), this relationship is
shown in the Fig. 2. Vesic (1967) confirmed that these
N q values give results which is almost near to the
practical conditions. Another criterion developed by
Brinch Hansen to evaluate the factor of the pile bearing
N q , but the values should be multiplying by a shape
factor 1.3 for the square and circular pile’s base cross
section [5].

Figure 1. Load/settlement curve for compressive load to failure on pile.

B. Piles in Sand Soil

The ultimate pile capacity, Pu, of a single pile is equal
to the summation of the ultimate skin friction and end
bearing resistances, less the pile weight;

PU  PSU  PBU  WP (1)

where,
PSU = Ultimate pile skin friction resistance
Figure 2. Pile bearing capacity factor Nq
PBU = Ultimate pile end bearing resistance
WP = Pile weight The second term in equation No. 2 is used to calculate
According to Michael Tomlinson and John Woodward the pile skin friction resistance to the compression
(1977), the classical equation to calculate the loading. Table 1 shows the values of K s related to K o
compression pile capacity in the sand soil is;
for different installation techniques. The value of the
factor K s is very critical and difficult to evaluate, because
1
QP  N q 'o Ab  K S  'o tan( ) AS (2) it is depending on the stress history of the soil and the
2 installation method of the piles. For example, the using of
where, driven pile technique is increasing the horizontal soil
 'o  effective soil overburden pressure at the pile base stress from its original K o value and the using of bored
level. pile technique can loosen the soil, and reduce the
horizontal soil stress. This factor is governed by the
N q = pile bearing capacity factor. following items;
Ab = the area of the pile base “cross sectional area”.  The stress history of the soil.
 The ratio between the pile penetration depth and the
K s = coefficient of the soil horizontal stress. pile width or diameter.
 = the angle of friction between pile and soil.  The shape and the stiffness of the pile.
AS = the area of the pile shaft.  The pile material.

The factors N q , K s are empirical factors have been TABLE I. THE COEFFICIENT OF THE SOIL HORIZONTAL STRESS, Ks

obtained from the results of piles static load tests,  is Installation method K s / Ko
obtained from the field test and laboratory tests on the
Driven piles, large displacement 15 mm 1.00 – 2.00
friction angle between the different soil types and
Driven piles, small displacement 0.75 – 1.25
different pile materials as per table 2. The value of the
Bored and cast-in-place piles 0.70 – 1.00
empirical coefficient of the pile bearing N q was by
Jetted piles 0.50 – 0.70

© 2018 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 77

 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2018

TABLE II. VALUES OF THE ANGLE OF PILE TO SOIL FRICTION FOR designation (RQD) or the discontinuity spacing quoted by
VARIOUS INTERFACE CONDITIONS PER KULHAWY (1984)
Hobbs (1975) as per table 3 recommendations.
Angle of friction between pile
and soil 
Pile / soil interface condition
TABLE III. MASS FACTOR J VALUE WITH RESPECT TO RQD AND
Smooth (coated) steel/sand (0.5 – 0.7)  THE DISCONTINUITY SPACING

Rough (corrugated) steel/sand (0.7 – 0.9)  RQD Mass

Fracture frequency per meter factor j
(0.9 – 1.0) 
(%)
Precast concrete/sand
0 - 25 15 0.2
Cast-in-place concrete/sand (1.0) 
25 - 50 15 - 18 0.2
Timber/sand (0.8 – 0.9) 
50 - 75 8-5 0.2 – 0.5
75 - 90 5-1 0.5 – 0.8
C. Piles in Rock Soil 90 - 100 1 0.8 – 1.0
For bored and cast-in-place piles which are drilled into
rock soil layer act as friction and end bearing piles. The method is used to calculate the pile ultimate
Wyllie (1991) estimated the factors and coefficients bearing resistance assume that the pile capacity is a
which are governing the development of shaft friction combination between shaft and base resistance. Both
through the rock socket depth. For the end bearing and resistances are based on correlations between the pile
pile settlement factors are summarized in the following static load test and the result of filed test in rock
items; formations or laboratory tests. the following is the
 The socket length to the diameter ration. equation which is used to calculate the pile base
 The strength and modulus of elasticity of the rock resistance for the driven and bored piles;
layer. qb  2 N  quc (4)
 The base condition of the drilled pile hole with
respect to the removal of the drilled material.
Where the bearing capacity factor N is equal to;
 Creep of the material at the rock / concrete
interface. 2 
 Settlement of the pile in relation to the elastic limit N  tan ( 45  ) (5)
2
of the side-wall.
Wyllie (1991) stated that if the bentonite slurry used in
the drilling process of the pile, the rock socket shaft
friction should be reduced by 25% compared to clean
rock socket, unless pile load test done to verify the actual
value of the friction resistance [6], [7].
The shaft resistance of the pile in the rock soil, is
depending on the bond between the pile material which is
concrete and the rock soil. The bond between the
concrete and the rock soil is depending on the unconfined
compression strength of the rock soil, the rock socket
bond stress has been developed by Horvarth (1978),
Rosenberg and Journeaux (1976), and Williams and Pells
(1981) [8].
The ultimate pile shaft resistance f s , in the rock soil
can be calculated by the following equation; Figure 3. Reduction factors for rock socket shaft friction

f s      quc (3)

where;
  reduction factor related to quc as shown in Fig. 3.
 correction factor related to the discontinuity spacing
in the rock mass as shown in Fig. 4 [8].
The Williams and Pells (1981) curve in Fig. 4 is higher
than the other two curves, but the  factor is having the
same value in all curves and it is depending on the mass
factor, j , which is the ratio between the elastic modulus
of the rock mass and the intact rock as shown in Fig. 4. In
case if the mass factor j is not known from the loading
test, it can be estimated with respect to the rock quality

© 2018 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 78

 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2018

from the results of non-failure static load test. It is

assumed that the load-settlement relationship is
hyperbolic, and the ultimate pile capacity can be
predicted by plotting a curve between the settlement  /
load P in the vertical axis and the settlement  in the
horizontal axis. Then plot the best fit line through the data
points. The ultimate pile capacity is derived from the
inverse slopes of this line [9], [10].
 (7)
C C
1 2
Q

Qu 
1 (8)
C1
Where;
Figure 4. Reduction factors for discontinuities in rock mass   pile displacement.
Qu  ultimate pile capacity.
For the moderately weathered mudstones, siltstones
and shales uniaxial compression tests should be made on
the rock cores samples to obtain the compression strength.
The base resistance can be calculated based on the
uniaxial compression test results by using the relationship
between quc and RQD as shown in table 4;

TABLE IV. TABLE 1. ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE OF PILES

RELATED TO THE UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF THE
INTACT ROCK AND THE RQD OF THE ROCK MASS

RQD (%) quc C 

0 - 70 0.33quc 0.1quc 30

70 - 100 0.33  0.8quc 0.1quc 30 - 60 Figure 5. Sample of Chin's Method Diagram

D. Prediction of Pile Capacity from Non-Destructive

Static Load Test - Chin’s Method III. CASE OF STUDY
The pile static load test can be categorized to two The following section will cover a case of study for
categories; the first category is the failure load test where long pile has been installed and tested in Dubai since
the pile is loaded until the failure. The failure load test is 2015. The data was collected from the project consultant
necessary to determine the pile's ultimate capacity. The for the research purpose, and it is categorized as per the
second category is the proof test which is used to check following items;
the ability of the pile to support a specific service load,  Project’s soil investigation report including the
usually the loading is up to 1.5 to 2.0 times the design piling recommendations.
load. Most of time the proof test does not provide the  Project’s piling drawings.
pile's ultimate capacity, therefore this test is not providing  Static load test report for the selected type of pile.
a clear information about the pile capacity and it is not
support the geotechnical engineers to do a cost saving in
A. Research Methodology
the foundation cost. Vesic (1977) stated that the scale of
the load - settlement curve is based on the elastic The following steps are the used methodology to
deformation of the pile and is expressed as; compare between the theoretical, practical and numerical
pile compression capacity.
PL
 (6)  Select one pile type from the case of study’s piles
EA types.
Where;  Collect all the required data from the soil
  elastic deformation of the pile. investigation such as (soil layers’ classifications,
P  applied load. soil parameters and piles recommendations).
L  pile length.  For the theoretical pile capacity, it can be extracted
E  elastic modulus of the pile’s material. from the piles recommendation in the project's soil
A  cross sectional area of the pile. investigation report.
E. Chin’s Method  For the practical pile capacity, it will be estimated
form the results of the static load test by using
Chin's method (Chin and Vail, 1973) is the most
Chin’s method (refer to section 2.2.1).
developed method to predict the ultimate pile capacity

© 2018 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 79

 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2018

 For numerical pile capacity, a finite element model The pile did not reach to the failure point during that
will be modeled by using PLAXIS 2D software to static load test. Therefore, Chin's method will be used to
get the piles compression capacity. predict the pile capacity from Non-Destructive static load
 Comparison between piles capacities in the test (refer to section 2.2). Fig. 5 illustrate the results of
different cases will be discussed in details. the static load test by plotting the settlement of the pile on
the horizontal axis and the settlement / load on the
vertical axis. By using Chin’s method technique, the
B. Theoretical Pile Capacity practical pile capacity can be predicted by using
Reference to the soil investigation report from M/S equations 7 and 8 as follow;
Arab Center (specialist soil test laboratory in Dubai) REF: 
SD14000067 dated on 31th December, 2014, the  C1    C2  3.0 E  05    0.0004 (9)
compression capacity of the pile with diameter equal to Q
900 mm and its toe level is -31.0 m from cut off level 1 1
equal to +3.375 m was 9,015 KN. This compression Qu    33,333KN (10)
capacity calculated by using set of theoretical and C1 3.0 E  05
empirical equations which are used to calculate the skin Qu 33,333
friction and end bearing pile capacities in sand and rock Qw    13,333KN (11)
soils (refer to equations 2,3 and 4). Table 5 summarize F .O.S 2.5
the selected pile details;
The practical pile capacity by using Chin’s method for
TABLE V. SELECTED PILE DETAILS Non-Destructive static load test is 13,333 KN. And the
Pile cut off Pile Toe Level Pile Length Pile Diameter
expected pile settlement under the working load from the
level [m] [m] [m] [mm] results of the static load test is 10 mm.
+ 3.375
DMD
- 31.0 DMD 34.375 900 D. Numerical Pile Capacity
Finite element software used to model the selected pile
C. Practical Pile Capacity with the soil layers, the used software is PLAXIS 2D.
Static load test has been done to the selected pile type The pile was modeled by using axisymmetric option, the
by the piling specialist contractor (test No. PTP 02), and soil layers were modeled by using Mohr-Coulomb as
the test was monitored by M/S Arab Center (specialist material model. Prescribed settlement will be applied to
soil test laboratory). The static load test has been done by the pile head and the force – settlement curve will be
using Kent ledge blocks method. The purpose of the test plotted to predict the numerical pile capacity. The
was the critical evaluating of the following pile's following are the model's boundaries which were used;
characteristics;
a. Pile and Soil Interface Reduction Factor
 Load settlement behavior of the pile during the load One of the important factor which has a significant
test up to 250% of the pile’s working load. impact on the pile skin friction resistance is the pile and
 Load transfer and distribution along the pile shaft soil interface condition. There is a reduction factor should
during the pile’s compression load test. be used in the modeling of pile, this factor is based on
 Skin friction along pile shaft during pile load tests some items as follow;
in compression.  Soil layers’ classification.
 The pile material.
Table 6 represents the static load test results of the  The method of the installation, for example the
selected pile;
using of bentonite slurry in the pile installation has
TABLE VI. STATIC LOAD TEST RESULTS OF THE SELECTED PILE a negative impact on the skin friction resistance
Load - P [KN] Settlement -S [mm] Settlement / Load because it generates a smooth surface between the
[mm/KN] pile and the surrounding soil. Therefore, the
0 0.793 0 reduction factor in this case will be small compare
2240 1.100 0.000491071 to other installation techniques.
4490 2.960 0.000659243 Generally, the reduction factor of skin friction
6780 4.850 0.000715339 resistance duo to interface condition has a value between
8970 7.060 0.000787068 1.0 to 0.5, in this model the used reduction factor for the
11210 8.935 0.000797056 first two layers (sand soil) is 0.8 and the value of the
13460 11.000 0.000817236 other layers (rock soil) is 0.9 (refer to table 2) [11].
15690 12.900 0.00082218 b. Graphical Boundaries.
17940 14.850 0.000827759
Fig. 6 shows the graphical boundaries of the pile
20180 16.800 0.000832507
model.
22430 19.100 0.000851538

© 2018 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 80

 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2018

 Qu  Fy  2  3,902  2  24,504 KN
Q 24,504
 Qw  u   12,252 KN
F .O.S 2
The numerical pile capacity by using PLAXIS 2D
software to model the selected pile is 12,252 KN. And the
expected pile settlement under the working load 1,950
KN/rad from Fig. 7 is 17mm.

Figure 6. Graphical boundaries

c. Soil layers’ classifications and soil parameters

Table 7 shows the soil layers’ classification of the
selected case of study.

TABLE VII. SOIL LAYERS CLASSIFICATIONS

Layer Depth
Engineering Parameters
m (DMD)
Soil
Layer Unit
Depth E Poison C’
To Wt, Ø
m MPa Ratio KPa
KN/m3
Silty
fine 13.0 -10.0 18 25 0.35 0 34
sand
Dense
to very
0.7 -10.7 18 50 0.35 0 36
dense
sand
3.3 -14.0 22 200 0.3 70 32
2.0 -16.0 22 200 0.3 100 32
2.0 -18.0 22 200 0.3 80 32
Calac-
2.0 -20.0 22 200 0.3 60 32
renite /
2.0 -22.0 22 75 0.3 20 27
Sand-
2.0 -24.0 22 75 0.3 27 27
stone
4.0 -28.0 22 150 0.3 60 32
5.0 -33.0 22 250 0.3 120 32
5.0 -38.0 22 250 0.3 130 32
Sand-
5.0 -43.0 22 400 0.3 85 34
stone

Fig. 7 illustrate the relation between the vertical

displacement of the pile head on the vertical axis and
radial force or resistance on the horizontal axis.
Reference to the British standard BS 8004: 1986 defines Figure 7. Selected pile model by using PLAXIS 2D & Load -
that the ultimate pile capacity is the load at which the Displacement curve
resistance of the soil becomes fully mobilized and goes
on to state that this is generally taken as the load causing
E. Comparison Between Theoretical, Practical and
the head of the pile to settle a depth of 10% of the pile
Numerical Pile Capacities
width or diameter (failure point) [12].
Table 8 and Fig. 8 summarize the predicted pile
 10%  900mm (pile diameter) = 90 mm. capacities for each case and illustrate the differences
 From Fig. 7, Fy  3,902 KN / rad at between them.
displacement equal to 90 mm.

© 2018 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 81

 International Journal of Structural and Civil Engineering Research Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2018

TABLE VIII. PILE CAPACITIES DETAILS have a better results compared to the theoretical method.
Pile Capacity This research provides a comparison between the
No. Pile Capacity Percent
[KN] theoretical, practical and numerical pile capacities for one
1 Theoretical pile capacity 9,015 100% case of study has been installed and tested in Dubai. The
2 Practical pile capacity 13,333 147% research result is that the practical pile capacity is higher
than the theoretical pile capacity by around 47%. And the
3 Numerical pile capacity 12,252 135%
numerical pile capacity is higher than the theoretical pile
capacity by around 35%. As a result, the pile capacity
from the theoretical equations should be increased by 30
to 40%. This will provide the ability to reduce the cost of
the piles foundation system by around 30%. As well as,
reducing the required pile's materials which is considered
as a sustainable practice for our environment.
For further research, the pile model can be improved
by using a non – soil material under the pile toe equal to 3
time the pile diameter, this to cancel the pile bearing
resistance and to calculate the skin friction resistance
from the numerical model. Base on that, the theoretical
values of skin friction and end bearing pile resistance can
be compared to the numerical values separately. This will
lead to a significant improvement in the theoretical
equations.

REFERENCES
[1] Y. Duraisamy., Introduction to pile foundation. Kuantan: Penerbit
University Malaysia Pahang, 2009.
[2] O. Aun, “The loading behavior of long piles,” 1st ed. University of
Sheffield, 1980.
[3] J. Bowles, Foundation analysis and design. 1st ed. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1977.
[4] H. Poulos and E. Davis, Pile foundation analysis and design. 1st
ed. New York: Wiley, 1980.
[5] M. Tomlinson and J. Woodward, Pile Design and Construction
Practice, 1st ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.
Figure 8. Pile capacities chart [6] R. Chellis, Pile Foundations, 1st ed. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1961.
[7] B. Das, Theoretical Foundation Engineering, 1st ed. Ft.
Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Pub., 2007.
IV. CONCLUSION [8] W. Guo, Theory and Practice of Pile Foundations, Boca Raton,
Proper soil investigation from specialist soil test FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2013.
[9] R. Liang and F. Zhang, Deep Foundations and Geotechnical in
laboratory during the design stage is essential, to provide Situ Testing. 1st ed. Reston: ASCE, 2010.
a suitable information about the soil layers’ [10] B. Look, Handbook of Geotechnical Investigation and Design
classifications and soil parameters such as soil unite Tables. London: Taylor & Francis, 2007.
weight, internal angle of friction, cohesion and the [11] R. Brinkgreve, W. Broere, and R. Al-Khoury, PLAXIS: 2D,
version 8. 1st ed. Lisse: Balkema, 2004.
modulus of elasticity of each soil layer. All these [12] British standard code of practice for foundations. (1986). 1st ed.
parameters are very important during the design stage to London: British Standards Institution.
design the pile foundation or to model it by using any
geotechnical software and to achieve results near from
the practical condition. Mohamed Nabil Omar was born in Egypt
The theoretical equations which used to design the pile in 1983. He received the B.Sc. in civil
engineering from Suez Canal university,
foundation are based on some parameters, these Port Said, Egypt in 2005. And the M.Sc. in
parameters have been estimated from the results of pile's Structural Engineering from British
static load test. This test has been done on piles have a University in Dubai, Dubai, UAE in 2017.
short pile's depth not exceeding 20 m. But nowadays, the He joined to the teaching team of the faculty
if engineering in the British university in
piling equipment has been developed to reach a depth Dubai in 2017 as doctor assistant.
equal to 60 to 80 m. This is to provide a suitable pile His main areas of research interest are
foundation system can be used to achieve the stability of structural engineering innovations and geotechnical engineering.
the high rise buildings or to transfer the building load Mr. Mohamed Nabil is a member of U.A.E society of engineers, the
Egyptian Engineers Syndicate and the Institution of Structural
from the weak soil strata to the hard soil strata. Therefore, Engineers (IStructE) - Graduate Member. He awarded the prize of best
these equations need more development by using the paper in the 3rd international sustainable buildings symposium (ISBS
results of long piles' static load tests and by using a finite 2017), Dubai, UAE.
element software to model the piles and the soil layers to

© 2018 Int. J. Struct. Civ. Eng. Res. 82