Drilled Shaft Skin Resistance Design in the Cooper Marl
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2015 Drilled Shaft kS in Resistance Design in the Cooper Marl William J. Gieser University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the Civil Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Gieser, W. J.(2015). Drilled Shaft Skin Resistance Design in the Cooper Marl. (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3667 This Open Access Thesis is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DRILLED SHAFT SKIN RESISTANCE DESIGN IN THE COOPER MARL by William J. Gieser Bachelor of Science Georgia Institute of Technology, 2009 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering College of Engineering and Computing University of South Carolina 2015 Accepted by: Sarah L. Gassman, Director of Thesis Charles E. Pierce, Reader Lacy Ford, Senior Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies © Copyright by William J. Gieser, 2015 All Rights Reserved. ii DEDICATION To my grandfather, Herbert P. Gieser, who always believed in hard work and education. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Throughout the process of research and writing, I have received a lot of help along the way. I would first like to thank all the teachers who have taught me along the way from kindergarten until the last class I took at the University of South Carolina. Every one of you has contributed something that helped in this task. For my time at the University of South Carolina, I would like to thank Dr. Chunyang Liu, Dr. Nathan Huynh, Dr. Nicole Berge, Dr. Michelle Maher, Dr. Charles Pierce, and Dr. Mike Meadows. All of you taught me while I was at the university and I truly appreciate it. In particular, I would also like to thank Dr. Sarah Gassman who was my academic advisor and thesis advisor in addition to a class professor. I really appreciate your patience with me throughout this process and your willingness to answer as many questions as it took for me to learn in the four classes you taught me as well as the thesis work. In the preparation of this thesis, I would like to thank Zane Abernethy for helping me with the engineering logic and local engineering and construction history, James “Ricky” Wessinger and Dr. Will Doar, III for helping with the geologic research and review, and Chris Gaskins and Jon Sinnreich for providing me with the load test data used in the analysis. Without all of you, this research would not have been possible. Finally, but not least, I would like to thank my friends and family for their support through the entire graduate school process. Sometimes, someone telling you that you have their support is as important as someone telling you how to solve the problem. iv ABSTRACT As drilled shafts have become a more popular foundation type in the Charleston, South Carolina area, there has been an ongoing goal of optimizing drilled shaft design while maintaining the structural integrity of the foundation. In the Charleston area, the primary bearing stratum for deep foundations is the Cooper Marl, a calcareous Oligocene formation. Research performed from 2002 to 2004 on load test data from drilled shafts constructed in the Cooper Marl and soil properties from three test sites for the Cooper River Bridge explored the relationship between the measured skin resistance and geotechnical properties. In the 15 years since the load tests for the Cooper River Bridge were performed, additional load tests have been performed throughout the Charleston area. Evaluation of this load test data, the Cooper River Bridge load test data, and earlier load test data allows better understanding of drilled shaft skin resistance in the Cooper Marl as well as the ability to use in-situ geotechnical properties to better predict axial capacity when a load test is not performed. Drilled shafts founded in the Cooper Marl are designed primarily for using skin resistance and LRFD design methodologies and load factors. Using data from 27 drilled shaft load tests at 15 test sites in the Cooper Marl, the relationships between load test measured unit skin resistance and undrained shear strength, overburden pressure, and SPT N-values were evaluated. The distribution of unit skin resistance with elevation was also studied across the Cooper Marl. To derive a design unit skin resistance for use when a load test is not feasible, a statistical method v evaluating the 97.5% confidence interval and the historical load test method were used. Finally, an empirical method was used to verify the LFRD resistance factor currently required for design in the Cooper Marl. Based on the performed analyses, there is not a correlation between unit skin resistance and SPT N-values. Across the Cooper Marl, the unit skin resistance distribution was found to be constant with depth up to -80 ft-MSL. When evaluating the relationship between undrained shear strength and unit skin resistance, the α-value was found to be 0.85, which is approximately 60% larger than the α values for clay presented in the literature. Based on the load test data, a design unit skin resistance of 3.2 ksf is supported using the historical load test method and a unit skin resistance of 2.88 ksf is supported using the 97.5% confidence interval method for typical sites. Additionally, the current resistance factor for LRFD design of 0.45 is data supported. Finally, although the Cooper Marl is treated as a homogeneous formation, there are known geologic discontinuities that should be accounted for during design. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ....................................................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................ iv ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................x LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. xi LIST OF SYMBOLS ............................................................................................................. xiv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................... xvi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE OF RESEARCH .........................................................................................1 1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ..........................................................................................3 1.3 DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION ..................................................................................4 CHAPTER 2: LOCAL GEOLOGY ..............................................................................................5 2.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................5 2.2 COOPER MARL GEOLOGICAL HISTORY AND GEOLOGIC CLASSIFICATION .............5 2.3 COOPER MARL GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION .....................................................6 2.4 COOPER MARL PHYSICAL PROPERTIES ................................................................12 2.5 COOPER MARL DISCONTINUITIES AND ANOMALIES ............................................14 CHAPTER 3: BACKGROUND .................................................................................................17 3.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................17 3.2 HISTORY OF DRILLED SHAFT USAGE ...................................................................17 vii 3.3 DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTION .........................................................................19 3.4 DRILLED SHAFT VERIFICATION TESTING .............................................................21 3.5 EFFECTS OF DRILLED SHAFT DEFECTS ON AXIAL PERFORMANCE .......................23 3.6 DRILLED SHAFT LOAD TESTING INFORMATION ...................................................24 3.7 TYPES OF DRILLED SHAFT LOAD TESTS ..............................................................26 3.8 LOAD TEST INTERPRETATION ..............................................................................34 3.9 DRILLED SHAFT AXIAL DESIGN ..........................................................................44 CHAPTER 4: DATA ..............................................................................................................59 4.1 LOAD TEST DATA ................................................................................................59 4.2 CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION ............................................................................62 4.3 SPT DATA ...........................................................................................................64 4.4 LAB TEST DATA ..................................................................................................67 4.5 LOAD TEST RESULTS ...........................................................................................67 4.6 DATA SORTING FOR ANALYSIS ............................................................................71