Chapter 5: Foundation Analysis and Design

5.2.2 Pile  Analysis,  Design  and  Detailing    

5.2.2.1 Pile Analysis. For this design example, it is assumed that all piles will be fixed-head, 22-inch-
diameter, cast-in-place piles arranged in 2×2 pile groups with piles spaced at 66 inches center-to-center.
The computer program LPILE Plus 5.0 is used to analyze single piles for both soil conditions shown in
Table 5.2-1 assuming a length of 50 feet. Pile flexural stiffness is modeled using one-half of the gross
moment of inertia because of expected flexural cracking. The response to lateral loads is affected to some
degree by the coincident axial load. The full range of expected axial loads was considered in developing
this example, but in this case the lateral displacements, moments and shears were not strongly affected;
the plots in this section are for zero axial load. A p-multiplier of 0.68 for group effects (as computed at
the end of Section 5.2.1.4) is used in all cases. Figures 5.2-7, 5.2-8 and 5.2-9 show the variation of shear,
moment and displacement with depth (within the top 30 feet) for an applied lateral load of 15 kips on a
single pile with the group reduction factor. It is apparent that the extension of piles to depths beyond
30 feet for the Class E site (or approximately 25 feet for the Class C site) does not provide additional
resistance to lateral loading; piles shorter than those lengths would have reduced lateral resistance. The
trends in the figures are those that should be expected. The shear and displacement are maxima at the pile
head. Because a fixed-head condition is assumed, moments are also largest at the top of the pile.
Moments and displacements are larger for the soft soil condition than for the firm soil condition.

10
Depth (ft)

15

20

25
Site Class C
Site Class E
30
-5 0 5 10 15
Shear, V (kip)

Figure 5.2-7 Results of pile analysis-shear versus depth

(applied lateral load is 15 kips)

5-33
FEMA P-751, NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design Examples

10

Depth (ft) 15

20

25
Site Class C
Site Class E
30
-1000 -500 0 500
Moment, M (in.-kips)

Figure 5.2-8 Results of pile analysis-moment versus depth

(applied lateral load is 15 kips)

10

15
Depth (ft)

20

25
Site Class C
Site Class E
30
-0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Displacement (in.)

Figure 5.2-9 Results of pile analysis-displacement versus depth

(applied lateral load is 15 kips)

5-34
 Chapter 5: Foundation Analysis and Design

The analyses performed to develop Figures 5.2-7 through 5.2-9 are repeated for different levels of applied
lateral load. Figures 5.2-10 and 5.2-11 show how the moment and displacement at the head of the pile are
related to the applied lateral load. It may be seen from Figure 5.2-10 that the head moment is related to
the applied lateral load in a nearly linear manner; this is a key observation. Based on the results shown,
the slope of the line may be taken as a characteristic length that relates head moment to applied load.
Doing so produces the following:

§ ℓ = 46 in. for the Class C site

§ ℓ = 70 in. for the Class E site

1600
Head moment, M (in.-kip)

1200

800

400
Site Class C
Site Class E

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Applied lateral load, V (kip)

Figure 5.2-10 Results of pile analysis – applied lateral load versus head moment

5-35
FEMA P-751, NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design Examples

30

25

Applied lateral load, V (kip)

20

15

10

5 Site Class C
Site Class E

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Head displacement, Δ (inch)

Figure 5.2-11 Results of pile analysis – head displacement versus applied lateral load

A similar examination of Figure 5.2-11 leads to another meaningful insight. The load-displacement
response of the pile in Site Class C soil is essentially linear. The response of the pile in Site Class E soil
is somewhat nonlinear, but for most of the range of response a linear approximation is reasonable (and
useful). Thus, the effective stiffness of each individual pile is:

§ k = 175 kip/in. for the Class C site

§ k = 40 kip/in. for the Class E site

5.2.2.2 Pile Group Analysis. The combined response of the piles and pile cap and the resulting strength
demands for piles are computed using the procedure outlined in Section 5.2.1.4 for each of the 32 load
combinations discussed in Section 5.2.1.3. Assume that each 2×2 pile group has a 9'-2" × 9'-2" × 4'-0"
thick pile cap that is placed 1'-6" below grade.

Check the Maximum Compression Case under a Side Column in Site Class C

Using the sign convention shown in Figure 5.2-3, the demands on the group are as follows:

§ P = 1,224 kip

§ Myy = 222 ft-kips

§ Vx = 20 kips

§ Myy = 732 ft-kips

§ Vy = 73 kips

From preliminary checks, assume that the displacements in the x and y directions are sufficient to
mobilize 30 percent and 35 percent, respectively, of the ultimate passive pressure:

5-36
 Chapter 5: Foundation Analysis and Design

⎛ 18 48 ⎞ ⎛ 48 ⎞⎛ 110 ⎞ 1
Vpassive, x = 0.30(575) ⎜ + ⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ( 1000 ) = 22.1 kips
⎝ 12 2(12) ⎠ ⎝ 12 ⎠⎝ 12 ⎠

and

⎛ 18 48 ⎞ ⎛ 48 ⎞⎛ 110 ⎞ 1
Vpassive, y = 0.35(575) ⎜ + ⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ( 1000 ) = 25.8 kips
⎝ 12 2(12) ⎠ ⎝ 12 ⎠⎝ 12 ⎠

and conservatively take hp = h/3 = 16 inches.

Since Vpassive,x > Vx, passive resistance alone is sufficient for this case in the x direction. However, in order
to illustrate the full complexity of the calculations, reduce Vpassive,x to 4 kips and assign a shear of 4.0 kips
to each pile in the x direction. In the y direction, the shear in each pile is as follows:

73 − 25.8
V= = 11.8kips
4

The corresponding pile moments are:

M = 4.0(46) = 186 in.-kips for x-direction loading

and

M = 11.8(46) = 543 in.-kips for y-direction loading

The maximum axial load due to overturning for x-direction loading is:

20(48) + 222(12) + 4(184) − 16(4)

Pot = = 32.5kips
2(66)

and for y-direction loading (determined similarly), Pot = 106.4 kips.

The axial load due to direct loading is Pp = 1224/4 = 306 kips.

Therefore, the maximum load effects on the most heavily loaded pile are the following:

Pu = 32.5 + 106.4 + 306 = 445 kips

M u = (184)2 + (543) 2 = 573in.-kips

The expected displacement in the y direction is computed as follows:

δ = V/k = 11.8/175 = 0.067 in., which is 0.14 percent of the pile cap height (h)

Reading Figure 5.2-5 with δ/H = 0.0014, P/Pult ≈ 0.34, so the assumption that 35 percent of Pult would be
mobilized was reasonable.

5-37
FEMA P-751, NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design Examples

5.2.2.3 Design of Pile Section. The calculations shown in Section 5.2.2.2 are repeated for each of the 32
load combinations under each of the four design conditions. The results are shown in Figures 5.2-12 and
5.2-13. In these figures, circles indicate demands on piles under side columns and squares indicate
demands on piles under corner columns. Also plotted are the φP-φM design strengths for the 22-inch-
diameter pile sections with various amounts of reinforcement (as noted in the legends). The appropriate
reinforcement pattern for each design condition may be selected by noting the innermost capacity curve
that envelops the corresponding demand points. The required reinforcement is summarized in Table 5.2-
4, following calculation of the required pile length.

800
8-#7

700 8-#6
6-#6
600 6-#5
Side
500
Corner

400
)p
i
k
(
P 300
,
d
a
lo
la 200
i
x
A
100

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
-100 Moment, M (in.-kip)

-200

-300

Figure 5.2-12 P-M interaction diagram for Site Class C

5-38
 Chapter 5: Foundation Analysis and Design

800
8-#7

700 8-#6
6-#6
600 6-#5
Side
500
Corner

400
)p
i
k
(
P 300
,
d
a
lo
la 200
i
x
A
100

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
-100 Moment, M (in.-kip)

-200

-300

Figure 5.2-13 P-M interaction diagram for Site Class E

5.2.2.4 Pile Length for Axial Loads. For the calculations that follow, recall that skin friction and end
bearing are neglected for the top 3 feet in this example. The design is based on having 1’-6” of soil over a
4’-0” deep pile cap.

5.2.2.4.1 Length for Settlement. Service loads per pile are calculated as P = (PD + PL)/4.

Check the pile group under the side column in Site Class C, assuming L = 52.5 feet – 5.5 feet = 47 feet:

P = (752 + 114)/4 = 217 kips.

Pskin = average friction capacity × pile perimeter × pile length for friction
= 0.5[0.3 + 2.5(0.03) + 0.3 + 49.5(0.03)]π(22/12)(44) = 292 kips

Pend = end bearing capacity at depth × end bearing area

= [65 + 49.5(0.6)](π/4)(22/12)2 = 250 kips

Pallow = (Pskin + Pend)/S.F. = (292 + 250)/2.5 = 217 kips = 217 kips (demand) OK

Check the pile group under the corner column in Site Class E, assuming L = 49 feet:

P = (460 + 77)/4 = 134 kips

5-39
FEMA P-751, NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design Examples

Pskin = [friction capacity in first layer + average friction capacity in second layer] × pile perimeter
= [24.5(0.3) + (24.5/2)(0.9 + 0.9 + 24.5[0.025])]π(22/12) = 212 kips

Pend = [40 + 24.5(0.5)](π/4)(22/12)2 = 138 kips

Pallow = (212 + 138)/2.5 = 140 kips > 134 kips OK

5.2.2.4.2 Length for Compression Capacity. All of the strength-level load combinations (discussed in
Section 5.2.1.3) must be considered.

Check the pile group under the side column in Site Class C, assuming L = 49 feet:

As seen in Figure 5.1-12, the maximum compression demand for this condition is Pu = 394 kips.

Pskin = 0.5[0.3 + 0.3 + 47(0.03)]π(22/12)(47) = 272 kips

Pend = [65 + 47(0.6)](π/4)(22/12)2 = 246 kips

φPn = φ(Pskin + Pend) = 0.75(272 + 246) = 389 kips ≈ 390 kips OK

Check the pile group under the corner column in Site Class E, assuming L = 64 feet:

As seen in Figure 5.2-13, the maximum compression demand for this condition is Pu = 340 kips.

Pskin = [27(0.3) + (34/2)(0.9 + 0.9 + 34[0.025])]π(22/12) = 306 kips

Pend = [40 + 34(0.5)](π/4)(22/12)2 = 150 kips

φPn = φ(Pskin + Pend) = 0.75(306 + 150) = 342 kips > 340 kips OK

5.2.2.4.3 Length for Uplift Capacity. Again, all of the strength-level load combinations (discussed in
Section 5.2.1.3) must be considered.

Check the pile group under side column in Site Class C, assuming L = 5 feet:

As seen in Figure 5.2-12, the maximum tension demand for this condition is Pu = -1.9 kips.

Pskin = 0.5[0.3 + 0.3 + 2(0.03)]π(22/12)(2) = 3.8 kips

φPn = φ(Pskin) = 0.75(3.8) = 2.9 kips > 1.9 kips OK

Check the pile group under the corner column in Site Class E, assuming L = 52 feet:

As seen in Figure 5.2-13, the maximum tension demand for this condition is Pu = -144 kips.

Pskin = [27(0.3) + (22/2)(0.9 + 0.9 + 22[0.025])]π(22/12) = 196 kips

φPn = φ(Pskin) = 0.75(196) = 147 kips > 144 kips OK

5-40
 Chapter 5: Foundation Analysis and Design

5.2.2.4.4 Graphical Method of Selecting Pile Length. In the calculations shown above, the adequacy of
the soil-pile interface to resist applied loads is checked once a pile length is assumed. It would be
possible to generate mathematical expressions of pile capacity as a function of pile length and then solve
such expressions for the demand conditions. However, a more practical design approach is to pre-
calculate the capacity for piles for the full range of practical lengths and then select the length needed to
satisfy the demands. This method lends itself to graphical expression as shown in Figures 5.2-14 and 5.2-
15.

Compression
10
Tension

20

t)f 30
(
h
t
p
e 40
d
el
i
P
50

60

70

80
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Design resistance (kip)

Figure 5.2-14 Pile axial capacity as a function of length for Site Class C

5-41
FEMA P-751, NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design Examples

0
Compression
10 Tension

20

)t 30
f(
h
t
p
e40
d
el
i
P
50

60

70

80
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Design resistance (kip)

Figure 5.2-15 Pile axial capacity as a function of length for Site Class E

5.2.2.4.5 Results of Pile Length Calculations. Detailed calculations for the required pile lengths are
provided above for two of the design conditions. Table 5.2-3 summarizes the lengths required to satisfy
strength and serviceability requirements for all four design conditions.

Table 5.2-3 Pile Lengths Required for Axial Loads

Piles Under Corner Column Piles Under Side Column
Site Class Condition Load Min Length Condition Load Min Length
Compression 369 kip 46 ft Compression 394 kip 49 ft
Site Class C Uplift 108 kip 32 ft Uplift 13.9 kip 8 ft
Settlement 134 kip 27 ft Settlement 217 kip 47 ft
Compression 378 kip 61 ft Compression 406 kip 64 ft
Site Class E Uplift 119 kip 42 ft Uplift 23.6 kip 17 ft
Settlement 134 kip 48 ft Settlement 217 kip 67 ft

5-42
 Chapter 5: Foundation Analysis and Design

5.2.2.5 Design Results. The design results for all four pile conditions are shown in Table 5.2-4. The
amount of longitudinal reinforcement indicated in the table is that required at the pile-pile cap interface
and may be reduced at depth as discussed in the following section.

Table 5.2-4 Summary of Pile Size, Length and Longitudinal Reinforcement

Site Class Piles Under Corner Column Piles Under Side Column
22 in. diameter by 46 ft long 22 in. diameter by 49 ft long
Site Class C
8-#6 bars 6-#5 bars
22 in. diameter by 61 ft long 22 in. diameter by 67 ft long
Site Class E
8-#7 bars 6-#6 bars

5.2.2.6 Pile Detailing. Standard Sections 12.13.5, 12.13.6, 14.2.3.1 and 14.2.3.2 contain special pile
requirements for structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C or higher and D or higher. In this
section, those general requirements and the specific requirements for uncased concrete piles that apply to
this example are discussed. Although the specifics are affected by the soil properties and assigned site
class, the detailing of the piles designed in this example focuses on consideration of the following
fundamental items:

§ All pile reinforcement must be developed in the pile cap (Standard Sec. 12.13.6.5).

§ In areas of the pile where yielding might be expected or demands are large, longitudinal and
transverse reinforcement must satisfy specific requirements related to minimum amount and
maximum spacing.

§ Continuous longitudinal reinforcement must be provided over the entire length resisting design
tension forces (ACI 318 Sec. 21.12.4.2).

The discussion that follows refers to the detailing shown in Figures 5.2-16 and 5.2-17.

5.2.2.6.1 Development at the Pile Cap. Where neither uplift nor flexural restraint are required, the
development length is the full development length for compression. Where the design relies on head
fixity or where resistance to uplift forces is required (both of which are true in this example), pile
reinforcement must be fully developed in tension unless the section satisfies the overstrength load
condition or demands are limited by the uplift capacity of the soil-pile interface (Standard Sec. 12.13.6.5).
For both site classes considered in this example, the pile longitudinal reinforcement is extended straight
into the pile cap a distance that is sufficient to fully develop the tensile capacity of the bars. In addition to
satisfying the requirements of the Standard, this approach offers two advantages. By avoiding lap splices
to field-placed dowels where yielding is expected near the pile head (although such would be permitted
by the Standard), more desirable inelastic performance would be expected. Straight development, while
it may require a thicker pile cap, permits easier placement of the pile cap’s bottom reinforcement
followed by the addition of the spiral reinforcement within the pile cap. Note that embedment of the
entire pile in the pile cap facilitates direct transfer of shear from pile cap to pile but is not a requirement of
the Standard. (Section 1810.3.11 of the 2009 International Building Code requires that piles be
embedded at least 3 inches into pile caps.)

5-43
FEMA P-751, NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design Examples

4" pile
embedment (6) #5

#4 spiral at
4.5 inch pitch
6'-4"

Section A
A

(6) #5

#4 spiral at
9 inch pitch
23'-0"

Section B
B

(4) #5

#4 spiral at
9 inch pitch
21'-0"

Section C
C

Figure 5.2-16 Pile detailing for Site Class C (under side column)

5-44
 Chapter 5: Foundation Analysis and Design

4" pile
embedment
(8) #7

#5 spiral at
3.5 inch pitch
12'-4"

Section A
A

(6) #7

#5 spiral at
3.5 inch pitch
20'-0"

Section B

(4) #7

#4 spiral at
9 inch pitch

Section C
32'-0"

Figure 5.2-17 Pile detailing for Site Class E (under corner column)

5-45
FEMA P-751, NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design Examples

5.2.2.6.2 Longitudinal and Transverse Reinforcement Where Demands Are Large. Requirements
for longitudinal and transverse reinforcement apply over the entire length of pile where demands are
large. For uncased concrete piles in Seismic Design Category D, at least four longitudinal bars (with a
minimum reinforcement ratio of 0.005) must be provided over the largest region defined as follows: the
top one-half of the pile length, the top 10 feet below the ground, or the flexural length of the pile. The
flexural length is taken as the length of pile from the cap to the lowest point where 0.4 times the concrete
section cracking moment (see ACI 318 Section 9.5.2.3) exceeds the calculated flexural demand at that
point. For the piles used in this example, one-half of the pile length governs. (Note that “providing” a
given reinforcement ratio means that the reinforcement in question must be developed at that point. Bar
development and cutoff are discussed in more detail in Chapter 7 of this volume of design examples.)
Transverse reinforcement must be provided over the same length for which minimum longitudinal
reinforcement requirements apply. Because the piles designed in this example are larger than 20 inches in
diameter, the transverse reinforcement may not be smaller than 0.5 inch diameter. For the piles shown in
Figures 5.2-16 and 5.2-17, the spacing of the transverse reinforcement in the top half of the pile length
may not exceed the least of the following: 12db (7.5 in. for #5 longitudinal bars and 10.5 in. for #7
longitudinal bars), 22/2 = 11 in., or 12 in.

Where yielding may be expected, even more stringent detailing is required. For the Class C site, yielding
can be expected within three diameters of the bottom of the pile cap (3D = 3 × 22 = 66 in.). Spiral
reinforcement in that region must not be less than one-half of that required in Section 21.4.4.1(a) of
ACI 318 (since the site is not Class E, Class F, or liquefiable) and the requirements of Sections 21.4.4.2
and 21.4.4.3 must be satisfied. Note that Section 21.4.4.1(a) refers to Equation 10-5, which often will
govern. In this case, the minimum volumetric ratio of spiral reinforcement is one-half that determined
using ACI 318 Equation 10-5. In order to provide a reinforcement ratio of 0.01 for this pile section, a #4
spiral must have a pitch of no more than 4.8 inches, but the maximum spacing permitted by
Section 21.4.4.2 is 22/4 = 5.5 inches or 6db = 3.75 inches, so a #4 spiral at 3.75-inch pitch is used.
(Section 1810.3.2.1.2 of the 2009 International Building Code clarifies that ACI 318 Equation 10-5 need
not be applied to piles.)

For the Class E site, the more stringent detailing must be provided “within seven diameters of the pile cap
and of the interfaces between strata that are hard or stiff and strata that are liquefiable or are composed of
soft to medium-stiff clay” (Standard Sec. 14.2.3.2.1). The author interprets “within seven diameters of ...
the interface” as applying in the direction into the softer material, which is consistent with the expected
location of yielding. Using that interpretation, the Standard does not indicate the extent of such detailing
into the firmer material. Taking into account the soil layering shown in Table 5.2-1 and the pile cap depth
and thickness, the tightly spaced transverse reinforcement shown in Figure 5.2-17 is provided within 7D
of the bottom of pile cap and top of firm soil and is extended a little more than 3D into the firm soil.
Because the site is Class E, the full amount of reinforcement indicated in ACI 318 Section 21.6.4 must be
provided. In order to provide a reinforcement ratio of 0.02 for this pile section, a #5 spiral must have a
pitch of no more than 3.7 inches. The maximum spacing permitted by Section 21.6.4.3 is 22/4 =
5.5 inches or 6db = 5.25 inches, so a #5 spiral at 3.5-inch pitch is used.

5.2.2.6.3 Continuous Longitudinal Reinforcement for Tension. Table 5.2-3 shows the pile lengths
required for resistance to uplift demands. For the Site Class E condition under a corner column
(Figure 5.2-17), longitudinal reinforcement must resist tension for at least the top 42 feet (being
developed at that point). Extending four longitudinal bars for the full length and providing widely spaced
spirals at such bars is practical for placement, but it is not a specific requirement of the Standard. For the
Site Class C condition under a side column (Figure5.2-16), design tension due to uplift extends only
approximately 5 feet below the bottom of the pile cap. Therefore, a design with Section C of

5-46
 Chapter 5: Foundation Analysis and Design

Figure 5.2-16 being unreinforced would satisfy the Provisions requirements, but the author has decided to
extend very light longitudinal and nominal transverse reinforcement for the full length of the pile.

5.2.3 Other  Considerations    

5.2.3.1 Foundation Tie Design and Detailing. Standard Section 12.13.5.2 requires that individual pile
caps be connected by ties. Such ties are often grade beams, but the Standard would permit use of a slab
(thickened or not) or calculations that demonstrate that the site soils (assigned to Site Class A, B, or C)
provide equivalent restraint. For this example, a tie beam between the pile caps under a corner column
and a side column is designed. The resulting section is shown in Figure 5.2-18.

For pile caps with an assumed center-to-center spacing of 32 feet in each direction and given Pgroup =
1,224 kips under a side column and Pgroup = 1,142 kips under a corner column, the tie is designed as
follows.

As indicated in Standard Section 12.13.5.2, the minimum tie force in tension or compression equals the
product of the larger column load times SDS divided by 10 = 1224(1.1)/10 = 135 kips.

The design strength for six #6 bars is as follows

φAs fy = 0.9(6)(0.44)(60) = 143 kips > 135 kips OK

According to ACI 318 Section 21.12.3.2, the smallest cross-sectional dimension of the tie beam must not
be less than the clear spacing between pile caps divided by 20 = (32'-0" - 9'-2")/20 = 13.7 inches. Use a
tie beam that is 14 inches wide and 16 inches deep. ACI 318 Section 21.12.3.2 further indicates that
closed ties must be provided at a spacing of not more than one-half the minimum dimension, which is
14/2 = 7 inches.

Assuming that the surrounding soil provides restraint against buckling, the design strength of the tie beam
concentrically loaded in compression is as follows:

φPn = 0.8φ[0.85f'c(Ag - Ast) + fyAst]

= 0.8(0.65)[0.85(3){(16)(14) – 6(0.44)}+ 60(6)(0.44)] = 376 kips > 135 kips OK

2" clear
at sides (3) #6 top bars

#4 ties at 7" o.c.

(3) #6 bottom bars

3" clear at
top and bottom

Figure 5.2-18 Foundation tie section

5-47