DESIGN OF SELF-DRILLING MICROPILES FOR PERMANENT APPLICATIONS

Freddy Lopez, Friedr. Ischebeck GmbH, Ennepetal, GERMANY, lopez@ischebeck.de

Racquel Nottingham, Friedr. Ischebeck GmbH, Ennepetal, GERMANY, nottingham@ischebeck.de
Ole Gadermann, Ischebeck USA Inc., Naples, Florida, USA, +1 239 403 8522, gadermann@ischebeck.de

ABSTRACT

The ongoing urban development is a global phenomenon, placing has high demands on urban infrastructure
(housing, public services, transportation, telecommunications, etc.). Micropiling is one of the most
successfully implemented deep foundation technologies in urban interventions, and in densely populated
and built-up areas. The use of micropiles enabled the implementation of several solutions within short time
frames, with minimal disturbance to the daily activities of the population. Since urban interventions usually
represent a very important investment and have an economic impact, special attention should be paid to the
serviceability of the urban infrastructure in the middle and long term. For the foundations, the design
loadbearing capacity of the used structural elements needs to be guaranteed during the planned life time of
the structures. In the case of micropiles, it must be ensured that the steel load bearing elements are effectively
protected against corrosion. This paper presents the structural design of permanent self-drilling micropiles,
subject to tension due to uplift loads. For the case study, different micropile systems - available worldwide
- will also be evaluated. For the afore mentioned micropile systems, the design considerations regarding the
durability of the reinforcement, based on their corrosion protection approaches, will be presented in this
paper.

Keywords: Deep foundations, micropiling, permanent applications, design and construction

SI CONVERSION FACTORS

Table 1. Approximate conversions from SI Units

Multiply
Dimension Symbol When you know To Find Symbol
by
cm centimeters 0.394 inches in
Length
m meters 3.281 feet ft
kN kilonewtons 224.81 poundforce lbf
Force
MN meganewtons 224.81 kilopoundforce kip
kPa (kN/m2) kilopascals 0.145 Poundforce / square inch psi
Stresses
MPa (MN/m2) megapascals 145 Poundforce / square inch psi

INTRODUCTION

Micropiling is one of the most successfully implemented deep foundation technologies. According to
(FHWA, 2005), a micropile is a drilled and grouted, non-displacement pile with a small-diameter (usually
less than 300 mm) that is typically reinforced. Due to the small pile diameter, micropiles can withstand
relatively significant axial loads and moderate lateral loads. The loads are primarily transferred through
friction from the steel reinforcement to the grout, and then to the ground in the micropile bond zone. The
end-bearing contribution to the external load bearing capacity is usually neglected for micropiles in soil or
weak rock. However, micropiles founded on high quality sound rock may develop a considerable end
bearing resistance.
Micropiles are increasingly used as deep foundation elements for new structures and/or as reinforcement
elements for existing facilities, which are often located in densely populated and built-up areas. These urban
interventions are usually permanent applications, commonly designed for a working life of more than 50
years. This situation demands high requirements regarding the corrosion protection of the used steel
elements and is an integral part of the design, since posterior corrosion protection or rehabilitation measures
are only conditionally or even impossible to implement (Lopez, 2017).
In Europe, the design and execution of micropiles is regulated by the European Standards EN 1997-1 and
EN 14199, respectively. In the US, guidelines and provisions for the design and execution of micropiles can
be found in (FHWA, 2005), (ICC, 2018) and (AASHTO, 2017), among others. Micropiles are mainly
classified based on their design application and the installation method (construction), the latter is mainly
defined by the grouting procedure, which has a significant influence on the bond capacity between the
ground and grout interface. The classification is schematically presented in the following figure:

Fig. 1 Micropile classification system based on type of grouting (FHWA, 2005)

An additional micropile type (Type E) is included in (AASHTO, 2017) and covers micropiles that are
constructed by drilling with grout injection through a continued-threaded, hollow-core steel bar.
This paper focuses on the structural design of permanent, self-drilling micropiles (Type E). Taking as
example an up-lift reinforcement project, the design considerations regarding the durability of different
micropile systems will be discussed.

CORROSION PROTECTION OF PERMANENT MICROPILES

The design loadbearing capacity of permanent reinforcement systems needs to be guaranteed during the
serviceability of the planed structures. In the case of micropiles, it must be ensured that the steel load bearing
elements are effectively protected against corrosion, to assure their long-term durability.
According to (FHWA, 2005), the degree and extent of the corrosion protection of the steel reinforcement is
a function of the loading condition (compression or tension), the expected service life of the micropiles, the
aggressiveness of the ground and/or groundwater, the perceived importance of the structure and the
consequences of failure.
Different site conditions, such as low resistivity values (< 2000 Ohm-cm), low pH-values (<5.5 or <8.5 in
soils with high organic content), high sulfate concentrations (>1000 ppm), presence of landfills and cinder
fills, as well as mining or industrial contamination should be considered as indicative of a potential corrosion
situation (AASHTO, 2017).
The most common corrosion protection measures are:
a) Use of coatings: the coatings (i.e. galvanic and/or epoxy) provide both physical and chemical
protection, as it forms a protective layer: a sacrificial zinc oxide cover with galvanization and a dielectric
cover with epoxy coating. Applicable standards for epoxy and galvanized coating are found in ASTM
A775/AASHTO M282 and ASTM A153, correspondingly (FHWA, 2005).
b) Plastic encapsulation: for this method, a corrugated plastic sleeve or sheath (PVC or HD-PE) is
installed around the reinforcing bar, similar to what is done for ground anchors in permanent
applications. Grout-filled corrugated sheaths comprise the so-called double corrosion protection
(FHWA, 2005).
c) Sacrificial corrosion allowance: this method considers to include a sacrificial steel thickness in the
design, to account for assumed losses in section resulting from corrosion over the design life.
d) Encapsulation in grout: this method requires that the steel reinforcement is fully covered with neat
cement grout. The grout provides an alkaline environment that reduces the corrosion potential. Research
has shown that crack widths controlled to less than 0.1mm can be considered to be self-healing,
therefore, cement grout is considered acceptable as an impermeable protective encapsulation, provided
that the crack width within the grout body can be demonstrated not to exceed 0.1mm (Lopez & Severi,
2017).

SELF-DRILLING MICROPILES

Self-drilling micropiles consist of continuously threaded hollow bars, made out of steel pipes, installed via
rotary percussive drilling. During the drilling process, the micropiles are continuously grouted (dynamic
injection), building a rough interlocking at the grout-soil interface, increasing the skin friction or grout-to-
ground bond resistance (Lopez & Severi, 2017). The components, the installation process and a typical
cross-section of the grouted body are presented in Fig. 2.
Among the different micropile typologies, self-drilling micropiles have been proven to be a very versatile
solution and are increasingly used in urban intervention projects, both for the construction of new
infrastructure and as reinforcement to retrofit existing structures. The use of self-drilling micropiles allow
for the flexible use of the drilling equipment, enabling the installation of long micropiles even in confined
spaces, obtaining high drilling performances associated with very low vibrations.
It is due to their flexible installation process that the use of self-drilling micropiles can be considered as a
cost-effective alternative to other deep foundation technologies, such as large size piles (bored, driven or
displaced), which require large and heavy equipment that doesn´t always fit in areas with restricted access
and/or limited working space (typical conditions for intra-urban interventions).
As reinforcement elements, the hollow-core bars must meet the requirements of ASTM A615/AASHTO
M31. Heavy wall steel tubes with yield strengths between 420MPa (Grade 60) and 520MPa (Grade 75) are
typically used. There are several self-drilling, hollow-core micropile systems available, such as: Ischebeck
TITAN, DSI DYWI drill, Williams Geo-Drill, etc.
The main differences among the available systems are the type of the steel tubing (seamless or
welded/mechanical) and the thread type (TITAN-thread, Rope thread, etc.).
 Fig. 2 Self-drilling micropiles: components, installation process and grouted body
(after Friedr. Ischebeck GmbH, 2020)
The implications of the different thread types is that under axial loading (tension and compression), the
grout body surrounding the hollow-core bar cracks at different magnitudes of loading, depending on the
thread type, grout body size and grout strength (FHWA, 2006). Fig. 3 presents schematically the cracking
pattern for different thread types under tension loads:

Fig. 3 Cracking pattern for TITAN-thread (left) and R-thread (right) under tension loads (Lopez, 2017)
Corrosion protection for R-threaded self-drilling systems
The “rope” or R-thread is the standard thread in the drilling industry for continuously threaded drill rods
and it is characterized by smooth (rounded) threads to permit easy and fast splicing of the drilling rods and
couplers (FHWA, 2006). Due to its geometry (designated acc. to ISO 10208), the thread mitigates only
conditionally the development and propagation of cracks in the grouted body. As a result, it would be
necessary to reduce the working stresses in order to guarantee that the crack widths do not exceed the value
of 0.1mm, thus limiting the load bearing capacities of the bars. This approach would affect the economy of
the system. Based on this, the manufacturers usually recommend the use of protective coatings, a corrosion
allowance, or a combination thereof. According to different European Technical Assessments (i.e. OiB,
2016 or OiB, 2018), the permanent reinforcement attains a working life of up to 50 years, depending on the
ground conditions and the sacrificial corrosion potential that is time-dependent:

Fig. 4 Corrosion depth Vs. Time (OiB, 2018)

Fig. 5 Loss in cross-sectional area due corrosion (OiB, 2018)

Corrosion protection for the TITAN self-drilling system

The permanent corrosion protection for the TITAN-System is provided by the encapsulation in grout, as
defined in the Technical Approval Z-34.14-209 (DIBt, 2020). As mentioned earlier, the cement grout can
be considered as an impermeable protective encapsulation if the crack width within the grout body can be
demonstrated not to exceed 0.1mm.
The TITAN-thread, unlike “rope” threads, is characterized by a depressed groove at the crown of the thread,
making it sharper, with thread shoulders varying from 40° to 70° similar to deformed rebar, meeting the
requirements of ASTM A615 (FHWA, 2006).
Under loading, cracks will be generated from different stresses caused by the same strain in the steel tendon
and in the grout body. In order to maintain the width of the primary cracks within an acceptable range
(<0.1mm), micro-cracks should appear (inner, secondary cracks), which will begin at the thread pitch,
balancing the stresses in the grouted body (Fig. 6).

Fig. 6 Cracking pattern under loading (Lopez, 2017)

The above-mentioned condition has been verified with several tests, carried out since 1999 to the date. One
example is presented in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7 Tension test with crack width measurements on an exhumed micropile TITAN 103/78.
Left: documentation of cracks for different load steps. Top-right: grouted body. Bottom-right: cumulated
crack width frequency for different load steps (Lopez, 2017)
Different tests, carried out on reinforced concrete elements, show that for a completed crack pattern, the
cracks at the surface are wider than at the immediate proximity to the rebar. The same behavior could be
observed during the examination of a TITAN micropile: for a completed crack pattern, large shrinkage
cracks (0.1mm) at the outer periphery can be observed. In the vicinity of the hollow-core bar, crack widths
of approx. 0.01mm were documented (Fig. 8).
 Fig. 8 Left: cracks at the surface of reinforced concrete elements (Leonhard, 1988). Right: crack width
measurements on grout samples, obtained from exhumed micropiles TITAN 73/35 (CBI, 2017)
The following tables present the provisions for the design of TITAN micropiles for permanent applications,
taking into account the required grout cover to guarantee the verification of the crack width limitation
(< 0.1mm) for both tension and compression loading:

Fig. 9 Characteristic load-carrying capacity (Rk) of the TITAN hollow-core bars, depending on the grout
cover (c) for permanent applications (DIBt, 2020).

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The scope of the intervention involves the permanent uplift reinforcement (design working life = 50 year)
of a parking deck (with one underground level). According to the Structural Engineer, the self-weight of the
planned structure was not sufficient to verify the stability against buoyancy, considering the design
groundwater table of 0.5m (below ground level). An overview of the planned intervention is presented in
Fig. 10. The assumed ground conditions and geotechnical properties are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Adopted parameters for the analysis
Tip resistance Internal
Thickness Cohesion Bulk density
Layer Description CPT friction angle
(m) c’ (kPa) γ / γ’ (kN/m3)
qc (MN/m2) φ’ (°)
Granular infill,
1 3 <5 32 0 20 / 11
loose to medium dense
Sandy silts,
2 3 <5 27 15 18 / 9
soft - stiff
Silty sands,
3 4 7.5 - 15 37 0 22 / 12
medium dense to dense
Sands,
4 12 5-8 32 0 20 / 11
medium dense
Aggressiveness: medium aggressive ground and/or groundwater conditions were assessed (medium corrosion load)
 Fig. 10 Overview of the intervention

Proposed micropiled reinforcement

In order to verify the stability of the structure against buoyancy, an uplift reinforcement was proposed, as
schematically presented in Fig. 11.

Fig. 11 Schematic presentation of the proposed reinforcement

Structural design

The micropiles were designed according to the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (AASHTO, 2017) and
the International Building Code (IBC) (ICC, 2018). The following relationship needs to be verified:
∅ ∑ ( ∗ , ) [1]
Where:
∅ = factored design resistance and ∑ ( ∗ , ) = factored design actions
The design uplift force acting on every single micropile is calculated considering the basic load combination
acc. to Equation 16-6 from IBC (ICC, 2018):
0.9 + 1.0 + 1.6 [2]
Where:
D = 23.5kPa (self-weight of the structure, Fig. 10); W = 0 (wind loads) and H = 31.0kPa (buoyant
groundwater pressure, Fig. 10).
The loads act on an influence surface area of X*Y = 3.7m*3.7m = 13.7m2, given by the center-to-center
distance between micropiles (Fig. 11)
∑ ( ∗ , ) = [0.9 ∗ 23.5 + 1.0 ∗ 0 + 1.6 ∗ (−31 )] ∗ 13.7 = −389.5
The effects of corrosion and deterioration from environmental conditions shall be considered in the selection
of the micropile type and in the determination of the required cross-section of the reinforcement (AASHTO,
2017). Considering the provisions for corrosion, the factored structural resistance of the reinforcement can
be obtained as follows:
=∅ =∅ (ß ∗ ∗ ) [3]
Where:
ØTU = resistance factor for structural tension resistance = 0.8 (AASHTO, 2017); Ab = cross-section of the
reinforcement and ß = reduction factor to account for corrosion losses during the planned working life.
Seven (7) types of typically used reinforcement elements were considered for the comparative analysis. The
results are summarized in Table 3 below:
Table 3. Verification of the structural resistance for the permanent application (Working life = 50 years)
ØTU D c ß fy*Ab RT
Description Size Remarks
(-) (mm) (mm) (-) (kN) (kN)
DCP DSI GEWI Pile
36 (#11) 0.8 152 58.0 1.00 520 416.0 RT ≥ 389.5kN => OK
(Threadbar Grade 75) (1)
DCP DSI GEWI Pile
32 (#10) 0.8 152 60.0 1.00 565 452.0 RT ≥ 389.5kN => OK
(Threadbar Grade 100) (1)
MCP III Williams
36 (#11) 0.8 152 58.0 1.00 521 416.8 RT ≥ 389.5kN => OK
75ksi All-thread bar (1)
MCP III Williams
32 (#10) 0.8 152 60.0 1.00 667 533.6 RT ≥ 389.5kN => OK
150ksi All-thread bar (1)
DSI DYWI Drill
R51-800 0.8 180 (3) 64.5 0.86(5) 640(5) 440.3 RT ≥ 389.5kN => OK
hollow bar (2)
DSI DYWI Drill
R51-800 0.8 180 (3) 64.5 0.90(5) 640(5) 460.8 RT ≥ 389.5kN => OK
galvanized hollow bar (2)
Ischebeck TITAN
40/16 0.8 165 (4) 62.5 1.00 511(6) 408.8 RT ≥ 389.5kN => OK
hollow bar (2)
(1)
Micropile Type A (AASHTO, 2017)
(2)
Micropile Type E (AASHTO, 2017)
(3)
Considering a drill bit with a diameter d = 130mm, and a widening of 50mm (see Fig. 2)
(4)
Considering a cross-cut drill bit with a diameter d = 115mm, and a widening of 50mm (see Fig. 2)
(5)
According to (OiB, 2018) (see Fig. 4)
(6)
According to (DIBt, 2020) (see Fig. 9)
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The present document described the structural design of self-drilling micropiles for permanent applications,
taking into consideration the provisions for the durability (corrosion protection) of the reinforcement.
The use of self-drilling micropiles, due to their flexible and efficient installation, enables to carry out
interventions even in areas with restricted space, causing only small affection to the surrounding work
environment.
Contrary to the installation of the reinforcement in a pre-drilled borehole, the use of additional corrosion
barriers (i.e. corrugated plastic sheaths) for self-drilling micropiles has a very limited practicability. Thus, a
corrosion allowance, usually in combination with the application of a superficial coating (i.e. galvanizing),
is adopted by the wide majority of self-drilling hollow bar systems, to account for corrosion losses during
the planned working life.
As presented in this document, the durability of the Ischebeck TITAN micropiles does not rely on sacrificial
corrosion losses, since the permanent corrosion protection is provided by the impermeable encapsulation in
grout, obtained by limiting the crack width within the grouted body to a maximum value of 0.1mm, as
validated by the Technical Approval Z-34.14-209 (DIBt, 2020).

REFERENCES
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 2017. AASHTO LRFD
Bridge Design Specifications, 8th Edition.
CBI Betonginstitutet AB (CBI), 2017. Material Investigation of Cement Stabilized Brace Foundations,
Evaluation report (Sweden)
German Institute for Construction Technology (DIBt), 2020. National Technical Approval Z-34.14-209:
TITAN Micropiles (Germany)
European Norm EN 1997-1: Eurocode 7, Geotechnical Design – Part 1: General Rules, 2010.
European Norm EN 14199: 2015: Execution of special geotechnical works – Micropiles, 2015.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2005. NHI Course No. 132078 Micropile Design and
Construction, Reference Manual.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2006. Hollow-core Soil Nails State, State-of-the Practice
Friedr. Ischebeck GmbH, 2020. Technical Brochures TITAN Micropiles
International Code Council Inc. (ICC), 2018. International Building Code (IBC)
Leonhardt, F., 1988. Cracks and Crack Control in Concrete Structures. Special Report PCI Journal.
Lopez, F., 2017; Dauerhafter Einsatz von Mikropfählen im Wasserbau. Proceedings of the Symposium
„Stahl im Wasserbau 2017“, Braunschweig, September 28-29 (in German).
Lopez, F., Severi, G., 2017. Micropiling in Urban Infrastructure: Advantages, Experience and Challenges.
Proceedings of the DFI-EFFC International Conference on Deep Foundations and Ground Improvement,
Rome, June 5-8.
Austrian Institute of Construction Engineering (OiB), 2016. European Technical Assessment ETA-11/0134.
Self-drilling Micropile System Minova MAI, R32 to T111 (Austria)
Austrian Institute of Construction Engineering (OiB), 2018. European Technical Assessment ETA-12/0603.
Self-drilling soil and rock nail DYWI Drill Hollow Bar System, R32-210 to R51-800 (Austria)
European Norm EN 14199: 2015: Execution of special geotechnical works – Micropiles, 2015.