Shaft 2012 Manual

COMPUTER PROGRAM
SHAFT
2012
A Program for the Study of Drilled Shafts under Axial Loads

by
Lymon C. Reese
Shin Tower Wang
Jose A. Arrellaga
Luis Vasquez
for
ENSOFT, INC
3003 W. Howard Lane
Austin, Texas 78728
May - 2012
COPYRIGHT ENSOFT, INC 2012

NO REPRODUCTION OR DISTRIBUTION WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION FROM ENSOFT, INC
ii
PROGRAM LICENSE AGREEMENT

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please read the terms of the following license
agreement carefully. You signify acceptance of the terms of this
Agreement by using the product.
This software product is licensed only to the user (company or individual)
whose name is registered with ENSOFT, INC., or to users at the registered
location, on only one computer at a time.
Additional installations of the software may be made by the user, as long
as the number of installations is equal to the number of purchased and
registered licenses.
Users that purchased a network version of this software product are
entitled to install the software in all computers on the network at their
registered location. However, the software can only be used
simultaneously by as many users as the total number of purchased and
registered licenses.
The user is not entitled to copy this software unless copying for backup
purposes. The user may not loan, rent, lease, or transfer this software to
any other person, company, or location. This software and
documentation are copyrighted materials and should be treated like any
other copyrighted material (e.g. a book or musical recording). This
software is protected by the United States Copyright Law and
International Copyright Treaty.
Copyright 1987-2012 by ENSOFT, INC. All rights reserved.
Printed in the Unites States of America. Except as permitted under the
United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be
reproduced, translated, or distributed without the prior written approval
of ENSOFT, INC.
Although the program has been used with apparent success in many
analyses, new information is developed continuously and new or updated
versions may be written from time to time. All users are requested to
SHAFT for Windows User's Manual
inform ENSOFT, INC. immediately of any possible errors that are found in
the coding of our software. As modifications, updates, or new versions
are produced, notices will be sent to all subscribed users that keep their
address current on ENSOFT, INC.s files.
iii
No warranty, expressed or implied, is offered as to the accuracy of results

from ENSOFT, INC.s software products. The software products should
not be used for design unless caution is exercised in interpreting the
results and independent calculations are available to verify the general
correctness of the results. Users are assumed to be knowledgeable of the
information in the printed documentation that are distributed
with the digital media. Users are assumed to recognize that
The input parameters, eg., soil and rock properties, shaft length,
diameter of rock socket, and many others, can have a significant effect on
the solution and must be chosen carefully. Users should have a thorough
understanding of the relevant theoretical criteria (appropriate references
are suggested in the software documentation).

iv
Contents
CHAPTER 1.
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1
General Description ................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.2
History of Development ............................................................................................................. 1-3
1.2.1
SHAFT1 (1987) .................................................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.2
SHAFT, Version 2 (1989)..................................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.3
SHAFT 3.0 for Windows (1995) .......................................................................................... 1-3
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
1.2.7
SHAFT for Windows (2012) ................................................................................................ 1-4
1.3
Organization of SHAFT Manuals ................................................................................................ 1-4
1.4
Typographical Conventions........................................................................................................ 1-4
1.5
Contents of SHAFT Package ....................................................................................................... 1-5
1.6
Hardware Requirements ............................................................................................................ 1-5
1.7
Technical Support ...................................................................................................................... 1-5
1.7.1
Preferred Methods of Software Support ........................................................................... 1-5
1.7.2
Support by Telephone ........................................................................................................ 1-6
1.7.3
Upgrade Verification and Internet Site .............................................................................. 1-6
1.7.4
Changes of Support Policy ................................................................................................. 1-6
CHAPTER 2.
2.1
Installation and Getting Started ..................................................................................... 2-1
Installation Procedures .............................................................................................................. 2-2
2.1.1
Installation of Single-User Version ..................................................................................... 2-2
2.1.2
Introduction of Network Version ....................................................................................... 2-5
2.1.3
Installation of Network Version ......................................................................................... 2-5
2.1.4
Backup of Original Software .............................................................................................. 2-6
2.1.5
Software Updates on the Internet ..................................................................................... 2-6
2.1.6
Installation of Software Updates from the Internet .......................................................... 2-6
2.2
Getting Started........................................................................................................................... 2-7

2.2.1
Starting the Program .......................................................................................................... 2-8
2.2.2
File Management ............................................................................................................... 2-8
2.2.3
Data Input of Application Problem .................................................................................... 2-9
2.2.4
Computation Options....................................................................................................... 2-10
2.2.5
Graphics ........................................................................................................................... 2-12
2.2.6
Arrangement of Windows ................................................................................................ 2-13
2.2.7
Help Files .......................................................................................................................... 2-14
CHAPTER 3.
Engineering Documentation .......................................................................................... 3-1
3.1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3-2
3.2
Computation Procedures for Clay .............................................................................................. 3-2
3.2.1
Side Resistance................................................................................................................... 3-2
3.2.2
End Bearing ........................................................................................................................ 3-6
3.2.3
Settlement.......................................................................................................................... 3-8
3.3
Computation Procedures for Sand........................................................................................... 3-11
3.3.1
Side Resistance................................................................................................................. 3-11
3.3.2
End Bearing ...................................................................................................................... 3-15
3.3.3
Settlement........................................................................................................................ 3-17
3.4
Computation Procedures for Clay-Shale .................................................................................. 3-20
3.5
Computation Procedures for Rock........................................................................................... 3-21
3.6
Computation Procedures for Gravels, Granular Decomposed Rock, or Granular Glacial Till
(Non-Cohesive Intermediate Geomaterials) ........................................................................................ 3-30
3.7
Computation Procedures for Weak Rock (Cohesive Intermediate Geomaterials) .................. 3-35
3.7.1
Design Procedure ............................................................................................................. 3-36
3.7.2
Commentary on Direct Load-Settlement Simulation Method......................................... 3-42
3.8
Computation Procedures for Gravelly Sand and Gravel .......................................................... 3-42
3.8.1
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3-42
3.8.2
Side Resistance................................................................................................................. 3-43
3.8.3
End Bearing ...................................................................................................................... 3-47
3.8.4
Settlement........................................................................................................................ 3-48
3.9
Consideration of the Factor of Safety and LRFD Design ......................................................... 3-50
3.9.1
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3-50
3.9.2
The Allowable Stress Design (ASD) .................................................................................. 3-50

vi
3.9.3
Load and Resistance Factor Design (The LRFD Method) ................................................. 3-51
3.9.4
Loads addressed by the LRFD specifications.................................................................... 3-52
3.9.5
Resistances addressed by the LRFD specifications .......................................................... 3-52
3.9.6
Comments on the LRFD Design ........................................................................................ 3-53
CHAPTER 4.
4.1
References for Data Input .............................................................................................. 4-1
File Menu ................................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.1.1
File New ........................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.1.2
File - Open .......................................................................................................................... 4-2
4.1.3
File Save........................................................................................................................... 4-3
4.1.4
File Save As ...................................................................................................................... 4-3
4.1.5
File Exit ............................................................................................................................ 4-3
4.2
Data Menu ................................................................................................................................. 4-4
4.2.1
Numeric Data Entries ......................................................................................................... 4-5
4.2.2
Data Title ......................................................................................................................... 4-6
4.2.3
Data Units........................................................................................................................ 4-6
4.2.4
Data Design Method (ASD or LRFD) ................................................................................ 4-7
4.2.5
Data - Drilled-Shaft Properties ........................................................................................... 4-8
4.2.6
Data - Soil Layer Data ......................................................................................................... 4-9
4.2.7
Data - Soil Layer Data - Layer Data ................................................................................... 4-12
4.2.7.1
Soil Data for Sand Layers.............................................................................................. 4-12
4.2.7.2
Soil Data for Clay Layers ............................................................................................... 4-15
4.2.7.3
Soil Data for Shale Layers ............................................................................................. 4-16
4.2.7.4
Soil Data for Strong Rock ............................................................................................. 4-17
4.2.7.5
Soil Data for Decomposed Rock Layers........................................................................ 4-19
4.2.7.6
Soil Data for Weak Rock Layers.................................................................................... 4-20
4.2.7.7
Soil Data for Strong Rock Layers Including Side Friction and Tip Resistance ............... 4-22
4.2.7.8
Soil Data for Gravelly Sand and Gravel Layers ............................................................. 4-22
4.2.8
Data - Factor of Safety (Allowable Stress Design) ............................................................ 4-23
4.2.9
Data - Computation Method ............................................................................................ 4-23
4.2.10
Data - Water Table ........................................................................................................... 4-25
4.2.11
Data - Control Options... .................................................................................................. 4-25
4.3
Help Menu................................................................................................................................ 4-26

CHAPTER 5.
vii
References for Program Execution and Output Reviews............................................... 5-1
5.1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.2
Computation Menu .................................................................................................................... 5-2
5.3
Computation - Run Analysis ....................................................................................................... 5-2
5.4
Computation - Edit Input Text ................................................................................................... 5-3
5.5
Computation - Edit Processor Run Notes .................................................................................. 5-4
5.6
Computation - Edit Output Text ................................................................................................ 5-4
5.7
Computation - View Shaft Elevation .......................................................................................... 5-5
5.8
Graphics Menu ........................................................................................................................... 5-6
5.8.1
Mouse Commands in the Graphics Mode ......................................................................... 5-7
5.8.2
Plot Menu........................................................................................................................... 5-7
5.9
Graphics - Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth ................................................................................ 5-9
5.10
Graphics - Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth ........................................................................... 5-10
5.11
Graphics -Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth ............................................................................ 5-10
5.12
Graphics - Skin Friction vs Depth (w/F.S.) ................................................................................ 5-11
5.13
Graphics - Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/ F.S.) ............................................................................ 5-12
5.14
Graphics -Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) .............................................................................. 5-13
5.15
Graphics - Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) ....................................................................... 5-14
5.16
Graphics - Combined Plots vs Depth (w/ F.S.) ......................................................................... 5-15
5.17
Graphics - Axial Load vs Settlement (Trend Curves) ................................................................ 5-16
5.18
Graphics - Axial Load vs Settlement (Upper- Bound Curves) ................................................... 5-17
5.19
Graphics - Axial Load vs Settlement (Lower-Bound Curves) .................................................... 5-18
5.20
Graphics - Axial Load vs Settlement (Comparison) .................................................................. 5-19
CHAPTER 6.
Example Problems........................................................................................................ 6-21
6.1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 6-22
6.2
Example Problem 1 .................................................................................................................. 6-23
6.2.1
Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 6-23
6.2.2
Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 6-23
6.2.3
Construction..................................................................................................................... 6-24
6.2.4
Loadings ........................................................................................................................... 6-24
6.2.5
Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 6-24
6.2.6
Ultimate Load ................................................................................................................... 6-24

viii
6.2.7
Geometry of the Drilled Shaft .......................................................................................... 6-24
6.2.8
Hand Computations ......................................................................................................... 6-24
6.2.9
Comparison of Results ..................................................................................................... 6-25
6.2.10
Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................... 6-25
6.2.11
Graphical Results of Computer Analysis .......................................................................... 6-25
6.2.12
Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 6-28
6.3
Example Problem 2 .................................................................................................................. 6-48
6.3.1
Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 6-48
6.3.2
Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 6-48
6.3.3
Construction..................................................................................................................... 6-48
6.3.4
Loadings ........................................................................................................................... 6-48
6.3.5
Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 6-48
6.3.6
Ultimate Load ................................................................................................................... 6-48
6.3.7
6.3.8
6.3.9
6.3.10
6.3.11
6.3.12
Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 6-52
6.4
Example Problem 3 .................................................................................................................. 6-58
6.4.1
Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 6-58
6.4.2
Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 6-58
6.4.3
Construction..................................................................................................................... 6-58
6.4.4
Loadings ........................................................................................................................... 6-58
6.4.5
Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 6-58
6.4.6
Ultimate Load ................................................................................................................... 6-58
6.4.7
6.4.8
6.4.9
6.4.10
6.4.11
6.4.12
Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 6-61

6.5
ix
Example Problem 4 .................................................................................................................. 6-65
6.5.1
Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 6-65
6.5.2
Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 6-65
6.5.3
Construction..................................................................................................................... 6-65
6.5.4
Loading ............................................................................................................................. 6-65
6.5.5
Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 6-65
6.5.6
6.5.7
6.5.8
6.5.9
6.5.10
6.5.11
Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 6-69
6.6
Example Problem 5 .................................................................................................................. 6-74
6.6.1
Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 6-74
6.6.2
Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 6-74
6.6.3
Construction..................................................................................................................... 6-74
6.6.4
Loading ............................................................................................................................. 6-74
6.6.5
Factor of Safety ................................................................................................................ 6-74
6.6.6
6.6.7
6.6.8
6.6.9
6.6.10
6.6.11
Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 6-77
6.7
Example Problem 6 .................................................................................................................. 6-80
6.7.1
Description of the Problem -Rough Socket ...................................................................... 6-80
6.7.2
6.7.3
Description of the Problem - Smooth Socket................................................................... 6-82
6.7.4
6.7.5
6.7.6
6.7.7
Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 6-85

6.8
Example Problem 7 .................................................................................................................. 6-88
6.8.1
Description of the Problem .............................................................................................. 6-88
6.8.2
6.8.3
6.8.4
6.8.5
Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 6-91
6.9
Example Problem 8 .................................................................................................................. 6-95
6.9.1
Soil Profile ........................................................................................................................ 6-95
6.9.2
Soil Properties .................................................................................................................. 6-95
6.9.3
Construction..................................................................................................................... 6-95
6.9.4
6.9.5
6.9.6
Output Data ..................................................................................................................... 6-97
6.10
Example Problem 9 ................................................................................................................ 6-102
6.10.1
Soil Profile ...................................................................................................................... 6-102
6.10.2
Soil Properties ................................................................................................................ 6-102
6.10.3
Hand Computations ....................................................................................................... 6-103
6.10.4
Comparison of Results ................................................................................................... 6-104
6.10.5
Input Data for Computer Analysis.................................................................................. 6-105
6.10.6
Graphical Results of Computer Analysis ........................................................................ 6-105
6.10.7
Output Data ................................................................................................................... 6-107
List of Technical References .......................................................................................................................... 1

xi
Figures
Figure 2.1 Main installation screen for ENSOFT software (may change with time) .................................. 2-3
Figure 2.4 Sample organization and operational flow chart...................................................................... 2-7
Figure 2.5 Options contained in the File menu.......................................................................................... 2-8
Figure 2.6 Options contained in the Data menu ...................................................................................... 2-10
Figure 2.7 Options contained in the Computation menu ........................................................................ 2-11
Figure 2.8 Options contained in the Graphics menu ............................................................................... 2-13
Figure 2.9 Options contained in the Window menu ................................................................................ 2-14
Figure 2.10 Options contained in the Help menu .................................................................................... 2-15
Figure 3.1 Explanation of Portions of Drilled Shaft not Considered in Computing Side Resistance.......... 3-5
Figure 3.2 Normalized Curves Showing Load Transfer in Side Resistance versus Settlement for Drilled
Shafts in Clay (From Reese and ONeill, 1988) ............................................................... 3-9
Figure 3.3 Normalized Curves Showing Load Transfer in End Bearing versus Settlement for Drilled Shafts
in Clay (From Reese and ONeill, 1988)........................................................................ 3-10
Figure 3.4 Plot of Experimental Values of ............................................................................................. 3-13
Figure 3.5 Plot fsz with Depth (z) for Values of ...................................................................................... 3-14
Figure 3.6 Normalized Curves Showing Load Transfer in Side Resistance Versus Settlement for Drilled
Shafts in Cohesionless Soil (From Reese and ONeill, 1988) ........................................ 3-18
Figure 3.7 Normalized Curves Showing Load Transfer in End Bearing Versus Settlement for Drilled Shafts
in Cohesionless Soil (From Reese and ONeill, 1988) ................................................... 3-19
Figure 3.8 Engineering Classification of Intact rock (After Deere, 1968, as presented by Horvath and
Kenney, 1979) .............................................................................................................. 3-22
Figure 3.9 Load-Settlement Curves for Test Shafts No. 1 and No. 2, Florida Keys .................................. 3-23
Figure 3.10 Load-Distribution Curves for Test Shafts No. 1(43.7 ft rock socket) and No. 2 (7.6 ft rock
socket), Florida Keys .................................................................................................... 3-24
Figure 3.11 Elastic Settlement Influence Factor as a Function of Embedment Ratio and Modular Ratio
(After Donald, Sloan, and Chiu, 1980).......................................................................... 3-28
Figure 3.12 Modulus Reduction Ration as a Function of RQD (From Bieniawski, 1984) ......................... 3-29
Figure 3.13 Hypothetical load-settlement relationship for method of Mayne and Harris...................... 3-33
Figure 3.14 Potential soil modulus for computing settlement in granular, decomposed rock (Category 3
IGM) ............................................................................................................................. 3-34
Figure 3.15 Factor for smooth Category 1 or 2 IGMs ............................................................................. 3-38
Figure 3.16 Factor M vs. concrete slump. ................................................................................................ 3-40
Figure 3.17 Factor n for smooth sockets for various combinations of parameters. ............................... 3-40
Figure 3.18 Comparison of -values for axial-load tests in gravelly sands (from Rollins et al, 2005) ....... 3-44
xii
Figure 3.19 Comparison of b-values for axial-load tests in gravels (from Rollins et al, 2005)................. 3-45
Figure 3.20 Comparison of b-values for load tests in all soil profiles (from Rollins et al, 2005) ............. 3-46
Figure 3.21 Normalized load versus displacement curves for tests in slightly cemented sand and gravelly
sand (from Rollins et al, 2005) ..................................................................................... 3-49
Figure 3.22 Normalized load versus displacement curves for tests in slightly cemented sand and gravel
(from Rollins et al, 2005) .............................................................................................. 3-49
Figure 4.1 Window screen for the File Open dialog................................................................................ 4-2
Figure 4.2 Message window for incomplete or invalid files ...................................................................... 4-3
Figure 4.3 Message window advising that changes were not saved to disk ............................................. 4-4
Figure 4.4 Options contained in the Data menu ........................................................................................ 4-5
Figure 4.5 Window screen for sample Data - Title..................................................................................... 4-6
Figure 4.6 Window screen for Data Menu Design Method (ASD or LRFD) ............................................. 4-7
Figure 4.7 Window screen for sample Data - Drilled-Shaft Properties...................................................... 4-9
Figure 4.8 Window screen for sample Data - Soil Layer Data.................................................................. 4-10
Figure 4.9 Window screen for sample Data - Soil Layer Data with the LRFD specification ..................... 4-12
Figure 4.10 Soil data for sand layers ........................................................................................................ 4-12
Figure 4.11 Soil data for clay layers ......................................................................................................... 4-15
Figure 4.12 Soil data for shale layers ....................................................................................................... 4-17
Figure 4.13 Soil data for layers of strong rock ......................................................................................... 4-18
Figure 4.14 Soil data for decomposed rock layers ................................................................................... 4-19
Figure 4.15 Soil data for weak rock layers ............................................................................................... 4-20
Figure 4.16 Window screen for sample Data Factor of Safety ................................................................ 4-22
Figure 4.17 Window screen for sample Data-Factor of Safety (ASD Method) ........................................ 4-23
Figure 4.18 Options contained in Data Computation Methods............................................................... 4-24
Figure 4.19 Options contained in Data Computation Methods - Specify the shaft length ..................... 4-25
Figure 4.20 Options contained in Data Computation Methods - Specify the design load ...................... 4-25
Figure 4.21 Options contained in Data Water Table ............................................................................... 4-25
Figure 4.22 Window screen for sample Help - About .............................................................................. 4-26
Figure 5.1 Command options contained in the Computation menu. ........................................................ 5-2
Figure 5.2 Sample use of Microsoft Notepad for editing input text of Example Problem 1. ................ 5-3
Figure 5.3 Sample Microsoft Notepad session of processor-run notes for a modified Example Problem
1. .................................................................................................................................... 5-4
Figure 5.4 Sample use of Microsoft Notepad for editing the output-text file of Example Problem 1. . 5-5
Figure 5.5 Sample View Shaft Elevation command option. ....................................................................... 5-5
Figure 5.6 Command option contained in the Graphics menu.................................................................. 5-6
Figure 5.7 Command options contained in the Plot menu. ....................................................................... 5-8
Figure 5.8 Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1. ............................. 5-9
Figure 5.9 Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1. ........................ 5-10
Figure 5.10 Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1. ...................... 5-11
Figure 5.11 Skin Friction vs. Depth (w/F.S.) command option for Example Problem 1........................... 5-12
Figure 5.12 Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. .................................................... 5-13
Figure 5.13 Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. .................................................... 5-14

xiii
Figure 5.14 Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) for Example Problem 1. .............................................. 5-15
Figure 5.15 Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. .................................................. 5-16
Figure 5.16 Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 1. ................................................................ 5-17
Figure 5.17 Upper-Bound Curves for Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 1. ........................ 5-18
Figure 5.18 Lower-Bound Curves for Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 1. ........................ 5-19
Figure 5.19 Comparison of Upper-Bound and Lower-Bound Curves for Example Problem 1................. 5-20
Figure 6.1 General soil description of Example Problem 1. ..................................................................... 6-24
Figure 6.2 Curve of Skin Friction vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. ........................................... 6-26
Figure 6.3 Curve of Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1......................................... 6-27
Figure 6.4 Curve of Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. ........................................ 6-27
Figure 6.5 Curve of Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1. ..................................... 6-28
Figure 6.6 General soil description of Example Problem 2. ..................................................................... 6-48
Figure 6.7 Curve of Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth for Example Problem 2. ......................................... 6-50
Figure 6.8 Curve of Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth for Example Problem 2. ...................................... 6-51
Figure 6.9 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 2. ...................................... 6-51
Figure 6.10 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 2................................................... 6-52
Figure 6.11 General soil description of Example Problem 3. ................................................................... 6-58
Figure 6.12 Curve of Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) for Example Problem 3................................. 6-60
Figure 6.14 General soil description of Example Problem 4. ................................................................... 6-65
Figure 6.15 Curve of Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth for Example Problem 4. ....................................... 6-68
Figure 6.16 Curve of Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth for Example Problem 4. .................................... 6-68
Figure 6.17 General soil description of Example Problem5. .................................................................... 6-74
Figure 6.18 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 5. .................................... 6-76
Figure 6.20 General pile and soil description for Example Problem 6..................................................... 6-80
Figure 6.21 Curves of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6 (rough and smooth sockets).
Obtained from hand computations (ONeill et al., 1975) ............................................ 6-83
Figure 6.22 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6using rough socket with closed
joints............................................................................................................................. 6-84
Figure 6.23 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6using smooth socket with closed
joints............................................................................................................................. 6-84
Figure 6.24 General pile and soil description for Example Problem 7..................................................... 6-88
Figure 6.25 Curves of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 7. Obtained from hand
computations (ONeill et al., 1975) .............................................................................. 6-90
Figure 6.27 General soil description of Example Problem ...................................................................... 6-95
Figure 6.28 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 8. .................................... 6-96
Figure 6.30 General soil description of Example Problem .................................................................... 6-103
Figure 6.31 Curve of LRFD Geotechnical Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 9. ........................... 6-106
Figure 6.32 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 9................................................. 6-107

xiv

xv
Tables
Table 2.1 Files created in SHAFT runs ........................................................................................................ 2-9
Table 3.1 Recommended values of for drilled shafts in clay. .................................................................... 3-3
Table 3.2 Relationship Between N and and (after Gibbs and Holtz, 1957) .................................... 3-15
Table 3.3 Recommended values of unit end bearing for cohesionless soil. ............................................ 3-16
Table 3.4 Estimation of Em/Ei based RQD and nature of joints (Modified after Carter and Kulhawy, 1988)
...................................................................................................................................... 3-37
Table 3.5 Adjustment of fa for presence of soft seams............................................................................ 3-39
Table 3.6 Recommended values of unit end bearing for cohesionless soil. ............................................ 3-47
Table 3.7 Recommended load factors from ASSHTO .............................................................................. 3-52
Table 3.8 Strength reduction factors recommended by AASHTO ........................................................... 3-53
Table 4.1 Supported mathematical operations and constants.................................................................. 4-5
Table 4.2 Relationship between N and f (after Gibbs and Holtz, 1957) .................................................. 4-13
Table 4.3 Recommended values of (internally used by the program). ................................................... 4-16
Table 5.1 Mouse commands in the graphics mode ................................................................................... 5-7
Table 6.1 Comparison of results for Example Problem 1......................................................................... 6-25
Table 6.5 Comparison of results for Example Problem 5 ........................................................................ 6-75
Table 6.6 Numerical computation of load-transfer factors for Example Problem 7 ............................... 6-89
Table 6.7 Summary of factored loads on the 8-ft OD drilled shaft for Example Problem 9 .................. 6-102
Table 6.8 Summary of factored loads on the 8-ft OD drilled shaft for Example Problem 9 .................. 6-102
Table 6.9 Calculations for axial compressive resistance, Strength I Limit State for Example Problem 9 .... 6104
Table 6.10 Comparison of results for Example Problem 9 .................................................................... 6-105

CHAPTER 1.
Introduction

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1-2
1.1 General Description

The procedures and programs used for analysis and design of drilled shafts to support axial
loading have undergone changes in recent years. There are two principal reasons for these changes:
field tests have been performed on full-sized, instrumented drilled shafts in a wide variety of soil and
rock providing the availability of data on load-transfer in skin friction and in end bearing; and
information has become available on improved methods of construction. In addition, advances in
computer software and operating systems have improved functionality of computer programs.
It is beyond the scope of this document to discuss methods of construction, but it is certainly
appropriate to emphasize the importance and influence of these methods. While past failures of drilled
shafts to perform properly under axial loading have been relatively rare, the difficulties that have been
reported, almost without exception, have been related to errors in construction. Therefore, the user of
SHAFT for Windows is urged to give careful attention to the preparation of construction specifications
and to the performance of field inspection by qualified personnel to ensure that good construction is
achieved.
At the present time it is well established that drilled shafts can carry a substantial portion of their
load in skin friction or side resistance. Much of the data from field tests of instrumented drilled shafts
show that the initial loads are sustained almost completely by skin friction. Usually, at a relatively small
downward movement, the full resistance in skin friction is mobilized and the remaining load is carried in
end bearing. At the ultimate load, a sizeable portion may be carried in end bearing but at a significant
amount of downward movement of the drilled shaft. In some instances, there is some reduction in the
load carried in side resistance as the downward movement is continued, due probably to the reduction
in shear strength of the soil along the sides of the shaft. Thus, the designer must take into account the
amount of downward movement and the resulting influence on load transfer when both end bearing
and skin friction are being counted on.
As noted above, tests of instrumented drilled shafts have allowed the load that was transferred to
the soil in skin friction (side resistance) to be measured and correlations have been developed between
the skin friction and soil properties. The scatter in the correlation is relatively small where excellent
methods of construction were employed. However, there are several reasons to use caution in making
designs that depend strongly on skin friction: the number of instrumented tests is relatively small, there
are some types of soil where tests have not been performed, and the load transfer in skin friction is
influenced strongly by construction procedures. Therefore, designs that make use of skin friction must
be made with care or field load tests must be made to prove the design or to obtain revised design
parameters.
SHAFT is a special-purpose program based on rational procedures for analyzing a drilled shaft
under axial loading. The program computes settlement of the top and base of the shaft as a function of
axial loading, along with the distribution of axial load along the length of the shaft.

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1-3
1.2 History of Development

1.2.1
SHAFT1 (1987)
With the advent of wide-spread availability of personal computers, the founder of ENSOFT, Inc.,
had a vision to improve the engineering capability for analysis and design of deep foundations by
providing useful software tools. The development of SHAFT1 was completed under the direction of Dr.
Lymon C. Reese and was first commercially distributed in 1987. While based on an earlier mainframe
program, SHAFT1 was developed to use an interactive-input method.
1.2.2
SHAFT, Version 2 (1989)

Version 2 of SHAFT was released in 1989. This version incorporated the improved methods of
analysis developed by Reese and ONeill (1988). In addition, a menu-based DOS interface was
introduced.
1.2.3
SHAFT 3.0 for Windows (1995)

The success of Windows 3.1 from Microsoft, Inc., as the dominant platform for personal
computers pushed software development to adopt a standard, graphical-user interface. This version of
SHAFT utilized Windows-based pre-and post-processors, while retaining the original computing engine
from Version 2.
1.2.4

SHAFT 4.0 was a complete recoding of both the pre-and post-processing programs running
under Windows 95/NT and the computing engine. The graphical-user interface was recoded to provide a
more intuitive process for data input and to enhance the graphical capabilities.
In addition, in the technical side, Version4 includes new capabilities to analyze drilled shafts in
intermediate geomaterials, such as gravel and soft rock. Version 4 was capable of automatically computing capacities for shaft subjected to uplift forces.
1.2.5

This version of SHAFT has been improved over the previous version in that the computational
methods have been updated to conform to the latest recommendations by the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA, 1999). In addition, the graphical output features have been updated to allow the
user to plot both the ultimate and service load cases for the shaft. SHAFT 5.0 also includes an updated
help file that contains information on all areas of the program where the user is asked to input
information, as well as information on program output.
1.2.6

SHAFT Version 6.0 added new soil criteria for computing the axial capacity of drilled shafts in
strata of gravelly sand and gravel based on the studies by Rollins et al (2005). Another new feature in
Version 6.0 is to allow the user to include both side friction and tip resistance for drilled shafts in strong
rock for comparison. The load-versus-settlement curve at the top of the drilled shaft in soils becomes
more and more important to the structural engineers for specifying the stiffness of the foundations. The
new version of SHAFT will allow the user to compare the upper-bound, lower-bound, and trend
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1-4
(averaged) curves together for engineering assessment. The user may specify the increment length, such
as 1ft, 2ft, 1m, or 2m, for printing the output. SHAFT Version 6.0 also generates t-z curves for each soil
layer and will save the data in an external file for export. The graphics allow the user to present the soil
profile along the predicted pile capacity as a function of depth. This version of SHAFT has been updated
to conform to the latest recommendations by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
1.2.7
SHAFT for Windows (2012)

Maintenance services become more demanding and important for Program SHAFT, which has
been used daily by the engineering institutes worldwide. Program SHAFT used the year number as the
version sequence starting in 2012. The major improvement in Shaft 2012 is to provide options for
specifying the reduction factors on side friction and tip resistance for each soil/rock layer if the user
select the LRFD method for design (see Example 9). The option for the conventional ASD (allowable
Stress Design) method through specifying factors of safety is still available in SHAFT 2012. The program
allows the user to change the line width and font sizes in the generated plots. The user manual was
updated and improved for this new version.
1.3 Organization of SHAFT Manuals

The documentation provided with the computer program SHAFT consists of one volume. The
Users Manual contains full documentation about the operation of the program on personal computers.
The manual covers the areas of installation, preparation of input data, program execution, view of
computational results, and example applications.
The manual also provides technical information about the theories of load-transfer and
settlement of drilled shafts in different types of soil/rock strata. The manual includes other helpful
technical references related to concepts utilized in program SHAFT.
1.4 Typographical Conventions

To orient the user to different SHAFT features, certain terms are set in typefaces that distinguish
them from the body text. The following formatting conventions are used throughout the Manual.
Commands that are typed directly on the keyboard: Enter ; F1 ; Esc
Commands with keys simultaneously pressed in the keyboard: Alt + F ; Ctrl + O
Menu items and other text displayed on the screen are in sans serif:
From the File menu choose Open
File names and names of directories, Internet and electronic mail addresses, and folder and icon
names are in italics:
Open the example file example1.sfd
c:\shaft\sfpedit.exe

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1-5
1.5 Contents of SHAFT Package

The standard package sent with SHAFT consists of the following items:
one CD-ROM;
one USB device (sometimes known as hardware lock or dongle).
The CD-ROM contains the main Windows-program module (sfpedit.exe), several examples of
input files (all files with extension *.sfd), the program engine for direct computations (sfce.dll), the
Windows-based installation program (install.exe), the Help file (shaft.hlp), and the Help contents file
(shaft.cnt). If any of these files is not included or damaged, the user should call ENSOFT, INC., or the
local distributor. The user manual in the electronic pdf format is also included in the CD-ROM.
In addition, the CD-ROM version is usually distributed with evaluation versions of other software
products developed by ENSOFT, INC.
1.6 Hardware Requirements

To use SHAFT, the user needs the following minimum hardware configuration:
Any personal computer with an Intel Pentium or compatible processor.
A CD-ROM drive and a hard disk with at least 20 Mb of free space.
Microsoft Windows 2000, XP, VISTA, Windows 7, or the latest Windows.
512 Mb of RAM memory.
Any windows-compatible printer, however a printer is optional.
A mouse or similar pointing device.
1.7 Technical Support

Although computer program SHAFT was designed to be distinguished by its ease of use and by its
helpful Users Manual, some users may still have questions. The technical staff at ENSOFT strongly
supports all registered users with questions related to the installation or use of SHAFT, according to the
stipulations presented below. The software is provided with free maintenance service for the first year.
After the first year the user is encouraged to purchase the yearly maintenance services. The yearly
maintenance services include free download of the latest version and free technical support as
described below.
1.7.1 Preferred Methods of Software Support
Software support is given, in order of preference, by the following methods:
electronic mail to: ensoft@ensoftinc.com

fax to: (512) 244-6067

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1-6
Users are strongly encouraged to utilize electronic means of support via email. In any event, users
should include the following information when requesting for software support: software version
(obtain from the Help/About menu) description of the problem copy, file attachment, or printout of the
input-data file name, fax, and telephone number of the contact person and of the registered user (or
name and office location of the registered company).
Although immediate answers are offered on most technical support requests, up to two business days
should be expected in case of difficulties or conflict of schedules. The users will be informed of ENSOFTs
reception of their electronic mails requesting software support if the problem is complicated and cannot
be resolved within two business days.
1.7.2
Support by Telephone
Technical help by means of direct calls to our local telephone number (512-244-6464) is
available, but limited. The current policy of ENSOFT is that all telephone calls for software support will
be answered free of charge for the first 15 minutes of each call if the user has the valid maintenance
policy. A charge of $90.00 US dollars per hour ($1.50 US dollars per minute) comes into effect for every
additional minute after the initial 15 minutes. Applicable charges will be billed to the user.
Software support by any of the preferred methods (fax or email) is free for all users that have
the annual maintenance policy.
1.7.3
Upgrade Verification and Internet Site

The new version of SHAFT (2012) will provide an option for the user to verify the latest version
number through the internet connection when the program is loaded on the screen. If the users
version is not the latest version and the maintenance has not been expired, the user can download the
latest version from our web server directly (www.ensoftinc.com). Users may also consult our internet
site http://www.ensoftinc.com) for additional information on software updates, demos, and new
applications; technical news; and company information.
1.7.4
Changes of Support Policy

The software support policy and associated expenses are subject to change at ENSOFTs
discretion and without specific mailed notices to the users. However, any change of rules will be verbally
provided during telephone calls for software support.

CHAPTER 2.
Installation and Getting

Started

CHAPTER 2 Installation and Getting Started
2-2
2.1 Installation Procedures

Program SHAFT is distributed with a hardware (USB) lock. The hardware lock consists of a device
that can be attached to the USB port of the computer in use. This method of software protection has
been found to provide compatibility with existing operating systems, better stability than other
alternatives, and allows users to obtain software updates or replacements via downloads from the world
wide web.
The file , contained in the distribution media, is a Windows-based program which will assist the
user in installing all program modules into a user-selected directory with the proper settings used for
the Windows environment. The user is assumed to have basic knowledge in running applications under
MS Windows. The following steps are recommended for a successful installation.
2.1.1
Installation of Single-User Version

Users are normally supplied with CDROM (software files and user manual) and hardware (USB)
lock. This version of SHAFT has been tested to be compatible with the following versions of Windows
2000, XP, Vista, and Windows 7.
The following guidelines are recommended to be followed during the installation process of
SHAFT for single-user licenses.
1. It is our recommendation that the hardware lock (USB dongle) should not be plugged in the
computer prior to the software-installation process. The USB dongle can be plugged into the
computer after the software has been installed successfully and the computer should recognize
the USB device immediately.
2. Start Windows. Insert the distribution CD-ROM in the appropriate tray. If the main installation
program does not start automatically, click on the Start button and select Run. On the
command line, type d:\setup.exe or e:\setup.exe, where d: or e: represents the drive that
contains the distribution CD. Press e or click OK to execute the command and start the main
installation program for ENSOFTs software. A screen similar to the one in Figure 2.1 should
appear.
3. Click anywhere on the SHAFT icon and then click on the Install Standard button to start the
installation of the single-user version of SHAFT.
4. The user should read the license agreement shown in Figure 2.2. Please click Yes if you agree
and would like to proceed.
5. If your license is for a single-user, select the "Single-User License" option and click Next.
6. The user will be provided with an option to select a drive and directory for the installation of
SHAFT; the default is c:\Ensoft\Shaft. If the desired directory does not exist, the installation
program will automatically create a new directory in the chosen hard drive.
7. Most distribution files will be copied to the installation directory (either the default of the one
selected by the user). However, certain files are copied to system directories in Windows and
some Windows services are started during installation. The name of the system files, their exact
locations, and the type of services that are started may change. Up to date settings are usually
2-3
included in the readme file copied to the selected installation directory. The readme file is
named according to the operating system in use.
8. Follow the dialog boxes until the installation finishes.
9. Plug the hardware lock (USB device) into one of the available USB ports in your computer.
Typically the computer will recognize the USB device automatically by finding the USB driver
from the Ensoft CD-ROM. If the computer cannot recognize the USB key automatically the
hardware wizard prompt from the operation system will guide the user through the required
driver installation.
Figure 2.1 Main installation screen for ENSOFT software (may change with time)
After the installation is finished, it is usually not necessary to reboot Windows for the program to run.
The user may run the program by double-clicking its icon in the ENSOFT/SHAFT folder located in the
Start/Programs menu.

2-4

2-5
2.1.2
Introduction of Network Version

Special network licenses and hardware locks are available for users that desire to operate SHAFT
on a Windows network. The network version is limited to users with two or more licenses at the same
physical site. Discounted rates apply for users purchasing multiple licenses for the same site.
Network versions of SHAFT have special subroutines written for installations in software
servers and for installations of individual clients.
The software server is known as the computer that will be carrying the network lock provided
by ENSOFT, INC. The software server is not necessarily the same as the existing network server. Any
computer in the existing Windows network may be designated software server for SHAFT as long as the
network lock is attached to its parallel port and the server version of the software is installed on its
hard drive. Software clients may be all other computers of the network that have the program
installed as clients. Software clients do not need any hardware lock attached to their computers. The
program installed in software clients will be allowed to run as long as the computer designated as
software server is running on the network with the proper operating system and with its network lock
secured in place.
Users of the network version of SHAFT are allowed to have the software installed in as many
computers as they have on their local Windows network. However, only a number of users equal to the
total number of purchased licenses (minimum two for networks) will be able to operate the program at
the same time.
2.1.3
Installation of Network Version

To install this program, the user must have network privileges to modify the Windows registry.
In large computer networks, this is usually only available to network administrators. They are the ones
recommended to proceed with these installations.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The network administrator must first define the computer that will be carrying the network
lock for this software. The computer carrying the network lock is known as the "server" for this
particular computer program. Notice that the "server" may be any computer in the network,
and not necessarily the existing file server or network server.
INSTALLATION TO A "SERVER": The "server" computer must be turned on and logged into the
network to enable other users (ie, "clients") to access this computer program. Please attach the
network lock (USB device) to the software server after the installation is completed.
INSTALLATION TO "CLIENTS": It is not necessary to connect the network lock to client
computers during installation or during program executions. Once the program is executed, the
installed network protocols will automatically recognize the computer where the network key
is residing and the number of simultaneous users.
Start Windows.
Insert the CD-ROM in the appropriate tray.
If the main installation program does not start automatically, click on the Start button and
select Run. On the command line, type d:\setup.exe or e:\setup.exe, where d: or e: represents
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
2-6
the drive that contains the distribution CD. Press the Enter key or click OK to execute the
command and start the main installation program for ENSOFTs software. A screen similar to
the one previously shown in Fig. 2.1 should appear.
Click anywhere on the SHAFT icon and then click on the Install Network button to start the
installation of the network version of SHAFT.
The user will be provided with an option to select a drive and directory for the installation of
SHAFT; the default is c:\Ensoft\Shaft6. If the desired directory does not exist, the installation
program will automatically create a new directory in the chose hard drive.
The installation program will automatically recognize the version of Windows that is running on
the destination computer. The user will be prompted to select an installation to a "Client" or to
a "Server" computer. If desired, the network administrator may install the program to a single
directory in a file server. In this case, the software must first be installed in the file server as a
software server and icons pointing to the winshaft.exe file (residing in the server) can later be
created in each individual client computer.
Most distribution files will be copies to the installation directory (either the default of the one
selected by the user). However, certain files are copied to system directories in Windows and
some Windows services are started during installation. The name of the system readme files,
their exact locations, and the type of services that are started may change. Up to date settings
are usually included in the readme file copied to the selected installation directory.
After the installation is finished, it is usually not necessary to reboot Windows for the program
to run. The user may run the program by double-clicking its icon in the folder located in the
menu.
2.1.4
Backup of Original Software

The distributed software may be copied for backup purposes. The program may be installed in
several computers at the same time. However, unless network licenses are purchased, the program will
only operate in computers that carry the appropriate hardware lock.
2.1.5
Software Updates on the Internet

Occasionally, ENSOFT will produce software improvements and/or fixes and place the latest
software programs on ENSOFTs internet site. Software users may freely download the latest program
update from the following site:
http://www.ensoftinc.com
2.1.6 Installation of Software Updates from the Internet
1. Download appropriate file specified above (either single-user version or network version) to a
local directory. If the download was not made to the computer carrying the hardware lock, the
downloaded file must be copied to the appropriate computer.
2. Run the downloaded file in the appropriate computer and follow instructions. This can be done
by double clicking within Windows Explorer, or through the Start/Run/Browse menu.
3. The downloaded file is a compressed zip file and normally decompresses into the temporary
Windows directory (usually c:\windows\temp). After decompression of files, the installation
program (setup.exe) is started automatically from within the temporary directory. All files in the
temporary directory are deleted automatically after completing the installation.
2-7
2.2 Getting Started

A general diagram showing the menu choices and operational flow chart of program SHAFT is
presented in Fig. 2.4. The following paragraphs provide a short description of the operational features of
SHAFT 6.0 and should quickly enable the user to get started with the program.
Figure 2.4 Sample organization and operational flow chart

2-8
2.2.1
Starting the Program

The program is started by double clicking the left mouse button anywhere in the SHAFT icon. A
new window will appear on the screen, with the following top-menu choices: File, Data, Computation,
Graphics, Window, and Help.
2.2.2 File Management
The File menu option contains five submenus, as shown in Fig. 2.5; they are:
New: to create a new data file.
Open: to open an existing data file.
Save: to save input data under the current file name.
Save As: to save input data under a different file name.
Exit: to exit program SHAFT.
Figure 2.5 Options contained in the File menu
Several additional files are created in every new SHAFT run. A general description of these files is
presented in Table 2.1. Every run of SHAFT thus generates four text files in the same drive and directory
where the input-data file was saved or opened. Any of these files may be opened with standard text
editors or word processing programs.


File Name
Extension
*.sfd
*.sfo
*.sfp
*.sfr
Usage
Descr iption
Input-data file
File
For mat
Text file
2-9
Example
Files
example1.sfd
example2.sfd
Output-data file
Text file
example1.sfo
example2.sfo
Plot-data file
Text file
example1.sfp
example2.sfp
Processor-data file
Text file
example1.sfr
example2.sfr
Table 2.1 Files created in SHAFT runs
2.2.3
Data Input of Application Problem

The menu contains several choices of submenus, as shown in Fig. 2.6. The choices are listed
below, along with a general description of their use.
Title ............. to enter a single line of text with a general description for the project.
Units ............ this option allows the user to select either (using pounds, feet, and inches) or (using
kiloNewtons and meters) or any other consistent set of units of . English units are enabled,
as a default, for all new runs. The user may change the system of units as many times as
desired and values that were previously inputted will be automatically converted by the
program.
Design Method (ASD or LRFD) ............ this option allows the user to select either (using pounds, feet,
and inches) or (using kiloNewtons and meters) or any other consistent set of units of .
English units are enabled, as a default, for all new runs. The user may change the system
of units as many times as desired and values that were previously inputted will be
automatically converted by the program.
Drilled Shaft Properties.to describe dimensions, and material properties of the drilled shaft.
Soil Layer Datathis submenu is used to define the type and depth of each soil/rock layer and to enter
the associated soil/ rock parameters.
Factor of Safety (Allowable Stress Design)this submenu is used to enter the factor of safety that will be
used during computations.
Computation Methods... this submenu is used to select the analysis for a specific shaft length or for a
specific design load.
Water Table... this submenu is used to specify the depth of the water table. The depth of water table is
referenced from the ground surface or finished grade.
Control Optionsthe user should input in this box the complete path and command line for the
preferred text editor or word processor that will be used to examine and print the input,
output, and processor plain text files created by the program. As a default , the command
line is used to operate the standard text editor Microsoft Notepad included with Windows
95, 98, or 2000. However, there may be some instances when the output files are too
large for Notepad and a different text editor or word processor should be used. In those
cases it is suggested to use Microsoft WordPad.

2-10
Figure 2.6 Options contained in the Data menu
2.2.4
Computation Options
The menu is provided to run the analytical computations after all data are entered and saved.
After the computation is executed successfully, this menu also provides options for the reviews of plaintext input data, notes produced during computation, and output data. It also provides an option for the
graphical observation of the modeled pile and soil layers. Submenu choices, shown in Fig. 2.7, are briefly
described below.
Run Analysis... this option is chosen to run the analytical computations. This option should be selected
after all data have been entered and saved.
Edit Input Text... this option calls the previously-chosen (selected under the submenu in the menu) to
observe and/or edit the analytical input data in plain-text format. The option becomes
available after the input data has been saved to disk, or when opening an existing inputdata file.
Edit Processor-Run Notes... this option calls the previously-chosen Text Editor (selected under the
submenu in the menu) to observe, format, and/or print the notes provided during
processing. The option becomes available (or modified) after a run attempt has been
2-11
made. The user is encouraged to read the processor-run notes if the program is not
running successfully. The processor-run notes should provide the user with some
information about possible causes of the problem.
Edit Output Text... this option calls the previously chosen (selected under the submenu in the menu) to
observe, format, and/or print the analytical-output data. The option becomes available
only after a successful run has been made. Certain output files may be too large for the
Microsoft Notepad editor, so other text editors would have to be used (Microsoft Word
Pad should be able to open most text files).
View Shaft Elevation... this option provides a graphical representation of the elevation of the modeled
shaft and the location of the specified soil layers.
Figure 2.7 Options contained in the Computation menu

2-12
2.2.5
Graphics
The menu is used to observe plots of output data provided by a successful program run. Options
for the observation of output curves under this menu are only enabled after a successful run has been
made. Even after performing successful runs, some options may still be disabled since the amount of
output data depends on specifications provided in the input file of each program run. Submenu choices,
shown in Fig. 2.8, are briefly described below.
Ultimate Skin Friction vs. Depth... this option provides a plot of ultimate skin friction on the modeled
shaft versus depth.
Ultimate Total Capacity vs. Depth... this option provides a plot of the ultimate total capacity (skin friction
+ tip resistance) of the modeled shaft versus depth.
Skin Friction vs. Depth (w/FS)... this option provides a plot of skin friction on the modeled shaft versus
depth with a factor of safety applied.
Tip Resistance vs. Depth (w/FS)... this option provides a plot of top resistance of the modeled shaft
versus depth with a factor of safety applied.
Total Capacity vs. Depth (w/FS)... this option provides a plot of the total capacity (skin friction + tip
resistance) of the modeled shaft versus depth with a factor of safety applied.
Combined Plots vs. Depth (ultimate)... this option provides a plot of ultimate skin friction, ultimate tip
resistance, and the ultimate total capacity versus depth on the same plot.
Combined Plots vs. Depth (w/FS)... this option provides a plot of skin friction, tip resistance, and the
total capacity versus depth on the same plot all with a factor of safety applied to them.
Axial Load vs. Settlement (Trend curves)... this option provides a plot of the axial loads versus settlement
at the shaft head based on the averaged trend.
Axial Load vs. Settlement (Upper Bound)... this option provides a plot of the axial loads versus
settlement at the shaft head based on the upper-bound data.
Axial Load vs. Settlement (Lower Bound)... this option provides a plot of the axial loads versus
settlement at the shaft head based on the lower-bound data.
Combined Plots of Load vs. Settlement... this option provides a plot of the axial loads versus settlement
curves at the shaft head based on the upper-bound, lower-bound, and averaged trend
data.

2-13
Figure 2.8 Options contained in the Graphics menu
2.2.6 Arrangement of Windows

The menu provides two standard functions for organizing open- screen windows and/or minimized
screen-window icons. Submenu options, shown in Fig. 2.9, are briefly described below.
Cascade ...... this option organizes all open-windowed menus so that all become visible with their tops
cascading from the top left portion of the screen.
Arrange Icons... this option organizes the icons of all minimized windowed menus so that all become
visible and aligned at the bottom portion of the screen.

2-14
Figure 2.9 Options contained in the Window menu
2.2.7
Help Files
The menu provides an online help reference on topics such as: using the program, entering data,
information about variables used in the program, and methods of analyses. Submenu options, shown in
Fig. 2.10, are briefly described below. The menu may be accessed at any time while in SHAFT.
Contents ...... the main reference files for help are accessed through this submenu option. Clicking on
this option provides a screen with reference help for the following topics: Menu, Menu,
Menu, Menu, and Menu. Under each topic are additional subtitles that correspond to
data-entry headings. If the user selects one of these, a help screen on the topic is
displayed.
About ........... this provides a screen describing the program version, date, and methods for accessing
technical support.

2-15
Figure 2.10 Options contained in the Help menu

CHAPTER 3.
Engineering
Documentation

CHAPTER 3 Engineering Documentation 3-2
3.1 Introduction
As noted in the Introduction, this document and the computer program provide methods for the
computation of the capacity of a drilled shaft under axial loading. The computation procedures are
based principally on the FHWA report previously mentioned. Detailed engineering documentation can
be found in the FHWA manual. All the equations that were employed in programming are presented in
the following paragraphs to give the user essential information on how a solution is obtained by the
program.
The assumption is made implicitly in the methods of analysis that excellent construction
procedures have been employed. Some factors of importance are that the excavation remained stable
and with the proper geometry, that the rebar was placed properly, that high-slump concrete was used,
that the concrete was placed in an approved manner, that the concrete was placed the same day that
the excavation was completed, and that any slurry that was used was conditioned before placing the
concrete. Much information on construction methods is given in the FHWA manual (Reese and ONeill,
1988 and ONeill and Reese, 1999). Also, a FHWA publication (LCPC, 1986) that was translated from the
French language gives a considerable amount of useful information.
While the methods of analysis that are presented have proved to be useful, the methods are not
perfect by any means. Research continues to be done on the behavior of drilled shafts and improved
methods of analysis are expected to be developed. An appropriate factor of safety must be employed in
order to arrive at a safe working load. The engineer may elect to employ a factor of safety that will lead
to a conservative assessment of capacity if the job is small. A load test to develop design parameters, or
to prove the design, is strongly recommended for a job of any significance.
3.2 Computation Procedures for Clay

3.2.1
Side Resistance
The basic approach in computing the load transfer in side resistance (skin friction) for drilled
shafts in clay is to employ the so called method. The undrained shear strength, , of the clay is found
from appropriate soil tests and the following equation is employed to compute the ultimate value of
unit load transfer at the depth z below the ground surface.
=
(3.1)
where
= ultimate load transfer in side resistance at depth z,
= undrained shear strength at depth z, and
= empirical factor that can vary with depth z.


The total load Qs in side resistance can then be computed by use of the following equation.
(3.2)
where
= differential area of the perimeter along sides of drilled shaft over the penetration depth, and
= penetration of drilled shaft belowground surface.
Equation 3.1 indicates that the unit load transfer in skin friction at depth z is a function of a
constant and the undrained shear strength at depth z. It is evident, actually, from the results of the load
tests of instrumented drilled shafts that is not a constant, but that it varies with depth. However, the
research that has been done to date is insufficient to allow a precise prediction of as a function of depth.
The following table reflects the current recommendations for the value of .
Table 3.1 Recommended values of for drilled shafts in clay.

Location along drilled shaft
Value of
From ground surface to

depth along drilled shaft of
5 ft.(1.5m)
Bottom one diameter of
the drilled shaft or one
shaft diameter above the
bell (if skin friction is being
used)
All other points along the
sides of the drilled shaft
Limiting Value of Load Transfer,

/ 2
-
0.55
3.2
300
It is necessary to provide an explanation for the values of that are shown in Table 3.1. The
undrained shear strength, , of heavily over-consolidated clay can be quite large and little, if any, loadtransfer data are available for such clays. Therefore, it is not known if the value of a of 0.55 is suitable
for such clays. Thus, a limiting value of load transfer in side resistance is shown in Table 3.1. The value of
3.2 tons/ft2 (300 kPa) was measured for a load test where ideal construction methods were possible and
where a relatively rough borehole was made (Engling and Reese, 1974). The table reflects the fact that
experimental data are missing for load transfer in side resistance in clay where the clay has an
undrained shear strength greater than about 6 tons/ft2 (575 kPa).
When an excavation is made and prior to the placement of concrete, the lateral stress at the
sides of the drilled hole is zero, or small if there is fluid in the excavation. Because of the fluidity of the
fresh concrete as it is placed, lateral stresses will then be imposed on the sides of the excavation. At the

ground surface, the stresses from the concrete will be zero or close to it. It can be expected that the
lateral stress from the concrete will increase almost linearly with depth, assuming that the concrete has
a relatively high slump. Some experiments (Bernal, 1983) show that the assumption of a linear increase
of the lateral stress from fluid concrete for depths of concrete of 10 ft (3.0m) or more is correct. For
greater depths, the lateral stress is strongly dependent on the character of the fresh concrete. From
available experimental evidence, it follows that a rational recommendation for indicates that should
vary perhaps linearly with depth, starting at zero at the ground line, to its ultimate value at some critical
depth below the ground line. However, data are unavailable for making such a detailed
recommendation. The recommendations in Table 3.1 generally lead to a reasonable correlation
between experimental and computed results.
With regard to the depth over which is assumed to be zero, some regard must be given to those
cases where there are seasonal changes of the moisture content of the soil. It is conceivable, perhaps
likely, that the clay near the ground surface will shrink away from the drilled shaft so that the load
transfer is reduced to zero in dry weather over the full depth of the seasonal moisture change. The
computer program SHAFT will allow the engineer to select the manner in which the value of will be
entered and an appropriate deviation from Table 3.1 should be made in the case of seasonal moisture
change. There may also be other instances where the engineer may wish to deviate from the
recommendations in Table 3.1 due to special circumstances at a particular site. A drilled shaft that is
subjected to a lateral load is an example of such a circumstance; if the lateral deflection at the
groundline is more than a few hundredths of an inch, the portion of the drilled shaft above the first
point of zero deflection should be discounted in terms of side resistance.
The setting of a zero value for for a distance of one diameter above the base of the drilled
shaft needs some explanation (Fig. 3.1). Experimental results, and theory as well, have shown that the
lateral stress against the sides of the shaft is reduced when the base of the drilled shaft moves
downward. This reduction in lateral stress results in a reduction of load transfer in skin friction for clay.
Thus, a necessary adjustment in the value of must be made for the portion of the drilled shaft just
above the base, or the portion just above the underream.

Figure 3.1 Explanation of Portions of Drilled Shaft not Considered in Computing Side Resistance
The values of that are shown in Table 3.1 are principally a result of analyses of a sizeable
amount of data from load tests of instrumented drilled shafts. The performance of a special direct-shear
test in the laboratory may be useful in gaining an insight into the nature of (Chuang, 1968; ONeill,
1970). Samples of the clay from the construction site can be obtained. A specimen can be fitted into the
lower half of the specimen holder and mortar, with the same water cement ratio as the concrete that is
to be used, can be poured in the upper half of the specimen holder. Moisture from the mortar can move
into the clay and cause a reduction in the shear strength of the clay. There can be a chemical
combination of the cement in the mortar and the clay particles, with a resulting increase in strength. The
minimum value of can be found that the minimum value of shearing resistance frequently occurs several
hundredths of an inch from the interface. Testing of this nature, in combination with a field test of an
instrumented drilled shaft, can be quite instructive.
There are occasions when it is desirable to make a rough computation of the load-carrying
capacity of a drilled shaft when the only data that are available for soil properties are the nature of the
soil and the results of dynamic penetration tests. Correlations have been made between undrained
shear strength of the clay and the N-value. The following correlations have been established for
obtaining approximate values of undrained shear strength for homogeneous clays from NSPT (Quiros
and Reese, 1977).
=
or
, / 2
10

=
,
.
(3.3)
where
= undrained shear strength of clay.
Equation 3.3 allows the methods presented previously to be used in computing load transfer in clay.
3.2.2
End Bearing
The computation offload transferring end bearing for deep foundations in clays, using the
undrained-strength approach, is much less subject to uncertainty than is the computation of load
transfer in skin friction. Skempton (1951) and other investigators have developed expressions that are
fairly consistent. In addition, the work of Skempton has been confirmed with acceptable accuracy by
results from instrumented drilled shafts where general base failure was observed. Equation 3.4, is
employed for computing the net, ultimate, unit end bearing for drilled shafts in saturated clay.
= , / (. )
(3.4)
where
= . + .
(3.5)
= average undrained shear strength of the clay (the value is computed over a depth of one to two
diameters below the base, but judgment must be used if the shear strength varies strongly with depth),
= penetration of shaft, and
= diameter of the base of the shaft.
If only standard-penetration-test data are available, the undrained shear strength can be estimated
approximately from Eq. 3.3.
For clays and clay-like soils, the limiting value of shown in Eq. 3.4 is based merely on the
largest value of end bearing that has been measured (Engling and Reese, 1974) and is not a theoretical
limit. A load test is indicated if the designer wishes to use a higher value.
In those instances where the clay at the base is of soft consistency, the value (or ) may be
reduced by about one-third to account for local (high-strain) bearing failure. Furthermore, when the
base of the shaft has a diameter greater than about 75 in. (1.9m), consideration should be given to
reducing , because the settlement required to obtain will be so great that applications of factors of
safety in the usual range of 2 to 3 may result in excessive short-term settlement. It is therefore

suggested that for drilled shafts in stiff to hard clay, with exceeding 75 in. (1.9m), the following
expression be used to reduce to , where is the net reduced ultimate end bearing stress, to
which appropriate factors of safety are to be applied to obtain design loads.
=
(3.6)
where
=
.
; , .
+ .
(3.7)
in which
; .
= . + .
= . ( ). ; . .
(3.8)
(3.9)
where
= diameter of base, units in inches,
= depth to base, inches, and
= undrained shear strength at base, units in ksf.
(NOTE : Eqs. 3.7 and 3.9 are nonhomogeneous and the values of and must be converted to the
appropriate values in English units for solutions with SI units. After obtaining the value of , the
solution proceeds with SI units.)
The above expressions are based on load tests of large-diameter underreamed drilled shafts in
very stiff clay and soft clay-shale (ONeill and Sheikh, 1985; Sheikh, et al, 1985) and restrict to be the
net bearing stress at a base settlement of 2.5 in. (64mm). When half or more of the design load is
carried in end bearing and a global factor of safety is applied, the global factor of safety should not be
less than 2.5, even if soil conditions are well-defined, unless one or more site-specific load tests are
performed.
The step-by-step procedures for the use of the equations for computing skin friction and end
bearing for clay are presented in Chapter 5.


3.2.3
Settlement
A number of experiments have been performed where the internal instrumentation in the
drilled shaft allowed the load transfer in side resistance and in end bearing to be determined as a
function of settlement. Curves for a number of cases have been normalized and are presented in Fig.
3.2, for side resistance and in Fig. 3.3, for end bearing. As may be seen, there is a considerable amount
of scatter in the results. However, the curves are useful to the designer in estimating the short-term
settlement and in adjusting the allowable load if the total or differential settlement appear to be too
great. Normally, if the procedures for establishing ultimate loads in this manual are followed, short-term
settlement should be restricted to values of less than one inch (25mm) when appropriate factors of
safety are applied.
The t-z and Q-w curves will be developed based on Figs. 3.2 and 3.3 for analyses of the loadsettlement curves at the pile head.
The settlement due to long-term loading must be computed site by site using consolidation
theory and cannot be generalized. However, long-term settlement will not be too significant at many
sites where the clays are heavily overconsolidated. Drilled shafts are installed less frequently in normally
consolidated clays where settlement due to consolidation could be significant.

Figure 3.2 Normalized Curves Showing Load Transfer in Side Resistance versus Settlement for Drilled Shafts in
Clay (From Reese and ONeill, 1988)

Figure 3.3 Normalized Curves Showing Load Transfer in End Bearing versus Settlement for Drilled Shafts in Clay
(From Reese and ONeill, 1988)

3.3 Computation Procedures for Sand

3.3.1
Side Resistance
The shear strength of sands and other cohesionless soils is characterized by an angle of internal
friction that ranges from about 30 upward, depending on the kinds of grains and their packing. The
cohesion is assumed to be zero. The friction angle at the interface between the concrete and the soil
may be different from that of the soil itself. The unit side resistance, as the drilled shaft is pushed
downward, is equal to the normal effective stress at the interface times the tangent of the interface
friction angle.
Excavations in cohesionless soil are made with drilling slurry or with a casing, where the normal
stress at the face of the completed excavation depends on the construction method. The fluid stress
from the fresh concrete will impose a normal stress that is dependent on the characteristics of the
concrete. Experiments have shown that concrete with moderate slump (up to 6 in., 150mm) acts
hydrostatically over a depth of 10 to 15 ft (3 to 4.6m) and that there is a leveling off in the lateral stress
at greater depths, probably due to arching (Bernal, 1983). Concrete with a high slump (about 9 in,
230mm) acts hydrostatically to a depth of 32 feet (10m) or more. Thus, the construction procedures and
the nature of the concrete will have strong influence on the magnitude of the lateral stress at the
concrete-soil interface. Furthermore, the angle of internal friction of the soil near the interface will be
affected by the details of construction.
In view of the above discussion, the method of computing the unit load transfer in side
resistance must depend on the results from field experiments as well as on theory. The following
equations are recommended for design. The form of the equations is based on theory but the values of
the parameters that are suggested for design are based principally on the results of field experiments.
=
(3.10)
(3.11)
where
= ultimate unit side resistance in sand at depth z,
= a parameter that combines the lateral pressure coefficient and a correlation factor,
= vertical effective stress in soil at depth z,
= friction angle at interface of concrete and soil,

L = depth of embedment of drilled shaft, and


dA = differential area of the perimeter along sides of drilled shaft over the penetration depth.
Equations 3.10 and 3.11 can be used in the computations, but simpler expressions can be
developed if the terms for K and tan are combined. The resulting expressions are shown in Eqs. 3.12
through 3.15.
= . ( )
(3.12)
(3.13)
= . . . , . .
(3.14)
= , .
(3.15)
where
z = depth below ground surface, ft.
(NOTE : Eq. 3.14 is nonhomogeneous and the value of z must be converted to an appropriate value in
English units for solutions with SI units. After obtaining values of , the solution proceeds with SI units.)
The parameter takes into account the coefficient of lateral earth pressure and the tangent of
the friction angle. The parameter also takes into account the fact that the stress at the interface due to
the fluid pressure of the concrete may be greater than that from the soil itself. In connection with the
lateral stress at the interface of the soil and the concrete, the assumption implicit in Eq. 3.12 is that
good construction procedures are employed. Among other factors, the slump of the concrete should be
6in. or more and drilling slurry, if employed, should not cause a weak layer of bentonite to develop at
the wall of the excavation. The reader is referred to the FHWA document (Reese and ONeill, 1988) for
further details on methods of construction.
The limiting value of side resistance shown in Eq. 3.12 is not a theoretical limit but is the largest
value that has been measured (Owens and Reese, 1982). Use of higher values should be justified by
results from a load test.
Fig. 3.4 shows the comparison of values computed from Eq. 3.14 and values derived from
loading tests in sand of fully instrumented drilled shafts. As may be seen, the recommended expression
for b yields values that are in reasonable agreement with experimental values.

Figure 3.4 Plot of Experimental Values of
Equation 3.12 has been employed in computations of and the results are shown in Fig. 3.5. As
may be seen, three values of were selected; two of these are in the range of values of for submerged
sand and the third is an approximate value of for dry sand. The curves are dashed below a depth of 60 ft
(18m) because only a small amount of data has been gathered from instrumented drilled shafts in sand
with deep penetrations. Field load tests are indicated if drilled shafts in sand are to be built with
penetrations of over 70 ft (21m).
Ultimate Unit Resistance In Sand, psf

0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
0
50 pcf
60 pcf
120 pcf
Depth, feet
10
20
30
40
50
60
Figure 3.5 Plot fsz with Depth (z) for Values of
It can be argued that Eqs. 3.12 and 3.13 are too elementary and that the angle of internal
friction, for example, should be treated explicitly. However, the drilling has an influence on soil
properties so that the true friction angle at the interface is not known. Furthermore, Eqs. 3.12 and 3.13
appear to yield an adequate correlation with results from field experiments.
The comparisons of results from computations with those from experiment, using the above
equations for sand, show that virtually every computed value is conservative (computed is less than
experimental). However, it is of interest to note that most of the tests in sand are at locations where the
sand was somewhat cemented. Therefore, some caution should be observed in using the design
equations for sand if the sand is clean, loose, and non-cemented.
The computer program is designed for use of either Eq. 3.10 or Eq.3.12 in computing the skin
friction in sand. If there is no information on the friction angle at the interface of the concrete and the
soil for use in Eq. 3.10, the angle of internal friction of the soil is in general use in design. In some cases,
only data from the Standard Penetration Test are available and the computer program can internally
convert the STP blow-count to the equivalent internal friction angle by using Table 3.2.


N
deg.
Dr %
deg.
Dr %
deg.
Dr %
0
2
4
6
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
0
32
34
36
38
42
45
0
45
55
65
75
90
100
30
32
34
36
37
39
40
41
42
44
45
37
46
57
65
72
77
82
86
90
95
100
31
32
34
35
36
36
37
38
39
39
40
41
42
42
43
44
44
40
48
55
60
65
67
72
75
77
80
83
86
90
92
95
97
99
Table 3.2 Relationship Between N and and (after Gibbs and Holtz, 1957)
3.3.2
End Bearing
Because of the relief of stress when an excavation is drilled into sand, there is a tendency for the
sand to loosen slightly at the bottom of the excavation. Also, there appears to be some densification of
the sand beneath the base of a drilled shaft as settlement occurs. The load-settlement curves that have
been obtained by experiment for the base of drilled shafts are consistent with the above concepts. The
load continued to increase for some of the tests to a settlement of more that 15 percent of the diameter
of the base. Such a large amount of settlement cannot be tolerated for most structures; therefore, it
was decided to limit the values of end bearing for drilled shafts in granular soil to that which would
occur at a downward movement of the base of 5 percent of the diameter of the base.


Values of are tabulated as a function of (uncorrected field values) in Table 3.3.
However, the values in the table may have to be reduced for large-diameter shafts, as shown later by
Eq. 3.16.
Range of Value on NSPT

0 to 75
Above 75
Value of qb, tons/ft2
tons/ft2
0.60 NSPT
45
MPa
0.0575 NSPT
4.3
Table 3.3 Recommended values of unit end bearing for cohesionless soil.
The computation of tip capacity is based directly on the blow count from the Standard
Penetration Test near the tip of the drilled shaft. Similar recommendations were made by Quiros and
Reese (1977). They recommended no unit end bearing for loose sand ( 30) a value of 16 tons/ft2
(1.53MPa) for medium-dense sand (30 < 36) and a value of 40 tons/ft2 (3.83MPa) for very dense
sand (36 < 41).
Neither of the sets of recommendations involve the stress in the soil outside the tip of the
drilled shaft. This concept is consistent with the writings of Meyerh of (1976) and others. Furthermore,
the values in Table 3.3 are based strongly on experimental results where the drilled shafts had various
penetrations. However, implicit in the values of that are given is that the penetration of the drilled
shaft must be at least 10 diameters below the ground surface. For penetrations less than 10 diameters,
it is recommended that be varied linearly from zero at the groundline to the value computed at 10
diameters using Table 3.3.
When base diameters exceed 50in., it is recommended that a reduced ultimate value, , be
used, in which
=
(3.16)
where
= the diameter of the base of the shaft, in inches.
Table 3.3 suggests that the limiting value of load transfer in end bearing is 45 tsf (4.3 MPa) at a
settlement of 5 percent of the diameter of the base. A value of 58 tsf (5.6MPa)was measured at a
settlement of 4 percent of the diameter of the base at a site in Florida (Owens and Reese, 1982).


3.3.3
Settlement
Data from experiments with instrumented drilled shafts have been analyzed, and curves
showing load-transfer as a function of short term settlement have been prepared. Fig. 3.6 is for load
transfer in side resistance, and Fig. 3.7 is for load transfer in end bearing. As might be expected, there is
a considerable amount of scatter in the results (more so than in clay); however, the curves provide
guidance to the engineer in making designs where total or differential settlement could be a problem.
Normally, if the procedures described in this manual for establishing ultimate loads are followed, shortterm settlement will be restricted to values of less than one inch when appropriate factors of safety are
employed.

Figure 3.6 Normalized Curves Showing Load Transfer in Side Resistance Versus Settlement for Drilled Shafts in
Cohesionless Soil (From Reese and ONeill, 1988)

Figure 3.7 Normalized Curves Showing Load Transfer in End Bearing Versus Settlement for Drilled Shafts in
Cohesionless Soil (From Reese and ONeill, 1988)
As noted earlier, curves for load transfer in end bearing for a number of field tests show that the
load continues to increase at settlements well beyond the 5percent of the base diameter, the value that
was selected for defining the ultimate unit end bearing. The engineer may wish to consider this fact as
designs are made.
Aurora and Reese (1977) proposed that the working load be computed by applying a factor of
safety of 2.0 to the ultimate base capacity, ( ) , and a factor of safety of 1.0 to the ultimate side
resistance, ( ) . This recommendation was suggested for shafts with total lengths under 30 feet
(9m) and penetrating 5 feet (1.5m) into clay-shale. The engineer should be aware that such a
recommendation results in an overall factor of safety of less than 2.0 with respect to the total ultimate
shaft capacity. Consequently, suitable adjustments should be made for variability in soil conditions, and
to meet requirements for shaft movement.
3.4 Computation Procedures for Clay-Shale

Early in 1977,Aurora and Reese published the results of a series of load tests that were
performed on drilled shafts installed in clay-shales. The term clay-shale used here is in accordance
with the method of classification suggested by Morgenstern and Eigenbrod (1974). The knowledge
obtained from the study permitted researchers to suggest a rational approach for designing shafts in
such soil. However, because all the shafts tested were less than 30 feet (9m) long, Aurora and Reese
carefully limited the proposed criteria for drilled shafts of comparable lengths that penetrate
approximately 5 feet (1.5m) into a shale stratum.
From their studies, Aurora and Reese (1977) concluded that shaft-construction procedures had
a marked effect on the load-transfer characteristics of the deep foundation. The shear strength
reduction factor, a, could be as high as 0.75 in shale for drilled shafts installed by the dry method. On
the other hand, this value must be reduced to 0.5 for shafts installed by the casing method or by the
slurry displacement method.
The shear strength of the clay-shale was investigated by in situ methods and by testing
undisturbed samples in the laboratory. The undrained shear strength was obtained from laboratory
triaxial tests; however, field tests using the static cone gave results reasonably close to those from
laboratory testing. Because of the difficulty of sampling clay-shale and because it is strongly anisotropic,
the shear strength determinations must be considered to be somewhat uncertain. Therefore, the value
of for clay-shale must be considered as approximate.
A value of 7.0 was suggested for the bearing capacity factor, Nc, for computing end bearing for
shafts built by the slurry-displacement method. This value can be increased to 8.0 when shafts are
constructed by the casing method or by the dry method. The research program on shafts in clay-shales
also resulted in the establishing of correlations between NSPT and the unconsolidated undrained shear
strength of shales, and between NSPT data and unit base resistance. For the shear strength correlation,
the following equation was suggested:
cQ =
NSPT
, tons/ft 2
53
,
.
(3.17)
where
cQ = the unconsolidated-undrained shear strength of the clayshale,
NSPT = the average number of blows/ft from the Standard Penetration Test.
For the bearing capacity correlation, the following equation was suggested:
qb =
NSPT
, tons/ft 2
7


=
,
.
(3.18)
where
qb = unit base resistance.
3.5 Computation Procedures for Rock

At the outset, some discussion is necessary concerning the definition of rock. Abroad view of the
classification of intact rock can be obtained by referring to Fig. 3.8 (Deere, 1968, and Peck, 1976; as
presented by Horvath and Kenney, 1979). The figure shows medium clay at the low range and gneiss at
the high range. Concrete and steel are shown for reference. A number of the categories of rock have
compressive strengths that are in the range of that for concrete or higher. As can be expected, many of
the design procedures for drilled shafts in rock are directed at weak rock because strong rock could well
be as strong or stronger than the concrete in the drilled shaft.

Figure 3.8 Engineering Classification of Intact rock (After Deere, 1968, as presented by Horvath and Kenney,
1979)
Except for instances where drilled shafts were installed in weak rocks such as shales or
mudstones, there are virtually no occasions where loading has resulted in failure. An example of a field
test where it was not possible to fail the drilled shaft is shown in Figs. 3.9 and 3.10. The rock was a vuggy
limestone that was difficult to core without fracture. It was only after considerable trouble that it was
possible to get the strength of the rock. Two compression tests were performed in the laboratory, and
in-situ grout-plug tests were performed under the direction of Schmertmann (1977).

Figure 3.9 Load-Settlement Curves for Test Shafts No. 1 and No. 2, Florida Keys

Figure 3.10 Load-Distribution Curves for Test Shafts No. 1(43.7 ft rock socket) and No. 2 (7.6 ft rock socket),
Florida Keys
A hole was drilled into the limestone, followed by the placing of a high-strength steel bar into
the excavation, the casting of a grout plug over the lower end of the bar, and the pulling of the bar after
the grout was set up. Five such tests were performed over the top 10 ft of the rock and the side
resistance ranged from 12.0 to 23.8 tons/ft2 (1.15 to 2.28MPa), with an average of approximately 18.0
tons/ft2 (1.72 MPa). The compressive strength of the rock was approximately 500psi (3.45MPa), putting
the vuggy limestone in the lower ranges of the strength of the chalk shown in Fig. 3.8.
Two axial-load tests were performed at the site on cylindrical drilled shafts that were 36 in.
(914mm) in diameter (Reese and Nyman, 1978). Test Shaft No. 1 penetrated 43.7 ft (13.3m) into the
limestone and Test Shaft No. 2 penetrated 7.6 feet (2.32m). Test Shaft No. 1was loaded first, with the
results shown in the figures, and it was then decided to shorten the penetration and construct Test Shaft
No. 2. As may be seen in Fig. 3.9, the load-settlement curves for the two shafts are almost identical, with
Test Shaft No. 2showing slightly more settlement at the 1000-ton (8.9MN) load (the limit of the loading
system). The settlement of the two shafts under the maximum load is quite small, and most of the
settlement (about 0.10 in, 2.5mm) occurred due to elastic shortening of the drilled shafts.
The distribution of load with depth, determined from internal instrumentation in the drilled
shafts, for the maximum load is shown in Fig. 3.10. As may be seen, no load reached the base of Test
Shaft No. 1, and only about 60 tons (530 kN) reached the base of Test Shaft No. 2. The data allowed a
design to be made for the foundations at the site with a considerable amount of security; however, as is

indicated, it was impossible to find the ultimate values of load transfer in side resistance and in end
bearing because of the limitations of the loading equipment as related to the strength of the rock. The
results are typical for drilled shafts that are founded in rock with respect to being unable to develop the
ultimate values of load transfer.
A special program of subsurface exploration is frequently necessary in order to obtain the in-situ
properties of the rock. Not only is it important to obtain the compressive strength and stiffness of the
sound rock but it is necessary to obtain detailed information on the nature and spacing of joints and
cracks so that the stiffness of the rock mass can be obtained. The properties of the rock mass will
normally determine the amount of load that can be imposed on a rock-socketed drilled shaft. The
pressure meter has been used to investigate the character of in-situ rock and design methods have been
proposed based on such results.
An example of the kind of detailed study that can be made concerns the mudstone of
Melbourne, Australia. The Geomechanics Group of Monash University has written a remarkable set of
papers on drilled shafts that give recommendations in detail for subsurface investigations,
determination of properties, design, and construction (Donald, et al, 1980; Johnston, et al, 1980a;
Johnston, et al, 1980b; Williams, 1980;Williams, et al, 1980a;Williams, et al, 1980b;Williams and Erwin,
1980). The Monash papers imply that the development of rational methods for the design of drilled
shafts in a particular weak rock will require an extensive study and, even so, some questions may remain
unanswered. It is clear, however, that a substantial expenditure for the development of design methods
for a specific site could be warranted if there is to be a significant amount of construction at the site.
Williams, et al (1980b) discussed their design concept and stated: A satisfactory design cannot
be arrived at without consideration of pile load tests, field and laboratory parameter determinations
and theoretical analyses; initially elastic, but later hopefully also elasto-plastic. With the present state of
the art, and the major influence of field factors, particularly failure mechanisms and rock defects, a
design method must be based primarily on the assessment of field tests.
Other literature concerning drilled shafts in rock leads to a confirmation of the above
statements about a computation method; therefore, the method that is presented here in must be
considered to be approximate. Detailed studies, including field tests, are needed in many instances to
confirm a design.
The procedure recommended by Kulhawy (1983) presents a logical approach. The basic steps
are as follows.
1. The penetration of the drilled shaft into the rock for the given axial load is obtained by using an
appropriate value of side resistance (see later recommendation).
2. The settlement of the drilled shaft in the rock is computed by adding the elastic shortening to
the settlement required to develop end bearing, assuming that the full load is taken by the base
of the drilled shaft. The stiffness of the rockmass is needed for this computation.
3. If the computed settlement is less than about 0.4 in. (10mm), the side resistance will dominate
and little load can be expected to reach the base of the foundation.

4. If the computed settlement is more than about 0.4 in. (10 mm), the bond in the socket may be
broken and the tip resistance will be more important.
Kulhawy (1983) presents curves that will give the approximate distribution of the load for Steps
3 and 4; however, the procedure that is adopted herein is to assume that the load is carried entirely in
side resistance or in end bearing, depending on whether or not the computed settlement is less or more
than 0.4 inch.
The recommendations that follow are based on the concept that both side resistance and end
bearing will not develop simultaneously. The concept is conservative, of course, but it is supported by
the fact that the maximum load transfer in side resistance in the rock will occur at the top of the rock
where the relative settlement between the drilled shaft and the rock is the greatest. If the rock is brittle,
which is a possibility, the bond at the top of the rock could fail with the result that additional stress is
transferred downward. There could then be a progressive failure in side resistance.
It is of interest to note that the settlement will be small if the load is carried only in side
resistance. The settlement in end bearing could be considerable and must be checked as an integral part
of the analysis.
The following specific recommendations are made in order to implement the above general
procedure.
1. Horvath and Kenney (1979) did an extensive study of the load transfer in side resistance for
rock-socketed drilled shafts. The following equation is in reasonable agreement with the bestfit curve that was obtained where no unusual attempt was made to roughen the walls.
= . ( ).
(3.19)
where
fs = ultimate side resistance, psi or lb/in2, and
qu = uniaxial compressive strength of the rock or concrete, whichever is less, psi or lb/in2 .
(NOTE : Eq. 3.19 is nonhomogeneous and the value of qu must be converted to English units, the
equation solved for fs in English units, and fs is then converted to SI units before proceeding in the
further computations with SI units.)
It is of interest to note that there was a large amount of scatter in the data gathered by Horvath
and Kenney (1977), but Eq. 3.19 can be used to compute the necessary length of the socket. It is
recommended that if the drilled shaft is installed in clay-shale, the ultimate side resistance may be
predicted more accurately by the procedures described in the previous section for clay-shale rather than
by using Eq. 3.19.


2. The shortening c of the drilled shaft can be computed by elementary mechanics by employing
the dimensions of the shaft and the stiffness of the concrete.
=
(3.20)
where
L = the penetration of the socket,
Q ST= the load at the top of the socket,
A = the cross sectional area of the socket, and

Ec = the equivalent Youngs modulus of the concrete in the socket, considering the stiffening effects of
any steel reinforcement.
3. The settlement of the base of the shaft can be obtained by assuming that the rock will behave
elastically. The following equation will give an acceptable result.
(3.21)
Where
w = settlement of the base of the drilled shaft,
I = influence coefficient,
Bb = diameter of drilled shaft, and
Em = modulus of the in situ rock, taking the joints and their spacing into account.
4. The value of I can be found by using Fig. 3.11 (Donald et al, 1980). The symbol Ec in the figure
refers to the Youngs modulus of the concrete in the drilled shaft.
5. The value of the Youngs modulus of the intact rock EL can be obtained by test or by selecting an
appropriate value from Fig. 3.8.
The value of the modulus of the in situ rock can be found by test, or the intact modulus can be
modified in an approximate way. Figure 3.12 will allow a modification of the modulus of the
intact rock by making use of the RQD. As may be seen, the scatter in the data is great, but the
trend is unmistakable.

Figure 3.11 Elastic Settlement Influence Factor as a Function of Embedment Ratio and Modular Ratio (After
Donald, Sloan, and Chiu, 1980)
6. The bearing capacity of the rock can be computed by a method proposed by the Canadian
Geotechnical Society (1978).
qa = Ksp qu
(3.22)
K sp =
3 + cs / Bb
10 1 + 300 / cs
(3.23)
where
qa = allowable bearing pressure,
Ksp = empirical coefficient that depends on the spacing of discontinuities and includes a factor
of safety of 3,
qu = average unconfined compressive strength of the rock cores,


cs = spacing of discontinuities,
= thickness of individual discontinuities, and
Bb = diameter of socket.
Equation 3.23is valid for a rock mass with spacing of discontinuities greater than 12in. (305mm),
thickness of discontinuities less than 0.2 in. (5mm) (or less than l in. or 25mm if filled with soil or rock
debris) and for a foundation with a width greater than 12 inches (305mm). For sedimentary or foliated
rocks, the strata must be level or nearly so (Canadian Geotechnical Society, 1978). Again, if the drilled
shaft is seated on clay-shale, the procedures described in the previous section should provide a better
prediction.
Figure 3.12 Modulus Reduction Ration as a Function of RQD (From Bieniawski, 1984)
7. If the rock is weak (compressive strength of less than 1000 psi),the design should depend on
load transfer in side resistance. The settlement should be checked to see that it does not exceed
0.4 inch.

8. If the rock is strong, the design should be made on the basis of end bearing. The settlement
under working load should be computed to see that it does not exceed the allowable as dictated
by the superstructure.
For the equations for the design of drilled shafts in rock to be valid, the construction must be
carried out properly. Because the load-transfer values are higher for rock, the details of the construction
require perhaps more attention than does construction in other materials. For example, for the load
transfer in side resistance to attain the allowable values, there must be a good bond between the
concrete and the natural rock. It is an excellent practice to roughen the sides of the excavation if it
appears necessary. There may be occasions when the drilling machine is under-powered and water is
placed in the excavation to facilitate the drilling. In such a case, the sides of the excavation may be gunbarrel slick with a layer of weak material at the sides of the excavation. The roughening of the sides of
the excavation in such a case is imperative.
Any loose material in the bottom of the excavation should be removed even though the design
is based on side resistance.
Another matter of concern with regard to construction in rock is whether or not the rock will
react to the presence of water or drilling fluids. Some shales will lose strength rapidly in the presence of
water.
3.6 Computation Procedures for Gravels, Granular Decomposed Rock, or

Granular Glacial Till (Non-Cohesive Intermediate Geomaterials)
The theory is based on the original work of Mayne and Harris (1993) and modifications by
ONeill et al (1996). The theory was proposed for gravelly soils, either transported or residual, with blow
counts (from the Standard Penetration Test) between 50 and 100. The method has been used by Mayne
and Harris to predict and verify the behavior of full-scale, drilled shafts in residual micaceous sands from
the Piedmont province in the eastern United States. Further verification tests were reported by ONeill
et al (1996) for granular glacial till in the northeastern United States.
The preconsolidation pressure,p of the granular material can be estimated from:
p = 0.2 N60 Pa
(3.24)
where
N60 = the uncorrected SPT blowcount, in blows per foot (or blows per 300mm) for the condition in which
the energy transferred to the top of the drive string is 60% of the drop energy of the SPT hammer; or =
the corrected blow count N value to N60.
Pa = the atmospheric pressure, in the selected system of units (usually 1 atmosphere, which converts to
101.3kPa, or 14.7 psi).


The overconsolidation ratio (ratio of maximum past vertical stress to present vertical stress),OCR, is
given by:
OCR = p / vo
(3.25)
Where
vo = the vertical effective stress (total soil pressure on a horizontal plane minus the water pressure in
the pores) at a horizontal plane in a given depth, usually at middepth of the drilled-shaft socket in the
gravel layer.
p = the preconsolidation pressure,obtained in Eq. (3.24).
The effective angle of internal friction of the gravel, , can be estimated from:
0.34
N 60
' = tan 1
(
)
+
p
12
.
2
20
.
3
/
v
a
(3.26)
The shaft-gravel interface is considered rough but nondilatant unless heavy mudcake buildup has been
allowed during drilling. It is assumed that if concrete is placed rapidly after excavation, the ground
stresses can be assumed to be maintained, fmax is given by the simple friction equation:
f max = K 0 tan v
(3.27)
in which the coefficient of horizontal earth pressure remains equal to Ko prior to excavation, which is
given by the correlative expression:
K 0 = (1 sin ) OCR sin
(3.28)
The use of equations 3.24 to 3.28 assumes that side shear failure occurs under drained conditions.
Below the base, undrained failure can be assumed conservatively. It is assumed that undrained failure
will occur in a full-scale loading test and that it is consistent with present practice to design with values
appropriate for loading tests. In this case:
su = 0.23'v OCR 0.8
(3.29a)


where su is the operational undrained shearing strength of the geomaterial beneath the base and vo is
the value of vertical effective stress at the elevation of the base. Finally, qmax is given by:
qmax = 9.33su
(3.29 b)
The above method is appropriate forN60 values in the range of 100 B/0.3m or less. The method
should be applied with caution for higher values of N60.
Load-deformation behavior of drilled shaft sockets in this type of materials can be computed
using methods similar to those described for drilled shafts in soft rock. A total load-settlement method,
as originally developed by Randolph and Wroth, is recommended.
In the following, only the load-settlement behavior of the socket is described. Elastic shortening
in the overburden (generally 0.25 - 2.0mm, depending on load and socket depth)will need to be added
to the computed settlement to obtain the settlement at the shaft head.
As shown in Fig. 3.13, the socket load-settlement relation is a three-branched curve. For a given
load Qt at the top of the socket, the corresponding elastic settlement along Segment 1, wt, is computed
from equation 3.30:
wt =
Qt I
D EsL
(3.30)
Here ,EsL is taken to be the Youngs modulus of the granular geomaterial along the sides of the socket at
the base level (as distinguished from the geomaterial below the base.) I is the elastic settlement
influence factor (equation 3.32).
Based on correlations between energy-corrected SPT tests and Youngs moduli determined from
dilatometer testing in Piedmont residuum, Mayne and Harris suggest:
0.82
ES = 22 Pa N60
(3.31)
in which N60 is again in B/0.3 m. If pressure meter, dilatometer or seismic data are available at the site,
more accurate estimates of Es (and Ko)might be possible.

Load
Qt1 Qt,max
Segment 1
wt1
Segment 2
w1+w
Settlement
Segment 3
Figure 3.13 Hypothetical load-settlement relationship for method of Mayne and Harris.
Mayne and Harris provided a closed-form solution for I for straight sided shafts from the original
solution of Randolph and Wroth, given in equation 3.32:
8 tanh(L) L
(1 )(L) D
I = 4(1 + )
E sm
4
tanh(L) L
4
E sL
(L) D
(1 )
1+
(3.32)
Several parameters appearing in equation 3.32 require definition and interpretation:

= Poissons ratio of the geomaterial, which can be taken as approximately 0.3 for gravel unless
evidence indicates otherwise.
L = socket length.
L = a lateral extent influence factor for elastic settlement, which can be taken to be 2 (2 / )0.5 (L/D), in
which
= ln [0.25 + (2.5 (Esm/EsL) (1 - ) - 0.25) ] (2L/D)}.

= 2 (1+) Ec/EsL
Ec = Youngs modulus of the composite (steel and concrete) cross section of the drilled shaft.
Esm=Youngs modulus of soil at the mid-depth of the socket. [Where the decomposed rock becomes
stronger with depth (N increases with depth along the socket), Esm/EsL can ordinarily be taken to be 0. 5.
=
E sL
, in which Eb= Youngs modulus of the granular geomaterial beneath the base of the drilled
Eb
shaft, which can be different from EsL.

In modeling drill shaft load tests in Piedmont residuum in the Atlanta, Georgia, area, Eb must be taken to
be about 0.4 EsL to obtain an optimum match with the measured load-settlement relations. That is, =
2.5.
A schematic of the variation of soil moduli for this method is shown in Fig. 3.14.
Ground surface or top of socket
E
Esm
L/2
Eb
L
L/2
EsL
Base of socket
Figure 3.14 Potential soil modulus for computing settlement in granular, decomposed rock (Category 3 IGM)
Equation 3.30 is used to model load vs. settlement only until the maximum side resistance, Qs max, has
been reached (segment 1,Figure 3.13).
Qs max=
f max ( D L)
(3.33)
And
Qt (end of segment 1) = Qt1
Qt1 =
Qs, max
I
1
[ cosh(L)][(1 )(1 + )]
(3.34)

Equation 3.34 is valid approximately for < 20.

Equations 3.30 and 3.34 define the end of linear segment 1 and the beginning of linear segment 2. At
this point, the load on the base at the end of segment 1 is
Qb1 = Qt1 Qs max.
The load at the end of segment 2 is the maximum total resistance of the shaft in the given gravel,
Qt,max = Qs, max + Qb, max.
If the side resistance is perfectly plastic (no load-softening or hardening after a movement of wt1), then:
D 2
Qt , max = f max (DL) + qmax

4
(3.35)
The corresponding settlement at the end of segment 2 is approximately wt1 plus the base settlement,
wb, due to the increment of base load Qt, max Qt1, which is given by:
wb = Qt , max Qt1
) (1 E)(D1 + )
b
(3.36)
Finally, the end of segment 2 is defined by Qt, max and (wt1 + wb). Segment 3 is a line defining continued
settlement at no increasing load, which is probably conservative for most decomposed rock.
3.7 Computation Procedures for Weak Rock (Cohesive Intermediate

Geomaterials)
Weak rock, in this computer program, is the term provided to materials that other authors call
cohesive intermediate geomaterials. In general, the soil resistances and settlements computed by this
criteria are considered appropriate for weak rock with compressive strength in the range of 0.5 to
5.0MPa (73 to 725 psi). The following intermediate geomaterials are usually within this category:
argillaceous geomaterials (such as heavily overconsolidated clay, hard-cohesive soil, and very soft rock)
or calcareous rock (limestone and limerock, within the specified values of compressive strength).
Drilled shafts are attractive as a reliable foundation system for the use in these type of
intermediate geomaterials at the boundary between soil and rock. These geomaterials are not difficult
to excavate and provide good stability and excellent capacity.
ONeill et al (1995) recommend methods for estimating side and base resistances as well as
settlement of drilled shafts under axial loads in this type of geomaterials. Their primary method, called
direct load-settlement simulation, is used in program SHAFT to compute the axial capacity of drilled
shafts socketed into weak rock.


3.7.1
Design Procedure
The direct simulation design model, based on an approximation of the broad range of finite
element solutions, proceeds as follows:
Decide whether the socket of weak rock in which the drilled shaft is placed requires subdivision
into sublayers for analysis. If the weak rock is relatively uniform, the behavior of axially loaded
drilled shafts can probably be simulated satisfactorily for design purposes using the simple
procedure outlined below. If there is significant layering of the weak rock in the depth range of
the socket, a load transfer function analysis should be modeled by a special finite element
method as recommended by ONeill et al (1996). Significant layering in this respect would exist if
the weak rock at the base of the shaft is considerably stronger and stiffer than that surrounding
the sides and/ or if changes in stiffness and strength of the weak rock occur along the sides of
the shaft. Load transfer function analyses should also be conducted if sockets exceed about
7.6m in length.
Obtain representative values of the compressive strength, qc, of the weak rock. It is recognized
in practice that qu is often used to represent compressive strength. Accordingly, qu will be used
to symbolize qc in this criteria. Whenever possible, the weak rock cores should be consolidated
to the mean effective stress in the ground and then subjected to undrained loading to establish
the value for qu. The validity of this solution is for soft rocks with 0.5< qu < 5.0MPa (73 < qu <
725 psi). The method also assumes that high-quality samples, such as those obtained using
triple-walled, core barrels, have been recovered.
Determine the percentage of core recovery. If the core recovery using high-quality sampling
techniques is less than 50 percent, this method does not apply, and field loading tests are
recommended to establish the design parameters. Determine the RQD(Rock Quality
Designation) of the sample and note the relative nature of the joints.
Determine or estimate the mass modulus of elasticity, Em, the weak rock, Em if the Youngs
modulus of the material in the softer seams within the harder weak rock, Es, can be estimated,
and if the Youngs modulus of the recovered, intact core material, Ei, is measured or estimated,
then the following expression, can be used:
Em
Lc
=
Ei
Ei
t seams + tint act core segments
Es
(3.37)
In equation 3.37, Lc is the length of the core, tseams is the summation of the thickness of all of
the seams in the core, which can be assumed to be (1-r) Lc where r is the core recovery ratio
(percent recovery/ 100), and the core length can be assumed to be rLc. If the weak rock is
uniform and without significant soft seams or voids, it is usually conservative to take Em = 115 qu.
If the core recovery is less than 100 percent, it is recommended that appropriate in situ tests be
conducted to determine Em. If the core recovery is at least 50 percent, the recovered weak rock
is generally uniform. Once the RQD and the nature of the jointing is known, Table 3.4 can be
used, with linear interpolation if necessary, to estimate Em/Ei.

Em/Ei
RQD (%)
Closed
Joints
Open
Joints
100
1.00
0.60
70
0.70
0.10
50
0.15
0.10
20
0.05
0.05
Table 3.4 Estimation of Em/Ei based RQD and nature of joints (Modified after Carter and Kulhawy, 1988)
Decide on whether the walls in the socket can be classified as rough. If experience indicates
that the excavation will produce a borehole that is rough according to the definition in FHWA
report, then the drilled shaft maybe designed according to the method for the rough borehole.
If not, or if the designer cannot predict the roughness, the drilled shaft should be designed
according to the method for the smooth borehole.
Estimate whether the soft rock is likely to smear when drilled with the construction equipment
that is expected on the job site. Smear in this sense refers to softening of the wall of the
borehole due to drilling disturbance and/or exposure of the borehole to free water. If the
thickness of the smear zone is expected to exceed about 0.1 times the mean asperity height, the
drilled shaft should be designed as if it were smooth.
Determine whether or not the joints are opened or closed. An open joint is a joint that
contains voids or soft materials in the seams, where as a closed joint is a joint that contains no
voids or soft material in the seams.
The effect of roughness, smear, and joint nature on both resistance and settlement are very
significant, as will be demonstrated in the design examples. As part of the site exploration
process for major transportation projects, full-sized drilled shaft excavations should be made so
that the engineer can quantify these factors, either by entering the bore hole or by using
appropriate down-hole testing tools, such as calipers and sidewall probes. Rough borehole
conditions can be assured if the sides of the borehole are artificially roughened by cutting
devices on the drilling tools immediately prior to concreting such that RF > 0. 15 is attained.
Estimate fa, the apparent maximum average unit side shear at infinite displacement. Note that fa
is not equal to fmax which is defined at a displacement defined by the user in this method.
weak rock, rough borehole, use:

fa = a + n tanr
(3.38)
where a is the adhesion between the concrete and the borehole wall, n is the normal
(horizontal) stress at the borehole wall before loading the shaft and r is the drained angle of
internal friction of the weak rock. Parameters a and r can be evaluated by direct shear testing
of the geomaterial, under drained, constant-normal stress.

If the shear strength parameters of soft rock are not known, use the following approximation:
fa =
qu
2
(3.39)
weakrock, smooth borehole, use:

fa = qu
(3.40)
where is a constant of proportionality that is determined from Fig.3.15, based on the finite
element simulations. The factor p on Fig. 3.15 is the value of atmospheric pressure in the units
employed by the designer. The maximum value of that is permitted is 0.5. The parameter on
Fig. 3.15 represents the angle of internal friction of the weak rock at the interface with the
concrete. Figure 3.15 is based on the use of rc = 30degrees, which is a value that was measured
at a test site in clay-shale that is believed to be typical of clay-shales and mudstones in the
United States.
If evidence indicates that frc is not equal to 30 degrees, then a should be adjusted to
tan rc
or
tan 30
= 1.73 Fig.3.15 tan rc
= Fig.3.15
(3.41)
Figure 3.15 Factor for smooth Category 1 or 2 IGMs


If Em/Ei is < 1, adjust fa for the presence of soft geomaterial within the SOFT ROCK matrix using
Table 3.5.Define the adjusted value of fa as faa.
Em/Ei
faa/fa
1.0
0.5
0.8
0.3
0.7
0.1
0.55
0.05
0.45
0.02
0.3
Table 3.5 Adjustment of fa for presence of soft seams
Estimate n, the normal stress between the concrete and borehole wall at the time of loading.
This stress is evaluated at the time when the concrete is fluid. If no other information is
available, general guidance on the selection of sn can be obtained from Eq. 3.42, which is based
on measurements of Bernal and Reese (1983).
n = M c zc
(3.42)
in which c, is the unit weight of the concrete and zc, is the distance from the top of the
completed column of concrete to the point in the borehole at which n is desired, usually the
middle of the socket, and M is an empirical factor which depends upon the fluidity of the
concrete as indexed by the concrete slump (obtained from Fig. 3.16). The values in the legend in
Fig. 3.16 are values of zc. Figure 3.16 may be assumed valid if the rate of placement of concrete
in the borehole exceeds 12m/hour and if the ratio of the maximum coarse aggregate size to
borehole diameter is less than 0.02. Note that n for slump outside the range of 125 to 225 mm
(5 to 9 inches) is not evaluated. Unless there is information to support larger values of n, the
maximum value of zc, should be taken as 12m (40ft) in these calculations. This statement is
predicated on the assumption that arching and partial setting will become significant after the
concrete has been placed in the borehole for more than one hour.
Determine the characteristic parameter n, which is a fitting factor for the load-settlement
syntheses produced by the finite element analyses. If the weak rock socket is rough:
n=
n
qu
(3.43)
If the weak rock socket is SMOOTH, estimate n from Fig. 3.17. Note that n was determined in
Fig. 3.17 for rc = 30 degrees. However, it is not sensitive to the value of rc. However, is
sensitive to rc, as indicated in equation 3.41.
1.0
0.8
0m
4m
8m
12 m
0.6
M
0.4
0.2
0.0
125
150
175
200
225
Slump of Concrete (mm)
Figure 3.16 Factor M vs. concrete slump.
0.5
rc = 30 deg.
400
0.4
500
0.3
600
0.2
1500
0.1
E m / n = 4000
3000
1000
2000
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
q u / p
Figure 3.17 Factor n for smooth sockets for various combinations of parameters.
If the socket is
(1.) relatively uniform, and the soft rock beneath the base of the socket has a consistency
equivalent to that of the soft rock along the sides of the shaft,
(2.) 2 <L/D<20, D>0.5 m, and
(3.) 10 < Ec/Em < 500,
then compute the load-settlement relation for the weak rock socket as enumerated as follows.
Compute Qt vs. wt (settlement at top of socket) from equation 3.44 or equation 3.45, depending
on the value of n. These equations apply to both rough and smooth sockets.

Qt = DL f f aa =
D 2
qb ,
4
f n
(3.44)
Qt = DLK f f aa =
D 2
qb ,
4
f > n
(3.45)
Equation 3.44 applies in the elastic range before any slippage has occurred at the shaft-weak
rock interface, and elastic base response, as represented by the last expression on the righthand side of the equation, also occurs. Equation 3.45 applies during interface slippage
(nonlinear response). In order to evaluate Qt, a value of wt is selected, and f, which is a
function of wt, is evaluated before deciding which equation to use. If f > n, evaluate Kf and use
equation 3.45; otherwise, use equation 3.44. Equations 3.46 and 3.47are used to evaluate f
and Kf, respectively.
f =
Em
Lf aa
(3.46)
Kf =n+
( H f n)(1 n)
H f 2n + 1
1
(3.47)
in which
0.5
L
= 1.14
D
L 0.5
E
0.05 1 log10 c 0.44
Em
D
(3.48)
and
0.5
L
= 0.37
D
L 0.5
E
0.15 1 log10 c + 0.13
Em
D
(3.49)


Finally
qb = wt
0.67
(3.50)
in which
L 200 L 1 + L
D
D
= 0.0134 E m D
L
L
+ 1
D
(3.51)
Check the values computed for qb. If core recovery in the weak rock surrounding the base is
100percent, qb should not exceed qmax = 2.5 qu. At working loads, qb should not exceed 0.4 qmax
Graph the load-settlement curve resulting from the computations. Select ultimate and service
limit resistances based on settlements. For example, the ultimate resistance might be selected
as the load Qt corresponding to a settlement wt of 25mm(1 in.),while the service limit resistance
might be selected as the load Qt corresponding to a value of wt < 25 mm (wt < 1 in.).
3.7.2 Commentary on Direct Load-Settlement Simulation Method

This method is intended for use with relatively ductile weak rocks, in which deformations occur
in asperities prior to shear. If the weak rock is friable or unusually brittle, the method may be
unconservative, and appropriate loading test data should be conducted to ascertain the behavior of the
drilled shaft for design purposes. The method is also intended for use with drilled shafts in weak rocks
that are produced in the dry. If it is necessary to produce the shaft using water, or with mineral or
synthetic drilling slurries, the shaft should be treated as smooth for design purposes unless it can be
proved that rough conditions apply. The method also carries the assumption that the bearing surface
at the base of the socket is clean, such that the shaft concrete is in contact with undisturbed weak rock.
If base cleanliness cannot be verified during construction, base resistance (qb) should be assumed to be
zero.
The design examples did not consider the effect of a phreatic surface (water table) above the
base of the socket. This effect can be handled by computing n assuming that the unit weight of the
concrete below the phreatic surface is its buoyant unit weight:
n = M [c zw + c (zc - zw)]
(3.52)
in which
c = buoyant unit weight of the concrete and
zw = depth from top of concrete to elevation of water table.
3.8 Computation Procedures for Gravelly Sand and Gravel

3.8.1
Introduction
Rollins et al (2005) presented an interesting study for side friction of drilled shafts in gravelly
soils. They mentioned that a series of axial-load tests were conducted by that the Utah Department of

Transportation (UDOT) in the mid 1980s. The test results suggested that side friction for drilled shafts in
gravelly soils was significantly higher than in sandy soils. The increased side friction was initially
attributed to the roughness of the soil-shaft interface and the tendency for gravels to dilate during
shearing. To evaluate side friction in gravelly soils, a series of uplift-load tests were performed on drilled
shafts in granular soil profiles, which ranged from uniform sand to sandy gravel as reported by the
authors. In addition, an effort was made by the authors to assemble available load-test data on drilled
shafts in gravelly soils in the technical literature published in the past. The data set collected through
their efforts enabled them to suggest new criteria for computation of side friction of drilled shafts in
gravelly sand or gravel.
3.8.2
Side Resistance
The method, described by the FHWA method in Equations 3.14 for side friction in cohesionless
soils, was used as the main method for evaluation of the side resistance in gravelly sand and sand.
Comparisons of the -values derived from data from approximately 123 loading tests are presented in
Figure 3.18 and Figure 3.19 for drilled shafts in gravelly sand and gravel, respectively. The best-fit curves
for gravelly sand and gravel in Figure 3.18and Figure 3.19 are significantly higher than design curves for
sands by Reese and ONeill recommended by FHWA. These results indicate that skin friction increases as
the gravel content increases. Back-calculated values of from all available load tests are plotted as a
function of depth in Figure 3.20. Although the curve from Reese and ONeill appears appropriate for
sands, this curve significantly underestimates the measured value of for gravelly sand and gravels,
especially considering that a factor of safety of 2 to 3 is subsequently applied in computing the loads
acceptable for design.

Figure 3.18 Comparison of -values for axial-load tests in gravelly sands (from Rollins et al, 2005)

Figure 3.19 Comparison of b-values for axial-load tests in gravels (from Rollins et al, 2005)

Figure 3.20 Comparison of b-values for load tests in all soil profiles (from Rollins et al, 2005)
ONeill (1944) recommended a design curve (-values) for use with gravelly soils. The equation
for -values was further correlated for the gravelly sand (25-50% gravel size) by Rollins et al as:
fsz = Sz
(3.53)
= 2.0 0.15z
0.75
, 0.25 < < 1.8

(3.54)
where z = depth below the ground surface, in meters.


The proposed -values for gravel (over 50% gravel size) is:
B = (3.4) e
(-0.085z)
, 0.25 < < 3.0

(3.55)
where e = natural base (2.718). It should be noted that almost all the gravels in the data base had blow
counts (N) greater than 25. Therefore, the above equations are not recommended for gravelly soils with
blow counts less than 25. For those cases, the -values recommended by Reese and ONeill for sand
should be used.
3.8.3
End Bearing
Because of the lack of data from field tests for tip resistance in gravelly sand or gravel, the
current recommendation is to use the same criteria recommended by Reese and ONeill for tip
resistance in cohesionless soils. In general, the recommendation for the tip resistance of drilled shafts in
cohesionless intends to be conservative because there is a tendency for the soil to loosen slightly at the
bottom of the excavation. The load-settlement curves that have been obtained by experiment for the
base of drilled shafts in sand indicate that the load continued to increase for some of the tests to a
settlement of more that 15 percent of the diameter of the base. Such a large amount of settlement
cannot be tolerated for most structures; therefore, it was decided to limit the values of end bearing for
drilled shafts in granular soil to that which would occur at a downward movement of the base of 5
percent of the diameter of the base. As has been shown by results of experiments with instrumented
shafts, and as is now well known, the side friction will be fully mobilized at the displacement of 0.5
inches (12.7 mm) or less. The tip resistance may be relatively small when the side resistance is fully
developed; therefore, the user should use load-transfer concepts in computing the capacity of a drilled
shaft that is appropriate for design.
Values of qb are tabulated as a function of NSPT (uncorrected field values) and shown in Table
3.6. However, the values in the table may need to be reduced for large-diameter shafts, as shown later
by Eq. 3.56.
Range of Value on N SPT

0 to 75
Above 75
q b ,tons/ft 2
0.60 N SPT
45
q b ,MPa
0.0575 N SPT
4.3
Table 3.6 Recommended values of unit end bearing for cohesionless soil.
Neither of the sets of recommendations in Table 3.6 involve the stress in the soil outside the tip
of the drilled shaft. The importance of the stress outside the tip of a drilled shaft is consistent with the
writings of Meyerhof (1976) and others. Furthermore, the values in Table 3.6 are based strongly on
experimental results where the drilled shafts had various penetrations. However, implicit in the values
of qb that are given is that the penetration of the drilled shaft must be at least 10 diameters below the
ground surface. For penetrations less than 10 diameters, it is recommended that qb be varied linearly
from zero at the groundline to the value computed at 10 diameters using Table 3.6.
When base diameters exceed 50in., it is recommended that a reduced ultimate value, qbr, be
used, in which


qbr = 50/Bb (qb)
(3.56)
Where
Bb = the diameter of the base of the shaft, in inches.
Based on analysis of available data, Table 3.6 indicates that the limiting value of load transfer in
end bearing is 45tsf (4.3MPa) at a settlement of 5percent of the diameter of the base. Variations in
results from experiments can be expected, for example, a value of 58 tsf (5.6MPa) was measured at a
settlement of 4 percent of the diameter of the base at a site in Florida (Owens and Reese, 1982).
3.8.4
Settlement
The characteristics of curves of side-friction versus displacement were presented conveniently in
Fig. 3.6 by the normalized load transfer and normalized displacement for cohesionless soil. Normalized
curves of load versus displacement for tests in slightly cemented sand and gravelly sand were plotted
together in Fig. 3.21. The load transfer has been normalized by diving by the maximum (ultimate) load
transfer corresponding to a displacement of 0.5 inches (12.7 mm) and the displacement has been
normalized by dividing by the shaft diameter. Similarly, normalized curves of load versus displacement
for tests in sand and gravel were plotted to in Fig. 3.22.
The shape of the curves for gravelly sand (Fig. 3.21) and gravel (Fig. 3.22) are flatter than those
proposed by Reese and ONeill, suggesting that soils are not cemented and that strength may be
developing due to dilation during shearing for gravelly sand and gravel. A considerable difference in the
shaft-soil-interface roughness was observed during construction. As the percentage of gravel increased,
the shaft-wall roughness also appeared to increase, as reported by Rollins et al. Another interesting
finding is that there was no appreciable difference between the ultimate skin friction measured in
tension or compression. However, differences in stiffness were observed.
Normalized curves of load versus displacement for gravelly sand and gravel can be used to
estimate skin friction development and load-settlement curves. Despite the availability of these
recommended curves, considerable engineering judgment is still necessary with regard to blow-count
interpretation, variation of soil layers and soil properties, and the construction method. Good practice is
to analyze the behavior of drilled shafts in gravelly sand and gravel layers based not only on the trend
(averaged) curve, but also taking into account the upper-bound and lower-bound curves assembled
from the test data by Rollins et al.

Figure 3.21 Normalized load versus displacement curves for tests in slightly cemented sand and gravelly sand
(from Rollins et al, 2005)
Figure 3.22 Normalized load versus displacement curves for tests in slightly cemented sand and gravel (from
Rollins et al, 2005)

3.9 Consideration of the Factor of Safety and LRFD Design

3.9.1
Introduction
In the United States, many design engineers use a combination of the factor of safety method
for geotechnical analysis of the foundation. The factor of safety method is often referred to as the
allowable stress design (ASD) method is termed the global approach. The engineer will consider all of
the factors at hand, including such things as the quality of the subsurface investigation, the statistical
nature of the loading, and the expected competence of the contractor, and an overall factor of safety is
selected for individual piles and for the group of piles. In recent years the concept of load and resistance
factor design has been used widely in structural engineering (referred to as LRFD method) and is termed
the component approach. The LRFD method was accepted formally in 1994 by the American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) as a standard.
The design of a foundation is controlled by geotechnical performance when the soils are weak
and the foundation will failure in a geotechnical mode such as bearing capacity under vertical loading,
bearing failure under lateral loading and/or overturning, or when foundation displacements (vertical,
lateral, or rotational) are larger than tolerably limits for the structure above the foundation. The design
of the foundation is controlled by structural performance (i.e. structural capacity in bending moment
and shear) when the strength of the bearing soils and/or rock are sufficiently high that the foundation
will fail under extreme loading as a structural member before geotechnical failure modes can develop.
Plainly, the engineer aims to prevent a failure of the structure. However, the precise definition
of failure may be difficult, leading to possible misunderstandings in communicating with the owner and
others. Therefore, the need for the structure to perform as expected by the owner over its service life
needs to be understood by all relevant parties. Limit states are defined as those conditions under which
a structure or its components no longer perform an intended function. Whenever a structure or a part
of a structure fails to satisfy one of its designated operational criteria, it is said to have reached a limit
state.
The two limit states of interest for most foundations are (1) strength limit state (ultimate limit
state), and (2) serviceability limit state. Strength limit states pertain to structural safety and collapse.
For drilled shafts under the axial load, the strength limit state is typically taken to be the ultimate axial
capacity of the drilled shaft embedded in soil/rock strata. Serviceability limit states pertain to conditions
under which performance requirements under normal service loads are exceeded. Such conditions
might include movement and elastic shortening of drilled shafts. Serviceability limit states are typically
checked using all specified or characteristic service loads (without any factors).
3.9.2
The Allowable Stress Design (ASD)

Engineers have traditionally used a global factor of safety for the design of drilled shafts, giving
careful consideration to all pertinent parameters influencing behavior. The value in the use of such an
overall factor is that the engineer may use judgment to select relevant parameters. For example, the
shear strength of the soil may be chosen more liberally or more conservatively, depending on the entire
character of the design. Examples of the use of global factors of safety for various geotechnical
structures have been discussed by many geotechnical engineers. One issue on the strength limit state of
the ASD method is the choice of the factor of safety (FS) to be used for the foundation design.
FS = R/Q
(3.57)


where R = mean value of resistance, and Q = the mean value of load (or the nominal applied load).
The choice of factor of safety for use in foundation design in the United States is usually based
on several factors, including consideration of impact of failure on the public well being, redundancy in
the foundation system, and the availability of information from load tests. Wright(1977) recommended
values of the global factor of safety (FS) for axially loaded drilled shafts for monumental structures (i.e.
major bridges) ranging from 3.5 where poor control is exercised over the construction to 2.3 where
normal control is exercised over construction. For temporary structures, FS is recommended to be 2.3
where good control is exercised over the construction and 1.7 where normal control is exercised.
Most designers select values of FS based on experience, upon a sense of the accuracy of their soil and
rock parameters and upon the perceived accuracy of the method that they are using to compute
resistance.
Use of factors of safety in design equal to 2.0 are usually allowed only if a load test of similar
foundation is performed at the project site. If a load test is performed during the design phase of a
project, any questions regarding foundation capacity and stiffness can be answered and the resulting
knowledge be utilized in design.
Serviceability limit states are typically checked using all specified or characteristic service loads
without any factors. The serviceability limit states are typically varied with the functions of the super
structures.
3.9.3
Load and Resistance Factor Design (The LRFD Method)

The allowable stress design (ASD) is familiar to most foundation designers. However, it suffers
from the shortcoming that all uncertainty is lumped into one global factor of safety that is difficult to
evaluate functionally reliability of the foundation. The functional reliability of the foundation involves
the variability of the soil and rock properties and pattern and quality of soil and rock sampling, as well as
the accuracy of the design model and quality of construction. While it is difficult to arrive at a global
factor of safety that addresses all of these effects, each of the component uncertainties can be analyzed
individually and incorporated into a load and resistance design method, which considers the load and
resistance components separately.
The LRFD specifications of AASHTO present methods of modifying the component loads and the
component resistances. The basic equation is shown below.
Qi Rn =
Rr
(3.58)
where i = factors to account for ductility, redundancy and operational importance; i = load factor;
Qi = force effect, stress or resultant; = resistance factor; Rn = nominal (ultimate) resistance; and Rr =
factored resistance.
As may be seen, several features of the LRFD method are similar to the method of partial safety
factors. The engineer, in obtaining a solution to Eq. 3.58, must estimate the loads and load
combinations that may be imposed on the structure, and estimate the ultimate resistance available to
resist the loading.


3.9.4
Loads addressed by the LRFD specifications

A large number of types of loads are considered in the LRFD specifications, including, dead load
of structural components and nonstructural attachments; dead load of wearing surface and utilities;
horizontal load from earth pressure; load from earth surcharge; vertical load from earth fill; load from
collision of a floating vessel; load from collision of vehicles; load from an earthquake; ice load; vertical
load from dynamics of vehicles; load from the centrifugal force of vehicle traveling on a curve; load from
the braking of vehicles; live load from vehicles; live load from surcharge; live load from pedestrians; load
from water pressure in fill; load from currents in stream; loads due to changes in temperature of
structure; wind load on structure; and wind load on vehicles. Each of the types of loads is discussed
(NHI, 1998) and some guidance is given in making the computation of magnitude of the load.
A number of basic load combinations (called limit states) are identified by ASSHTO for use in
design. The combinations are grouped into Strength (I, II, III, IV, V), Service (I, II, III), Extreme Event (I, II),
and Fatigue. Table 3.7 summarizes the recommended load factors, which are directly related to the
drilled shaft.
Table 3.7 Recommended load factors from ASSHTO
3.9.5
Resistances addressed by the LRFD specifications
The principal emphasis of the LRFD specifications in regard to resistance resides in the
determination of values of geotechnical parameters. The process for planning and executing a program
of surface investigation is described (NHI, 1998); the sources of variability in estimating the properties
of soil and rock are described; and the statistical parameters are identified that can lead to the selection
of a resistance factor. The various items are discussed that pertain to the selection of the magnitude of
the reduction factor, .

The recommended strength reduction factors for drilled shafts under axial loads from the LRFD
specifications of AASHTO Standards are listed in Table 3.8.
Table 3.8 Strength reduction factors recommended by AASHTO
3.9.6
Comments on the LRFD Design
The AASHTO LRFD Specifications are written based on probabilistic limit state theory with
several listed load combinations. The advantages of a probability-based LRFD specification are:
A more uniform level of safety throughout the system will result;
Measure of safety will be a function of the variability of loads and resistance;
Designers will have an estimate of the probability of meeting or exceeding the design
criteria during the design life;
The potential exists to place all structural materials and methods of construction on equal
footing;


A realistic rational framework for future development of the specification will be
available;
Proponents of future changes in materials and construction techniques will be asked to
provide the same measure of reliability that all current materials and construction
methods will be asked to meet;
Designers will have a better understanding of where and how uncertainties of load and
resistance models are accounted for, and will be able to relate past performance.
The disadvantages of basing a specification on this philosophy include an increased design
effort, as it is realistic to expect that a greater number of load and resistance factors will be
available. However, the designer will need little or no knowledge of reliability theory.

CHAPTER 4.
References for Data Input

CHAPTER 4 References for Data Input 4-2
4.1 File Menu

This menu contains options related to the management of input- data files and to exit the
program. Input-data files created for SHAFT are provided with a standard file-name extension in the
Form of *.sfd (where * represents any allowable file name). All input data files are standard text files
and may be edited with any text editor or word-processing program.
4.1.1
File New
Once the program is started, default values are used for certain operating parameters and a
blank input-data file is created. Selecting New under the File menu resets all SHAFT variables to either
default or blank values, as appropriate. This option should be selected when a new data file is desired to
be created from a blank form. This menu option may also be accessed with the Ctrl+N keyboard
combination.
4.1.2
File - Open
This is used to open a file that has been previously prepared and saved to disk. The File Open
window dialog, shown in Fig. 4.1, is used to search for an existing input-data file. By default, the file is
initially searched in the directory where SHAFT was installed. Standard windows-navigation procedures
may be used to locate the name and directory of the desired project file. This menu option may be
accessed with the Ctrl+O keyboard combination.
Every analytical run of SHAFT produces several additional files (previously described in Table 2.1
of this manual). The name of the input-data file indicates the names of all related files produced by a
successful program run (output, graphics, and processor text files). All the additional program files will
be created in the same directory as the input file. Input-data files that are partially completed may be
saved and later opened for completion, run, and observation of results.
Figure 4.1 Window screen for the File Open dialog


Opening some partially-completed SHAFT input files or invalid data files may produce an
information window reporting that an invalid or incomplete file is being opened (Fig 4.2). The user
should click the OK button and all partial-input data that was previously prepared should become
available.
The program allows users to read input-data files created for the previous SHAFT5.0 or 6.0
versions by selecting the drop-down arrow under the Files of type: option at the bottom of the Open
window screen. The program will automatically convert the opened SHAFT 5.0 or 6.0 input files to
SHAFT(the latest version) when the user saves the opened file.
Figure 4.2 Message window for incomplete or invalid files
4.1.3
File Save
This option is used to save input data under the current file name. With this method of storing
data to disk, any input data that was previously saved with the same file name is replaced with the
current parameters. Input-data files should be saved every time before proceeding with runs for
analytical computation. This menu option may also be accessed with the Ctrl+S keyboard combination.
4.1.4
File Save As
This option allows the user to save any opened or new input data file under a different file name
or different directory. Any input data file saved under an existing file name will replace the contents of
the existing file.
4.1.5
File Exit
This is selected to exit SHAFT. Any input-data file that was modified and not yet saved to disk
will produce a confirmation window before exiting the program (see Fig. 4.3).

Figure 4.3 Message window advising that changes were not saved to disk
4.2 Data Menu

The input of specific parameters for an application is controlled under options contained within
this menu (shown in Fig. 4.4). It is recommended that the user choose each submenu and enter
parameters in a consecutive manner starting from the top option.
Selecting or clicking any of the submenu choices contained in the Data menu produces various
types of windows. As a reminder of standard commands of Microsoft Windows, open windows may be
closed by all or some of the following methods:
clicking the OK button (if available),or
clicking the X-box on the upper-right corner of the window, or
double-clicking the SHAFT icon on the upper-left corner of the window, or
clicking once on the SHAFT icon on the upper-left corner of the window and then choosing
Close.
Open windows may optionally be left open on the screen. The selection of other menu options
will then produce new windows on top of those that were left open.
Many sub-windows of the Data menu will show an Add Row, Insert Row and/or Delete Row
buttons. The Add Row button always adds new rows at the end after all existing rows. The Insert Row
button always inserts a new row right after an existing row highlighted by the mouse. Clicking on the
Delete Row button deletes the row where the cursor is located.

Figure 4.4 Options contained in the Data menu
4.2.1
Numeric Data Entries

Cells that require numeric data may accept entries of mathematical expressions in addition to
simple numeric entries. Entering a mathematical expression works similarly to normal numeric data. The
user types the expression that represents the data and presses the e key to calculate the entered
expression and to display the numeric result in the same cell.
Table 4.1below shows the list of supported operations and constants. The order of operations
follows the order in the list of Table 4.1. Note that implicit multiplication (i.e. 2(4+6)) is not supported
(instead, use 2*(4+6) for the previous example).
Symbol
OPERATORS
Description
()
^
*
/
+
-
Parenthesis (may be nested)

Exponentiation
Multiplication
Division
Addition
Subtraction
Negation (same as subtraction)
Symbol
PI (or pi)
e (or E)
CONSTANTS
Value
3.1415927
2.7182818
Table 4.1 Supported mathematical operations and constants


The two constants that are currently supported are PI and e. Implicit multiplications using
constants is not supported (use 2*e instead of 2e). Negation of the constants PI or e is not allowed. For
instance, instead of entering -PI the user must enter - (PI).
Scientific notation (i.e. 1.65e8 or 1.65e-8) may be used to input very large or very small
numbers. After an expression is calculated, very large or very small numbers will be displayed using
scientific notation.
4.2.2
Data Title
This option activates the window shown in Fig. 4.5, where the user can enter a line of text
containing a general description for the application problem. Any combination of characters may be
entered in the text box in order to describe a particular application. The user input will be restrained
automatically once the maximum length of text is reached. This is done to prevent the user from going
beyond the maximum permissible length of characters allowed for the title line.
Figure 4.5 Window screen for sample Data - Title
4.2.3
Data Units
This option provides the user with a choice of specifying input data in English Units, and S.I.
Units (international units). In general, the following specific units of measurements will beused
throughout the program:
Units
English
International
Length
foot (ft)
meters (m),
Force
pounds (lbs)
kilo Newtons (kN)
Modulus
psi
kPa
The user should always check the unit specification, which is affixed to each variable, for data input. For
instance, psi instead of psf is used for the elastic modulus of materials.
The user may change from one system of units to the other as many times as desired. The
program will automatically convert all the appropriate input that was already specified by the user

before the time of selection of a different system of units. Small conversion errors may appear if
multiple changes of units are performed. The user must always check that input data have been
converted appropriately.
4.2.4
Data Design Method (ASD or LRFD)

This submenu option allows the user to select either the allowable stress design (ASD) method
or the load and resistance factor design referred to as LRFD method as shown in Fig. 4.6. In the United
States, many design engineers use a combination of the factor of safety method for geotechnical
analysis of the foundation and the load and resistance factor design method for analysis of the
foundation as a structural member. The factor of safety method is often referred to as the allowable
stress design (ASD) method and the load and resistance factor design is referred to as LRFD. The ASD
method has most often used by foundation engineers and is termed the global approach. The engineer
will consider all of the factors at hand, including such things as the quality of the subsurface
investigation, the statistical nature of the loading, and the expected competence of the contractor, and
an overall factor of safety is selected for individual piles and for the group of piles. The LRFD method
originated in structural engineering and is termed the component approach. The LRFD method was
accepted formally in 1994 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) as a standard.
Figure 4.6 Window screen for Data Menu Design Method (ASD or LRFD)


4.2.5
Data - Drilled-Shaft Properties

This submenu option allows the user to input pile dimensions and section properties. A general
description for the data needed under each entry of the Data - Drilled-Shaft Properties submenu option
is listed below and shown in Fig. 4.7.
Diameter of stem (smallest to be considered)
This is the initial-stem diameter to be considered in the computations. The English unit for this
variable is ft, while meter is for the SI unit.
Diameter of stem (largest to be considered)
This is the largest-stem diameter to be considered in the computations. The English unit for this variable
is ft, while meter is for the SI unit.
The program will compute the axial capacity of drilled shafts starting with the initial-stem diameter, and
then add 0.5 ft (0.152m) to the diameter for each consecutive run until the diameter reaches the largest
specified. If the user only wants to run with the initial diameter, the variable for the largest stem
diameter should be entered as zero.
This function to have multiple diameters in one run of SHAFT is not available for cases where weak rock
is present in the subsoil. The user must perform a separate analysis for each rock socket into the weak
rock.
Ratio of base diameter to stem diameter
For a belled-drilled shaft, the user may enter the ratio of the base diameter to the stem diameter. The
program will calculate the dimension of the bell accordingly. For a straight shaft, the value for this
variable should be zero.
Angle of the bell with respect to vertical
For a belled-drilled shaft, the user may enter the angle (in degrees) from the vertical line to the slope of
the bell (always smaller than 90 degrees). The program will calculate the dimension of the bell
accordingly. For a straight shaft, the value for this variable should be zero.
Top portion of shaft without skin friction
This number (always positive) represents the portion on the top of the shaft that is declared
noncontributing to side resistance. The English unit for this variable is ft while meter is for the SI
unit.
Bottom portion of shaft without skin friction
This number (always positive) represents the section at the bottom of the shaft that is declared
noncontributing to side resistance. The English unit for this variable is ft while meter is for the SI
unit.

Modulus of Elasticity of the drilled shaft
This number (always positive) represents the elastic modulus of the drilled shaft. The user can calculate
the elastic modulus of the composite section, or simply use the elastic modulus of the concrete. The
English unit for this variable is psi while kPa is for the SI unit.
Figure 4.7 Window screen for sample Data - Drilled-Shaft Properties
4.2.6
Data - Soil Layer Data

This submenu allows the user to specify the different types of soil/rock and material properties
to be used for the computations. An illustration of the Soil Layer Data window for an example
application is shown in Fig. 4.8.
A general description for the data needed under each column in the Data -Soil Layer Data
submenu option is listed below.

Figure 4.8 Window screen for sample Data - Soil Layer Data
Layer
This is a sequential number that is provided to each soil layer. This number is automatically provided by
the program as new rows of soil layers are added. The maximum number of soil layers that may be used
in a program run is limited to 10.
Soil Type
There are six internal types of soils that may be specified for program SHAFT. The user specifies the
desired soil type using a dropdown list with the following choices:
Code Number Internal Soil Type
1 ................................... Sand (FHWA)
2 ................................... Clay (FHWA)
3 ........................... Shale (Aurora and Reese)
4 ................. Strong Rock (FHWA, qu > 1000 psi)
5 ........................Decomposed Rock (FHWA)
6 ..............................Weak Rock (FHWA)
7 ............ Strong Rock (Side friction +Tip Resistance)
8 ............................. Gravelly sand (Rollins)
9 ..................................Gravels (Rollins)
For strong rock FHWA recommends to use either side friction or tip resistance only, not both as
described in Chapter 3. However, in some situation the user would like to consider the capacity

including the side friction and tip resistance together as indicated in Option 7. The user should use a
good engineering judgment when considering this option.
Bottom of Layer
Values for the bottom of the soil layer are entered according to the origin of coordinates set at the
ground surface. As a minimum, the bottom of the last soil layer must be two pile diameters deeper than
the depth of the modeled shaft.
Layer Data
The Layer Data button allows the user to define soil or rock properties for different strata. A sub-window
will pop on the screen when the Layer Data button is clicked. The program requires different input
parameters for each type of soil and rock. Therefore, the data column in the sub-window that appears
varies with the selection made by the user in the Soil Type drop-down list. A detailed description of the
parameters needed for each soil and rock type is described in section 4.2.7.
Max. Side Friction
In this entry the user may specify the maximum value of skin-friction transfer that is permissible for a
given stratum. If the user enters a value for the maximum-permissible, skin friction, the program will
compare the internally-computed value with the maximum provided and use the smaller of these two
for the final computation. If the user does not want to add any restriction on the computed value,
simply enter 0 to suppress this option and always use the internally-computed values.
Max. End Bearing
In this entry the user may specify the maximum value of transfer in end bearing that is permissible for a
given stratum. If the user enters a value for the maximum-permissible, end bearing, the program will
compare the internally-computed value with the maximum provided and use the smaller of these two
for the final computation. If the user does not want to add any restriction on the computed value,
simply enter 0 to suppress this option and always use the internally-computed values.
LRFD Resistance Factor (Side Friction)
If the user selects the LRFD design method, a new data column for entering the LRFD resistance factor
on side friction will be added onto the input table as shown in Fig. 4.9. In this entry the user may specify
the resistance factor on skin-friction transfer that is permissible for a given stratum. If the user does not
want to have any reduction on the computed side friction value, simply enter 1.0.
LRFD Resistance Factor (End Bearing)
If the user selects the LRFD design method, a new data column for entering the LRFD resistance factor
on tip resistance will be added onto the input table as shown in Fig. 4.9. In this entry the user may
specify the resistance factor on the tip resistance that is permissible for a given stratum. If the user does
not want to have any reduction on the tip resistance, simply enter 1.0.

Figure 4.9 Window screen for sample Data - Soil Layer Data with the LRFD specification
4.2.7
Data - Soil Layer Data - Layer Data

As mentioned earlier, the Layer Data button allows the user to define soil and/or rock properties
for different strata. A sub-window appears on the screen when the Layer Data button is clicked. The
program requires different input parameters for each type of soil and rock. Therefore, the data column
in the sub-window that appears varies with the selection that was previously made by the user in the
Soil Type drop-down list.
In general, each sub-window that comes up under the Soil Data button consists of entry fields
for the top of the layer and the bottom of the layer. The user may enter different parameters for the top
and the bottom of each layer. The program will linearly interpret the data for any point between those
two depths. The following sections will provide general description on data needed for each soil type.
4.2.7.1 Soil Data for Sand Layers
A sample window for this soil option is shown in Fig. 4.10. The required properties for sand layers are
explained below.
Figure 4.10 Soil data for sand layers

Unit Weight
This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight. Values for the top and bottom of the sand
layer are entered in standard units of force per unit volume (either lb/ft3 or kN/m3).
Friction Angle
This column entry corresponds to values of the internal angle of friction (also known as angle) for the
top and bottom of the sand layer. The values of internal angle of friction are entered in standard units of
degrees. Note that if the internal-friction angle is provided by the user (i.e. its value is different than
zero), the column entry for Blow Counts is not used in the computations and may be left as zero.
Table 4.2 Relationship between N and f (after Gibbs and Holtz, 1957)
Blow Counts (Optional)

This column entry corresponds to the number of blow counts obtained at the top and bottom of the
sand layer while performing a Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). The user may optionally input blow
counts obtained from SPT tests in cases when the values of internal friction angle are not readily
available. When the user provides a value different than zero for the Friction Angle, the values for Blow
Counts are not used in the computations and may be entered as zero. The computer program converts
internally between the provided values of blow counts from SPT tests to equivalent values of internalSHAFT for Windows User's Manual

friction angle by using Table 4.2 for friction transfers. If is given, the internal computation of end bearing
is performed using the Quiros and Reese (1977) procedure (see technical comments of end bearing in
sand layers for further reference). If and blow counts (different than zero) are given, values are used for
end bearing. If blow counts are given and = 0 then end bearing is calculated using the blow counts (see
technical comments).
Ko
This column reflect values for the lateral earth pressure coefficient for the top and bottom of the sand
layer. Values for Ko depend on the relative density of the sand and the process by which the sand
deposits were formed. If the sand deposits did not receive any artificial compaction, values of Ko range
from about 0.40 for loose to 0.50 for dense sand. Artificial compaction or tamping may increase Ko
values to 0.80.
If the user intends to use Ko for friction computations, the user must leave Beta as zero and enter values
different than zero for Ko. Likewise, if the user intends to use Beta coefficient for friction computations,
leave Ko as zero.
Beta
The Beta value is an empirical parameter that takes into account the lateral earth pressure coefficient
and the effective-friction angle at the interface between the concrete of the shaft and the soil. The
parameter thus takes into account the fact that the stress at the interface due to the fluid pressure of
the concrete may be greater than that from the soil itself. Many factors that modify the lateral stress at
the soil-concrete interface can be taken into account with the Beta value. For instance, other factors
may include the use of drilling fluid, use of casing or a dry excavation during the construction process,
and the type of slump used in the concrete.
If the input for Beta is left as zero, the computer program automatically generates Beta values at each
foot of penetration in the sand layer (or at each 0.3meters if SI units are used). Internally, the SHAFT
program uses the method specified in FHWA and AASHTO guidelines. This method (Reese and ONeill,
1988) is covered in Chapter 3 of this manual. The method uses a formula that assumes a drilled shaft
construction with a concrete slump of 6in.or higher. The method also considers that drilling slurry, if
employed, should be such that it would not cause a weak layer of bentonite to develop at the wall of the
excavation. The following formula is used internally to compute values:
For N > 15... = 1.5 - 0.135 z0.5
For N < 15... = (N/15) (1.5 - 0.135 z0.5)
Where
= empirical value, limited to 1.2 > > 0.25
z = depth belowground surface, in units of ft.
N = uncorrected blow counts from the SPT test.
Optionally the user may input his own value of beta for the top and bottom of the layer. The program
will interpolate linearly between the values provided for the top and the bottom of the layer.

If the user intends to use Ko (lateral earth pressure coefficient) for friction computation, the user must
leave Beta as zero and input values different than zero for Ko. If the user intends to use Beta coefficient
for friction computation, the user must leave Ko as zero and input values or leave Beta as zero. If the
user designates zero values for both Ko and Beta, the program will internally generate Beta for friction
computations.
4.2.7.2 Soil Data for Clay Layers
A sample window for this soil option is shown in Fig. 4.11. The required properties for clay layers are
explained below.
Unit Weight
This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight. Values for the top and bottom of the clay
Cohesion
This column represents the input values for the unconfined-undrained shear strength at the top and
bottom of the clay layer. Ordinarily, these values are taken as one half of the compression strength of
samples obtained from unconsolidated-unconfined triaxial tests.
The user may specify values of zero for the top and bottom of clay layers where the contribution of side
friction should be neglected. As mentioned in the technical literature of Chapter 3, it is recommended to
ignore the transfer in side friction from the ground surface to the depth of 5 ft (1.5m) if the drilled shaft
is in a soil profile with clay as the top layer. It is also recommended to ignore transfers in side friction at
the bottom one diameter of straight shafts or at the height of the bell plus the bottom one shaft
diameter above the bell for belled shafts if they are in a soil profile with clay at the bottom section of
the shaft. Please review Fig. 3.1 in Chapter 3 for a graphic representation of these recommendations.
Figure 4.11 Soil data for clay layers

This column entry corresponds to the number of blow counts obtained at the top and bottom of the soil
layer while performing Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). The user may optionally input blow counts
obtained from SPT tests in cases when the values of undrained shear strength are not readily available.
When the user provides a value different than zero for the Cohesion, the values for Blow
Counts are not used in the computations and may be entered as zero.
The option to input values of blow counts instead of undrained shear strength should be selected only
when it is desirable to make a rough computation of the load-carrying capacity of a drilled shaft. The
computer program converts internally between the provided values of blow counts from SPT tests to
equivalent values of undrained shear strength by using the following equations (previously specified in
Chapter 3 of this manual):
cu = NSPT / 10, for cu in units of tons/ft2.
cu = NSPT / 0.1, for cu in units of kPa.
Alpha Factor
This is an empirical factor that varies with depth and takes into account the construction procedures of
the drilled shaft. The amount of research that has been performed to date is still insufficient to allow for
a precise prediction of as a function of depth.
If the user leaves the default values of zero, the program will automatically compute values of according
to recommendations from literature (Reese and ONeill, 1988; and ONeill and Hassan, 1994). The values
that are internally computed by the program are specified in Table 4.3.
The values suggested for in Table 4.3 that are also internally computed by the program are by no means
certain and mainly correspond to undrained loading of drilled shafts in cohesive soil. The user should
input his own values of if site-specific data is available from loading tests. It is obvious that better
estimates of values can be obtained from loading tests on drilled shafts that are constructed in situ with
the same techniques and procedures that are planned for the production shafts.
Bearing Capacity Coefficient, Nc
This column corresponds to the value of bearing capacity coefficient to be used in the computations of
end bearing for clay. A value of 7.0 is suggested for the bearing capacity factor Nc, for shafts built by the
slurry-displacement method. This value can be increased to 8.0 when shafts are constructed by the
casing or by the dry method.
Table 4.3 Recommended values of (internally used by the program).
4.2.7.3 Soil Data for Shale Layers

A sample window for this soil option is shown in Fig. 4.12. The required properties for shale layers are
explained below.


Figure 4.12 Soil data for shale layers
Unit Weight
This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight. Values for the top and bottom of the shale
Cohesion
This column represents the input values for the unconfined-undrained shear strength at the top and
bottom of the clay-shale layer. Ordinarily, these values are taken as one half of the compression
strength of samples obtained from unconsolidated-unconfined triaxial tests.
layer while performing a Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). The user may optionally input blow
counts obtained from SPT tests in cases when the values of undrained shear strength are not readily
available. When the user provides a value different than zero for the Cohesion, the values for Blow
Counts are not used in the computations and may be entered as zero. The computer program converts
internally between the provided values of blowcounts from SPT tests to equivalent values of undrained
shear strength by using equation 3.17, previously specified in the technical literature contained in
Chapter 3 of this manual.
cQ = NSPT / 53, for cQ in tons/ft2,
cQ = NSPT / 0.55, for cQ in MPa.
where
cQ = unconsolidated-undrained shear strength of the clay shale.
NSPT= average number of blow counts (blows per foot) from the Standard Penetration Test.
Alpha Factor
This is a factor that takes into account the construction procedures of the drilled shaft. This is also
known as the adhesion factor or the shear-strength reduction factor. This value can be as high as
0.75 for drilled shafts installed by the dry method in shale. On the other hand, this value is reduced to
0.50 for drilled shafts installed by the casing method or by the slurry-displacement method.
Bearing Capacity Coefficient, Nc
This column corresponds to the value of bearing capacity coefficient to be used in the computations of
end bearing for shale. A value of 7.0 is suggested for the bearing capacity factor Nc, for shafts built by
the slurry-displacement method. This value can be increased to 8.0 when shafts are constructed by the
casing or by the dry method.
4.2.7.4 Soil Data for Strong Rock
A sample window for this option is shown in Fig. 4.13. The required properties for this type of soil are
explained below.
Figure 4.13 Soil data for layers of strong rock
Rock Strength
This column corresponds to the values of uniaxial compressive strength of rock. The strong rock criterion
requires the unconfined compressive strength of rock to be at least 144,000 psf (6,900 kPa). The
program takes into consideration the smallest value between the compressive strengths of concrete and
rock to compute the capacity in side resistance.
Concrete Strength
This column corresponds to the values of unconfined compressive strength (cylinder test) of concrete.
The program takes into consideration the smallest value between the compressive strengths of concrete
and rock to compute the capacity in side resistance.
Discontinuity Spacing
The spacing of discontinuities is taken into account to compute the bearing capacity of the rock. The
formula is valid for a rock mass with spacing of discontinuities larger than 12 in. (305mm.).
Discontinuity Thickness
The thickness of discontinuities is taken into account to compute the bearing capacity of the rock. The
formula is valid for a rock mass with thickness of discontinuities smaller than 0.2 in. (5mm.).
Socket Diameter
The diameter of the socket is taken into account to compute the bearing capacity of the rock.
Elastic Modulus
This column corresponds to the value of Youngs modulus of the intact rock. The computer program
internally modifies the value of the elastic modulus of the intact rock according to the RQD values that
are placed in the last input data for strong rock. The objective is to obtain values for the modulus of the
in-situ rock that take into account the number of joints and their spacings. If values of the modulus of
elasticity for the rock are available from in-situ tests, the test values should be used along with an input
of 100 in the RQD column (to avoid modifications of the in-situ rock modulus).
RQD


This column corresponds to the values of rock quality designation or RQD obtained from in-situ soil
tests. According to the RQD value, the modulus of the intact rock is modified to account for joints in the
rock. The adjustments are performed internally by the computer program using Fig. 3.12, in Chapter 3.
4.2.7.5 Soil Data for Decomposed Rock Layers
explained below.
Unit Weight
This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight. Values for the top and bottom of the
gravel layer are entered in standard units of force per unit volume (either lb/ft3 or kN/m3).
Blow Counts
layer while performing a Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). The user should preferably input the
value ofN60, which is the SPT blow counts, in blows per foot (or blows per 300mm) for the condition in
which the energy transferred to the top of the drive string is 60% of the drop energy of the SPT hammer.
Figure 4.14 Soil data for decomposed rock layers
Poissons Ratio
The Poisson ratio of the gravel at the top and bottom of the layer. This value can be approximated as 0.3
to 0.4 for drained loading in gravel, unless more specific values are available for the site. This value is
only used in the computations of load versus settlement for this type of soil.
Youngs Modulus (Optional)
This column represents Youngs modulus of elasticity of the granular material at the top and at the
bottom of the socket in the gravel layer. These values are only used in the computations of load versus
settlement for this type of soil. If the user leaves the default values of zero for Youngs Modulus, the
program will automatically compute values at the top and bottom of the gravel layer based on the Nvalues inputted earlier.
The program computes the modulus of elasticity of the soil based on equations 3.31 and 3.24 presented
in Chapter 3.


(3.24)
In performing computations, the program assumes the following values:
Pa = the atmospheric pressure is considered to be 1 atmosphere (101.3 kPa, or 14.7 psi), in Eq. (3.24).
Esm = Youngs modulus of the soil at mid-depth of the socket is considered to be equal to 0.5 EsL.
Eb = Youngs modulus of the soil at beneath the base of the shaft is considered to be equal to 0.5 EsL.
EsL = Youngs modulus of elasticity of the soil at the elevation of the tip of the drilled shaft but along the
sides of the socket (this is not the modulus beneath the base of the shaft).
In general, the profile of Youngs modulus of elasticity of the gravel layer is idealized as shown in Fig.
3.14 in Chapter 3.
Socket Diameter
The diameter of the socket in the gravel soil may be specified to be different than at other layers. The
values on this column are only used in the computation of load versus settlement.
4.2.7.6 Soil Data for Weak Rock Layers
explained below.
Figure 4.15 Soil data for weak rock layers
Rock Strength
This column represents input of qu, the compressive strength at the top and bottom of the weak rock.
Whenever possible, the weak rock cores should be consolidated to the mean effective stress in the
ground and then subjected to undrained loading to establish the value for qu. The validity of this
solution is for soft rocks with 0.5< qu< 5.0 MPa (73< qu< 725psi). The method also assumes that highquality samples, such as those obtained using triple-walled, core barrels, have been recovered.
Interface Condition
This column input is related to the condition of the borehole after drilling. Weakrocks behave quite
differently if the borehole is either rough or smooth after drilling. The user must select only one of the
four available options for the top and bottom of the layer of weak rock: Rough Surface w/closed joints,
Smooth Surface w/closed joints, Rough Surface w/open joints, or Smooth Surface w/ open joints.
In general, if the user selects to use a Rough Surface option, one of the following conditions should be
present:

The construction specifications should require that the drilling contractor roughen the borehole
by cutting circular grooves of approximately 50-mm. (2-in.) height into the sides of the borehole.
Each circular groove should penetrate at least 25mm (1 in.) into the borehole walls over the
full360 degrees around the holes. The circular grooves should have vertical spacings no greater
than 0.3 m (1 ft).
The designer must be otherwise convinced that the drilling will produce a roughness pattern
generally equivalent to the specification recommended above (circular grooves), without leaving
any soft, soil-like material (or smears) on the wall of the borehole.
It is recommended to consider a Smooth option if none of the conditions specified earlier con be
achieved. In addition, if there is a possibility that the borehole is drilled using a drilling slurry, unless
circular grooves are cut into the weak rock and verified by callipering, the user should assume a surface
condition.
Joints are considered closed if they contain no voids or soft material in the joint. Likewise a joint is
considered open if the joint contains voids or soft material.
Concrete Slump
This column represents the value for the slump of the concrete that will be used in the weak-rock
socket. The user would normally use the same concrete slump at the top and bottom of the layer. The
fluidity of the concrete (as measured by the concrete slump) along with the depth of concrete are used
as an indication of the pressures that the concrete will exert against the borehole walls.
The internal formulas used in the computer program are only valid for the following conditions:
the concrete slump must be between 125 to 225 mm (5 in. to 9 in.),
the rate of placement of concrete in the borehole should exceed 12 m/hour (40 ft per hour, or
about 8in. per minute), and
the ratio of the maximum size of the coarse aggregate to the borehole diameter should be less
than 0.02.
Interface Friction Angle
This column represents the value for rc in degrees. This parameter, rc, represents the angle of internal
friction of the weak rock at the interface with the concrete. A value for rc that is considered typical of
most clay-shales and mudstones in the United States is rc = 30 degrees. This is a value that was
measured at a test site in clay-shale.
Socket Diameter
This column represents the value for D, the diameter of the rock socket, in units of length (ft or m). The
value of socket diameter is used in the computation of settlement. The computer program thus uses
only the value specified at the bottom of the layer.
The computations of settlement are only considered accurate for drilled shafts satisfying the following
conditions:
2< L/D< 20,where L is the length of the socket in weak rock and D the socket diameter, and
D > 0.5 m (or D > 20 in.).
Elastic Modulus of Rock Core

This column represents the value for Ei, Youngs elastic modulus of elasticity of intact rock cores at the
top and bottom of the socket. The parameter must be provided in units of stress (lbs/in2 or kPa).
RQD
This column represents the input for the RQD of the cored rock at the top and bottom of the socket. Em
can be estimated from the ratios in the table below based on the RQD of the IGM cores. In cases in
which the RQD of the IGM cores is less than 50 percent, it is advisable to make direct measurements of
Em in situ through plate loading tests, borehole jack tests, large-scale pressure meter tests, or by backcalculating Em from drilled shaft loading tests, since the correlations in the table below become less
accurate with decreasing RQD.
Internally, the computer program uses the RQD to modify the modulus of elasticity of the rock, Ei, to
obtain the mass modulus of elasticity, Em, based on the values of Table 3.4 in Chapter 3. Linear
interpolation is used for intermediate values.
4.2.7.7 Soil Data for Strong Rock Layers Including Side Friction and Tip Resistance
The data format described for Strong Rock in Section 4.2.7.4 is applicable to this option. For strong rock
FHWA recommends to use either side friction or tip resistance only, not both as described in Chapter 3.
However, in some situation the user would like to consider the capacity including the side friction and
tip resistance together by using this option. The user should use a good engineering judgment when
considering this option.
4.2.7.8 Soil Data for Gravelly Sand and Gravel Layers
A sample window for gravelly sand layers or gravel layers is shown in Fig. 4.16. The required properties
for this type of soil are explained below.
Figure 4.16 Window screen for sample Data Factor of Safety
Unit Weight
This column entry corresponds to values of total unit weight. Values for the top and bottom of the sand


This column entry corresponds to the number of blow counts obtained at the top and bottom of the
gravelly layer while performing a Standard Penetration Test (SPT test). It should be noted that the blow
counts have to be greater 25 for using the criteria for gravelly sand layers and gravel layers.
Beta
The Beta value is an empirical parameter that takes into account the lateral earth pressure coefficient
and the effective-friction angle at the interface between the concrete of the shaft and the soil. The
parameter thus takes into account the fact that the stress at the interface due to the fluid pressure of
the concrete may be greater than that from the soil itself. Many factors that modify the lateral stress at
the soil- concrete interface can be taken into account with the Beta value. For instance, other factors
may include the use of drilling fluid, use of casing or a dry excavation during the construction process,
and the type of slump used in the concrete.
If the input for Beta is left as zero, the computer program automatically generates Beta values at each
foot of penetration in the sand layer (or at each 0.3meters if SI units are used). Internally, the SHAFT
program uses the equations recommended by Rollins etal (2005) for the Beta value, which is covered in
Chapter 3 of this manual.
Optionally the user may input his own value of Beta for the top and bottom of the layer. The program
will interpolate linearly between the values provided for the top and the bottom of the layer.
4.2.8
Data - Factor of Safety (Allowable Stress Design)

This submenu allows the user to specify the factor of safety that will be used during internal
computations (Fig. 4.17) for ASD method. The user may enter a global factor of safety for the total
ultimate capacity, or merely apply a factor of safety to the ultimate tip resistance. Despite the factor of
safety that is specified by the user, the computer program will provide full printouts of the unfactored
ultimate skin friction and ultimate tip resistance for reference.
Figure 4.17 Window screen for sample Data-Factor of Safety (ASD Method)
4.2.9 Data - Computation Method

The user has the option to run the analysis by specifying either a desired depth or design load. As shown
in Fig. 4.18, the Computation Method under the Data menu provides the user the following options:
Specify the shaft length

Specify the design load

Figure 4.18 Options contained in Data Computation Methods
If the user selects to specify the shaft length, the dialog box in Fig. 4.19 will appear for the user
to enter the proposed shaft length. Similarly, if the user selects to specify the design load, the dialog box
in Fig. 4.20 will appear for the user to enter the proposed design load.
In both cases, as seen in Fig. 4.19 and 4.20, the user should also specify the Type of Loading by
selecting one of the following options:
Compression. When the loads are in compression, the program ads the contribution from side
friction and end bearing. The weight of the shaft is not taken into account during computations
of pile capacity for compressive loads.
Uplift. For loads in tension, the program takes into account the contributions from side friction
and weight of the shaft. The user may also reduce the side-friction contribution to uplift loads
by specifying a reduction factor smaller than 1.
The depth specified for the bottom layer must be at least two diameters deeper than the
specified-shaft length. The program uses the averaged-soil properties within two diameter below the
shaft tip for computations of end bearing. In general, users are recommended to specify the shaft
length.
The program uses 150 lb/ft3 to compute the concrete weight in tension. In most cases, the weight of
concrete is ignored in compression due to the small differences that exist between the weight of the
displaced soil and the concrete.

Figure 4.19 Options contained in Data Computation Methods - Specify the shaft length
Figure 4.20 Options contained in Data Computation Methods - Specify the design load
4.2.10 Data - Water Table

This submenu, shown in Fig.4.21, allows the user to specify the depth of the water table. This item must
be entered or the program will assign the default value of the water table as being located at the ground surface.
The water-table depth is referenced from the ground surface.
Figure 4.21 Options contained in Data Water Table
4.2.11 Data - Control Options...

The user should input in this box the complete path and command line for the preferred-text
editor or word processor that will be used to examine and print the input, output, and the processor,
plain text files created by the program. As a default, the command line c:\windows\notepad.exe is used
to operate the standard-text editor. Microsoft Notepad is included with Windows 2000, XP, VISTA, or
Windows 7. However, there may be some instances when the output files are too large for Notepad and
a different text editor or word processor should be used. In those cases it is suggested to use Microsoft
WordPad (c:\windows\notepad.exe).

4.3 Help Menu

The Contents submenu provides on-line references that may be needed during data input. The
About... submenu provides general references about the program and how to reach ENSOFT, INC. A
sample window screen of the Help About menu is provided in Fig. 4.22.
The Help - Contents submenu has been developed for all areas of the program where the user
needs to input data. This submenu may be accessed for reference at any time while preparing data
input.
Figure 4.22 Window screen for sample Help - About

CHAPTER 5.
References for Program

Execution and Output
Reviews

CHAPTER 5 References for Program Execution and Output Reviews 5-2
5.1 Introduction
Chapter 5 presents options related to execution of the program and includes methods of
addressing run-time errors. This Chapter also includes suggestions for reviewing input, output, and
processor text files. The final section of this Chapter includes descriptions about all the output curves
that may be observed in graphical form. The commands covered in this chapter are contained in the top
menu, under the Computation and the Graphics titles.
5.2 Computation Menu

This menu option is selected to execute the program using the parameters that were saved in
the input-data file. Within the options contained under this menu, shown in Fig. 5.1, there are
commands that facilitate the reviews of the text files produced for storing input data, output results,
and processor notes. In addition, the user may select an option to observe a graphical representation of
the side view of the modeled pile and soil layers. Detailed description of the submenu options contained
under the Computation menu are explained in the following topics.
5.3 Computation - Run Analysis

An input file, after preparation or modification, must be saved to disk before selecting the
Computation Run Analysis submenu option, which executes the analytical portion of programSHAFT.
The module, a stand-alone program routine, is called for execution by the shell process of the
environment in Microsoft Windows.
The user should remember to save the input data under an user-specified name before
executing the analytical module. When saving data to disk, SHAFT will automatically add an extension
of the type *.sfd to the name of the input file.
Figure 5.1 Command options contained in the Computation menu.
A sub-window is usually produced during the execution of the module. In systems running
Microsoft Windows normally, when the modules execution process is finished, the sub-window

automatically disappears and the active command is returned to the main SHAFT program. If the active
command is not automatically returned to the SHAFT program. A finished execution of the module is
determined when the sub-window displays [Inactive SHAFT.EXE]in its top-left corner. In such case the
user may desire to change the file properties of file shaft.exe so that the module returns the active
command to the main SHAFT program automatically upon completion. This may be done by running the
Windows Explorer (in the Start button, under the Programs menu) and selecting the file shaft6.exe in
the drive and directory where SHAFT was installed. With the file selected, the user should click
Properties under the File menu. In the Program tab, select Close on Exit and click the OK button.
At the beginning of the run, the analytical module will read the saved input data progressively,
showing the line number which is being read. If an input-data format is incorrect during reading, the
analytical module will stop immediately and in many cases it saves an error message and a status report
in a file with the extension *.sfr. This file may be accessed by selecting Edit Processor-Run Notes in the
Computation menu.
Within the processor-run notes, if all input data was read correctly, the analytical module will
show the message THE EXECUTION IS IN PROGRESS....... The analytical module automatically creates an
output file with the same name as the input and with the extension *.sfo. Once a successful run is
produced, the user may proceed to the next items for observation of results.
5.4 Computation - Edit Input Text

This submenu option is used to edit the input-data file in plain text mode. This command
becomes active after new data files have been saved to disk or when opening existing data files. The
command is helpful for experienced users who may just want to change one or two parameters quickly
using the text editor, or for those users wishing to observe the prepared input data in text mode.
This submenu automatically invokes the word processor or text editor specified in Control
Options... under the Data menu. The default setting is to use the utility program named notepad.exe
provided by Microsoft Windows. Input-data files are automatically saved to disk with the extension of
*.sfd by program SHAFT. Use of the notepad for editing the input data is shown in Fig. 5.2.
Figure 5.2 Sample use of Microsoft Notepad for editing input text of Example Problem 1.

5.5 Computation - Edit Processor Run Notes

This submenu option is used to edit an intermediate text file that is automatically produced
during each analytical run. This file only includes notes produced during the processing of the input data.
This submenu option becomes active after new-data files have been saved to disk and executed, or
when opening previously-executed data files.
This submenu automatically invokes the word processor or text editor specified in Control
Options... under the Data menu. The default setting is to use the utility program named notepad.exe
provided by Microsoft Windows.
Files containing processor-run notes are automatically saved to disk with the same file name as
the input-data file but with the extension *.sfr. Use of the Microsoft Notepad for editing the
processor- run notes for Example Problem 1 is shown in Fig. 5.3.
Figure 5.3 Sample Microsoft Notepad session of processor-run notes for a modified Example Problem 1.
Observation of the notes produced during a processor run may become helpful to debug a data
file that did not produce a successful run. A successful run usually produces a file of processor-run notes
containing similar lines of text as those in Fig. 5.3.
5.6 Computation - Edit Output Text

This submenu option is used to edit the output-text file that is automatically produced during
each analytical run. This command becomes active after new data files have been saved to disk and
successfully executed, or when opening previously-executed data files.
The submenu automatically invokes the word processor or text editor that was previously
specified in Control Options... under the Data menu. The default setting is to use the utility program
named notepad.exe provided by Microsoft Windows.
Output files are automatically saved to disk with the same file name as the input-data file but
with the extension *.sfo. Use of Microsoft Notepad for editing the output file for Example Problem 1 is
shown in Fig. 5.4.

Figure 5.4 Sample use of Microsoft Notepad for editing the output-text file of Example Problem 1.
5.7 Computation - View Shaft Elevation

This submenu option is used to observe a graphical representation of the side view of the
modeled pile and soil layers. This command option becomes active after data of Drilled-Shaft Properties
, and Soil Layer Data have been entered under the Data menu, or when opening previously-executed
data files. A sample graphics of the View Shaft Elevation command option is shown in Fig. 5.5.
Figure 5.5 Sample View Shaft Elevation command option.

5.8 Graphics Menu

This menu option is selected to observe the different graphical representations of the program
results contained in the output file. Submenu options contained under this menu are shown in Fig. 5.6.
Not all of the graphics may be enabled for observation, active curves depend on specifications contained
in the input.
All of the graphical representation of output data that may be produced by the program are
contained in the following commands of the Graphics menu:
Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth
Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth
Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth
Skin Friction vs Depth (w/F.S.)
Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.)
Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.)
Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate)
Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.)
Axial Load vs Settlement (trend curve)
Axial Load vs Settlement (upper-bound curve)
Axial Load vs Settlement (lower-bound curve)
Axial Load vs Settlement (combined curves)
The observation of any of the above-listed curves will activate the graphics mode of SHAFT6.0.
Several changes occur during use of the graphics mode: new mouse commands are enabled and a new
top-menu option becomes available.
Figure 5.6 Command option contained in the Graphics menu.


5.8.1
Mouse Commands in the Graphics Mode

Table 5.1 describes mouse commands that become enabled automatically during all graphical
observation of output curves.
Event
Mouse Left Click
Mouse Right Click
Mouse Double Click on Legend
Description
Zooms in on the graphics at the clicked position (up to five zoom levels)
Zooms out from the graphics
Turns the selected cruve on/off at every click
Table 5.1 Mouse commands in the graphics mode
5.8.2
Plot Menu
This new menu command only appears in the top-menu bar while in the graphics mode.
Command options contained in this menu, shown in Fig. 5.7, are explained below.
Show Legend
This activates or deactivates the floating legend included in the graphics mode. The legend box can be
moved with click-and-drag operations of the mouse to any position in the graphics screen. Despite its
location in the screen, the legend is always located at the right-bottom corner of the printouts.
Show Soil Layers
Click this menu-item to activate or deactivate the soil profile plotted at the right side of the graphics.
Show Markers
This menu provides the option to activate or deactivate the markers for each point of all the curves
displayed in the active screen of the graphics mode. By default, the program automatically plots at every
foot of penetration, or every 30.5 cm when using metric units. The user may optionally select to show
markers every 1, 2, 3, 5, or 10 increments of unit. The type of markers used in each curve is
automatically selected by the program. Once activated, the markers are enabled for all visible curves of
the active graphics screen.
Front Sizes
This menu provides the option to enlarge the default size of fronts used in plots. The user may optionally
select to enlarge the front by 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, or 4 times of the default size.
Line Width
This menu provides the option to enlarge the default width of lines used in plots. The user may
optionally select to enlarge the width by 2, 4, 6, or 10 times of the default width.
Graph Title
The user may optionally add a title to the active graphics using this command. The parameters selected
here are not saved with the output file and must be changed each time the file is opened.

Edit Legend
The user may change the text of the legend in the active graphics using this command. The modified
names are not saved with the output file and must be changed each time the file is opened.
Print...
This command is used to produce a hard copy of the active graphics screen. The Print sub-windows
includes a drop-down menu that allows the user to select any of the installed Windows printers, allows
for change of printer properties, and allows the selection of the total number of copies to be printed.
The printed graphics is sized according to the margins that the user specifies in the Plot Page Setup
menu.
Page Setup
The user can here specify the printed size of the active-graphics screen. The size of the plot is base on
the specified margins and selection of paper orientation. The parameters selected here are not saved
with the output file and must be changed each time that the graphics is plotted.
Active Graphs...
This command is used to active or de-active curves on the screen.
Figure 5.7 Command options contained in the Plot menu.


Save to Disk...
This command is used to save the active-graphics screen to disk. The format of the saved file is as bmp
graphics (bitmap file), which is the internal-file format used in Microsoft Windows.
5.9 Graphics - Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth

The user may select this command option to observe a graphical representation of the curve of
the ultimate skin friction (side resistance) versus depth for the modeled-drilled shaft. This curve is
automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled shaft. The curve consists of data points at every
foot (30.5 cm) of the shaft. The data value at each depth represents the unfactored, total friction
(ultimate values) from the ground surface down to that depth. A sample graphics screen of the Ultimate
Skin Friction vs Depth command option is shown in Fig. 5.8. In cases of uplift, the values of skin friction
represented in the graphics have been modified by the reduction factor that was specified for uplift
loads. The values of skin friction, although reduced for uplift, are still ultimate and do not take into
account the specified load factors.
Figure 5.8 Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1.

5.10 Graphics - Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth

the ultimate tip resistance versus depth for the modeled pile. This curve is automatically generated in all
analytical runs of a drilled shaft. The curve consists of data points at every foot (30.5 cm) of the shaft.
The data value at each depth represents the unfactored, tip resistance (ultimate values) developed at
that depth. A sample graphics screen of the Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth command option is shown
in Fig. 5.9. The curve of Tip Resistance vs Depth becomes disabled for uplift loads.
Figure 5.9 Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1.
5.11 Graphics -Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth

the ultimate total capacity versus depth for the modeled-drilled shaft. This curve is automatically
generated in all analytical runs of an axially-loaded drilled shaft. The curve consists of data points at
every foot (30.5 cm) of the shaft. The data value at each depth represents the unfactored, total capacity
(ultimate loads) from the ground surface down to that depth. A sample graphics screen of the Ultimate
Total Capacity vs Depth command option is shown in Fig. 5.10.


Values of total capacity are equal to skin friction plus tip resistance for compressive loads. Total
capacity is equal to skin friction plus shaft weight for uplift loads. For uplift loads, the values have been
modified according to the reduction factor that the user has previously specified.
Figure 5.10 Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth command option for Example Problem 1.
5.12 Graphics - Skin Friction vs Depth (w/F.S.)

skin friction (side resistance) versus depth for the modeled-drilled shaft. This curve is automatically
generated in all analytical runs of a drilled shaft. The curve consists of data points at every foot (30.5 cm)
of the shaft. The data value at each depth represents the factored, total friction from the ground surface
down to that depth. A sample graphics screen of the Skin Friction vs Depth (w/F.S.) command option is
shown in Fig. 5.11. In cases of uplift, the values of skin friction represented in the graphics have been
modified by the reduction factor that was specified for uplift loads. The values of skin friction, although
reduced for uplift, are still ultimate and do not take into account the specified load factors.

Figure 5.11 Skin Friction vs. Depth (w/F.S.) command option for Example Problem 1.
5.13 Graphics - Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/ F.S.)

tip resistance versus depth for the modeled pile. This curve is automatically generated in all analytical
runs of a drilled shaft. The curve consists of data points at every foot (30.5 cm) of the shaft. The data
value at each depth represents the factored, tip resistance developed at that depth. A sample graphics
screen of the Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/ F.S.) command option is shown in Fig. 5.12. The curve of Tip
Resistance vs Depth becomes disabled for uplift loads.

Figure 5.12 Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.
5.14 Graphics -Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.)

total capacity versus depth for the modeled-drilled shaft. This curve is automatically generated in all
analytical runs of an axially-loaded drilled shaft. The curve consists of data points at every foot (30.5 cm)
of the shaft. The data value at each depth represents the factored, total capacity from the ground
surface down to that depth. A sample graphics screen of the Total Capacity vs Depth command option is
shown in Fig. 5.13.
Values of total capacity are equal to skin friction plus tip resistance for compressive loads. Total
capacity is equal to skin friction plus shaft weight for uplift loads. For uplift loads, the values have been
modified according to the reduction factor that the user has previously specified.

Figure 5.13 Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.
5.15 Graphics - Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate)

The user may select this command option to observe a graphical representation of the curves of
ultimate skin friction, ultimate tip resistance, and ultimate total capacity versus depth for the modeled
drilled shaft on the same plot. This curv eis automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled
shaft. The curve consists of data points at every foot (30.5 cm) of the shaft. A sample graphics screen of
the Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) command option is shown in Fig. 5.14. For the analysis using
multiple diameters, this graphics will present the combined plots for the drilled shaft with the initial
diameter only.

Figure 5.14 Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) for Example Problem 1.
5.16 Graphics - Combined Plots vs Depth (w/ F.S.)

skin friction, tip resistance, and total capacity, all with a factor of safety applied, versus depth for the
modeled-drilled shaft on the same plot. This curve is automatically generated inall analytical runs of a
drilled shaft. The curve consists of data points at every foot (30.5 cm) of the shaft. A sample graphics
screen of the Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.)command option is shown in Fig. 5.15.

Figure 5.15 Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.
5.17 Graphics - Axial Load vs Settlement (Trend Curves)

axial load versus settlement for the modeled drilled shaft based on the trend (averaged) curves shown in
FHWA manual. This curve is automatically generated in all analytical runs of a drilled shaft. A sample
graphics screen of the Axial Load vs Settlement command option is shown in Fig. 5.16.

Figure 5.16 Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 1.
5.18 Graphics - Axial Load vs Settlement (Upper- Bound Curves)

axial load versus settlement for the modeled drilled shaft based on the upper-bound curves shown in
graphics screen of the command option is shown in Fig. 5.17.

Figure 5.17 Upper-Bound Curves for Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 1.
5.19 Graphics - Axial Load vs Settlement (Lower-Bound Curves)

axial load versus settlement for the modeled drilled shaft based on the lower-bound curves shown in
graphics screen of the Axial Load vs Settlement command option is shown in Fig. 5.18.

Figure 5.18 Lower-Bound Curves for Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 1.
5.20 Graphics - Axial Load vs Settlement (Comparison)

axial load versus settlement for the modeled drilled shaft based on the trend (averaged), upper-bound,
and lower-bound curves shown in FHWA manual. This combined plots provide the user with some
comparison between each condition. For the analysis using multiple diameters, this graphics will present
the combined plots for the drilled shaft with the initial diameter only. A sample graphics screen of the
command Axial Load vs Settlement option is shown in Fig. 5.19.

Figure 5.19 Comparison of Upper-Bound and Lower-Bound Curves for Example Problem 1.

CHAPTER 6 Example Problems
CHAPTER 6.
6-21
Example Problems

6-22
6.1 Introduction
This chapter presents several example problems studied using the computer program SHAFT. In
order to assure accuracy from the computer results, some examples have been compared with results
from hand calculations. The step-by-step hand calculations were carried out based on the procedures
earlier described in Chapter 3. The user can have confidence in their results if limited amounts of hand
calculations can be done for comparison. The studies in the chapter also provide guidance for the
method of analysis of axially loaded piles with SHAFT.
Several problems are provided herein as examples of different applications that may be solved
using our computer program SHAFT. Each example focuses on a particular computational feature of the
program. Input files for each example are automatically copied to the SHAFT directory during
installation. The data files are named ExampleX.sfd, where X represents the desired example number
(1thorugh 8).
Example problems provide the user information on input and output of various cases, and
present a quick tutorial for real-world applications. The user is encouraged to study these examples and,
with modifications, may even use them to solve similar problems. However, by no means can these
limited examples explore the full functions and features provided by SHAFT.
The main features of each example included with SHAFT are summarized as follows.
Example 1 ..... Drilled shaft in sand. Including the following specific program features:
three layers of sand,
method for sand (user-specified values),
inputted values of blow counts, NSPT, from Standard Penetration Tests for sand
properties,
Example 2 ..... Drilled shaft in layers of clay and sand. Including the following specific program features:
top two layers of clay,
ignored side resistance on top 5 ft,
internally-generated values of Nc,
bottom three layers of sand, and
method for sand (using internally-generated values).
Example 3 ..... Drilled shaft in clay. Including the following specific program features:
two layers of clay,
variable cu on top layer of clay,
small bell at bottom,
ignored side resistance at top 5 ft, and
ignored side resistance at bottom one diameter over bell.
Example 4 ..... Drilled shaft with enlarged base. Including the following specific program features:
three layers of clay,
one intermediate layer of sand,
method for sand (user-specified values),
large bell at bottom,
ignored side resistance at top 5 ft, and
ignored side resistance at bottom one diameter over bell.
6-23
Example 5 ..... Drilled shaft in strong rock. Including the following specific program features:
top layer of clay, and
bottom is dolomite rock (strong rock).
Example 6 ..... Drilled shaft in weak rock. Including the following specific program features:
top layer of sand,
bottom is a weak rock, and
example with metric units.
Example 7 ..... Drilled shaft in decomposed rock. Including the following specific program features:
top layer of sand with neglected skin friction,
two bottom layers of decomposed rock,
internally generated elastic modulus of decomposed rock based on blow counts
(NSPT), and
example with metric units.
Example 8 ..... Drilled shaft in gravelly sand and gravel. Including the following specific program
features:
top layer of sand,
two bottom layers of gravelly sand and gravel strata,
internally generated Beta values for gravel based on blow counts (NSPT), and
example with English units.
6.2 Example Problem 1

This is an example of a shaft drilled into sand. The example has been studied in the referenced literature
of Reese and ONeill, 1988. The example is also modeled after load tests in sand, Owens and Reese,
1982.
6.2.1 Soil Profile
The soil profile is shown in Fig.6.1. The water table is at a depth of 4 ft below the ground surface.
6.2.2 Soil Properties
N-values (blowcounts per foot) from the Standard Penetration Test are included in Fig. 6.1.

6-24
Figure 6.1 General soil description of Example Problem 1.
6.2.3 Construction
High-quality construction is assumed. The contractor will have all the required equipment in good order
and experienced personnel will be on the job.
6.2.4 Loadings
The working-axial load is 170 tons, lateral load is negligible, and no downdrag is expected.
6.2.5 Factor of Safety
It is assumed that a load test has been performed nearby but considering the possible variation in the
soil properties over the site and other factors, an overall factor of safety of 2.5 is selected. The diameter
will be sufficiently small so that reduced-end bearing will not be required. Consequently, the global
factor of safety can be applied to both components of resistance.
6.2.6 Ultimate Load
The ultimate-axial load is thus established as 2.5 x 170 = 425 tons, since a global factor of safety (of 2.5)
is used.
6.2.7 Geometry of the Drilled Shaft
A straight-sided, drilled shaft is selected with a diameter of 3.0 ft and a penetration of 60 feet.
6.2.8
Hand Computations

6-25
Side Resistance
Computations are performed assuming a total-unit weight of sand equal to 115 pcf. The hand
computations are as follows:
Depth interval
Ft.
0-4
4-30
30-60
A
ft
37.7
245.0
282.7
Avg. effective stress

Tsf
0.115
0.572
1.308
0.8
0.8
0.6
DQs
tons
3.5
112.1
221.9
Qs = 337.5
Base Resistance
Computations for base resistance are performed using the soil at the base of the shaft. At the 60-ft
location, NSPT= 21.
qB = (0.6) (21) = 12.6 tsf
AB = 7.07 ft2
QB = (7.07) (12.6) = 89.1 tons
Total Resistance
QU = 337.5 + 89.1 = 427 tons QT= 425 tons (OK).
6.2.9 Comparison of Results
Table 6.1 contains a comparison of the results obtained from hand computations against those from
computer run in SHAFT.
Category
Side Resistance
Tip Resistance
Total Capacity
Manual Calculations
(tons)
338
89
427
Computer Analysis
(tons)
343
89
432
Deviation
1.5%
0%
1.2%
Table 6.1 Comparison of results for Example Problem 1
6.2.10 Input Data for Computer Analysis

The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem1 is reproduced below in courier
typeface, for distinction.
6.2.11 Graphical Results of Computer Analysis
Each of the resulting plots of skin friction, tip resistance, and total capacity versus depth (w/F.S.)
provided by the computer program contains three curves, as may be seen in Figs. 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4
respectively. These curves correspond to three increments in drilled shaft diameter, since the data input
specified 6 ft as the largest and 3 ft as the smallest diameters for consideration. The program
automatically computed results for the smallest diameter and for each 0.5-ft increase in diameter up to
the largest specified by the user.
Results of combined plots versus depth, shown in Fig. 6.5, only contains the curves of skin friction, tip
resistance, and total capacity versus depth for the initial shaft diameter.
6-26
Figure 6.2 Curve of Skin Friction vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

6-27
Figure 6.3 Curve of Tip Resistance vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.
Figure 6.4 Curve of Total Capacity vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.

6-28
Figure 6.5 Curve of Combined Plots vs Depth (w/F.S.) for Example Problem 1.
6.2.12 Output Data

Contents of the output-data file for Example Problem 1 is reproduced below in courier typeface, for
distinction.
VERTICALLY LOADED DRILLED SHAFT ANALYSIS PROGRAM SHAFT
VERSION 2012 (C)COPYRIGHT ENSOFT,INC.1989 - 2012
Example Problem 1, Owens and Reese, 1982, Shaft E-2
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
60.0 FT
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
4.0 FT.
FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE TOTAL ULTIMATE CAPACITY = 2.50

------------------------------------------------------FACTOR OF SAFETY APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE CAPACITY = 2.50
------------------------------------------------------

6-29
SOIL INFORMATION
--------------LAYER NO 1----SAND
AT THE TOP
SKIN FRICTION COEFFICIENT- BETA
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, LB/SQ FT
INTERNAL FRICTION ANGLE, DEG.
BLOWS PER FOOT FROM STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, LB/CU FT
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, LB/SQ FT
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.110E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.000E+00
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.110E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.400E+01
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.140E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.400E+01
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.140E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.300E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.600E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.210E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.300E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 2----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 3----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT

6-30
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.600E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.210E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.800E+02
DRILLED SHAFT INFORMATION

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
IGNORED BOTTOM PORTION
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
3.000 FT.
=
3.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
10.180 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
=
=
=
=
=
ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;

ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (FOR UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
TOTAL ULTIMATE RESISTANCE;
TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING A FACTOR OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE;
= TOTAL ALLOWABLE LOAD USING FACTORS OF SAFETY
APPLIED TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE AND
THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE.
VOLUME
(CU.YDS)
0.26
0.52
0.79
1.05
1.31
1.57
1.83
2.09
2.36
2.62
2.88
3.14
3.40
3.67
3.93
4.19
4.45
QS
(TONS)
0.00
1.30
2.60
4.34
6.27
8.40
10.73
13.26
15.98
18.91
22.03
25.35
28.87
32.59
36.50
40.62
44.93
QB
(TONS)
10.19
12.32
14.46
16.44
18.41
20.39
22.37
24.35
26.33
28.31
30.29
32.27
34.25
36.23
38.21
40.19
42.17
QU
(TONS)
10.19
13.62
17.06
20.77
24.68
28.79
33.10
37.61
42.32
47.22
52.32
57.62
63.12
68.82
74.71
80.81
87.10
QBD
(TONS)
4.08
6.23
8.38
10.91
13.63
16.56
19.68
23.00
26.52
30.23
34.15
38.26
42.57
47.08
51.79
56.69
61.80
QDN
(TONS)
4.08
5.45
6.82
8.31
9.87
11.52
13.24
15.04
16.93
18.89
20.93
23.05
25.25
27.53
29.89
32.32
34.84
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
30.31
26.01
21.72
19.83
18.85
18.33
18.06
17.96
17.96
18.03
18.17
18.34
18.54
18.77
19.02
19.29
19.57


18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
42.0
43.0
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
4.71
4.97
5.24
5.50
5.76
6.02
6.28
6.55
6.81
7.07
7.33
7.59
7.86
8.12
8.38
8.64
8.90
9.16
9.43
9.69
9.95
10.21
10.47
10.74
11.00
11.26
11.52
11.78
12.04
12.31
12.57
12.83
13.09
13.35
13.62
13.88
14.14
14.40
14.66
14.92
15.19
15.45
15.71
49.44
54.15
59.06
64.16
69.47
74.97
80.67
86.57
92.67
98.96
105.46
112.15
119.04
124.36
129.82
135.44
141.20
147.11
153.17
159.38
165.74
172.25
178.90
185.71
192.66
199.76
207.01
214.41
221.96
229.66
237.50
245.50
253.64
261.93
270.37
278.96
287.70
296.58
305.62
314.80
324.14
333.62
343.25
44.15
46.13
48.11
50.09
52.07
54.05
56.02
63.88
72.16
80.80
86.38
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
89.08
93.59
100.28
107.16
114.25
121.53
129.02
136.70
150.45
164.83
179.76
191.83
201.23
208.12
213.43
218.90
224.51
230.28
236.19
242.25
248.46
254.82
261.32
267.98
274.78
281.74
288.84
296.09
303.49
311.04
318.73
326.58
334.57
342.71
351.01
359.45
368.04
376.77
385.66
394.70
403.88
413.21
422.69
432.32
67.10
72.60
78.30
84.20
90.29
96.59
103.08
112.12
121.53
131.28
140.01
147.78
154.67
159.99
165.45
171.07
176.83
182.74
188.80
195.01
201.37
207.88
214.53
221.34
228.29
235.39
242.64
250.04
257.59
265.29
273.13
281.13
289.27
297.56
306.00
314.59
323.33
332.21
341.25
350.43
359.77
369.25
378.88
37.44
40.11
42.87
45.70
48.61
51.61
54.68
60.18
65.93
71.90
76.73
80.49
83.25
85.37
87.56
89.81
92.11
94.48
96.90
99.38
101.93
104.53
107.19
109.91
112.69
115.54
118.44
121.39
124.41
127.49
130.63
133.83
137.09
140.40
143.78
147.21
150.71
154.26
157.88
161.55
165.29
169.08
172.93
6-31
19.86
20.16
20.46
20.78
21.10
21.42
21.75
22.98
24.21
25.43
26.17
26.50
26.49
26.30
26.13
25.98
25.87
25.77
25.70
25.65
25.61
25.59
25.59
25.60
25.62
25.65
25.70
25.76
25.82
25.90
25.98
26.08
26.18
26.29
26.40
26.52
26.65
26.78
26.92
27.06
27.21
27.36
27.52
RESULT FROM TREND (AVERAGED) LINE

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3867E-01
0.1934E+00
0.3867E+00
0.1934E+02
0.2900E+02
0.3874E+02
0.9654E+02
0.1707E+03
0.2227E+03
0.2548E+03
0.3383E+03
0.3648E+03
0.3702E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1912E-04
0.9558E-04
0.1912E-03
0.9558E-02
0.1434E-01
0.1912E-01
0.4783E-01
0.9117E-01
0.1299E+00
0.1637E+00
0.3374E+00
0.5973E+00
0.7245E+00
TIP LOAD
ton
0.8660E-03
0.4330E-02
0.8660E-02
0.4330E+00
0.6495E+00
0.8660E+00
0.2165E+01
0.4330E+01
0.6495E+01
0.8660E+01
0.2148E+02
0.4043E+02
0.4646E+02
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00


0.3804E+03
0.4128E+03
0.1004E+01
0.1917E+01
0.5701E+02
0.9041E+02
0.9000E+00
0.1800E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1237E-02
0.6186E-02
0.1237E-01
0.6186E+00
0.9279E+00
0.1237E+01
0.3093E+01
0.6186E+01
0.9279E+01
0.1237E+02
0.3024E+02
0.5592E+02
0.6157E+02
0.6770E+02
0.9620E+02
TIP
TIP LOAD
ton
0.4949E-03
0.2474E-02
0.4949E-02
0.2474E+00
0.3711E+00
0.4949E+00
0.1237E+01
0.2474E+01
0.3711E+01
0.4949E+01
0.1272E+02
0.2494E+02
0.3135E+02
0.4632E+02
0.8462E+02
TIP
6-32
RESULT FROM UPPER-BOUND LINE

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.5525E-01
0.2763E+00
0.5525E+00
0.2763E+02
0.4155E+02
0.5548E+02
0.1366E+03
0.2322E+03
0.2897E+03
0.3183E+03
0.3675E+03
0.3932E+03
0.3988E+03
0.4050E+03
0.4335E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.2274E-04
0.1137E-03
0.2274E-03
0.1137E-01
0.1707E-01
0.2277E-01
0.5682E-01
0.1058E+00
0.1469E+00
0.1804E+00
0.3464E+00
0.6067E+00
0.7340E+00
0.1011E+01
0.1923E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.9000E+00
0.1800E+01
RESULT FROM LOWER-BOUND LINE

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.2380E-01
0.1190E+00
0.2380E+00
0.1190E+02
0.1785E+02
0.2380E+02
0.5962E+02
0.1110E+03
0.1543E+03
0.1890E+03
0.3085E+03
0.3365E+03
0.3415E+03
0.3558E+03
0.3921E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1574E-04
0.7868E-04
0.1574E-03
0.7868E-02
0.1180E-01
0.1574E-01
0.3936E-01
0.7698E-01
0.1129E+00
0.1467E+00
0.3283E+00
0.5878E+00
0.7150E+00
0.9959E+00
0.1911E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.9000E+00
0.1800E+01

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
3.500 FT.
=
3.500 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
13.856 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.

6-33
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
42.0
43.0
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
QS
(CU.YDS) (TONS)
0.36
0.00
0.71
1.52
1.07
3.04
1.43
5.06
1.78
7.31
2.14
9.80
2.49
12.52
2.85
15.47
3.21
18.65
3.56
22.06
3.92
25.70
4.28
29.58
4.63
33.68
4.99
38.02
5.35
42.59
5.70
47.39
6.06
52.42
6.41
57.68
6.77
63.18
7.13
68.90
7.48
74.86
7.84
81.05
8.20
87.47
8.55
94.12
8.91
101.00
9.27
108.11
9.62
115.46
9.98
123.03
10.34
130.84
10.69
138.88
11.05
145.08
11.40
151.46
11.76
158.01
12.12
164.73
12.47
171.63
12.83
178.70
13.19
185.95
13.54
193.36
13.90
200.96
14.26
208.72
14.61
216.66
14.97
224.77
15.32
233.06
15.68
241.51
16.04
250.15
16.39
258.95
16.75
267.93
QB
(TONS)
13.34
15.78
18.22
20.53
22.84
25.15
27.46
29.77
32.07
34.38
36.69
39.00
41.31
43.62
45.93
48.24
50.55
52.86
55.17
57.48
59.79
62.10
64.41
73.08
82.75
93.45
103.61
111.62
116.78
118.93
120.32
121.01
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
QU
(TONS)
13.34
17.29
21.25
25.59
30.15
34.95
39.97
45.23
50.72
56.44
62.39
68.58
74.99
81.64
88.52
95.63
102.97
110.54
118.34
126.38
134.64
143.14
151.87
167.20
183.75
201.57
219.07
234.65
247.62
257.81
265.40
272.47
279.25
285.98
292.87
299.94
307.19
314.61
322.20
329.96
337.90
346.01
354.30
362.76
371.39
380.19
389.17
QBD
(TONS)
5.33
7.83
10.32
13.27
16.45
19.86
23.50
27.37
31.48
35.81
40.38
45.18
50.21
55.47
60.96
66.68
72.64
78.83
85.24
91.89
98.77
105.88
113.23
123.35
134.10
145.49
156.90
167.68
177.55
186.45
193.21
199.87
206.51
213.23
220.13
227.20
234.44
241.86
249.45
257.22
265.16
273.27
281.55
290.01
298.64
307.45
316.43
QDN
(TONS)
5.33
6.92
8.50
10.23
12.06
13.98
15.99
18.09
20.29
22.58
24.96
27.43
30.00
32.66
35.41
38.25
41.19
44.22
47.34
50.55
53.86
57.26
60.75
66.88
73.50
80.63
87.63
93.86
99.05
103.13
106.16
108.99
111.70
114.39
117.15
119.98
122.88
125.84
128.88
131.98
135.16
138.40
141.72
145.10
148.56
152.08
155.67
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
28.65
24.26
19.88
17.95
16.92
16.34
16.02
15.86
15.81
15.84
15.92
16.04
16.19
16.36
16.56
16.77
17.00
17.23
17.48
17.73
17.99
18.26
18.53
19.55
20.62
21.75
22.77
23.52
23.96
24.11
24.02
23.89
23.74
23.60
23.48
23.38
23.30
23.23
23.18
23.15
23.13
23.12
23.12
23.13
23.16
23.19
23.23


48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
17.11
17.46
17.82
18.18
18.53
18.89
19.24
19.60
19.96
20.31
20.67
21.03
21.38
277.09
286.41
295.91
305.59
315.43
325.45
335.65
346.02
356.56
367.27
378.16
389.22
400.46
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
121.24
398.33
407.65
417.15
426.83
436.67
446.70
456.89
467.26
477.80
488.51
499.40
510.46
521.70
325.58
334.91
344.41
354.08
363.93
373.95
384.14
394.51
405.05
415.77
426.66
437.72
448.95
159.33
163.06
166.86
170.73
174.67
178.68
182.76
186.90
191.12
195.41
199.76
204.19
208.68
6-34
23.29
23.34
23.41
23.48
23.56
23.65
23.74
23.84
23.94
24.05
24.16
24.28
24.40

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3710E-01
0.1855E+00
0.3710E+00
0.1855E+02
0.2782E+02
0.3710E+02
0.9301E+02
0.1720E+03
0.2339E+03
0.2744E+03
0.3862E+03
0.4278E+03
0.4365E+03
0.4549E+03
0.4992E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1656E-04
0.8280E-04
0.1656E-03
0.8280E-02
0.1242E-01
0.1656E-01
0.4143E-01
0.8085E-01
0.1175E+00
0.1504E+00
0.3234E+00
0.5839E+00
0.7116E+00
0.1142E+01
0.2205E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1010E-02
0.5052E-02
0.1010E-01
0.5052E+00
0.7578E+00
0.1010E+01
0.2526E+01
0.5052E+01
0.7578E+01
0.1010E+02
0.2514E+02
0.4829E+02
0.5840E+02
0.7759E+02
0.1231E+03
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1050E+01
0.2100E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1443E-02
0.7217E-02
0.1443E-01
0.7217E+00
0.1083E+01
0.1443E+01
0.3608E+01
0.7217E+01
0.1083E+02
0.1443E+02
0.3562E+02
0.6697E+02
0.8068E+02
0.9214E+02
0.1309E+03
TIP
TIP LOAD
TIP

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.5225E-01
0.2612E+00
0.5225E+00
0.2612E+02
0.3919E+02
0.5233E+02
0.1311E+03
0.2362E+03
0.3110E+03
0.3522E+03
0.4291E+03
0.4605E+03
0.4742E+03
0.4856E+03
0.5244E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1909E-04
0.9543E-04
0.1909E-03
0.9543E-02
0.1431E-01
0.1909E-01
0.4778E-01
0.9199E-01
0.1315E+00
0.1651E+00
0.3327E+00
0.5920E+00
0.7211E+00
0.1149E+01
0.2211E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1050E+01
0.2100E+01

TOP
LOAD
TOP MOVEMENT
MOVEMENT


ton
0.2317E-01
0.1158E+00
0.2317E+00
0.1158E+02
0.1738E+02
0.2317E+02
0.5798E+02
0.1110E+03
0.1573E+03
0.1953E+03
0.3424E+03
0.3951E+03
0.3988E+03
0.4242E+03
0.4739E+03
IN.
0.1416E-04
0.7081E-04
0.1416E-03
0.7081E-02
0.1062E-01
0.1416E-01
0.3541E-01
0.7007E-01
0.1036E+00
0.1356E+00
0.3140E+00
0.5758E+00
0.7022E+00
0.1135E+01
0.2200E+01
ton
0.5773E-03
0.2887E-02
0.5773E-02
0.2887E+00
0.4330E+00
0.5773E+00
0.1443E+01
0.2887E+01
0.4330E+01
0.5773E+01
0.1466E+02
0.2962E+02
0.3611E+02
0.6305E+02
0.1152E+03
6-35
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1050E+01
0.2100E+01

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
4.000 FT.
=
4.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
18.098 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
(CU.YDS)
0.47
0.93
1.40
1.86
2.33
2.79
3.26
3.72
4.19
4.65
5.12
5.59
6.05
6.52
QS
(TONS)
0.00
1.73
3.47
5.78
8.36
11.20
14.31
17.68
21.31
25.21
29.37
33.80
38.49
43.45
QB
(TONS)
16.84
19.59
22.35
24.99
27.62
30.26
32.90
35.54
38.18
40.82
43.46
46.10
48.74
51.38
QU
(TONS)
16.84
21.33
25.81
30.77
35.98
41.46
47.21
53.22
59.49
66.03
72.83
79.90
87.23
94.83
QBD
(TONS)
6.74
9.57
12.41
15.78
19.41
23.31
27.47
31.89
36.58
41.54
46.76
52.24
57.99
64.00
QDN
(TONS)
6.74
8.53
10.33
12.31
14.39
16.59
18.88
21.29
23.80
26.41
29.13
31.96
34.89
37.93
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
27.33
22.91
18.49
16.52
15.46
14.85
14.49
14.29
14.20
14.19
14.22
14.30
14.42
14.55


15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
42.0
43.0
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
6.98
7.45
7.91
8.38
8.84
9.31
9.78
10.24
10.71
11.17
11.64
12.10
12.57
13.03
13.50
13.96
14.43
14.90
15.36
15.83
16.29
16.76
17.22
17.69
18.15
18.62
19.08
19.55
20.02
20.48
20.95
21.41
21.88
22.34
22.81
23.27
23.74
24.21
24.67
25.14
25.60
26.07
26.53
27.00
27.46
27.93
48.67
54.16
59.91
65.92
72.20
78.74
85.55
92.62
99.96
107.56
115.43
123.56
131.95
140.61
149.53
158.72
165.81
173.10
180.58
188.27
196.15
204.23
212.51
220.99
229.66
238.54
247.61
256.88
266.35
276.02
285.88
295.95
306.21
316.67
327.33
338.19
349.24
360.49
371.95
383.60
395.45
407.49
419.74
432.18
444.83
457.67
54.02
56.66
59.30
61.94
64.57
67.21
69.85
72.49
81.27
90.92
101.48
112.96
122.66
130.51
136.45
140.41
144.37
148.33
151.69
154.40
156.38
157.57
158.16
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
158.36
102.69
110.81
119.20
127.86
136.78
145.96
155.40
165.12
181.23
198.49
216.91
236.52
254.61
271.12
285.98
299.13
310.18
321.43
332.28
342.67
352.53
361.80
370.67
379.34
388.02
396.89
405.97
415.24
424.71
434.37
444.24
454.30
464.57
475.03
485.68
496.54
507.60
518.85
530.30
541.95
553.80
565.85
578.10
590.54
603.18
616.02
70.28
76.82
83.63
90.70
98.03
105.63
113.49
121.62
132.47
143.93
156.02
168.74
181.02
192.82
204.11
214.89
223.56
232.43
241.26
250.03
258.70
267.26
275.77
284.33
293.01
301.88
310.95
320.22
329.69
339.36
349.22
359.29
369.55
380.01
390.67
401.53
412.58
423.84
435.29
446.94
458.79
470.84
483.08
495.53
508.17
521.01
41.08
44.33
47.68
51.14
54.71
58.38
62.16
66.05
72.49
79.39
86.76
94.61
101.84
108.45
114.39
119.65
124.07
128.57
132.91
137.07
141.01
144.72
148.27
151.74
155.21
158.76
162.39
166.09
169.88
173.75
177.70
181.72
185.83
190.01
194.27
198.62
203.04
207.54
212.12
216.78
221.52
226.34
231.24
236.22
241.27
246.41
6-36
14.71
14.88
15.06
15.26
15.47
15.68
15.90
16.12
16.93
17.77
18.64
19.54
20.26
20.80
21.19
21.42
21.50
21.58
21.63
21.65
21.64
21.59
21.52
21.45
21.37
21.32
21.27
21.24
21.22
21.21
21.21
21.22
21.23
21.26
21.29
21.33
21.38
21.44
21.50
21.56
21.63
21.71
21.79
21.87
21.96
22.06

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3615E-01
0.1807E+00
0.3615E+00
0.1807E+02
0.2711E+02
0.3615E+02
0.9052E+02
0.1743E+03
0.2393E+03
0.2907E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1497E-04
0.7483E-04
0.1497E-03
0.7483E-02
0.1122E-01
0.1497E-01
0.3743E-01
0.7421E-01
0.1083E+00
0.1411E+00
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1155E-02
0.5773E-02
0.1155E-01
0.5773E+00
0.8660E+00
0.1155E+01
0.2887E+01
0.5773E+01
0.8660E+01
0.1155E+02
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00


0.4273E+03
0.4884E+03
0.5012E+03
0.5326E+03
0.5906E+03
0.3121E+00
0.5734E+00
0.7013E+00
0.1284E+01
0.2497E+01
0.2883E+02
0.5648E+02
0.6803E+02
0.1013E+03
0.1607E+03
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1650E-02
0.8248E-02
0.1650E-01
0.8248E+00
0.1237E+01
0.1650E+01
0.4124E+01
0.8248E+01
0.1237E+02
0.1650E+02
0.4111E+02
0.7852E+02
0.9419E+02
0.1204E+03
0.1710E+03
TIP
TIP LOAD
ton
0.6598E-03
0.3299E-02
0.6598E-02
0.3299E+00
0.4949E+00
0.6598E+00
0.1650E+01
0.3299E+01
0.4949E+01
0.6598E+01
0.1656E+02
0.3444E+02
0.4187E+02
0.8235E+02
0.1504E+03
TIP
6-37

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.5042E-01
0.2521E+00
0.5042E+00
0.2521E+02
0.3782E+02
0.5042E+02
0.1264E+03
0.2393E+03
0.3219E+03
0.3807E+03
0.4868E+03
0.5282E+03
0.5439E+03
0.5701E+03
0.6207E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1684E-04
0.8419E-04
0.1684E-03
0.8420E-02
0.1263E-01
0.1684E-01
0.4213E-01
0.8300E-01
0.1197E+00
0.1539E+00
0.3217E+00
0.5809E+00
0.7095E+00
0.1290E+01
0.2502E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.2279E-01
0.1140E+00
0.2279E+00
0.1140E+02
0.1709E+02
0.2279E+02
0.5699E+02
0.1119E+03
0.1584E+03
0.2007E+03
0.3664E+03
0.4485E+03
0.4585E+03
0.4951E+03
0.5605E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1317E-04
0.6584E-04
0.1317E-03
0.6584E-02
0.9876E-02
0.1317E-01
0.3292E-01
0.6563E-01
0.9714E-01
0.1282E+00
0.3023E+00
0.5659E+00
0.6930E+00
0.1277E+01
0.2492E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
4.500 FT.
=
4.500 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
22.905 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.

6-38
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
42.0
43.0
44.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
QS
(CU.YDS) (TONS)
0.59
0.00
1.18
1.95
1.77
3.90
2.36
6.50
2.95
9.40
3.53
12.60
4.12
16.09
4.71
19.89
5.30
23.97
5.89
28.36
6.48
33.04
7.07
38.03
7.66
43.30
8.25
48.88
8.84
54.76
9.43
60.93
10.02
67.40
10.60
74.16
11.19
81.23
11.78
88.59
12.37
96.25
12.96
104.20
13.55
112.46
14.14
121.01
14.73
129.86
15.32
139.00
15.91
148.45
16.50
158.19
17.08
168.23
17.67
178.56
18.26
186.54
18.85
194.74
19.44
203.16
20.03
211.80
20.62
220.67
21.21
229.76
21.80
239.07
22.39
248.61
22.98
258.37
23.57
268.35
24.15
278.56
24.74
288.99
25.33
299.64
25.92
310.52
QB
(TONS)
19.20
22.05
24.89
27.64
30.39
33.14
35.88
38.63
41.38
44.13
46.88
49.63
52.38
55.13
57.88
60.63
63.38
66.13
68.88
71.63
74.37
82.73
91.83
101.69
112.32
122.63
131.48
138.80
144.55
148.68
152.80
156.92
161.05
165.17
169.30
173.42
177.00
179.99
182.32
183.95
184.92
185.41
185.57
185.57
QU
(TONS)
19.20
24.00
28.79
34.14
39.79
45.74
51.98
58.52
65.36
72.49
79.93
87.66
95.69
104.01
112.63
121.55
130.77
140.29
150.10
160.21
170.62
186.93
204.28
222.69
242.18
261.63
279.92
296.99
312.78
327.24
339.34
351.66
364.21
376.97
389.97
403.18
416.08
428.60
440.69
452.30
463.48
474.40
485.22
496.09
QBD
(TONS)
7.68
10.77
13.86
17.56
21.56
25.85
30.45
35.34
40.53
46.01
51.80
57.88
64.26
70.93
77.91
85.18
92.75
100.61
108.78
117.24
126.00
137.29
149.19
161.68
174.78
188.05
201.04
213.71
226.05
238.03
247.66
257.51
267.58
277.87
288.39
299.13
309.87
320.61
331.30
341.93
352.53
363.15
373.87
384.75
QDN
(TONS)
7.68
9.60
11.52
13.66
15.92
18.29
20.79
23.41
26.14
29.00
31.97
35.06
38.27
41.60
45.05
48.62
52.31
56.12
60.04
64.08
68.25
74.77
81.71
89.08
96.87
104.65
111.97
118.80
125.11
130.90
135.74
140.66
145.68
150.79
155.99
161.27
166.43
171.44
176.28
180.92
185.39
189.76
194.09
198.44
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
24.44
20.37
16.29
14.49
13.51
12.94
12.60
12.42
12.33
12.31
12.33
12.40
12.49
12.61
12.75
12.90
13.06
13.23
13.41
13.60
13.79
14.42
15.08
15.75
16.44
17.08
17.60
18.00
18.31
18.52
18.58
18.65
18.73
18.82
18.91
19.01
19.09
19.15
19.18
19.19
19.19
19.17
19.15
19.14


45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
26.51
27.10
27.69
28.28
28.87
29.46
30.05
30.63
31.22
31.81
32.40
32.99
33.58
34.17
34.76
35.35
321.62
332.94
344.48
356.25
368.24
380.46
392.90
405.56
418.44
431.55
444.88
458.43
472.21
486.21
500.43
514.87
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
185.57
507.19
518.51
530.06
541.83
553.82
566.03
578.47
591.13
604.01
617.12
630.45
644.00
657.78
671.78
686.00
700.45
395.85
407.17
418.71
430.48
442.47
454.69
467.13
479.79
492.67
505.78
519.11
532.66
546.44
560.44
574.66
589.10
202.88
207.41
212.02
216.73
221.53
226.41
231.39
236.45
241.61
246.85
252.18
257.60
263.11
268.71
274.40
280.18
6-39
19.13
19.13
19.14
19.16
19.19
19.22
19.25
19.30
19.34
19.40
19.46
19.52
19.59
19.66
19.74
19.82

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3543E-01
0.1771E+00
0.3543E+00
0.1771E+02
0.2657E+02
0.3543E+02
0.8865E+02
0.1756E+03
0.2415E+03
0.3025E+03
0.4602E+03
0.5429E+03
0.5490E+03
0.6039E+03
0.6720E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1388E-04
0.6941E-04
0.1388E-03
0.6941E-02
0.1041E-01
0.1388E-01
0.3471E-01
0.6935E-01
0.1017E+00
0.1338E+00
0.3027E+00
0.5642E+00
0.6052E+00
0.1425E+01
0.2787E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1203E-02
0.6014E-02
0.1203E-01
0.6014E+00
0.9021E+00
0.1203E+01
0.3007E+01
0.6014E+01
0.9021E+01
0.1203E+02
0.3007E+02
0.5935E+02
0.6402E+02
0.1188E+03
0.1884E+03
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.5400E+00
0.1350E+01
0.2700E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1718E-02
0.8591E-02
0.1718E-01
0.8591E+00
0.1289E+01
0.1718E+01
0.4296E+01
0.8591E+01
0.1289E+02
0.1718E+02
0.4296E+02
0.8275E+02
0.8908E+02
0.1410E+03
0.2004E+03
TIP

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.4908E-01
0.2454E+00
0.4908E+00
0.2454E+02
0.3681E+02
0.4908E+02
0.1230E+03
0.2412E+03
0.3267E+03
0.4010E+03
0.5363E+03
0.5887E+03
0.5950E+03
0.6469E+03
0.7063E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1532E-04
0.7662E-04
0.1532E-03
0.7662E-02
0.1149E-01
0.1532E-01
0.3833E-01
0.7643E-01
0.1110E+00
0.1448E+00
0.3122E+00
0.5710E+00
0.6121E+00
0.1431E+01
0.2792E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.5400E+00
0.1350E+01
0.2700E+01

6-40

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.2250E-01
0.1125E+00
0.2250E+00
0.1125E+02
0.1687E+02
0.2250E+02
0.5625E+02
0.1123E+03
0.1590E+03
0.2045E+03
0.3825E+03
0.4971E+03
0.5029E+03
0.5608E+03
0.6376E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1249E-04
0.6244E-04
0.1249E-03
0.6244E-02
0.9366E-02
0.1249E-01
0.3122E-01
0.6243E-01
0.9266E-01
0.1228E+00
0.2932E+00
0.5575E+00
0.5984E+00
0.1419E+01
0.2783E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.6873E-03
0.3437E-02
0.6873E-02
0.3437E+00
0.5155E+00
0.6873E+00
0.1718E+01
0.3437E+01
0.5155E+01
0.6873E+01
0.1718E+02
0.3595E+02
0.3897E+02
0.9650E+02
0.1763E+03
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.5400E+00
0.1350E+01
0.2700E+01

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
5.000 FT.
=
5.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
28.278 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
(CU.YDS)
0.73
1.45
2.18
2.91
3.64
4.36
5.09
5.82
6.55
7.27
8.00
QS
(TONS)
0.00
2.17
4.34
7.23
10.45
14.00
17.88
22.09
26.64
31.51
36.72
QB
(TONS)
20.83
23.66
26.48
29.23
31.98
34.73
37.48
40.23
42.98
45.72
48.47
QU
(TONS)
20.83
25.82
30.82
36.46
42.43
48.73
55.36
62.32
69.61
77.24
85.19
QBD
(TONS)
8.33
11.63
14.93
18.92
23.24
27.89
32.87
38.18
43.83
49.80
56.11
QDN
(TONS)
8.33
10.33
12.33
14.58
16.97
19.49
22.14
24.93
27.85
30.89
34.08
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
21.38
17.75
14.12
12.53
11.67
11.17
10.87
10.71
10.63
10.62
10.65


12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
42.0
43.0
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
8.73
9.46
10.18
10.91
11.64
12.36
13.09
13.82
14.55
15.27
16.00
16.73
17.46
18.18
18.91
19.64
20.36
21.09
21.82
22.55
23.27
24.00
24.73
25.46
26.18
26.91
27.64
28.37
29.09
29.82
30.55
31.27
32.00
32.73
33.46
34.18
34.91
35.64
36.37
37.09
37.82
38.55
39.27
40.00
40.73
41.46
42.18
42.91
43.64
42.25
48.12
54.31
60.84
67.70
74.88
82.40
90.25
98.43
106.94
115.78
124.95
134.45
144.28
154.45
164.94
175.76
186.92
198.40
207.26
216.37
225.73
235.34
245.19
255.29
265.64
276.23
287.08
298.17
309.51
321.10
332.94
345.02
357.35
369.93
382.76
395.84
409.16
422.73
436.55
450.62
464.93
479.50
494.31
509.37
524.67
540.23
556.03
572.08
51.22
53.97
56.72
59.47
62.22
64.97
67.72
70.47
73.22
80.90
89.19
98.10
107.65
117.86
126.93
134.83
141.51
146.94
151.06
155.19
159.31
163.44
167.56
171.68
175.81
179.93
184.06
188.18
192.30
195.95
199.07
201.64
203.59
204.89
205.67
206.06
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
206.19
93.47
102.09
111.03
120.31
129.92
139.85
150.12
160.72
171.65
187.84
204.97
223.06
242.11
262.14
281.38
299.77
317.28
333.86
349.47
362.45
375.68
389.17
402.89
416.87
431.10
445.57
460.29
475.26
490.47
505.46
520.18
534.57
548.61
562.24
575.61
588.82
602.03
615.35
628.93
642.74
656.81
671.13
685.69
700.50
715.56
730.87
746.42
762.23
778.28
62.74
69.71
77.00
84.63
92.58
100.87
109.49
118.44
127.72
139.30
151.46
164.19
177.51
191.43
205.22
218.87
232.37
245.69
258.83
269.34
280.10
291.10
302.36
313.86
325.61
337.61
349.86
362.35
375.09
387.89
400.73
413.59
426.46
439.31
452.20
465.19
478.31
491.64
505.21
519.03
533.10
547.41
561.97
576.79
591.84
607.15
622.71
638.51
654.56
37.39
40.84
44.41
48.12
51.97
55.94
60.05
64.29
68.66
75.14
81.99
89.22
96.84
104.86
112.55
119.91
126.91
133.54
139.79
144.98
150.27
155.67
161.16
166.75
172.44
178.23
184.12
190.10
196.19
202.18
208.07
213.83
219.44
224.90
230.24
235.53
240.81
246.14
251.57
257.10
262.72
268.45
274.28
280.20
286.22
292.35
298.57
304.89
311.31
6-41
10.71
10.80
10.90
11.03
11.16
11.31
11.47
11.63
11.80
12.30
12.81
13.33
13.87
14.42
14.88
15.27
15.58
15.83
16.02
16.08
16.14
16.21
16.29
16.38
16.46
16.56
16.65
16.75
16.86
16.95
17.03
17.09
17.14
17.18
17.20
17.23
17.24
17.27
17.29
17.33
17.37
17.41
17.46
17.51
17.57
17.63
17.69
17.76
17.83

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3488E-01
0.1744E+00
0.3488E+00
0.1744E+02
0.2616E+02
0.3488E+02
0.8721E+02
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1312E-04
0.6558E-04
0.1312E-03
0.6558E-02
0.9837E-02
0.1312E-01
0.3279E-01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1203E-02
0.6014E-02
0.1203E-01
0.6014E+00
0.9021E+00
0.1203E+01
0.3007E+01
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01


0.1745E+03
0.2440E+03
0.3074E+03
0.4881E+03
0.5947E+03
0.6099E+03
0.6710E+03
0.7466E+03
0.6559E-01
0.9697E-01
0.1277E+00
0.2952E+00
0.5567E+00
0.6587E+00
0.1568E+01
0.3079E+01
0.6014E+01
0.9021E+01
0.1203E+02
0.3007E+02
0.5945E+02
0.7114E+02
0.1320E+03
0.2093E+03
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6000E+00
0.1500E+01
0.3000E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1718E-02
0.8591E-02
0.1718E-01
0.8591E+00
0.1289E+01
0.1718E+01
0.4296E+01
0.8591E+01
0.1289E+02
0.1718E+02
0.4296E+02
0.8316E+02
0.9897E+02
0.1567E+03
0.2227E+03
TIP
TIP LOAD
ton
0.6873E-03
0.3437E-02
0.6873E-02
0.3437E+00
0.5155E+00
0.6873E+00
0.1718E+01
0.3437E+01
0.5155E+01
0.6873E+01
0.1718E+02
0.3574E+02
0.4330E+02
0.1072E+03
0.1959E+03
TIP
6-42

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.4806E-01
0.2403E+00
0.4806E+00
0.2403E+02
0.3605E+02
0.4806E+02
0.1203E+03
0.2399E+03
0.3302E+03
0.4110E+03
0.5803E+03
0.6453E+03
0.6611E+03
0.7188E+03
0.7848E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1426E-04
0.7130E-04
0.1426E-03
0.7130E-02
0.1069E-01
0.1426E-01
0.3565E-01
0.7131E-01
0.1046E+00
0.1370E+00
0.3043E+00
0.5626E+00
0.6649E+00
0.1573E+01
0.3083E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6000E+00
0.1500E+01
0.3000E+01

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.2227E-01
0.1113E+00
0.2227E+00
0.1113E+02
0.1670E+02
0.2227E+02
0.5567E+02
0.1114E+03
0.1600E+03
0.2056E+03
0.3946E+03
0.5440E+03
0.5586E+03
0.6231E+03
0.7084E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1200E-04
0.6001E-04
0.1200E-03
0.6001E-02
0.9002E-02
0.1200E-01
0.3001E-01
0.6002E-01
0.8944E-01
0.1186E+00
0.2861E+00
0.5508E+00
0.6525E+00
0.1562E+01
0.3075E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6000E+00
0.1500E+01
0.3000E+01

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
=
=
=
=
=
=
5.500
5.500
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
FT.
FT.
FT.
DEG.
FT.
FT.

6-43
AREA OF ONE PERCENT STEEL =

34.216 SQ.IN.
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
QS
(CU.YDS) (TONS)
0.88
0.00
1.76
2.38
2.64
4.77
3.52
7.95
4.40
11.49
5.28
15.40
6.16
19.67
7.04
24.30
7.92
29.30
8.80
34.66
9.68
40.39
10.56
46.48
11.44
52.93
12.32
59.74
13.20
66.92
14.08
74.47
14.96
82.37
15.84
90.64
16.72
99.28
17.60
108.27
18.48
117.63
19.36
127.36
20.24
137.45
21.12
147.90
22.00
158.71
22.88
169.89
23.76
181.43
24.64
193.34
25.52
205.61
26.40
218.24
27.28
227.99
28.16
238.01
29.04
248.30
29.92
258.87
30.80
269.71
31.68
280.82
32.56
292.20
33.44
303.86
34.32
315.79
35.20
327.99
36.08
340.46
QB
(TONS)
22.47
25.28
28.09
30.84
33.59
36.34
39.09
41.84
44.59
47.33
50.08
52.83
55.58
58.33
61.08
63.83
66.58
69.33
72.08
79.27
86.98
95.22
103.99
113.32
122.46
130.67
137.92
144.16
149.36
153.48
157.60
161.73
165.85
169.98
174.10
178.22
182.35
186.47
190.59
194.72
198.84
QU
(TONS)
22.47
27.66
32.86
38.79
45.08
51.74
58.76
66.14
73.89
82.00
90.47
99.31
108.51
118.08
128.00
138.30
148.95
159.97
171.35
187.55
204.62
222.58
241.44
261.21
281.17
300.56
319.35
337.50
354.97
371.72
385.59
399.74
414.15
428.84
443.81
459.04
474.55
490.33
506.38
522.71
539.31
QBD
(TONS)
8.99
12.50
16.01
20.29
24.93
29.93
35.30
41.04
47.14
53.60
60.42
67.61
75.16
83.08
91.36
100.00
109.00
118.37
128.11
139.98
152.43
165.45
179.04
193.22
207.70
222.16
236.60
251.00
265.35
279.63
291.03
302.70
314.64
326.86
339.35
352.11
365.14
378.45
392.02
405.88
420.00
QDN
(TONS)
8.99
11.07
13.14
15.52
18.03
20.69
23.50
26.46
29.55
32.80
36.19
39.72
43.40
47.23
51.20
55.32
59.58
63.99
68.54
75.02
81.85
89.03
96.58
104.49
112.47
120.23
127.74
135.00
141.99
148.69
154.24
159.90
165.66
171.54
177.52
183.62
189.82
196.13
202.55
209.08
215.72
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
18.99
15.72
12.45
11.02
10.25
9.80
9.54
9.39
9.33
9.32
9.35
9.40
9.48
9.58
9.70
9.82
9.96
10.10
10.25
10.66
11.07
11.50
11.93
12.37
12.78
13.14
13.44
13.70
13.91
14.08
14.13
14.19
14.26
14.33
14.41
14.49
14.57
14.66
14.75
14.85
14.95


42.0
43.0
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
36.96
37.84
38.72
39.60
40.48
41.36
42.24
43.12
44.00
44.88
45.76
46.64
47.52
48.40
49.28
50.16
51.04
51.92
52.80
353.21
366.23
379.52
393.09
406.93
421.04
435.42
450.08
465.00
480.21
495.68
511.43
527.45
543.74
560.30
577.14
594.25
611.63
629.29
202.97
207.09
211.21
214.91
218.14
220.86
223.05
224.66
225.74
226.38
226.71
226.81
226.81
226.81
226.81
226.81
226.81
226.81
226.81
556.18
573.32
590.74
608.00
625.06
641.90
658.47
674.74
690.74
706.59
722.39
738.24
754.26
770.55
787.12
803.95
821.06
838.45
856.10
434.40
449.07
464.01
479.05
494.18
509.38
524.64
539.94
555.30
570.76
586.36
602.15
618.17
634.46
651.03
667.87
684.98
702.36
720.02
222.47
229.33
236.29
243.20
250.02
256.76
263.39
269.90
276.30
282.64
288.95
295.30
301.70
308.22
314.85
321.58
328.43
335.38
342.44
6-44
15.05
15.15
15.26
15.35
15.44
15.52
15.59
15.65
15.70
15.74
15.79
15.83
15.87
15.92
15.97
16.03
16.09
16.15
16.21

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3447E-01
0.1724E+00
0.3447E+00
0.1724E+02
0.2586E+02
0.3447E+02
0.8618E+02
0.1725E+03
0.2471E+03
0.3101E+03
0.5158E+03
0.6440E+03
0.6708E+03
0.7381E+03
0.8213E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1256E-04
0.6279E-04
0.1256E-03
0.6279E-02
0.9418E-02
0.1256E-01
0.3139E-01
0.6279E-01
0.9344E-01
0.1232E+00
0.2895E+00
0.5505E+00
0.7134E+00
0.1711E+01
0.3372E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1203E-02
0.6014E-02
0.1203E-01
0.6014E+00
0.9021E+00
0.1203E+01
0.3007E+01
0.6014E+01
0.9021E+01
0.1203E+02
0.3007E+02
0.5956E+02
0.7825E+02
0.1452E+03
0.2302E+03
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6600E+00
0.1650E+01
0.3300E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1718E-02
0.8591E-02
0.1718E-01
0.8591E+00
0.1289E+01
0.1718E+01
0.4296E+01
0.8591E+01
0.1289E+02
0.1718E+02
0.4296E+02
0.8358E+02
0.1089E+03
0.1724E+03
0.2450E+03
TIP

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.4732E-01
0.2366E+00
0.4732E+00
0.2366E+02
0.3549E+02
0.4732E+02
0.1184E+03
0.2370E+03
0.3348E+03
0.4161E+03
0.6235E+03
0.7019E+03
0.7272E+03
0.7907E+03
0.8633E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1349E-04
0.6744E-04
0.1349E-03
0.6744E-02
0.1012E-01
0.1349E-01
0.3372E-01
0.6746E-01
0.9992E-01
0.1310E+00
0.2981E+00
0.5559E+00
0.7190E+00
0.1717E+01
0.3375E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6600E+00
0.1650E+01
0.3300E+01

6-45

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.2210E-01
0.1105E+00
0.2210E+00
0.1105E+02
0.1657E+02
0.2210E+02
0.5524E+02
0.1105E+03
0.1612E+03
0.2065E+03
0.4069E+03
0.5856E+03
0.6143E+03
0.6855E+03
0.7793E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1165E-04
0.5824E-04
0.1165E-03
0.5824E-02
0.8736E-02
0.1165E-01
0.2912E-01
0.5824E-01
0.8706E-01
0.1155E+00
0.2808E+00
0.5450E+00
0.7078E+00
0.1706E+01
0.3368E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.6873E-03
0.3437E-02
0.6873E-02
0.3437E+00
0.5155E+00
0.6873E+00
0.1718E+01
0.3437E+01
0.5155E+01
0.6873E+01
0.1718E+02
0.3553E+02
0.4763E+02
0.1179E+03
0.2155E+03
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6600E+00
0.1650E+01
0.3300E+01

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
6.000 FT.
=
6.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
40.720 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
(CU.YDS)
1.05
2.09
3.14
4.19
5.24
6.28
7.33
8.38
QS
(TONS)
0.00
2.60
5.20
8.67
12.54
16.80
21.46
26.51
QB
(TONS)
24.08
26.88
29.68
32.43
35.18
37.93
40.68
43.43
QU
(TONS)
24.08
29.49
34.89
41.11
47.72
54.73
62.14
69.94
QBD
(TONS)
9.63
13.35
17.08
21.65
26.61
31.97
37.73
43.89
QDN
(TONS)
9.63
11.79
13.95
16.44
19.09
21.89
24.86
27.98
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
17.05
14.08
11.10
9.81
9.11
8.71
8.48
8.35


9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
42.0
43.0
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
9.43
10.47
11.52
12.57
13.62
14.66
15.71
16.76
17.80
18.85
19.90
20.95
21.99
23.04
24.09
25.14
26.18
27.23
28.28
29.33
30.37
31.42
32.47
33.51
34.56
35.61
36.66
37.70
38.75
39.80
40.85
41.89
42.94
43.99
45.04
46.08
47.13
48.18
49.22
50.27
51.32
52.37
53.41
54.46
55.51
56.56
57.60
58.65
59.70
60.75
61.79
62.84
31.97
37.81
44.06
50.70
57.74
65.18
73.01
81.24
89.86
98.88
108.30
118.12
128.33
138.94
149.94
161.34
173.14
185.34
197.93
210.92
224.30
238.08
248.72
259.65
270.88
282.40
294.23
306.35
318.77
331.48
344.49
357.81
371.41
385.32
399.52
414.02
428.82
443.92
459.31
475.00
490.99
507.28
523.86
540.74
557.92
575.40
593.17
611.24
629.61
648.27
667.24
686.50
46.18
48.93
51.68
54.43
57.18
59.93
62.67
65.42
68.17
70.92
77.69
84.89
92.54
100.65
109.22
118.28
126.59
134.12
140.84
146.73
151.75
155.87
159.99
164.12
168.24
172.37
176.49
180.61
184.74
188.86
192.99
197.11
201.23
205.36
209.48
213.60
217.73
221.85
225.98
230.10
233.84
237.15
240.02
242.41
244.29
245.64
246.54
247.07
247.34
247.43
247.43
247.43
78.14
86.74
95.74
105.13
114.92
125.10
135.68
146.66
158.03
169.81
185.99
203.00
220.87
239.58
259.16
279.62
299.73
319.45
338.77
357.64
376.05
393.95
408.71
423.77
439.12
454.77
470.72
486.96
503.50
520.34
537.48
554.92
572.65
590.68
609.00
627.63
646.55
665.77
685.29
705.10
724.83
744.43
763.88
783.15
802.22
821.04
839.71
858.31
876.95
895.71
914.67
933.93
50.44
57.39
64.73
72.47
80.61
89.15
98.08
107.41
117.13
127.25
139.38
152.07
165.34
179.19
193.63
208.65
223.78
238.98
254.26
269.61
285.00
300.43
312.71
325.29
338.17
351.35
364.82
378.59
392.66
407.03
421.69
436.65
451.91
467.46
483.32
499.47
515.91
532.66
549.70
567.04
584.53
602.14
619.87
637.71
655.64
673.65
691.78
710.07
728.55
747.25
766.21
785.47
31.26
34.70
38.29
42.05
45.97
50.04
54.27
58.66
63.21
67.92
74.39
81.20
88.35
95.83
103.67
111.85
119.89
127.78
135.51
143.06
150.42
157.58
163.48
169.51
175.65
181.91
188.29
194.78
201.40
208.14
214.99
221.97
229.06
236.27
243.60
251.05
258.62
266.31
274.12
282.04
289.93
297.77
305.55
313.26
320.89
328.41
335.88
343.33
350.78
358.28
365.87
373.57
6-46
8.29
8.28
8.31
8.36
8.44
8.53
8.64
8.75
8.88
9.01
9.35
9.69
10.04
10.40
10.76
11.12
11.45
11.73
11.98
12.20
12.38
12.54
12.59
12.64
12.71
12.77
12.84
12.92
12.99
13.07
13.16
13.25
13.34
13.43
13.52
13.62
13.72
13.82
13.92
14.03
14.12
14.22
14.30
14.38
14.45
14.52
14.58
14.63
14.69
14.75
14.80
14.86

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3417E-01
0.1708E+00
0.3417E+00
0.1708E+02
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1214E-04
0.6069E-04
0.1214E-03
0.6069E-02
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1203E-02
0.6014E-02
0.1203E-01
0.6014E+00
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02


0.2563E+02
0.3417E+02
0.8542E+02
0.1710E+03
0.2506E+03
0.3133E+03
0.5437E+03
0.6884E+03
0.7317E+03
0.8052E+03
0.8960E+03
0.9103E-02
0.1214E-01
0.3034E-01
0.6069E-01
0.9076E-01
0.1197E+00
0.2849E+00
0.5452E+00
0.7689E+00
0.1856E+01
0.3666E+01
0.9021E+00
0.1203E+01
0.3007E+01
0.6014E+01
0.9021E+01
0.1203E+02
0.3007E+02
0.5966E+02
0.8536E+02
0.1584E+03
0.2511E+03
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.7200E+00
0.1800E+01
0.3600E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1718E-02
0.8591E-02
0.1718E-01
0.8591E+00
0.1289E+01
0.1718E+01
0.4296E+01
0.8591E+01
0.1289E+02
0.1718E+02
0.4296E+02
0.8399E+02
0.1188E+03
0.1880E+03
0.2672E+03
TIP
TIP LOAD
ton
0.6873E-03
0.3437E-02
0.6873E-02
0.3437E+00
0.5155E+00
0.6873E+00
0.1718E+01
0.3437E+01
0.5155E+01
0.6873E+01
0.1718E+02
0.3533E+02
0.5196E+02
0.1287E+03
0.2351E+03
TIP
6-47

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.4676E-01
0.2338E+00
0.4676E+00
0.2338E+02
0.3507E+02
0.4676E+02
0.1169E+03
0.2341E+03
0.3402E+03
0.4207E+03
0.6669E+03
0.7585E+03
0.7933E+03
0.8626E+03
0.9418E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1291E-04
0.6455E-04
0.1291E-03
0.6455E-02
0.9682E-02
0.1291E-01
0.3227E-01
0.6456E-01
0.9633E-01
0.1264E+00
0.2931E+00
0.5506E+00
0.7741E+00
0.1861E+01
0.3669E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.7200E+00
0.1800E+01
0.3600E+01

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.2197E-01
0.1098E+00
0.2197E+00
0.1098E+02
0.1648E+02
0.2197E+02
0.5492E+02
0.1098E+03
0.1627E+03
0.2078E+03
0.4194E+03
0.6177E+03
0.6700E+03
0.7478E+03
0.8501E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1138E-04
0.5690E-04
0.1138E-03
0.5690E-02
0.8535E-02
0.1138E-01
0.2845E-01
0.5690E-01
0.8524E-01
0.1131E+00
0.2767E+00
0.5398E+00
0.7638E+00
0.1852E+01
0.3662E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.7200E+00
0.1800E+01
0.3600E+01

6-48

This is an example of a shaft drilled into a soil of a mixed profile with layers of clay and sand. The
example is modeled after load tests performed and reported by Touma and Reese, 1972, at the G1 site.
6.3.1 Soil Profile
The soil profile is shown in Fig. 6.6. The water table is at a depth of 17 ft below the ground surface.
Values of undrained shear strength obtained from laboratory tests and N-values (blow counts per foot)
from the Standard Penetration Test are included in Fig. 6.6.
6.3.3 Construction
High-quality construction, good specifications, and excellent inspection are assumed.
6.3.4 Loadings
Working axial load is 150 tons, no downdrag is expected, and lateral loading is negligible. The depth to
the zone of seasonal moisture change is judged to be about 10 feet.
Soil conditions across the site are variable, and the foundation is for a major and complex structure. An
overall factor of safety of 3.0 was selected.
6.3.6 Ultimate Load
A straight-sided shaft is selected, with a diameter of 3.0 ft and a penetration of 59 feet.
A straight-sided shaft is selected, with a diameter of 3.0 ft and a penetration of 59 feet.
6.3.8
Hand Computations

6-49
Side Resistance
Computations are performed assuming a total unit weight of clay equal to 125 pcf and total unit weight
of sand equal to 115 pcf. For ease of hand computations, an average value of was selected for the sand
layer. However, the computer program has been instructed to generate internally the values of and to
interpolate linearly with depth. The hand computations are as follows:
Soil
Type
Clay
Clay
Sand
Depth Interval
ft.
0-5
5-32
32.59
A
ft2
---207.3
254.5

tsf
(cased)
0.81
1.887
z
or
0
0.55
0.6
Qs
tons
0
116.7
288.1
Qs = 404.8
Base Resistance
Computations for base resistance are performed using the soil at the base of the shaft. At the 59-ft
location, NSPT= 25.
qB = (0.6) (25) = 15.0 tsf
AB = 7.07 ft2
QB = (7.07) (15.0) = 106.0 tons
Total Resistance
QU = 404.8 + 106.0 = 510 tons > QT= 450 tons (OK).
Category
Manual Calculations
Computer Analysis
Deviation
(tons)
(tons)
Side Resistance
405
392(a)
3.2%
(b)
Tip Resistance
106
129
21.7%
Total Capacity
510
521
2.2%
(a)
values of were generated at the top and bottom of each sand layer and were interpolated linearly by
the program.
(b)
The computer takes into account soil properties of two diameters below the bottom of the drilled
shaft.

The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem2 is reproduced below in courier
Example
1
2 1 1 1
3 3 0 0
5 17 59
2 5
Problem 2, Touma and Reese, 1972, G1 Site

1 2
5 0 3500000
3 3


0 125 0.0
0 125 0.0
0.55 0.55
2 32
0 125 0.0
0 125 0.0
0.55 0.55
1 40
0.0 115 0
0.0 115 0
2
0 0
1 64
0.0 115 0
0.0 115 0
2
0 0
1 80
0.0 115 0
0.0 115 0
2
0 0
6-50
0 0 6400 0 1 1
0 0 6400 0 1 1
1600 0 6400 0 1 1
1600 0 6400 0 1 1
0.0 20 4000 0 1 1
0.0 20 4000 0 1 1
0.0 25 4000 0 1 1
0.0 25 4000 0 1 1
0.0 50 4000 0 1 1
0.0 50 4000 0 1 1

Resulting plots of ultimate skin friction, ultimate tip resistance, and ultimate total capacity versus depth
provided by the computer program may be observed in Figs. 6.7,6.8 and 6.9 respectively. Results of axial
load versus short-term settlement are included in Fig. 6.10.
Figure 6.7 Curve of Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth for Example Problem 2.

6-51
Figure 6.8 Curve of Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth for Example Problem 2.
Figure 6.9 Curve of Ultimate Total Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 2.

6-52
Figure 6.10 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 2.
6.3.12 Output Data

The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem2 is reproduced below in courier
VERSION 2012 (C)COPYRIGHT ENSOFT,INC.1989- 2012
Example Problem 2, Touma and Reese, 1972, G1 Site
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
59.0 FT
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
17.0 FT.

------------------------------------------------------

6-53
SOIL INFORMATION
--------------LAYER NO 1----CLAY
AT THE TOP
STRENGTH REDUCTION FACTOR-ALPHA
END BEARING COEFFICIENT-Nc
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.600E+01
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.640E+04
0.000E+00
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.800E+01
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.640E+04
0.500E+01
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.800E+01
0.160E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.640E+04
0.500E+01
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.160E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.640E+04
0.320E+02
=
=
=
=
0.736E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.200E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 2----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 3----SAND
AT THE TOP


DEPTH, FT
6-54
= 0.115E+03
= 0.400E+04
= 0.320E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.646E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.200E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.400E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.646E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.250E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.400E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.420E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.250E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.640E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.420E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.500E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.640E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.293E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.500E+02
0.115E+03
0.400E+04
0.800E+02
LAYER NO 4----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 5----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT

6-55

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
3.000 FT.
=
3.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
5.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
10.180 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
QS
(CU.YDS) (TONS)
1.57
4.15
1.83
8.29
2.09
12.44
2.36
16.59
2.62
20.74
2.88
24.88
3.14
29.03
3.40
33.18
3.67
37.33
3.93
41.47
4.19
45.62
4.45
49.77
4.71
53.92
4.97
58.06
5.24
62.21
5.50
66.36
5.76
70.51
6.02
74.65
6.28
78.80
6.55
82.95
6.81
87.10
7.07
91.24
7.33
95.39
7.59
99.54
7.86
103.69
8.12
107.83
8.38
111.98
8.64
122.62
8.90
133.27
QB
(TONS)
46.36
46.57
46.77
46.98
47.19
47.40
47.61
47.82
48.03
48.24
48.45
48.66
48.87
49.08
49.29
49.50
49.71
49.92
50.13
50.34
50.54
57.91
66.25
75.56
81.75
84.83
84.83
84.83
84.83
QU
(TONS)
50.50
54.86
59.22
63.57
67.93
72.29
76.64
81.00
85.36
89.72
94.07
98.43
102.79
107.14
111.50
115.86
120.21
124.57
128.93
133.28
137.64
149.15
161.64
175.10
185.44
192.67
196.81
207.46
218.10
QBD
(TONS)
19.60
23.82
28.03
32.25
36.47
40.69
44.90
49.12
53.34
57.55
61.77
65.99
70.21
74.42
78.64
82.86
87.08
91.29
95.51
99.73
103.94
110.55
117.47
124.73
130.94
136.11
140.26
150.90
161.55
QDN
(TONS)
16.83
18.29
19.74
21.19
22.64
24.10
25.55
27.00
28.45
29.91
31.36
32.81
34.26
35.71
37.17
38.62
40.07
41.52
42.98
44.43
45.88
49.72
53.88
58.37
61.81
64.22
65.60
69.15
72.70
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
31.59
29.93
28.27
26.98
25.94
25.10
24.39
23.80
23.29
22.84
22.46
22.11
21.81
21.54
21.29
21.07
20.87
20.69
20.52
20.36
20.22
21.10
22.05
23.06
23.61
23.74
23.49
24.01
24.50


35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
42.0
43.0
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
9.16
9.43
9.69
9.95
10.21
10.47
10.74
11.00
11.26
11.52
11.78
12.04
12.31
12.57
12.83
13.09
13.35
13.62
13.88
14.14
14.40
14.66
14.92
15.19
15.45
143.92
154.57
165.21
175.85
186.47
197.09
207.68
218.26
228.81
239.34
249.84
260.31
270.74
281.13
291.49
301.80
312.06
322.27
332.43
342.54
352.59
362.57
372.50
382.35
392.14
89.33
94.47
100.26
104.11
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
106.04
128.54
233.25
249.04
265.47
279.96
292.52
303.13
313.73
324.30
334.86
345.38
355.88
366.35
376.78
387.18
397.53
407.84
418.10
428.32
438.48
448.58
458.63
468.62
478.54
488.39
520.67
173.70
186.06
198.63
210.55
221.82
232.43
243.03
253.61
264.16
274.69
285.19
295.66
306.09
316.48
326.84
337.14
347.41
357.62
367.78
377.89
387.94
397.92
407.84
417.70
434.98
77.75
83.01
88.49
93.32
97.51
101.04
104.58
108.10
111.62
115.13
118.63
122.12
125.59
129.06
132.51
135.95
139.37
142.77
146.16
149.53
152.88
156.21
159.51
162.80
173.56
6-56
25.45
26.42
27.40
28.14
28.65
28.94
29.22
29.49
29.74
29.98
30.20
30.42
30.62
30.81
30.98
31.15
31.31
31.46
31.60
31.73
31.85
31.96
32.06
32.16
33.70

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.5697E-01
0.2849E+00
0.5697E+00
0.2850E+02
0.4288E+02
0.5727E+02
0.1379E+03
0.2239E+03
0.2865E+03
0.3199E+03
0.4043E+03
0.4330E+03
0.4346E+03
0.4481E+03
0.4955E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.2201E-04
0.1101E-03
0.2201E-03
0.1101E-01
0.1652E-01
0.2205E-01
0.5483E-01
0.1014E+00
0.1430E+00
0.1781E+00
0.3550E+00
0.6176E+00
0.7451E+00
0.1026E+01
0.1945E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1250E-02
0.6248E-02
0.1250E-01
0.6248E+00
0.9372E+00
0.1250E+01
0.3124E+01
0.6248E+01
0.9372E+01
0.1250E+02
0.3099E+02
0.5834E+02
0.6704E+02
0.8226E+02
0.1305E+03
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.9000E+00
0.1800E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1785E-02
0.8926E-02
0.1785E-01
0.8926E+00
0.1339E+01
0.1785E+01
0.4463E+01
0.8926E+01
0.1339E+02
TIP

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.8698E-01
0.4349E+00
0.8698E+00
0.4369E+02
0.6573E+02
0.8775E+02
0.1979E+03
0.2941E+03
0.3534E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.2738E-04
0.1369E-03
0.2738E-03
0.1370E-01
0.2059E-01
0.2748E-01
0.6716E-01
0.1188E+00
0.1618E+00
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01


0.3854E+03
0.4430E+03
0.4731E+03
0.4771E+03
0.4853E+03
0.5264E+03
0.1967E+00
0.3666E+00
0.6305E+00
0.7583E+00
0.1037E+01
0.1953E+01
0.1785E+02
0.4363E+02
0.8069E+02
0.8885E+02
0.9769E+02
0.1388E+03
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.9000E+00
0.1800E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.7141E-03
0.3570E-02
0.7141E-02
0.3570E+00
0.5356E+00
0.7141E+00
0.1785E+01
0.3570E+01
0.5356E+01
0.7141E+01
0.1835E+02
0.3599E+02
0.4524E+02
0.6684E+02
0.1221E+03
TIP
6-57

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3204E-01
0.1602E+00
0.3204E+00
0.1602E+02
0.2403E+02
0.3208E+02
0.8023E+02
0.1476E+03
0.2035E+03
0.2435E+03
0.3652E+03
0.3888E+03
0.3913E+03
0.4110E+03
0.4646E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1722E-04
0.8611E-04
0.1722E-03
0.8611E-02
0.1292E-01
0.1722E-01
0.4310E-01
0.8382E-01
0.1223E+00
0.1579E+00
0.3433E+00
0.6042E+00
0.7318E+00
0.1015E+01
0.1936E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.9000E+00
0.1800E+01

6-58

This is an example of a shaft drilled into clay. The example is modeled after load tests performed and
reported by Whitaker and Cooke, 1966, Pile A.
6.4.1 Soil Profile
The soil profile is shown in Fig. 6.11. The clay is overconsolidated. The depth to the water table was not
given and is not needed in capacity calculations. However, the water table should be obtained for
construction considerations.
Values of undrained shear strength obtained from laboratory tests are included in Fig. 6.11.
6.4.3 Construction
High-quality construction, good specifications, and excellent inspection are assumed.
6.4.4 Loadings
Working axial load is 230tons, no downdrag is expected, expansive clay is not a problem, and lateral
loading is negligible. The depth to the zone of seasonal moisture change is judged to be about 10 feet.
It is assumed that a load test has been performed in the area, that the Design parameters have been
proven, and that the soil conditions across the site are relatively uniform; therefore, an overall factor of
safety of 2.0was selected.
6.4.6 Ultimate Load
Using a factor of safety of 2, the ultimate axial load was computed to be 460 tons.
An underreamed shaft was selected to penetrate a total of 40 ft into the clay. The height of the bell is
4.0 ft, making the length of the straight-sided portion 36.0 feet. The diameter of the straight-sided
portion of the shaft is 2.58ft and the diameter of the bell is 5.5 feet. Since 5.5ft (66 in) is less than 75 in,
reduced end bearing need not be considered.
6-59
6.4.8 Hand Computations

Side Resistance
For ease of hand computations, it is assumed a constant value of Az equal to 0.55 and an average cu of
2,280 psf. However, the computer program interpolates linearly the top and bottom values of cu with
depth. The hand computations are as follows:
Depth interval
Avg. effective
A
z
Qs
stress
ft.
ft2
tsf
tons
0-5
0
0
5-33.4
230.2
1.14
0.55
144.3
33.4-40
0
0
Qs=144.3
Base Resistance
The average undrained shear strength over one base diameter below the base is 1.48 tsf and the area of
the base is 23.76 ft2.
qB = (1.48) (9) = 13.32 tsf
A B = 23.76 ft2
QB = (13.32) (23.76) = 316.5 tons
Total Resistance
QU = 144.3 + 316.5 = 461 tons QT= 460 tons (OK).
Category
Manual Calculations
Computer Analysis
Deviation
(tons)
(tons)
Side Resistance
144
139*
-3.5%
Tip Resistance
317
330
-4.1%
Total Capacity
461
469
1.7%
*values of cu at the top and bottom of the clay layer were interpolated linearly by the program

The contents of the input-data file prepared for Example Problem 3 is reproduced below in courier
Example Problem 3, Whitaker and Cooke, 1996, Pile A
1
2 1 1 1 1 2
2.58 0 2.13 20 5 2.58 3500000
2 0 40 2 2
2 50
9 125 0.0 1600 0 6400 0 1 1
9 125 0.0 3200 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55

6-60
2 80
9 125 0.0 3200 0 6400 0 1 1
9 125 0.0 3200 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55

The resulting plot of combined ultimate axial capacities versus depth provided by the computer program
may be observed in Fig. 6.12. Results of axial load versus short-term settlement are included in Fig. 6.13.
Figure 6.12 Curve of Combined Plots vs Depth (ultimate) for Example Problem 3.

6-61
6.4.12 Output Data

The contents of the output-data file prepared for Example Problem 3 is reproduced below in courier
Example Problem 3,
Whitaker and Cooke, 1996, Pile A
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
40.0 FT
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
0.0 FT.


6-62
------------------------------------------------------
SOIL INFORMATION
--------------LAYER NO 1----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.160E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.640E+04
0.000E+00
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.320E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.640E+04
0.500E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.320E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.640E+04
0.500E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.320E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.640E+04
0.800E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 2----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT

-------------------------


DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
6-63
=
2.580 FT.
=
5.495 FT.
=
4.255 FT.
=
20.000 DEG.
=
5.000 FT.
=
2.580 FT.
=
7.529 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
1.943 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
=
=
=
=
=

QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
VOLUME
QS
(CU.YDS) (TONS)
3.64
3.92
3.83
8.06
4.02
12.20
4.22
16.41
4.41
20.69
4.61
25.04
4.80
29.46
4.99
33.96
5.19
38.52
5.38
43.16
5.57
47.87
5.77
52.65
5.96
57.50
6.15
62.42
6.35
67.41
6.54
72.48
6.74
77.61
6.93
82.82
7.12
88.10
7.32
93.45
7.51
98.87
7.70
104.36
7.90
109.93
8.09
115.56
8.28
121.27
8.48
127.05
8.67
132.90
8.87
138.82
QB
(TONS)
237.86
241.27
244.69
248.10
251.52
254.94
258.35
261.77
265.18
268.60
272.01
275.43
278.85
282.26
285.68
289.09
292.51
295.93
299.34
302.76
306.17
309.59
313.01
316.42
319.84
323.25
326.67
330.09
QU
(TONS)
241.78
249.33
256.89
264.51
272.21
279.97
287.81
295.72
303.70
311.76
319.88
328.08
336.34
344.68
353.09
361.57
370.12
378.75
387.44
396.21
405.05
413.95
422.93
431.99
441.11
450.30
459.57
468.91
QBD
(TONS)
122.85
128.70
134.54
140.46
146.45
152.51
158.64
164.84
171.11
177.46
183.87
190.36
196.92
203.55
210.25
217.02
223.87
230.78
237.77
244.83
251.96
259.16
266.43
273.78
281.19
288.68
296.23
303.86
QDN
(TONS)
120.89
124.67
128.44
132.26
136.10
139.99
143.91
147.86
151.85
155.88
159.94
164.04
168.17
172.34
176.55
180.79
185.06
189.37
193.72
198.10
202.52
206.98
211.47
215.99
220.55
225.15
229.78
234.45
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
66.35
65.09
63.83
62.71
61.70
60.80
59.98
59.23
58.56
57.95
57.39
56.89
56.43
56.01
55.62
55.27
54.95
54.66
54.40
54.15
53.93
53.73
53.55
53.39
53.24
53.11
53.00
52.89

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.2558E-01
0.1279E+00
0.2558E+00
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1517E-04
0.7587E-04
0.1517E-03
TIP LOAD
ton
0.3954E-02
0.1977E-01
0.3954E-01
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03


0.1279E+02
0.1923E+02
0.2569E+02
0.6386E+02
0.9862E+02
0.1274E+03
0.1448E+03
0.2091E+03
0.2610E+03
0.2761E+03
0.2978E+03
0.3741E+03
0.7587E-02
0.1138E-01
0.1518E-01
0.3797E-01
0.7092E-01
0.1027E+00
0.1326E+00
0.3030E+00
0.5712E+00
0.7019E+00
0.8580E+00
0.1657E+01
0.1977E+01
0.2966E+01
0.3954E+01
0.9886E+01
0.1977E+02
0.2966E+02
0.3954E+02
0.9886E+02
0.1585E+03
0.1792E+03
0.2009E+03
0.2772E+03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.7740E+00
0.1548E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.5906E-02
0.2953E-01
0.5906E-01
0.2953E+01
0.4430E+01
0.5906E+01
0.1477E+02
0.2953E+02
0.4430E+02
0.5906E+02
0.1477E+03
0.2220E+03
0.2420E+03
0.2602E+03
0.3118E+03
TIP
TIP LOAD
ton
0.2002E-02
0.1001E-01
0.2002E-01
0.1001E+01
0.1502E+01
0.2002E+01
0.5005E+01
0.1001E+02
0.1502E+02
0.2002E+02
0.5005E+02
0.9500E+02
0.1163E+03
0.1416E+03
0.2426E+03
TIP
6-64

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3907E-01
0.1954E+00
0.3907E+00
0.1960E+02
0.2951E+02
0.3941E+02
0.9550E+02
0.1332E+03
0.1554E+03
0.1731E+03
0.2655E+03
0.3319E+03
0.3488E+03
0.3669E+03
0.4186E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1779E-04
0.8893E-04
0.1779E-03
0.8897E-02
0.1336E-01
0.1783E-01
0.4438E-01
0.7878E-01
0.1102E+00
0.1406E+00
0.3205E+00
0.5934E+00
0.7244E+00
0.8793E+00
0.1670E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.7740E+00
0.1548E+01

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.1364E-01
0.6818E-01
0.1364E+00
0.6818E+01
0.1023E+02
0.1364E+02
0.3420E+02
0.6315E+02
0.8762E+02
0.1048E+03
0.1528E+03
0.1868E+03
0.2033E+03
0.2287E+03
0.3296E+03
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1278E-04
0.6389E-04
0.1278E-03
0.6389E-02
0.9583E-02
0.1278E-01
0.3196E-01
0.6300E-01
0.9325E-01
0.1223E+00
0.2856E+00
0.5483E+00
0.6794E+00
0.8367E+00
0.1644E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.7740E+00
0.1548E+01

6-65

This is an example of a drilled shaft with an enlarged base into layers of silty sand, and sandy clay.
6.5.1 Soil Profile
The soil profile is shown in Fig. 6.14. The water table is at a depth of 10 ft during part of the year. The
depth of seasonal moisture change is 5 feet.
Values of undrained shear strength obtained from laboratory tests and the N-values from the Standard
Penetration Test are included in Fig. 6.14. The N value for the Interbedded silt and fine sand is 18.
6.5.3 Construction
Advantage is to be taken of the strong bearing material below the sand, and a large bell will be installed.
High-quality construction (including elimination of water from the bell), good specifications, and
excellent inspection are assumed. Slurry and casing will be employed to a depth of 24 feet.
6.5.4 Loading
The working axial load is 640 tons, distributed as 500 tons dead load and 140 tons live load. No
downdrag is expected, no lateral loading is to be considered, and effects of expansive clays near the
surface are to be considered in a separate analysis.
No load test has been conducted but soil conditions are consistent across the site and are familiar to the
designer. A global factor of safety of 2.5 is selected.
A belled shaft with a 12-ft-diameter bell cut at 45 degrees at a depth of 40 feet is initially designed. The
shaft is also designed with a 4-ftdiameter straight portion.
6.5.7
Hand Computations

6-66
Side Resistance
For ease of hand computations, average values of z and were selected for the clay and sand layers. In
this model, the computer program has been instructed to use internally the same constant values of z
and that are used in the hand computations. The hand computations are as follows:
Soil
Depth interval A
z
Qs
Type
ft.
ft2
tsf
tons
or
Clay
0-5
62.8
1.5
0
0
Clay
5-10
62.8
1.5
0.55
51.8
Sand/silt
10-20
125.7
0.744
0.80
74.8
Clay
20-32
150.8
2.5
0.55
207.4
Clay
32-40
0
0
Qs = 334.0
Base Resistance
Computations for base resistance are performed using the soil at the base of the shaft.
Nc = 6.0 [1 + 0.2(40/12)] = 10.0 > 9; use 9.
qb = 9(2.5) = 22.5 tsf
a = 0.0071 + 0.0021 (40/12) = 0.0141
b = 0.45(5)0.5 = 1.01
Fr = 2.5/[0.0141(144) + 2.5 (1.01)] = 0.55
qbr = 0.55 (22.5) = 12.4 tsf
AB = ( p/4 ) ( 122) = 113.1 ft2
QB = 12.4(113.1) = 1402 tons.
Total Resistance
QT = 334 + 1402 = 1736 tons.
Check Structural Capacity of Bell
The ultimate load applied to the base of the bell, using dead load factor of 1.4 and live load factor of 1.7,
is as follows:
Qu = 1.4 (500) + 1.7 (140) - 334 = 604 tons.
It is predicted that the ultimate structural capacity of a 45 degree bell with a 3:1 slope is 15 ksf. A
concrete strength reduction factor of 0.85 is applied to this value; however no other factors are applied.
The ultimate structural capacity, using a material factor of 0.85 is thus the following:
Qu = (15/2)(0.85)(113.1) = 721.0 tons.
Ultimate Load Capacity
(a) based on the global F.S. = 1736/2.5 = 694.4 tons > 604 tons
(b) based on the structural capacity of the bell and F.S. of 2.5 on side resistance: 334/2.5 + 721.0 = 854.6
tons >> 604 tons
OK both ways, structural capacity of bell does not control.

Category
Side Resistance
Tip Resistance
Total Capacity
Manual Calculations
(tons)
334
1402
1736
Computer Analysis
(tons)
335
1361
1697
6-67
Deviation
0.3%
-2.9%
-2.2%

Example Problem 4, Drilled Shaft With Enlarged Base
1
2 1 1 1 1 2
4 0 3 45 5 4 3500000
4 10 40 2.5 2
2 10
0 120 0.0 3000 0 6400 0 1 1
0 120 0.0 3000 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
1 20
0.0 120 0 0.0 0 4000 0 1 1
0.0 120 0 0.0 0 4000 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
2 80
9 120 0.0 5000 0 6400 0 1 1
9 120 0.0 5000 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
2 100
9 120 0.0 5000 0 6400 0 1 1
9 120 0.0 5000 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55

The resulting plots of ultimate skin friction and ultimate tip resistance versus depth provided by the
computer program may be observed in Figs. 6.15 and 6.16. Note that the load-transfer curve of skin
friction versus depth in Fig. 6.15 starts from about the 14-ft depth. This is because the program was
instructed to ignore skin friction at the top 5 ft and at the bottom 4 ft (one shaft diameter). In addition,
the program automatically ignores transfers in skin friction for the height of the bell, which is an
additional 4 ft.

6-68
Figure 6.15 Curve of Ultimate Skin Friction vs Depth for Example Problem 4.
Figure 6.16 Curve of Ultimate Tip Resistance vs Depth for Example Problem 4.

6-69
6.5.11 Output Data


Example Problem 4, Drilled Shaft With Enlarged Base
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
40.0 FT
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
10.0 FT.

------------------------------------------------------
SOIL INFORMATION
--------------LAYER NO 1----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.600E+01
0.300E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.640E+04
0.000E+00
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.300E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.640E+04
0.100E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 2----SAND

6-70
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.400E+04
0.100E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.400E+04
0.200E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.500E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.640E+04
0.200E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.500E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.640E+04
0.800E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.500E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.640E+04
0.800E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 3----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO 4----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT

6-71
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.500E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.640E+04
0.100E+03

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
4.000 FT.
=
12.000 FT.
=
4.499 FT.
=
45.000 DEG.
=
5.000 FT.
=
4.000 FT.
=
18.098 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
8.838 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
30.0
31.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
QS
(CU.YDS) (TONS)
13.26
10.37
13.73
20.74
14.19
31.11
14.66
41.47
15.12
51.84
15.59
58.17
16.05
64.78
16.52
71.68
16.98
78.87
17.45
86.35
17.91
94.12
18.38
102.18
18.85
110.53
19.31
119.17
19.78
128.10
20.24
145.38
20.71
162.66
21.17
179.94
QB
(TONS)
1375.73
1400.84
1425.96
1442.65
1450.95
1450.93
1442.63
1434.43
1426.59
1419.18
1412.20
1405.66
1399.56
1393.92
1388.74
1384.03
1379.80
1376.05
QU
(TONS)
1386.10
1421.58
1457.07
1484.12
1502.79
1509.09
1507.41
1506.10
1505.46
1505.53
1506.32
1507.84
1510.09
1513.09
1516.84
1529.41
1542.46
1555.99
QBD
(TONS)
698.23
721.16
744.09
762.80
777.32
783.63
786.09
788.89
792.17
795.94
800.22
805.01
810.31
816.13
822.47
837.39
852.56
867.96
QDN
(TONS)
692.01
708.72
725.42
737.91
746.21
748.73
747.23
745.88
744.84
744.13
743.75
743.70
743.99
744.63
745.61
750.17
754.96
760.00
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
104.47
103.57
102.68
101.26
99.38
96.82
93.90
91.18
88.64
86.28
84.08
82.04
80.13
78.35
76.70
75.56
74.49
73.49


32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
21.64
22.10
22.57
23.03
23.50
23.97
24.43
24.90
25.36
197.22
214.50
231.78
249.06
266.34
283.62
300.91
318.19
335.47
1372.79
1370.03
1367.74
1365.86
1364.36
1363.19
1362.31
1361.68
1361.26
1570.01
1584.53
1599.52
1614.92
1630.70
1646.82
1663.22
1679.87
1696.72
883.62
899.52
915.65
931.99
948.52
965.22
982.06
999.03
1016.10
765.28
770.82
776.58
782.56
788.72
795.05
801.52
808.12
814.82
6-72
72.56
71.69
70.87
70.11
69.39
68.71
68.08
67.47
66.90

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3162E-01
0.1581E+00
0.3162E+00
0.1581E+02
0.2372E+02
0.3162E+02
0.7929E+02
0.1521E+03
0.2009E+03
0.2461E+03
0.4100E+03
0.6034E+03
0.6942E+03
0.9025E+03
0.1205E+04
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1270E-04
0.6352E-04
0.1270E-03
0.6352E-02
0.9528E-02
0.1270E-01
0.3177E-01
0.6318E-01
0.9268E-01
0.1220E+00
0.2900E+00
0.5644E+00
0.7011E+00
0.1303E+01
0.2542E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.7468E-02
0.3734E-01
0.7468E-01
0.3734E+01
0.5601E+01
0.7468E+01
0.1867E+02
0.3734E+02
0.5601E+02
0.7468E+02
0.1867E+03
0.3734E+03
0.4668E+03
0.6874E+03
0.9903E+03
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.1115E-01
0.5577E-01
0.1115E+00
0.5577E+01
0.8366E+01
0.1115E+02
0.2789E+02
0.5577E+02
0.8366E+02
0.1115E+03
0.2789E+03
0.5577E+03
0.6972E+03
0.9483E+03
0.1193E+04
TIP
TIP LOAD
ton
0.3781E-02
0.1891E-01
0.3781E-01
TIP

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.4657E-01
0.2328E+00
0.4657E+00
0.2328E+02
0.3493E+02
0.4667E+02
0.1170E+03
0.2185E+03
0.2781E+03
0.3270E+03
0.5242E+03
0.8020E+03
0.9381E+03
0.1180E+04
0.1425E+04
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1397E-04
0.6987E-04
0.1397E-03
0.6987E-02
0.1048E-01
0.1398E-01
0.3497E-01
0.6909E-01
0.9981E-01
0.1299E+00
0.3034E+00
0.5890E+00
0.7316E+00
0.1338E+01
0.2569E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.1768E-01
0.8839E-01
0.1768E+00
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1149E-04
0.5746E-04
0.1149E-03
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03


0.8839E+01
0.1326E+02
0.1768E+02
0.4423E+02
0.8743E+02
0.1247E+03
0.1600E+03
0.2946E+03
0.4048E+03
0.4481E+03
0.6250E+03
0.9852E+03
0.5746E-02
0.8619E-02
0.1149E-01
0.2873E-01
0.5740E-01
0.8562E-01
0.1137E+00
0.2766E+00
0.5397E+00
0.6704E+00
0.1269E+01
0.2515E+01
0.1891E+01
0.2836E+01
0.3781E+01
0.9453E+01
0.1891E+02
0.2836E+02
0.3781E+02
0.9453E+02
0.1891E+03
0.2363E+03
0.4265E+03
0.7873E+03
6-73
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01

6-74

This is an example of a drilled shaft into strong rock.
6.6.1 Soil Profile
The soil profile is shown in Fig.6.17. Only a small amount of water was encountered at the site during
the geotechnical investigation.
Figure 6.17 General soil description of Example Problem5.

The dolomite rock found at the site has a compressive strength of 8,000 psi and the RQD was 100
percent. The Youngs modulus of the intact rock was estimated as 2.0 x 106 psi and the modulus of the
rock mass was identical to this value. Assume the spacing of discontinuities is about 7 ft and that the
thickness of the discontinuities is negligible.
6.6.3 Construction
The excavation can be made dry. A socket can be drilled into the strong rock and inspected carefully
before concrete is poured.
6.6.4 Loading
The lateral load is negligible. The working axial load is 300 tons. No downdrag or uplift is expected.
An overall factor of safety of 3.0is selected.
A diameter of 3.5 ft is selected, and a socket of 3.5 ft into the dolomite is specified.

6-75

Assuming all load is transferred in end bearing and using the method proposed by the Canadian
Geotechnical Society (1978):
qa = Ksp qu
K sp =
3 + cs / Bb
10 1 + 300 / cs
= 0.5
qa = (0.5) (8000) = 4,000 psi

QB = (4,000) (/4) (42)2 = 5.54 x 106 lb = 2,771 tons
The value of end bearing includes a factor of safety of 3.
Category
Manual Calculations
Computer Analysis
Deviation
(tons)
(tons)
Side Resistance
---90*
---Tip Resistance
2771
2765
-0.2%
Total Capacity
---2795
--- Transfer in side friction is computed by the program for the upper clay layer

Example Problem 5, Drilled Shaft in Strong Rock

1
2 1 1 1 1 2
3.5 0 0 0 0 0 3800000
2 50 20 3 3
2 15
0 120 0.0 2000 0 6400 0 1 1
0 120 0.0 2000 0 6400 0 1 1
0.55 0.55
4 50
1152000 1152000 7 0.0001 3.5 1152000 2000000 100 0 1 1
1152000 1152000 7 0.0001 3.5 1152000 2000000 100 0 1 1

The resulting plots of ultimate total capacity versus depth provided by the computer program may be
observed in Fig. 6.18. A large increase in total capacity can be observed in Fig. 6.18 due to the larger end
bearing in the strong rock.
Fig.6.19 includes a plot of axial load versus settlement. As expected, the linear curve indicates that most
settlement is due to the elastic compression of the shaft.

6-76

6-77
6.6.11 Output Data

Example Problem 5, Drilled Shaft in Strong Rock
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
20.0 FT
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
50.0 FT.

------------------------------------------------------
SOIL INFORMATION
--------------LAYER NO 1----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.600E+01
0.200E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.640E+04
0.000E+00
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.200E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.640E+04
0.150E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO
2----STRONG ROCK
AT THE TOP

6-78
DIAMETER OF SOCKET, FT
= 0.350E+01
SPACING OF DISCONTINUITIES,FT
= 0.700E+01
THICKNESS OF INDIVIDUAL DISCONTINUITIES,FT
= 0.100E-03
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF ROCK,LB/SQ FT
= 0.115E+07
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF CONCRETE,LB/SQ FT = 0.115E+07
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR THE INTACT ROCK, LB/SQ IN.
= 0.200E+07
ROCK QUALITY DESIGNATION (RQD) %
= 0.100E+03
DEPTH, FT
= 0.150E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DIAMETER OF SOCKET, FT
= 0.350E+01
SPACING OF DISCONTINUITIES,FT
= 0.700E+01
THICKNESS OF INDIVIDUAL DISCONTINUITIES,FT
= 0.100E-03
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF ROCK,LB/SQ FT
= 0.115E+07
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF CONCRETE,LB/SQ FT = 0.115E+07
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR THE INTACT ROCK, LB/SQ IN.
= 0.200E+07
= 0.100E+03
DEPTH, FT
= 0.500E+02

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
3.500 FT.
=
3.500 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
13.856 SQ.IN.
= 0.380E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
(CU.YDS)
0.36
0.71
1.07
1.43
1.78
2.14
2.49
QS
(TONS)
6.05
12.10
18.15
24.19
30.24
36.29
42.34
QB
(TONS)
69.07
70.99
72.92
74.84
76.77
78.69
80.61
QU
(TONS)
75.12
83.09
91.06
99.03
107.01
114.98
122.95
QBD
(TONS)
29.07
35.76
42.45
49.14
55.83
62.52
69.21
QDN
(TONS)
25.04
27.70
30.35
33.01
35.67
38.33
40.98
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
147.97
116.57
85.17
69.47
60.05
53.77
49.29


8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
2.85
3.21
3.56
3.92
4.28
4.63
4.99
5.35
5.70
6.06
6.41
6.77
7.13
48.39
54.44
60.48
66.53
72.58
78.63
84.68
90.73
90.73
90.73
90.73
90.73
90.73
82.54
84.12
85.32
86.09
86.47
86.60
86.60
8294.92
8294.92
8294.92
8294.92
8294.92
8294.92
130.93
138.56
145.80
152.62
159.05
165.23
171.28
8385.64
8385.64
8385.64
8385.64
8385.64
8385.64
75.90
82.48
88.92
95.23
101.40
107.50
113.54
2855.70
2855.70
2855.70
2855.70
2855.70
2855.70
43.64
46.19
48.60
50.87
53.02
55.08
57.09
2795.21
2795.21
2795.21
2795.21
2795.21
2795.21
6-79
45.92
43.20
40.91
38.93
37.19
35.66
34.33
1568.65
1470.61
1384.10
1307.21
1238.41
1176.49
LOAD SETTLEMENT RELATIONSHIP

-----------------------------------------TOP
LOAD
TONS
0.6987E+03
0.1048E+04
0.1572E+04
0.2344E+04
0.3474E+04
0.5168E+04
0.7710E+04
0.8386E+04
0.8386E+04
0.8386E+04
0.8386E+04
0.8386E+04
0.8386E+04
0.8386E+04
0.8386E+04
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.2482E-01
0.3722E-01
0.5581E-01
0.8281E-01
0.1213E+00
0.1791E+00
0.2657E+00
0.2887E+00
0.2887E+00
0.2887E+00
0.2887E+00
0.2887E+00
0.2887E+00
0.2887E+00
0.2887E+00

6-80

This is an example of a drilled shaft in weak rock.
6.7.1 Description of the Problem -Rough Socket
Consider the shaft and soil profile shown in Fig. 6.20. The user is asked to compute the load-settlement
relation for the socket, and to estimate the ultimate resistance at a settlement of wt = 25mm. The socket
is assumed to be rough. The RQD for the sample is 100%.
Figure 6.20 General pile and soil description for Example Problem 6.
6.7.2
Hand Computations
1. Since the core recovery and RQD are high, assume that: Em= 115 qu. Note that Ec/Em= 100%.
2. faa = fa = 2.4/2 = 1.2 MPa, or 1200 kPa (equation 3.39).
3. zc = 6.1 m (depth from top of concrete to middle of socket). Considering concrete placement
specifications:
n = 0.92c zc from figure 3.15, or
n = 0.92(20.4)(6.1) = 115 kPa = 1.14p
4. n = 115 kPa / 2400 kPa = 0.048 (equation 3.42).
5. L/D = 6.1 / 0.61 = 10.
6. = 1.14 (10)0.5 0.05[(10)0.5 1] log 100 0.44 = 2.94 (equation 3.48)
7. = 0.37 (10)0.5 0. 15 [(10)0.5 1] log 100 + 0. 13, or
= 0.651 (equation 3.49)
8. f = {[115 (2400) 2.94)]/[3.14 (6100 mm)(0.651) 1200]}wi
f = 0.0542 (equation 3.46).

6-81
9. K f = 0.048 + (0.0542wt 0.048)(1 0.048)/(0.0542wt 0.096 + 1)

K f = 0.048 + (0.0542wt 0.048) (0.952) / (0.0542wt + 0.904) (equation 3.47).
10. At the end of the elastic stage, f = (implied by equation 3.44). Therefore,
n
0.048
wte = =
= 0.88mm,
0.0542
where wte signifies wt at the end of the elastic stage. (Note that elastic response occurs only up
to a very small settlement in this example.)
11. qb = wt0.67 (equations 3.50 and 3.51)
0.67
[200 (100.5 2.94)(11)]
qb = {[(115) (2400) (10/11)}
wt0.67
[3.14(6100). 651]
qb = 383.7 wt (mm)0.67 (kPa). Note that = 383.7.
12. DL = 11.7m2 ; D2 /4 = 0.2922m2

13. Compute Qt corresponding to wte , signified by Q te :
Q te = 11.7 (0.0542) (0.88) (1200) + (0.2922) (383.7) (0.88)0.67
Q te = 670 + 103 = 773 kN (equation 3.44).
Note that at this point, 670 kN is transferred to the weak rock in side resistance and 103 kN is
transferred in base resistance. (Q te , wte ) is a point on the load-settlement curve, and a straight
line can be drawn from (Q t = 0, wt = 0) to this point.
14. Compute the values of Q t for selected values of wt on the nonlinear portion of the loadsettlement curve. Numerical evaluations are made in the following table.
(1)
wt
(mm)
5
10
15
25
(2)
f
= 0.0542wt
0.271
0.542
0.813
1.355
(3)
Kf(Step 9)
0.229
0.373
0.472
0.599
(4)
Qs
= DLK f faa
(kN)
3210
5232
6621
8402
(5)
= 0.67
(kPa)
1128
1795
2355
3316
(6)
2
=(
)
4
(kN)
330
524
688
969
(7)
()
= (4) + (6)
3540
5756
7309
9371
Note that:
qb (at wt = 25mm) = 3.32 MPa = 1.38 qu < qmax = 2.5qu
Which is OK for definition of ultimate resistance. Based on base resistance, working load should
be limited to qb = qu or wt should be limited to about 12 mm at working load. Note also that the
compressive stress in the shaft at wt = 15 mm is 25,000 kPa (7309 kN/cross-sectional area),
which may be approaching the structural failure load in the drilled shaft.
15. The numerical values from steps 13 and 14 are graphed in Fig. 6.21 Also shown in Fig. 6.21 is the
case with smooth socket for the same problem. Hand computations for the case of smooth
socket are included in the next section.
The physical significance of the parameters f and Kf is evident from the numerical solution. f
is a proportionality constant for elastic resistance for side shear, and Kf is a proportionality
parameter for actual side shear, including elastic, plastic and interface slip effects.

6-82
6.7.3 Description of the Problem - Smooth Socket

Consider the same example as before (shaft and soil profile shown in Fig. 6.20). The rock socket is now
assumed to be smooth. Estimate that rc = 30 degrees. The user is asked to compute the load-settlement
relation for the socket, and to estimate the ultimate resistance at a settlement of wt = 25 mm.
1. fa = faa = q u
2. Referring to figure 3.15, for = 1.14, and qu = 2.4 MPa, we have = 0.12.
fa = faa = 0.12(2400) = 288 kPa

qu/ p = 2400 / 101.3 = 24, and Em/ n = 115 (2.4) (1000) / 115 = 2400
From figure 3.16, n = 0.11.
= 2.94 (unchanged); = 0.651 (unchanged)
f = {[115 (2400) 2.94)]/[3.14 (6100 mm)(0.651) 288]}wt
f = 0.226 (equation 3.46).
8. Kf = 0.11+[(0.226 wt - 0.11)(1- 0.11)]/[0.226 wt -2(0.11)+1];
Kf = 0.11+(0.226 wt - 0.11)(0. 89)/(0.226 wt + 0.78).
9. At f = n, wte = 0. 11/0.226 = 0.487 mm.
10. qb = 383.7 (wt)0.67, where wt is in mm. and qb in kPa. From equations 3.50 and 3.51
(unchanged).
11. Qte = 11.7 (0.226) (0.487) (288) + (0.2922) (383.7) (0.487)0.67;
Qte = 371 + 103 = 474 kN (equation 3.44).
12. Qte = 474 kN, wte = 0.487 mm is the point at the end of the linear portion of the load
settlement curve.
13. Compute the values of Qt for selected values of wt on the nonlinear portion of the loadsettlement curve. Numerical evaluations are made in the table below.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
14. The numerical values for smooth socket are graphed in Fig. 6.21 in comparison with the
values from rough socket to illustrate the effect of borehole roughness in this problem. Note
again that qb< 2.5 qu

6-83
Figure 6.21 Curves of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6 (rough and smooth sockets). Obtained
from hand computations (ONeill et al., 1975)

The resulting plots of axial load versus settlement provided by the computer program for the cases of a
rough socket with closed joints and a smooth socket with closed joints may be observed in Figs. 6.22 and
6.23.

6-84
Figure 6.22 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6using rough socket with closed joints.
Figure 6.23 Curve of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 6using smooth socket with closed joints.

6-85
6.7.7 Output Data


Example Problem 6, Drilled Shaft in Weak Rock
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
9.1 M
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
9.1 M

------------------------------------------------------
SOIL INFORMATION
--------------LAYER NO 1----SAND
AT THE TOP
UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH, KN/SQ M
SOIL UNIT WEIGHT, KN/CU M
MAXIMUM LOAD TRANSFER FOR SOIL, KN/SQ M
DEPTH, M
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.350E+02
0.000E+00
0.189E+02
0.240E+03
0.000E+00
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.350E+02
0.000E+00
0.189E+02
0.240E+03
0.305E+01
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, M
LAYER NO
2----WEAK ROCK
AT THE TOP

DIAMETER OF SOCKET, M
SLUMP OF CONCRETE, M
ANGLE OF INTERFACE FRICTION, DEG.
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF ROCK,KN/SQ M
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR THE INTACT ROCK, KN/SQ M
DEPTH, M
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.610E+00
0.175E+00
0.300E+02
0.240E+04
0.276E+06
0.100E+03
0.305E+01
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.610E+00
0.175E+00
0.300E+02
0.240E+04
0.276E+06
0.100E+03
0.120E+02
6-86
AT THE BOTTOM
DIAMETER OF SOCKET, M
SLUMP OF CONCRETE, M
ANGLE OF INTERFACE FRICTION, DEG.
UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION STRENGTH OF ROCK,KN/SQ M
ELASTIC MODULUS FOR THE INTACT ROCK, KN/SQ M
DEPTH, M

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
0.610 M
=
0.610 M
=
0.000 M
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 M
=
0.000 M
=
0.003 SQ. M
= 0.276E+08 KN/SQ M
=
0.000 CU. M
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
( M )
0.3
0.6
0.9
1.2
1.5
1.8
2.1
2.4
2.7
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
(CU.M )
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
QS
( KN )
0.0
7.8
15.7
26.2
39.2
54.9
73.1
94.0
117.4
QB
( KN )
77.0
95.3
113.7
132.0
150.4
168.8
543.0
1019.1
1298.3
QU
( KN )
76.8
103.1
129.4
158.2
189.6
223.6
616.1
1113.0
1415.7
QBD
( KN )
25.5
39.6
53.6
70.2
89.4
111.1
254.1
433.7
550.2
QDN
( KN )
25.6
34.4
43.1
52.7
63.2
74.5
205.4
371.0
471.9
QU/VOLUME
( KN /CU.M)
679.54
586.45
493.37
451.65
432.72
425.11
994.50
1578.36
1791.54


3.0
3.3
3.6
3.9
4.2
4.5
4.8
5.1
5.4
5.7
6.0
6.3
6.6
6.9
7.2
7.5
7.8
8.1
8.4
8.7
9.0
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.5
2.6
143.5
633.5
1211.8
1778.9
2333.6
2877.2
3411.0
3935.7
4452.2
4961.1
5463.0
5958.3
6447.5
6930.8
7408.6
7881.0
8348.3
8810.7
9268.4
9721.5
10170.3
1343.4
1346.6
1338.8
1324.8
1307.9
1289.6
1270.8
1251.9
1233.1
1214.7
1196.5
1178.8
1161.6
1144.7
1128.3
1112.3
1096.6
1081.4
1066.5
1052.0
1037.8
1486.9
1980.1
2550.7
3103.8
3641.5
4166.9
4681.8
5187.6
5685.4
6175.8
6659.6
7137.2
7609.0
8075.5
8536.9
8993.3
9444.9
9892.1
10334.9
10773.5
11208.1
591.3
1082.3
1658.1
2220.5
2769.6
3307.1
3834.6
4353.0
4863.3
5366.0
5861.9
6351.3
6834.6
7312.4
7784.7
8251.8
8713.9
9171.2
9623.9
10072.2
10516.2
495.6
660.0
850.2
1034.6
1213.8
1389.0
1560.6
1729.2
1895.1
2058.6
2219.9
2379.1
2536.3
2691.8
2845.6
2997.8
3148.3
3297.4
3445.0
3591.2
3736.0
6-87
1697.45
2046.77
2419.16
2718.90
2963.18
3165.39
3334.82
3478.19
3600.47
3705.48
3796.16
3874.84
3943.38
4003.29
4055.75
4101.76
4142.15
4177.64
4208.81
4236.19
4260.19

-----------------------------------------TOP
LOAD
kN
0.7927E+03
0.8185E+03
0.8562E+03
0.9116E+03
0.9932E+03
0.1113E+04
0.1291E+04
0.1554E+04
0.1935E+04
0.2467E+04
0.3191E+04
0.4143E+04
0.5559E+04
0.8121E+04
0.1089E+05
TOP MOVEMENT
M
0.3545E-03
0.3917E-03
0.4471E-03
0.5298E-03
0.6533E-03
0.8377E-03
0.1113E-02
0.1525E-02
0.2138E-02
0.3043E-02
0.4372E-02
0.6314E-02
0.9726E-02
0.1832E-01
0.3462E-01

6-88

This is an example of a drilled shaft in gravel.
6.8.1 Description of the Problem
Consider the shaft and soil profile shown in Fig. 6.24. The user is asked to compute the load-settlement
relation and to estimate the ultimate resistance.
Figure 6.24 General pile and soil description for Example Problem 7.
6.8.2
Hand Computations
1. qmax (base) = 9.33 (0.23)(230)(8.79)0.80

qmax (base) = 2806 kPa, [equations 3.29 (a)and 3.29 (b)]
2. Assessment of moduli:
( 1) = 22(101)750.82
( 1) = 76,600
(equation 3.31).
( 2) = = 22(101)900.82
( 2) = 89,000
(equation 3.31).
(avg. ) = [6.1(76,000) + 3.05 (89,000)]/9.15
(avg. ) = 80,700 kPa.
= 22(101)1000.82
= 97,000
(equation 3.31).
=
2.5
= 38,800 .

6-89
The numerical computation for load-transfer factors are included in Table 6.6.
Table 6.6 Numerical computation of load-transfer factors for Example Problem 7
15.25
=
= 16.7
0.915
= 2(1 + 0.4) [27,600,000] = 868; x = 2.5 (by convention).
= ln{[0.25 + (2.5(80,700/89,000)(1 0.4) 0.25)2.5]33.3}

= 4.61.
= 2[2/(4.61)(868)]
0.5
(16.7) = 0.747
3. Compute the influence coefficient, I, according to equation 3.32:

8 tanh 0.747
16.7
(868)(1 0.4)(2.5)(0.747)
= 4(1 + 0.4)
80,700
4 89,000 tanh 0.747
4
+
16.7
(1 0.4)(2.5)
4.61(0.747)
1+
= 0.19
4. Qs max = (0.915) [6.1 (162) + 3.05 (197)]

(equation 3.33, segmentally)
5. Q s max = 4568 kN
6.
7.
1 =
4568
0.191
2.5 cosh(0.747)[(10.4)(1+0.4)]
= 4807
(equation 3.34).
= (6413 4807)[0.6(1.4)]/[97,000/2.5)(0.915)]
= 38.0
(equation 3.36).
8. 2 = 38.0 + 10.8
2 = 48.8 = 6413 .
9.
The numerical values obtained from hand computations for versus , are graphed in Fig. 6.25

6-90
Figure 6.25 Curves of Axial Load vs Settlement for Example Problem 7. Obtained from hand computations
(ONeill et al., 1975)

Example Problem 7, Drilled Shaft in Gravel
2
2 1 1 1 1 2
0.915 0 0 0 6.1 0 27600000
3 6.1 15.25 3 3
1 6.1
0.0 21 35 0.0 0 240 0 1 1
0.0 21 35 0.0 0 240 0 1 1
2
0.8 0.8
5 12.2
21 75 0.4 0 0.915 4000 0 1 1
21 75 0.4 0 0.915 4000 0 1 1
5 18.5
21 80 0.4 0 0.915 4000 0 1 1
21 100 0.4 0 0.915 4000 0 1 1

The resulting plots of axial load versus settlement provided by the computer program may be observed
in Fig. 6.26.

6-91
6.8.5 Output Data


Example Problem 7, Drilled Shaft in Gravel
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
15.3 M
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
6.1 M

------------------------------------------------------
SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

6-92
LAYER NO 1----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, M
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.350E+02
0.000E+00
0.210E+02
0.240E+03
0.000E+00
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.350E+02
0.000E+00
0.210E+02
0.240E+03
0.610E+01
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.000E+00
0.400E+00
0.750E+02
0.210E+02
0.400E+04
0.610E+01
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.000E+00
0.400E+00
0.750E+02
0.210E+02
0.400E+04
0.122E+02
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.000E+00
0.400E+00
0.800E+02
0.210E+02
0.400E+04
0.122E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, M
LAYER NO
2----DECOMPOSED ROCK
AT THE TOP
ELASTIC MODULUS OF GRAVEL, KN/SQ M
POISSION RATIO OF GRAVEL
DEPTH, M
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, M
LAYER NO
3----DECOMPOSED ROCK
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, M
AT THE BOTTOM
= 0.000E+00
= 0.400E+00


DEPTH, M
=
=
=
=
6-93
0.100E+03
0.210E+02
0.400E+04
0.185E+02

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
0.915 M
=
0.915 M
=
0.000 M
=
0.000 DEG.
=
6.100 M
=
0.000 M
=
0.007 SQ. M
= 0.276E+08 KN/SQ M
=
0.000 CU. M
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
( M )
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
(CU.M )
4.6
5.3
5.9
6.6
7.2
7.9
8.5
9.2
9.9
QS
( KN )
363.3
774.9
1195.6
1624.8
2062.1
2507.2
2986.1
3491.9
4020.5
QB
( KN )
1226.4
1254.6
1280.5
1304.5
1370.4
1468.6
1534.4
1600.0
1665.4
QU
( KN )
1589.8
2029.5
2476.1
2929.3
3432.5
3975.7
4520.5
5092.0
5685.9
QBD
( KN )
772.1
1193.1
1622.4
2059.6
2518.9
2996.7
3497.5
4025.3
4575.7
QDN
( KN )
529.9
676.5
825.4
976.4
1144.2
1325.2
1506.8
1697.3
1895.3
QU/VOLUME
( KN /CU.M)
345.29
385.64
418.23
445.35
474.43
503.70
528.67
553.00
576.33

-----------------------------------------TOP
LOAD
kN
0.4534E+03
0.9068E+03
0.1360E+04
0.1814E+04
0.2267E+04
0.2721E+04
0.3174E+04
0.3627E+04
TOP MOVEMENT
M
0.5831E-03
0.1166E-02
0.1749E-02
0.2332E-02
0.2915E-02
0.3498E-02
0.4081E-02
0.4665E-02


0.4081E+04
0.4534E+04
0.4943E+04
0.5352E+04
0.5762E+04
0.6171E+04
0.6171E+04
6-94
0.5248E-02
0.5831E-02
0.1548E-01
0.2514E-01
0.3479E-01
0.4444E-01
0.5333E-01

6-95

This is an example of a shaft drilled installed in gravelly sand and gravel strata. The example used the
values recommended by Rollins et al (2005) for computing the side friction in gravelly sand and gravel.
The blow counts (SPT-N) in gravelly layers have to be greater than 5in order to use the recommended
criteria for gravelly soils.
6.9.1 Soil Profile
The soil profile is shown in Fig. 6.27. The water table is at a depth of 4 ft below the ground surface.
N-values (blow counts per foot) from the Standard Penetration Test are included in Fig. 6.27.
Figure 6.27 General soil description of Example Problem
6.9.3 Construction
High-quality construction is assumed. For gravelly soils, the contractor may start with the slurry
method with a good control of slurry quality. In some case the contractor may experience lost of the
slurry in the hole. The contractor needs to be very careful to avoid the hole cave-in or collapse during
operation in gravelly strata. The contractor may need to use the casing method if the slurry method
cannot work for a particular condition. The contractor will have all the required equipment in good
order and experienced personnel will be on the job for drilling holes in gravelly soils.
Example Problem 8, Drilled shaft in gravelly sand and gravel strata
1
2 1 1 1 1 2
4 4 0 0 0 0 3500000
3 4 60 2.5 2.5
1 4
0.0 115 0 0.0 11 0 0 1 1
0.0 115 0 0.0 11 0 0 1 1
2


0.8 0.8
8 30
130 40 0
130 50 0
9 80
130 60 0
130 80 0
6-96
0 0 1 1
0 0 1 1
0 0 1 1
0 0 1 1

The results of skin friction, tip resistance, and total capacity versus depth provided by the computer
program were plotted together in Figs. 6.28. Fig. 6.29 includes a plot of axial load versus settlement.
As expected, the full capacity can be fully mobilized at settlement of 0.6 inches.

6-97
6.9.6 Output Data

Example Problem 8, Drilled shaft in gravelly sand and gravel strata
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
60.0 FT
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
4.0 FT.

------------------------------------------------------
SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

6-98
LAYER NO 1----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.110E+02
0.115E+03
0.100E+11
0.000E+00
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.800E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.110E+02
0.115E+03
0.100E+11
0.400E+01
=
=
=
=
=
0.180E+01
0.400E+02
0.130E+03
0.100E+11
0.400E+01
=
=
=
=
=
0.121E+01
0.500E+02
0.130E+03
0.100E+11
0.300E+02
=
=
=
=
=
0.156E+01
0.600E+02
0.130E+03
0.100E+11
0.300E+02
=
=
=
=
=
0.428E+00
0.800E+02
0.130E+03
0.100E+11
0.800E+02
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO
2----GRAVELLEY SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
LAYER NO
3----GRAVEL
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT

6-99

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
4.000 FT.
=
4.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
18.098 SQ.IN.
= 0.350E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
QBD
QDN
LENGTH
(FEET)
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
25.0
26.0
27.0
28.0
29.0
=
=
=
=
=

VOLUME
QS
(CU.YDS) (TONS)
0.47
0.00
0.93
1.73
1.40
3.47
1.86
5.78
2.33
11.73
2.79
18.33
3.26
25.56
3.72
33.39
4.19
41.82
4.65
50.81
5.12
60.36
5.59
70.45
6.05
81.05
6.52
92.14
6.98
103.72
7.45
115.77
7.91
128.26
8.38
141.18
8.84
154.52
9.31
168.26
9.78
182.38
10.24
196.87
10.71
211.71
11.17
226.88
11.64
242.38
12.10
258.18
12.57
274.28
13.03
290.65
13.50
307.28
QB
(TONS)
47.80
57.30
66.80
75.35
84.05
92.89
101.88
111.01
120.29
129.71
139.27
148.98
158.84
168.84
178.99
189.28
199.72
210.30
221.02
231.89
242.91
254.07
274.16
295.66
318.62
343.06
365.12
384.69
401.69
QU
(TONS)
47.80
59.04
70.27
81.14
95.78
111.22
127.43
144.40
162.10
180.52
199.64
219.43
239.89
260.99
282.71
305.05
327.97
351.48
375.54
400.15
425.29
450.94
485.86
522.54
561.00
601.24
639.39
675.34
708.97
QBD
(TONS)
19.12
24.66
30.19
35.92
45.35
55.49
66.31
77.80
89.93
102.70
116.07
130.04
144.58
159.68
175.32
191.48
208.15
225.30
242.93
261.02
279.54
298.50
321.37
345.15
369.83
395.41
420.32
444.53
467.96
QDN
(TONS)
19.12
23.62
28.11
32.45
38.31
44.49
50.97
57.76
64.84
72.21
79.85
87.77
95.95
104.39
113.08
122.02
131.19
140.59
150.22
160.06
170.12
180.38
194.35
209.02
224.40
240.50
255.76
270.14
283.59
QU/VOLUME
(TONS/CU.YDS)
76.51
63.42
50.32
43.58
41.15
39.82
39.11
38.78
38.69
38.78
38.99
39.28
39.64
40.05
40.49
40.96
41.45
41.95
42.46
42.98
43.51
44.03
45.38
46.77
48.21
49.68
50.87
51.82
52.52


30.0
31.0
32.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
36.0
37.0
38.0
39.0
40.0
41.0
42.0
43.0
44.0
45.0
46.0
47.0
48.0
49.0
50.0
51.0
52.0
53.0
54.0
55.0
56.0
57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
13.96
14.43
14.90
15.36
15.83
16.29
16.76
17.22
17.69
18.15
18.62
19.08
19.55
20.02
20.48
20.95
21.41
21.88
22.34
22.81
23.27
23.74
24.21
24.67
25.14
25.60
26.07
26.53
27.00
27.46
27.93
324.16
346.03
367.97
389.96
411.99
434.04
456.10
478.14
500.16
522.14
544.07
565.94
587.74
609.46
631.08
652.60
674.00
695.29
716.45
737.47
758.35
779.08
799.66
820.08
840.33
860.41
880.32
900.04
919.59
938.94
958.11
416.02
430.49
445.11
458.07
469.13
478.06
484.64
489.45
493.07
496.08
499.10
502.12
505.13
508.15
511.17
514.18
517.20
520.21
523.23
526.25
529.26
532.28
535.30
538.31
541.33
544.35
547.36
550.38
553.39
556.41
559.20
740.17
776.52
813.08
848.03
881.12
912.10
940.74
967.59
993.23
1018.22
1043.17
1068.06
1092.87
1117.61
1142.24
1166.78
1191.20
1215.50
1239.68
1263.72
1287.61
1311.36
1334.96
1358.39
1381.66
1404.76
1427.68
1450.42
1472.98
1495.35
1517.31
490.57
518.22
546.01
573.19
599.64
625.27
649.95
673.92
697.39
720.57
743.71
766.79
789.79
812.72
835.54
858.27
880.88
903.37
925.74
947.97
970.06
992.00
1013.78
1035.40
1056.86
1078.15
1099.26
1120.19
1140.94
1161.51
1181.79
296.07
310.61
325.23
339.21
352.45
364.84
376.30
387.04
397.29
407.29
417.27
427.22
437.15
447.04
456.90
466.71
476.48
486.20
495.87
505.49
515.05
524.55
533.98
543.36
552.66
561.90
571.07
580.17
589.19
598.14
606.92
6-100
53.00
53.81
54.59
55.21
55.67
55.99
56.14
56.18
56.15
56.09
56.03
55.96
55.90
55.84
55.77
55.70
55.63
55.56
55.48
55.41
55.32
55.24
55.15
55.06
54.97
54.87
54.77
54.67
54.56
54.45
54.33

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.1425E+00
0.7124E+00
0.1425E+01
0.7144E+02
0.1075E+03
0.1435E+03
0.3543E+03
0.5847E+03
0.7102E+03
0.8125E+03
0.9910E+03
0.1079E+04
0.1103E+04
0.1148E+04
0.1358E+04
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.2787E-04
0.1393E-03
0.2787E-03
0.1394E-01
0.2095E-01
0.2795E-01
0.6981E-01
0.1282E+00
0.1709E+00
0.2119E+00
0.3946E+00
0.6661E+00
0.7981E+00
0.1390E+01
0.2637E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.4078E-02
0.2039E-01
0.4078E-01
0.2039E+01
0.3058E+01
0.4078E+01
0.1019E+02
0.2039E+02
0.3058E+02
0.4078E+02
0.1018E+03
0.1994E+03
0.2402E+03
0.3579E+03
0.5676E+03
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.5825E-02
0.2913E-01
0.5825E-01
TIP

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.2350E+00
0.1175E+01
0.2350E+01
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.3820E-04
0.1910E-03
0.3820E-03
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03


0.1185E+03
0.1782E+03
0.2379E+03
0.5549E+03
0.8161E+03
0.9038E+03
0.9593E+03
0.1107E+04
0.1224E+04
0.1257E+04
0.1295E+04
0.1474E+04
0.1917E-01
0.2881E-01
0.3845E-01
0.9438E-01
0.1608E+00
0.2005E+00
0.2356E+00
0.4147E+00
0.6931E+00
0.8278E+00
0.1416E+01
0.2657E+01
0.2913E+01
0.4369E+01
0.5825E+01
0.1456E+02
0.2913E+02
0.4369E+02
0.5825E+02
0.1452E+03
0.2773E+03
0.3326E+03
0.4250E+03
0.6039E+03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.2330E-02
0.1165E-01
0.2330E-01
0.1165E+01
0.1748E+01
0.2330E+01
0.5825E+01
0.1165E+02
0.1748E+02
0.2330E+02
0.5848E+02
0.1216E+03
0.1478E+03
0.2908E+03
0.5312E+03
TIP
6-101

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.7123E-01
0.3561E+00
0.7123E+00
0.3561E+02
0.5342E+02
0.7136E+02
0.1789E+03
0.3421E+03
0.4767E+03
0.5920E+03
0.8732E+03
0.9333E+03
0.9306E+03
0.1001E+04
0.1241E+04
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1935E-04
0.9676E-04
0.1935E-03
0.9676E-02
0.1451E-01
0.1936E-01
0.4846E-01
0.9549E-01
0.1388E+00
0.1802E+00
0.3743E+00
0.6392E+00
0.7663E+00
0.1363E+01
0.2618E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.6250E+00
0.1200E+01
0.2400E+01

6-102

An example is presented in Appendix A of NHI Drilled Shaft Manual (2010) to illustrate design of drilled
shafts as foundations for a proposed replacement bridge. This case study is included in Example 9 for
demonstrating the accuracy and convenience of using SHAFT in design of drilled shafts under axial loads
based on the LRFD design procedures. The proposed shaft is 8-ft in diameter and the total length
(penetration) below the original grade (without scouring) is 192 ft.
The factored axial, lateral, and moment forces at the foundation level were derived through a separate
comprehensive structural modeling based on the LRFD design requirement. The summary of factored
loads on the proposed drilled shaft at the existing mudline is presented in Table 6.7.
Table 6.7 Summary of factored loads on the 8-ft OD drilled shaft for Example Problem 9
6.10.1 Soil Profile

A generalized subsurface profile along the alignment of the bridge is shown in Fig. 6.30. Soils
subdivided into general strata with identified layer thickness (Table 6.8) can be used in analysis. The
water table is at the existing ground surface. Based on hydrologic studies at this location a scour
depth of 38 ft is recommended for the design flood (100 year flood).
Table 6.8 Summary of factored loads on the 8-ft OD drilled shaft for Example Problem 9

Soil properties for use in analysis including unit weight, internal friction angle (sand layers),
undrained shear strength (clay layers), and others can be found in Fig. 6.30. Corrected N-value,
(N1)60, for the sand layer at the tip of the drilled shaft is 41.

6-103
Figure 6.30 General soil description of Example Problem

Calculations of nominal side and base resistance were carried out using a spreadsheet tool. Table 6.8
shows the calculation results for the Strength I limit state of this example. The table is divided into three
areas: (A) side resistance in cohesionless soil layers; (B) side resistance in cohesive soil layers, and (C)
base resistance.

6-104
Table 6.9 Calculations for axial compressive resistance, Strength I Limit State for Example Problem 9
Computations for base resistance are performed using the soil at the base of the shaft. At the depth of
192 ft, NSPT= 41.
qB = (0.6) (41) = 24.6 tsf
AB = 50.27 ft2
QB = (50.27) (24.6) = 1,236.6 tons = 2,474 kips
Total Nominal Resistance
QU = 2469 + 2922 + 2474 = 7865 kips


Category
Factored Side Resistance
Factored Tip Resistance
Factored Total Capacity
Manual Calculations
(kips)
2672
1237
3909
Computer Analysis
(kips)
2624
1237
3861
6-105
Deviation
1.8%
0%
1.2%

Example 9 LRFD design
1
2 1 1 1 0 1
8 0 0 0 38 0 3600000
7 0 192 2.5 3
1 25
0.0 125 41 0.0 0 0 0 0.55
0.0 125 41 0.0 0 0 0 0.55
2
0 0
1 65
0.0 125 44 0.0 0 0 0 0.55
0.0 125 44 0.0 0 0 0 0.55
2
0 0
1 85
0.0 120 40 0.0 0 0 0 0.55
0.0 120 40 0.0 0 0 0 0.55
2
0 0
2 100
0 110 0.0 1750 0 0 0 0.45
0 110 0.0 1750 0 0 0 0.45
0.55 0.55
1 110
0.0 120 40 0.0 0 0 0 0.55
0.0 120 40 0.0 0 0 0 0.55
2
0 0
2 190.5
0 110 0.0 2300 0 0 0 0.45
0 110 0.0 2300 0 0 0 0.45
0.55 0.55
1 212.5
0.0 120 0 0.0 41 0 0 0.55
0.0 120 0 0.0 41 0 0 0.55
2
0 0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5

The results of skin friction, tip resistance, and total capacity versus depth provided by the computer
program were plotted together in Figs. 6.28. Fig. 6.29 includes a plot of axial load versus settlement.
As expected, the full capacity can be fully mobilized at settlement of 0.6 inches.

6-106
Figure 6.31 Curve of LRFD Geotechnical Capacity vs Depth for Example Problem 9.

6-107
6.10.7 Output Data

Example 9 LRFD design
PROPOSED DEPTH =
----------------
NUMBER OF LAYERS =
------------------
WATER TABLE DEPTH =

-------------------
192.0 FT
0.0 FT.
SOIL INFORMATION
---------------

6-108
LAYER NO 1----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.120E+01
0.000E+00
0.410E+02
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.100E+11
0.000E+00

DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.825E+00
0.000E+00
0.410E+02
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.100E+11
0.250E+02
LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (SIDE FRICTION)

LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR (TIP RESISTANCE)
= 0.550E+00
= 0.500E+00
AT THE BOTTOM
LAYER NO 2----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.825E+00
0.000E+00
0.440E+02
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.100E+11
0.250E+02

DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.412E+00
0.000E+00
0.440E+02
0.000E+00
0.125E+03
0.100E+11
0.650E+02

= 0.550E+00
= 0.500E+00
AT THE BOTTOM
LAYER NO 3----SAND
AT THE TOP
= 0.412E+00
= 0.000E+00


DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
0.400E+02
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.100E+11
0.650E+02

DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.255E+00
0.000E+00
0.400E+02
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.100E+11
0.850E+02

= 0.550E+00
= 0.500E+00
6-109
AT THE BOTTOM
LAYER NO 4----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.175E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.110E+03
0.100E+11
0.850E+02

DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.175E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.110E+03
0.100E+11
0.100E+03

= 0.450E+00
= 0.500E+00
AT THE BOTTOM
LAYER NO 5----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.250E+00
0.000E+00
0.400E+02
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.100E+11
0.100E+03

6-110
AT THE BOTTOM
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.250E+00
0.000E+00
0.400E+02
0.000E+00
0.120E+03
0.100E+11
0.110E+03

= 0.550E+00
= 0.500E+00
LAYER NO 6----CLAY
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.230E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.110E+03
0.100E+11
0.110E+03

DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.550E+00
0.900E+01
0.230E+04
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.110E+03
0.100E+11
0.191E+03

= 0.450E+00
= 0.500E+00
AT THE BOTTOM
LAYER NO 7----SAND
AT THE TOP
DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.250E+00
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.410E+02
0.120E+03
0.100E+11
0.191E+03
AT THE BOTTOM
= 0.250E+00


DEPTH, FT
=
=
=
=
=
=

= 0.550E+00
= 0.500E+00
6-111
0.000E+00
0.000E+00
0.410E+02
0.120E+03
0.100E+11
0.213E+03

------------------------DIAMETER OF STEM
DIAMETER OF BASE
END OF STEM TO BASE
ANGLE OF BELL
IGNORED TOP PORTION
ELASTIC MODULUS, Ec
VOLUME OF UNDERREAM
=
8.000 FT.
=
8.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
0.000 DEG.
=
38.000 FT.
=
0.000 FT.
=
72.392 SQ.IN.
= 0.360E+07 LB/SQ IN
=
0.000 CU.YDS.
PREDICTED RESULTS
----------------QS
QB
WT
QU
LRFD QS
=
=
=
=
=

WEIGHT OF DRILLED SHAFT (UPLIFT CAPACITY ONLY);
TOTAL SIDE FRICTION USING LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR
TO THE ULTIMATE SIDE RESISTANCE;
LRFD QB = TOTAL BASE BEARING USING LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR
TO THE ULTIMATE BASE RESISTANCE
LRFD QU = TOTAL CAPACITY WITH LRFD RESISTANCE FACTOR.
LENGTH VOLUME
QS
(FEET) (CU.YDS) (TONS)
39.0
72.62
19.99
40.0
74.48
40.49
41.0
76.34
60.99
42.0
78.20
81.65
43.0
80.06
102.45
44.0
81.92
123.37
45.0
83.79
144.42
46.0
85.65
165.57
47.0
87.51
186.81
48.0
89.37
208.14
49.0
91.23
229.53
50.0
93.10
250.99
51.0
94.96
272.49
52.0
96.82
294.03
53.0
98.68
315.59
54.0
100.54
337.18
55.0
102.41
358.76
56.0
104.27
380.34
QB
(TONS)
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
2010.88
1994.34
1976.82
1958.34
1938.88
1918.44
1897.04
1874.66
QU
(TONS)
2030.87
2051.37
2071.87
2092.53
2113.33
2134.25
2155.30
2176.45
2197.69
2219.02
2240.41
2245.33
2249.31
2252.37
2254.47
2255.62
2255.80
2255.00
LRFD QS
(TONS)
10.99
22.27
33.55
44.91
56.35
67.86
79.43
91.06
102.75
114.47
126.24
138.04
149.87
161.72
173.58
185.45
197.32
209.19
LRFD QB
(TONS)
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
1005.44
997.17
988.41
979.17
969.44
959.22
948.52
937.33
LRFD QU
(TONS)
1016.43
1027.71
1038.99
1050.35
1061.79
1073.30
1084.87
1096.50
1108.19
1119.91
1131.68
1135.21
1138.28
1140.88
1143.02
1144.67
1145.84
1146.52


57.0
58.0
59.0
60.0
61.0
62.0
63.0
64.0
65.0
66.0
67.0
68.0
69.0
70.0
71.0
72.0
73.0
74.0
75.0
76.0
77.0
78.0
79.0
80.0
81.0
82.0
83.0
84.0
85.0
86.0
87.0
88.0
89.0
90.0
91.0
92.0
93.0
94.0
95.0
96.0
97.0
98.0
99.0
100.0
101.0
102.0
103.0
104.0
105.0
106.0
107.0
108.0
109.0
110.0
111.0
112.0
113.0
114.0
115.0
116.0
117.0
118.0
119.0
106.13
107.99
109.85
111.72
113.58
115.44
117.30
119.16
121.03
122.89
124.75
126.61
128.47
130.33
132.20
134.06
135.92
137.78
139.64
141.51
143.37
145.23
147.09
148.95
150.82
152.68
154.54
156.40
158.26
160.13
161.99
163.85
165.71
167.57
169.44
171.30
173.16
175.02
176.88
178.74
180.61
182.47
184.33
186.19
188.05
189.92
191.78
193.64
195.50
197.36
199.23
201.09
202.95
204.81
206.67
208.54
210.40
212.26
214.12
215.98
217.85
219.71
221.57
401.90
423.43
444.92
466.37
487.76
509.07
530.31
551.46
572.51
593.42
614.19
634.81
655.27
675.56
695.67
715.59
735.32
754.85
774.16
793.26
812.13
830.76
849.15
867.28
885.16
902.77
920.10
937.15
953.90
966.00
978.10
990.19
1002.29
1014.39
1026.48
1038.58
1050.68
1062.77
1074.87
1086.97
1099.06
1111.16
1123.26
1135.35
1154.18
1173.19
1192.38
1211.75
1231.31
1251.04
1270.95
1291.05
1311.33
1331.78
1347.68
1363.58
1379.48
1395.38
1411.28
1427.18
1443.07
1458.97
1474.87
1851.31
1830.87
1813.36
1798.76
1787.09
1778.33
1772.49
1769.57
1769.57
1769.57
1769.57
1769.57
1769.57
1671.44
1567.54
1457.86
1342.41
1221.19
1094.19
961.42
822.89
701.66
597.76
511.17
441.90
389.95
355.31
338.00
436.13
540.03
649.71
765.16
886.38
1013.38
1146.14
1284.68
1405.91
1509.81
1503.44
1474.28
1422.34
1347.61
1250.09
1129.79
1004.02
872.79
757.95
659.52
577.50
511.88
462.67
429.86
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
2253.20
2254.30
2258.28
2265.13
2274.84
2287.40
2302.80
2321.03
2342.08
2362.99
2383.77
2404.38
2424.84
2347.00
2263.20
2173.45
2077.73
1976.04
1868.36
1754.68
1635.01
1532.42
1446.91
1378.45
1327.06
1292.71
1275.41
1275.14
1390.03
1506.03
1627.81
1755.35
1888.67
2027.76
2172.63
2323.26
2456.58
2572.58
2578.31
2561.25
2521.40
2458.77
2373.35
2265.14
2158.20
2045.98
1950.33
1871.28
1808.81
1762.92
1733.62
1720.91
1724.78
1745.24
1761.14
1777.04
1792.93
1808.83
1824.73
1840.63
1856.53
1872.43
1888.33
221.04
232.89
244.71
256.50
268.27
279.99
291.67
303.30
314.88
326.38
337.81
349.15
360.40
371.56
382.62
393.58
404.43
415.17
425.79
436.29
446.67
456.92
467.03
477.01
486.84
496.52
506.05
515.43
524.65
530.09
535.53
540.98
546.42
551.86
557.31
562.75
568.19
573.64
579.08
584.53
589.97
595.41
600.86
606.30
616.66
627.11
637.67
648.32
659.07
669.93
680.88
691.93
703.09
714.34
721.49
728.65
735.80
742.95
750.11
757.26
764.42
771.57
778.73
925.65
915.44
906.68
899.38
893.54
889.17
886.25
884.79
884.79
884.79
884.79
884.79
884.79
835.72
783.77
728.93
671.20
610.59
547.10
480.71
411.44
350.83
298.88
255.59
220.95
194.97
177.66
169.00
218.06
270.02
324.86
382.58
443.19
506.69
573.07
642.34
702.95
754.91
751.72
737.14
711.17
673.80
625.05
564.90
502.01
436.39
378.98
329.76
288.75
255.94
231.33
214.93
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
6-112
1146.70
1148.32
1151.39
1155.89
1161.81
1169.16
1177.92
1188.09
1199.67
1211.17
1222.59
1233.93
1245.18
1207.28
1166.39
1122.51
1075.63
1025.76
972.89
917.01
858.11
807.75
765.91
732.59
707.79
691.50
683.71
684.43
742.71
800.11
860.39
923.56
989.61
1058.55
1130.38
1205.09
1271.15
1328.54
1330.80
1321.67
1301.14
1269.22
1225.90
1171.20
1118.67
1063.50
1016.64
978.08
947.82
925.87
912.21
906.86
909.81
921.06
928.22
935.37
942.53
949.68
956.84
963.99
971.14
978.30
985.45


120.0
121.0
122.0
123.0
124.0
125.0
126.0
127.0
128.0
129.0
130.0
131.0
132.0
133.0
134.0
135.0
136.0
137.0
138.0
139.0
140.0
141.0
142.0
143.0
144.0
145.0
146.0
147.0
148.0
149.0
150.0
151.0
152.0
153.0
154.0
155.0
156.0
157.0
158.0
159.0
160.0
161.0
162.0
163.0
164.0
165.0
166.0
167.0
168.0
169.0
170.0
171.0
172.0
173.0
174.0
175.0
176.0
177.0
178.0
179.0
180.0
181.0
182.0
223.43
225.29
227.15
229.02
230.88
232.74
234.60
236.46
238.33
240.19
242.05
243.91
245.77
247.64
249.50
251.36
253.22
255.08
256.95
258.81
260.67
262.53
264.39
266.26
268.12
269.98
271.84
273.70
275.57
277.43
279.29
281.15
283.01
284.87
286.74
288.60
290.46
292.32
294.18
296.05
297.91
299.77
301.63
303.49
305.36
307.22
309.08
310.94
312.80
314.67
316.53
318.39
320.25
322.11
323.98
325.84
327.70
329.56
331.42
333.28
335.15
337.01
338.87
1490.77
1506.67
1522.57
1538.47
1554.36
1570.26
1586.16
1602.06
1617.96
1633.86
1649.76
1665.65
1681.55
1697.45
1713.35
1729.25
1745.15
1761.05
1776.94
1792.84
1808.74
1824.64
1840.54
1856.44
1872.34
1888.23
1904.13
1920.03
1935.93
1951.83
1967.73
1983.63
1999.52
2015.42
2031.32
2047.22
2063.12
2079.02
2094.92
2110.81
2126.71
2142.61
2158.51
2174.41
2190.31
2206.20
2222.10
2238.00
2253.90
2269.80
2285.70
2301.59
2317.49
2333.39
2349.29
2365.19
2381.09
2396.99
2412.88
2428.78
2444.68
2460.58
2476.48
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
413.45
469.89
529.64
592.71
659.10
728.81
801.84
878.18
1904.22
1920.12
1936.02
1951.92
1967.82
1983.72
1999.62
2015.51
2031.41
2047.31
2063.21
2079.11
2095.01
2110.91
2126.80
2142.70
2158.60
2174.50
2190.40
2206.30
2222.20
2238.09
2253.99
2269.89
2285.79
2301.69
2317.59
2333.49
2349.38
2365.28
2381.18
2397.08
2412.98
2428.88
2444.78
2460.67
2476.57
2492.47
2508.37
2524.27
2540.17
2556.06
2571.96
2587.86
2603.76
2619.66
2635.56
2651.46
2667.35
2683.25
2699.15
2715.05
2730.95
2746.85
2762.74
2778.64
2850.97
2926.62
3005.59
3087.88
3173.49
3262.42
3354.66
785.88
793.03
800.19
807.34
814.50
821.65
828.81
835.96
843.12
850.27
857.42
864.58
871.73
878.89
886.04
893.20
900.35
907.50
914.66
921.81
928.97
936.12
943.28
950.43
957.59
964.74
971.89
979.05
986.20
993.36
1000.51
1007.67
1014.82
1021.97
1029.13
1036.28
1043.44
1050.59
1057.75
1064.90
1072.05
1079.21
1086.36
1093.52
1100.67
1107.83
1114.98
1122.13
1129.29
1136.44
1143.60
1150.75
1157.91
1165.06
1172.21
1179.37
1186.52
1193.68
1200.83
1207.99
1215.14
1222.29
1229.45
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
206.73
234.94
264.82
296.35
329.55
364.40
400.92
439.09
6-113
992.61
999.76
1006.92
1014.07
1021.23
1028.38
1035.53
1042.69
1049.84
1057.00
1064.15
1071.31
1078.46
1085.61
1092.77
1099.92
1107.08
1114.23
1121.39
1128.54
1135.69
1142.85
1150.00
1157.16
1164.31
1171.47
1178.62
1185.78
1192.93
1200.08
1207.24
1214.39
1221.55
1228.70
1235.86
1243.01
1250.16
1257.32
1264.47
1271.63
1278.78
1285.94
1293.09
1300.24
1307.40
1314.55
1321.71
1328.86
1336.02
1343.17
1350.32
1357.48
1364.63
1371.79
1378.94
1386.10
1421.47
1458.50
1497.19
1537.53
1579.54
1623.21
1668.54


183.0
184.0
185.0
186.0
187.0
188.0
189.0
190.0
191.0
192.0
340.73
342.59
344.46
346.32
348.18
350.04
351.90
353.77
355.63
357.49
2492.38
2508.27
2524.17
2540.07
2555.97
2571.87
2587.77
2603.67
2619.56
2652.32
957.85
1027.56
1087.31
1137.11
1176.94
1206.82
1226.73
1236.69
1236.69
1236.69
3450.23
3535.84
3611.49
3677.18
3732.91
3778.68
3814.50
3840.36
3856.25
3889.01
1236.60
1243.76
1250.91
1258.07
1265.22
1272.37
1279.53
1286.68
1293.84
1311.85
478.93
513.78
543.66
568.55
588.47
603.41
613.37
618.35
618.35
618.35
6-114
1715.53
1757.54
1794.57
1826.62
1853.69
1875.78
1892.90
1905.03
1912.18
1930.20

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.1931E+00
0.9654E+00
0.1931E+01
0.9654E+02
0.1448E+03
0.1932E+03
0.4841E+03
0.9611E+03
0.1381E+04
0.1683E+04
0.2599E+04
0.3028E+04
0.3289E+04
0.3497E+04
0.3956E+04
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.2733E-04
0.1367E-03
0.2733E-03
0.1367E-01
0.2050E-01
0.2733E-01
0.6840E-01
0.1367E+00
0.2021E+00
0.2566E+00
0.5025E+00
0.7994E+00
0.1299E+01
0.2783E+01
0.5265E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.4509E-02
0.2254E-01
0.4509E-01
0.2254E+01
0.3382E+01
0.4509E+01
0.1127E+02
0.2254E+02
0.3382E+02
0.4509E+02
0.1127E+03
0.2252E+03
0.4267E+03
0.7915E+03
0.1255E+04
TIP
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.9600E+00
0.2400E+01
0.4800E+01
TIP LOAD
ton
0.6441E-02
0.3221E-01
0.6441E-01
0.3221E+01
0.4831E+01
0.6441E+01
0.1610E+02
0.3221E+02
0.4831E+02
0.6441E+02
0.1610E+03
0.3210E+03
0.5936E+03
0.9399E+03
0.1336E+04
TIP
TIP LOAD
ton
0.2576E-02
0.1288E-01
TIP

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.3086E+00
0.1543E+01
0.3086E+01
0.1543E+03
0.2317E+03
0.3093E+03
0.7750E+03
0.1501E+04
0.2082E+04
0.2412E+04
0.3036E+04
0.3355E+04
0.3616E+04
0.3834E+04
0.4230E+04
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.3681E-04
0.1840E-03
0.3681E-03
0.1840E-01
0.2761E-01
0.3684E-01
0.9223E-01
0.1830E+00
0.2652E+00
0.3248E+00
0.5445E+00
0.8388E+00
0.1346E+01
0.2830E+01
0.5300E+01
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.9600E+00
0.2400E+01
0.4800E+01

TOP
LOAD
ton
0.1023E+00
0.5113E+00
TOP MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1939E-04
0.9697E-04
MOVEMENT
IN.
0.1000E-04
0.5000E-04


0.1023E+01
0.5113E+02
0.7670E+02
0.1023E+03
0.2559E+03
0.5123E+03
0.7589E+03
0.9777E+03
0.1959E+04
0.2683E+04
0.2961E+04
0.3160E+04
0.3682E+04
0.1939E-03
0.9697E-02
0.1454E-01
0.1939E-01
0.4849E-01
0.9702E-01
0.1452E+00
0.1911E+00
0.4380E+00
0.7591E+00
0.1253E+01
0.2737E+01
0.5231E+01
0.2576E-01
0.1288E+01
0.1932E+01
0.2576E+01
0.6441E+01
0.1288E+02
0.1932E+02
0.2576E+02
0.6441E+02
0.1293E+03
0.2597E+03
0.6431E+03
0.1175E+04
6-115
0.1000E-03
0.5000E-02
0.7500E-02
0.1000E-01
0.2500E-01
0.5000E-01
0.7500E-01
0.1000E+00
0.2500E+00
0.5000E+00
0.9600E+00
0.2400E+01
0.4800E+01

List of Technical References

References
R-2
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), AASHTO Guide
Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design. Prepared by R.A. Imbsen, 2007.
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), AASHTO LRFD Bridge
Design Specifications, Customary U.S. Units, 4th Ed., Section 10. Washington, D.C. 2007.
Aurora, Ravi and L. C. Reese, Field Tests of Drilled Shafts in Clay-Shales. Ninth International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, July, 1977.
Bernal, J. and L. C. Reese, Study of the Lateral Pressure of Fresh Concrete as Related to the Design of
Drilled Shaft. A Research Report No. 308-1F, conducted for the Texas Highway Department, in
cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, November, 1983.
Bieniawski, Z. T., Rock Mechanics Design in Mining and Tunneling, A. A. Balkema: Rotterdam/Boston,
1984, 272 pages.
Brown, D.A., J.P. Turner, and R.J. Castelli, Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and LRFD Design
Methods, prepared for U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
Publication No. FHWA-NHI-10-016, 2010
Canadian Geotechnical Society, Canadian Foundation Engineering Manual, Part 2, Shallow Foundations,
Canadian Geotechnical Society, Montreal, 1978, 99 pages.
Chuang J. W. and L. C. Reese, Studies of Shearing Resistance between Cement Mortar and Soil,
Research Report No. 89-3, Project 3-5-65-89, conducted for the Texas Highway Department, in
Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, October, 1968, 71 pages.
Deere, D. V., Geological Considerations, Chapter l in Rock Mechanics in Engineering Practice by K. G.
Stagg and O. C. Zienkiewicz, Wiley, New York, 1968, pp.1-20.
Donald, I. B., S.W. Sloan, and H. K. Chiu, Theoretical Analyses of Rock-socketed Piles, Proceedings,
International Conference on Structural Foundations on Rock, Sydney, Balkema: Rotterdam,
1980.
Engeling, D. and L. C. Reese, Behavior of Three Instrumented Drilled Shafts Under Short Term Axial
Loading. Research Report No. 176-3, Project 3-5-72-176, conducted for the Texas Highway
Department, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, May, 1974, 116
pages.
Horvath, R.G., and T.C. Kenney, Shaft Resistance of Rock-Socketed Drilled Piers, Proceedings,
Symposium on Deep Foundations, ASCE, Atlanta, Georgia, 1979, pp.182-214.
References
R-3
Johnston, I. W., I. B. Donald, A. B. Bennet, and J. W. Edwards, The Testing of Large Diameter Pile Rock
Sockets with a Retrievable Test Rig, Proceedings, Third Australian-New Zealand Conference on
Geomechanics,Wellington, 1980a.
Johnston, I.W.,A. F. Williams, and H. K. Chiu, Properties of Soft Rock Relevant to Socketed Pile Design,
Proceedings, International Conference on Structural Foundations on Rock, Sydney, Balkema:
Rotterdam, l980b.
Kulhawy, F. H., Transmission Line Structures Foundations for Uplift-Compression Loading,
Geotechnical Group, Cornell University, Report No. EL-2870, Report to Electrical Power Research
Institute, Geotechnical Group, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, February, 1983.
LCPC (le Laboratoire Centraldes Ponts et Chaussees,) Bored Piles, English Translation of Les Pieux
Fores, (FHWA TS-86-206, March, 1986).
Mayne, P.W. and D.E. Harris, Axial Load-Displacement Behavior of Drilled Shaft Foundations in
Piedmont Residuum. , Georgia Tech Research Corporation, Geotechnical Engineering Division,
Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Civil Engineering, Atlanta, GA, February, 1993.
Meyerhof, G. G., Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations, Journal of the SoilMechanics
and Foundation Engineering, Proceedings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 102, No.
GT3, March, 1976, pp. 197-228.
Mogenstern, N. R. and K. D. Eigenbrod, Classification of Argillaceous Soils and Rocks, Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, Proceedings, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 100,
No. GT10, October, 1974, pp. 1137- 1156.
ONeill M.W. and L.C. Reese, Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and Design Methods, prepared
for U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of
Implementation McLean, Virginia, 1999
ONeill M.W. and L. C. Reese, Behavior of Axially Loaded Drilled Shafts in Beaumont Clay. Research
Report No. 89-8,Project 3-5-65-89, conducted for the Texas Highway Department, in
Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, December, 1970.
ONeill, M.W. and S.A. Sheikh, Geotechnical Behavior of Underreams in Pleistocene Clay, Drilled Piers
and Caissons II, Ed. by C. N. Baker, Jr., ASCE, May, 1985, pp. 57-75.
ONeill, M. W., F.C. Townsend, K.M. Hassan, A. Buller, and P.S. Chan, Load Transfer for Drilled Shafts in
Intermediate Geomaterials, Report No. FHWA-RD-95-172, Federal Highway Administration,
McLean, VA, November, 1996.
Owens,M. J. and L. C. Reese, The Influence of a Steel Casing on the Axial Capacity of A Drilled Shaft, A
report to the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation, Research Report
References
R-4
255-1F, Center for Transportation Research, Bureau of Engineering Research, The University of
Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, July, 1982, 204 pages.
Peck, R. B., Rock Foundations for Structures, Proceedings, Specialty Conference on Rock Engineering
for Foundations and Slopes, Boulder, Colorado, ASCE, 1976.
Quiros, G. W. and L. C. Reese, Design Procedures for Axially Loaded Drilled Shafts, Research Report
176-5F, Center for Highway Research, The University of Texas at Austin, 1977.
Randolph, M.F. and C.P. Wroth, Analysis of Deformation of Vertically Loaded Piles, Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering Division , ASCE, Vol. 104, No. 12, December, 1978.
Reese, L. C., Analysis of Data from Mustran Cells, Axial-Load Test of Caisson CS1, Eugene Talmadge
Memorial Bridge, Chatham Country, Georgia, an unpublished report to Dames & Moore, Boca
Raton, Florida, 1985.
Reese, L. C. and T. Bowman, Report on Testing of a Drilled Shaft at Georgetown Steel Company in
Beaumont, an unpublished report to Tracor, 1975.
Reese, L. C. and K. J. Nyman, Field Load Tests of Instrumented Drilled Shafts at Islamorada, Florida, a
report to Girdler Foundation and Exploration Corporation, Clearwater, Florida, February, 1978.
Reese, L. C. and M.W. ONeill Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and Design Methods, prepared
for U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Office of
Implementation McLean, Virginia, 1988
Reese, L. C., M. W. ONeill, and S. T. Wang, Drilled Shaft Tests, Interchange of West Belt Toll Road and
US 290 Harris County, Texas, an unpublished report to Harris County Toll Road Authority,
Houston, Texas, 1988.
Rollins, K.M.,R. J. Clayton, R.C. Mikesell, and B.C. Bradford, Drilled Shaft Side Friction in Gravelly Soils,
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers,
Vol. 131, No. 8, August, 2005, pp. 987-1003.
Schmertmann, J.H., Report on Development of a Keys Limerock Shear Test for Drilled Shaft Design, A
Report to Girdler Foundation and Exploration Company, Clearwater, Florida, December, 1977.
Sheikh, S. A., M. W. ONeill, and K. Kapasi, Behavior of 45- Degree Underream Footing in Eagle Ford
Shale, Research Report No. 85-12, University of Houston, University Park, December, 1985.
Skempton,A.W., The Bearing Capacity of Clays, Proceedings, Building Research Congress, Division I,
Building Research Congress, London, 1951.
Williams, A. F., Principles of Side Resistance Development in Rock Socketed Piles, Proceedings, Third
Australian-New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics, Wellington, 1980.

References
R-5
Williams, A. F., I. B.Donald, and H.K. Chiu, Stress Distributions in Rock Socketed Piles, Proceedings,
International Conference on Structural Foundations on Rock, Sydney, Balkema: Rotterdam,
1980a.
Williams, A. F, I. W. Johnston, and I. B. Donald, The Design of Socketed Piles in Weak Rock,
Proceedings, International Conference on Structural Foundations on Rock, Sydney, Balkema:
Rotterdam, 1980b.
Williams,A. F., and M. C. Erwin, The Design and Performance of Cast-in-situ Piles in Extensively Jointed
Silurian Mudstone, Proceedings, Third Australian-New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics,
Wellington, 1980.


Shaft 2012 Manual

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Shaft 2012 Manual

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

COMPUTER PROGRAM

A Program for the Study of Drilled Shafts under Axial Loads

COPYRIGHT ENSOFT, INC 2012

PROGRAM LICENSE AGREEMENT

No warranty, expressed or implied, is offered as to the accuracy of results

SHAFT for Windows User's Manual

Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-1

General Description ................................................................................................................... 1-2

History of Development ............................................................................................................. 1-3

SHAFT1 (1987) .................................................................................................................... 1-3

SHAFT, Version 2 (1989)..................................................................................................... 1-3

SHAFT 3.0 for Windows (1995) .......................................................................................... 1-3

SHAFT 4.0 for Windows (1998) .......................................................................................... 1-3

SHAFT 5.0 for Windows (2001) .......................................................................................... 1-3

SHAFT 6.0 for Windows (2007) .......................................................................................... 1-3

SHAFT for Windows (2012) ................................................................................................ 1-4

Organization of SHAFT Manuals ................................................................................................ 1-4

Typographical Conventions........................................................................................................ 1-4

Contents of SHAFT Package ....................................................................................................... 1-5

Hardware Requirements ............................................................................................................ 1-5

Technical Support ...................................................................................................................... 1-5

Preferred Methods of Software Support ........................................................................... 1-5

Support by Telephone ........................................................................................................ 1-6

Upgrade Verification and Internet Site .............................................................................. 1-6

Changes of Support Policy ................................................................................................. 1-6

Installation and Getting Started ..................................................................................... 2-1

Installation Procedures .............................................................................................................. 2-2

Installation of Single-User Version ..................................................................................... 2-2

Introduction of Network Version ....................................................................................... 2-5

Installation of Network Version ......................................................................................... 2-5

Backup of Original Software .............................................................................................. 2-6

Software Updates on the Internet ..................................................................................... 2-6

Installation of Software Updates from the Internet .......................................................... 2-6

Getting Started........................................................................................................................... 2-7

Starting the Program .......................................................................................................... 2-8

File Management ............................................................................................................... 2-8

Data Input of Application Problem .................................................................................... 2-9

Computation Options....................................................................................................... 2-10

Graphics ........................................................................................................................... 2-12

Arrangement of Windows ................................................................................................ 2-13

Help Files .......................................................................................................................... 2-14

Engineering Documentation .......................................................................................... 3-1

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3-2

Computation Procedures for Clay .............................................................................................. 3-2

Side Resistance................................................................................................................... 3-2

End Bearing ........................................................................................................................ 3-6

Computation Procedures for Sand........................................................................................... 3-11

Side Resistance................................................................................................................. 3-11

End Bearing ...................................................................................................................... 3-15

Computation Procedures for Clay-Shale .................................................................................. 3-20

Computation Procedures for Rock........................................................................................... 3-21

Design Procedure ............................................................................................................. 3-36

Commentary on Direct Load-Settlement Simulation Method......................................... 3-42

Computation Procedures for Gravelly Sand and Gravel .......................................................... 3-42

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3-42

Side Resistance................................................................................................................. 3-43

End Bearing ...................................................................................................................... 3-47

Consideration of the Factor of Safety and LRFD Design ......................................................... 3-50

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3-50

The Allowable Stress Design (ASD) .................................................................................. 3-50

Loads addressed by the LRFD specifications.................................................................... 3-52

Resistances addressed by the LRFD specifications .......................................................... 3-52

Comments on the LRFD Design ........................................................................................ 3-53

References for Data Input .............................................................................................. 4-1