0% found this document useful (0 votes)
348 views59 pagesDesign of Pole Structures
CIVIL 750 course note
Uploaded by
JIA MACopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
348 views59 pagesDesign of Pole Structures
CIVIL 750 course note
Uploaded by
JIA MACopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 59
Chapter 6
Design of pole retaining walls Poles
‘The design procedures for naturally round timber are similar fo'those for sawn tincbes,
‘but the properties of the timber are significantly different to that of sawn timber.
Properties of Poles °
‘The material properties of poles ere significantly higher than those for sawn, timber,
especially the beading properties. The reason for the enhanced bending properties is
because of the change in rate of growth with age of the tree and to a lesser extent the
minimal infemuption to the grain structure,
ear th
[TS accom te
eae Peete
igh dency slow grown timber yy
Figure P1 f
Rate of Growth of Timber "
‘When the trees are young, there is a fast rate of growth thus the core wood of the tree .
tends to be low density, low strongth anil stiffuess timber. ,"The rato of growth slows °
with age and thie outer ‘Wood tends to-be denseh, stronger and: stiffer thai the care
Af with all bending members the material furthermost from the negtal axis his the
and “thost inthienco én the strength and siiffness properties of the member. |
In the New Zealand Timber Structures Standard, Characteristic.
the Gute: wood density of the tres. "Two categories aro given:
Stresses are related to
“)—Hligh Gensity. 450 gin’
Gi). Lowdensity -350 kein’
‘Tho characteristic yaluss ligted'in th Standérd are foir unprocessed gresiy poled. “As
‘with all timber there ig an increase in strength 'and stiffness on drying of the timbét.
‘able PL
Characteristic suesses (MPs) and modulus of elasticity (GPa) for naturally round
softwood timbers in green condition (Table 7.1 of | 1NZS3603:1993)
: [ costo et Ka + Fropary
Gago | Siow | E
Hh BB a 3 35 90 at
Noma {350 | 3 | 23 | a | si | as | oy
‘Noie~‘Thhe outer cone dbaiy i the bas deny (Oven diy welghv/volans Ta green conditon) Ta the
+ outer 20 % of radius ofthe poe, Shaving and Peeling of Poles
‘When a branch grows from the side of a tree, the longitudinal fibres in the-tress will
grow around the brarich and remain coritinnous, Sea seen an Loe renee |
diameter of the tree at the branch location, |
Inseseefonatar
af thetvn ot the loon
at abeench
.
Figure P2
Branches :
jn maiy situations the local variation (ode) in “ip a diameter of the tree is |
unsecceptable, To reniove these nodés anil to also rédiucs fhe'taper of the pole, the 2 .
poles yo ofttn pesled or shaved. The, pecling or shaving cute the cottinuovs:
Tongitudinat fibres hence reftucing terion, st bending strength and stifnass,
A ty factor i used in the code fo account for thy regnction im strength and stifasas
from pooling or saving.
«fable 3
Pesling or saying fattor ig (Pablo 7,2. of NZS 360: 1953) |
‘Rppliete Wachine poling “Hoskine saving
fy orks 088 :
ae Rereeeey ane eee
eae F 7 ge
‘The Effect of Steaming oo SEE Ee eee aac rete >
In two of the main treatment methods for poles,~the ‘poled are steamed prior to
(reattnent to reijové the sap from thé tisibér and-to’ hence increase the uptake of
preservative. ‘The steaming process tends to breakdown the bond betwen the wood
‘fibres. ‘This zésullS in large réduétion in the Bi 1g tind tenbion + ‘strbrigth,"’smaller
redaction in the sheat and compressive strenigt aiid-a slight reduction in’the bending
stiffness,
‘The ky; factor in the standard eocbimts for the reduction in properties from steaming.
‘Table P3
Steaming factor (Table 7.3 form NZS3603:1993)
Fppledto To
Korky oar
forty or fy 990
Ez 095 Strength of Round Members
Shear Strength zl ‘
For a xound timber member subjected to a flexural shear the following must be
satisfied:
ves gy, i 1
; whee 4Y, design strength, F
vy - Roms
‘The néminal strength s given by: :
Phat, te 2
shSat plate & area’
: 23bd for a rectangular
cueceE meraber,
‘The sheat plane, Aj,
used ‘ozelate the point of mmaximuta shear stress to the cross-
septionsl area: The
ress, at aby ah be determined ising
vo
tele 3
De.
whars “*
: b = breadth
‘The miuximum shear stress oocts at the centre of the cross-section, ‘Compressive Strength
"Phe compressive strength of a round menaber must satisfy:~
NES Wee 5
where), = design action from
strength Limit state loada,
Neg = nominal design strength.
‘The nominal design strength is given by:-
Noe =hykg fe” : i 68
: where 1, f,4° = as hormal
ot ky for A eclaibular moms Adends on
depth of miémmber
ils bers neal
restraints,
‘This relationship came from the Buler buckling: ot ee column where the Euler *
critical buckliig load, B is avery:
8
9
For a circular colunan,
10
and i 2
‘Therefore ae 2
4%)
ay,
Therefore o,, is a function of L/d, instead of I,fi,
Bending Strength
“The bending strength of a round member must satis!
M3 <4, 3
Where’ ~ MH, 0. =» design setiga endings
mioment from strength
Limit state loads,
‘M, = nominal design bending
. * strength, '
"The nominal design bending strength is given by:-
M, = kak skp fo 14
where Ey, = as normal
3
Hee eee
7 32
‘The stability factor fy, for a rectangular member depends oxi L/B and d/b,
‘This xblationship came from the Buler buckling of a perfect béam where the Euler
critical buckling mometit, Mis givemby:- ~~
eee
i, 2S, ae
Z,
‘Therefore the Buler critical bucklitg stress is given by:-
. x VRIGT 7
a,
Fora ciréular column,
wat
ae 17
|
| =.
InZ 18
and for wood GaHAS
4
‘Thorefore a 19
2 »
"Thotefore-buclding is now only dependent on L/.
ee oe eps Pole Foundations
‘Most pole foundations are requited to zesist some lateral load. ‘This is especially tue
i for pole retaiiing structores. In the design of these structures there are two main
considerations:-
@ The pile must have lateral load capacity to ensure failure does not
cent. Checks are made for the Strength Limit Stato
- G) The deformation of tho pile should be within acceptable limits,
Checks ate mide for the Serviceability Limit State
(2 Pole Behaviour undei Lateral Loads :
‘Whe a!pole is subjéctid to a Ietoral, eno of two modes of failure could ocear:~
@ Pile falls in bebdiig”
ile strength
EEE ss
a Bigure RWL
“Mate at Utimate Capacity
Gi) Soil fails camsing pole to rotate
Figure RW2
Soil at Ultimate Capacity Ultimate Lateral Load Soil Capacity
Cohesive Soils
‘When agile is subjected to ilaterl load, the presse distbuticn vars frm 25,
near'the ground surface to a maxitnum of 8 fo 12s.
E.
2, [4-125]
figure WS “*
Soil Stress Se 1h i
eae
‘The above stress distribution in the soil is alittle Aérd to analyse. Broshs in 196%
came op with, é simplification fot stress in the soll at ultimate conditions,
My
28, | 95,
Figure RW4
Brom’s [dealised Soil Stress er
Broms propoted that thére was an inactive zone, é,, for a distance of 1.5.times the
diameter of the pole foundation (d}. ‘This diameter should inclnde the concrete
surrounding the pole if the pole is embedded in concrete, ‘The remaining soil would
have a soil stress of 9s,
‘The value of 9s, wae derived from bearing capacity analyses on cohesive soils,
lateral bearing capacity
will not interact when pole
spacitig greater than 8¢¢ ad,
Bearing failure
surface
: Figure RWS ca
Plan Showing Beating Fathire around Laterally Loaded Poles
For pole spatings Yes than it is prope th lowing should be sed, i
MIs shspeth
9sy
Earth Pressure Factor
‘&
ide Y dg
Pole Spacing
Figure RW6
‘Variation of Berth Prossure with Pole Spacing * ‘The nomial horizontal load, Hy, can be telated to thé depth of embedment, D, by
condidering:- iH
He, Hy
+ Therefope, UF ‘i ve ee
Taking moments about o,
2s xed, 194,
Substinting foc @) ; ; aaa
2 yz
9a.dy9( f4e4d aaa 0 343 |
Therefore,
re seed a a(zty)
ye y-23"=0
@
@Q
@)
@
© Substitoing tor x= (D'-y )
Therefore,
vereyL(p'-yf=0 5 o
Rearranging
3° #2 (2e' 4D" )y—D? L. ®
Solving
“if
we tt at BF
Substituting for y from (2)... » fe oy 7
‘i Hax0.4) {AGED Fab -(2e'4n')} 10)
: 7 epee eae Fe
: f Nee RE yemenbed te B it |
‘The maxiinunt bendiig inoiaéht in the pile o¢ouii af the point‘of zero sheds in the pile,
Consider: . c i
I.
Shear Fehce
«Pending Moment
igure RWS
le Actions,
Resolving horizontally
H=S,d;¢ ay
‘Therefore, :
“
(2) }- es 2 as)
x? Santen
"25, dy
Note S,is a product of the capacity seduction factor (@), the soil strength factor @ for
spacing gréater than 3d) and S,.
Cohesionless Soils
(14)
With a, cohesi gto etna tbe piss Gibton is very mc.“
iriffuenced by dopth: The stress distibiiion in the soil is complex, :
Shpb'y
Figure RW10
Brom’s Approximation to Stress Distribution in a Cohesionless Soil ' In the Brom’s approximation the soil pressure is assamed to vary with depth. The soil
i pressure at the ground is zero and increase with Hineacly with depth with a maximum
at the bottam of the pile being
as)
where dy = diameter of pile founding
Y =-tnit weight of soit
There is also a laege restrainiig
farce at the bottom of the pile in the opposite
. direction to the ecil pressure, : :
. To determine the nombsal horizontal stngth; 2%, take moments about thé bottom of
pole, A :
H, (D+e): 23h, 74, DR (6) :
; sre rd, DP ; an
° D(Dte) rrr. anvedmact heck an
Boe pe i. eats
FL Rementbey te
|
"Maccimont bending oocuis at the point of zets shegr
|
Hw
Saiyd ‘Shear Force ending Mement
Figure RWIL
Pile Actions in Non Cohesive Soil
\ Resolving horizontally {Ps Qt hoe dus (F),
1
HaGRS; x3nk, xf nde xy (18) '
where 5;= 0.5 (capacity reduction factor) "Therefore
2.
kp dry
See B Bdor,
Taking moments at depth f,
Mya =H (of tL Ke veathis — (20)
: ol ,3 [tHe
iaenaf 0 | S
= H.
2S
oo
ay.
- -@ay Lateral Pressure on Retalning Structures
‘The «majority of timber retzining structures are backfilled with granular matexiol to
facilitate drainage, A field tile drain or equivalent is ysoally placed at the base of the
‘wall to ensure that the water table does not rise above the base,
Figure RWI2 :
Section through Timber Retaining Wall.
oe
4 perl/2keysHy's
| ; | spacing of poles
Hy petKyatlst :
-— I
Pressure Distribution. ‘Farves on Pole
Dee Yes Figure RWI3
Soil Pressure on a Retaining Structure ‘The soil behind the wal is assumed to be in am active stato as the wall tends to move
away from fhe earth, ‘The soil pressure at thé base of tho wall is
Soil Presatixe dt base of Wall=KeYsEhy @2)
Hf the poles are spaced at a distance, s, thei the soil presiuré boliig resisted by the piles
is K,yHs and the total farce resisted by the wall is
1
Py sR sll gs @3) Design ior Strength Limit State .
‘he following is bused on M. J. Pendor's recommendations, AS with all design the
following mst be satisfied,
SSR,
Where S° = design load effects
ity Téduction factor
na iominal capacity
The design low effects can be determined ‘wsinjysiocmél “load “Factors _given-in
Nzs4203:1992 : ‘
For example
126 &169 SoeSeeL: athe Gr
0sce Ww
"For lateral earth prossures it is suggested thatthe load factor is taken a8 1.6.
‘The strength teduetion factor, 4, for soil is taken as 0.5 for soils,
‘Design for Serviceability Limit State
ponents of displa
‘When a pole.js subjected to a lateral Joad there is 3,
(@
)
©
I Ab Az tt du
e
Figure RW14
Displaced Shape of Pole Retaining Structare ‘Therefore the totel displacement, Arai is given by
Arona = Ay + Ag + Aw (4)
where Ay = binding displaceiment
rotation displitcement
trinslation displacement
Determination of Rotaticn arid Translation at Ground Level
Consider a.pale einbedded into clay subjected to a lateral load P, and a bending
smometi Mal tae bottom of the ingetive zone.
, SY
Botta of 3
inactive zone H Be
« fay!
- Figue RWAE pepe chet eee
‘ts pals at bottbin’ot thé inactive Lond is'e inition’ of the sil”
aa and diameter of founding, d; The displacement is also a
depth’ Gf cinbédiinent is greater than the
detent.” ,
‘The active Jetigth of the of 2. ee Ly, is given by
Tq 05 dO
where dy = diameter of founding
B, x10*
Kos 2
Ey
Ep = modulus of elasticity of
the pole
EK, = modulus of elasticity of
‘the soil
: = 300 s,for clay.
Uf tho embedment is Jess than the active Jength MJ Pender suggests increasing the
_displacements by 25 %. ‘The horizontal displacement at botiom of the inactive zone, u is given by:-
us fan Pat fem @5)
and the rotation @ is given by:~
O= fan Patt fom (26)
where P, = horizontal load at the
. bottom of the inactive
zone
M = applied ‘ moment ~ the
botlom of the inactive
; zono"
rs us, Sts fon 820 Coefticients,
‘The coeffiecients have beeh determined from finite antlyses, ‘The following are often
nsed:- + _ tek. CIVIL750 - 2016
Timber Pole Design
sRound Timber Poles are strong, versatile and
economical elements of building construction
Economical because the lags have less work
done on them, are generally debarked and
treated and some peeled or shaved to give a
uniform appearance
eMost poles are radiata plne, the properties of
Which are given in NZS 3604 Section 7
aDesign stresses are significantly higher In
poles than in sawn timber
because in the sawing
process defects such as
knots and angle of grain
arise in sawn timber where
In the natural wood the
grain flows round the defect
Availability
Timber Poles are available based on two.
density classes ~ the lower class identified in
the Code of 350 ka/m3 is generally covered
by all suppliers of round timber poles
throughout NZ
«The higher value of 450 kg/m3 Density is
regularly achleved in timber grown north of
Fauranga but the material in this Instance
would require testing and certification
Consequently designers generally deal with the lessar value
to be safe and generally achieve a more economical Job ~ on
the other hand for specific requirements where substantial
size savings can be made for a large number of units,
designing for and specifying higher grade timber poles and
having them be selected and certified Is wise
| CIVIL750 ~ 2016
Treatment
«Poles are steam conditioned and CCA treated to H3, H4, HS
&H6, Refer Timber Design Guide Cho
+ H3 for exterior poles not in contact with the ground
= Hé for Ground Contact - fence posts, agricultural posts and
minor retaining walls where replacement is easily achieved
and minor cost
HS for Ground Contact ~ house poles, retaining walls,
twansmission poles ~ generally accepted as the norm and
often insisted upon by TA’s as the
minimum requirement
+ H6 Marine Exposure - treatment
often carried out by speciatist
treatment contractors
}
{ CIVIL750 - 2016
Examples
Sizes
Pole sizes are specified in terms of "small end diameter” (SED)
anging from 60,mm to 200 mm typically, although Upwards to
600 ~ 700 ram dla are available on special order
Lengths up to 12.m are readily avaliable in the standard sizes and
can be specially sought and ordered up to 18 m long ~ lengths
vary outside the standard sizes
Section Properties based on the diameter of the pole atthe critical
section ,
‘+ Blastie Modulus Z = 11d? / 32
+ Moment of Inertia = Td*/ 64
Poles have a taper of Sim in diameter each 1.0 metre length of
ole ~ accordingly the size of tha pole at critical positions fn its
length can be calculated. Generally poles driven axe placed small
‘end down and poles placed and grouted have small end at the top
‘Square Piles 90, 120 and 140 square are also available for house:
foundations and retaining walls ~ but remember to use sawn
timber values for design NOT Pole Properties CIVIL750 - 2016
Pole Properties
+ Refer NZS 3604 Section 7 of the Standard, Table 7.1 for
Properties of Timber in Timber Poles based on Green
Condition. Generally for ground contact or exposed
environment the Green Stresses should apply in design
although a “dry use factor” is given in Table 7.4 for use by
designers if appropriate
= The peeling and shaving process removes ugly nodes where
branches have grown out of the tree and reduces the
natural taper to a standard value (8mm per m of tength) ~
this gives designers confidence In designing for a size which
they can predict. The peeling or shaving attracts a kay
factor which modifies certain properties of the timber ~
refer Table 7.2 in the Standard and Notes Ch21 TDG
Pole Properties cont'd
= In order to remove the sap from the timber and increase
preservative uptake, poles are steamed prior to treatment.
The steaming process breaks down the bond between wood
fibres and hence has an effect on the properties of the
timber. A ka; factor (Refer Table 7.3 in the Standard and
Notes Ch21 TDG) allows for this reduction, The term
“steamed” can mean “treated”
«If Australian or Pacific Island Timber Is being used adopt
the stresses specified In the local or Australian.Standard
881720
NOTE, — Load Factors applied to Retaining Structures where
earth pressures provide the “live” load, we use 1.6 In this
course. Transit NZ Bridge Manual requires 1.82 and some
Engineers may select 1.5 ~ it’s @ matter of choice CIVIL750 - 2016
Analysis of Pole structures
1+ Poles tn bullding construction are used In axially loaded situations such es
‘vetleal poles under a dwelling with dlegonal bracing carrying lateral foads
to ground (refer board sketch)
«+ Alternatively the vertical poles can carry combined actions by acting as
faxally loaded members and carcying lateral loads by cantilever action
1+ Refer to the supplementary pages at the end of the ppt presentation slides,
to view twa alternative models fr lateral load and axially loaded piles
+ Note thatthe design of the foundation forthe simple cantilever example is
very srl to the more complex fied based portal where some of the
Tateral entrying capacity is carried by moment at the top of the pale ~ in
‘both these Instances the foundation Is designe to carry the ULS axtal
Toads and the bending moment atthe base
1» The pole, however, in the frame example fs designed to carry the
combined actions Using the worst moment (at the top of the pole)
Strength of Round Timber Poles
1 Poles in Shear
+ Shear Strength must satisfy V* < @ V, whera 0 = 0.8
+ The nominal strength in shear is given by
+ Va= Ky Kg Kay fe Ay. where f, is the shear strass from
Table 7.1 or 2.2 (Green) and A, is the shear plane area
+ A, = 2bd/3 for rectangular post foundations
+ A= 311d / 16 for round poles diameter d
+ K, generally not included
= Poles under Axial Load
+ Compressive Strength must satisfy N* < 9 Nc
+ The nominal strength in compression is given by
© Nc = Ke Kacey Kap kay fe A where f, is the compressive
strass from Table 7.1 or 2.2 (Green) and Als the area of
the pole at the design position CIVIL750 - 2016
Design Poles in Strength
= Poles under Axial Load contd
+ The ptabilty factor ig fora rectangular pile is based on
S=L/d where Lis the simply supported length
betergen lateral restraints for'a column or twice the
height of a cantilever pole ~ rafer Fig 2.4 for le
+ The stability factor ky for a round pile is based en S = |.
/.d whore Lis a6 above and d ie tha iamatar of the polo
Sr the points of lateral restraint = refer Fig 2-4 fot fears
+ Ky generally not included
+ Bending Strength of Poles
+ Bending Strength must satisfy M* < OM,
‘* The nominal bending strength is given by
+B, = K, Kp go a fy Z where f, isthe bending stress
frbm Table 71 8¢'2.2 (Green) fant Z 1s the section
modulus of the pole af the design position = Ht de / 32
Bending Strength cont'd
«Bending Strength continued ..
» The stability factor (in bending) for a rectangular
member follows the same procedure as sawn timber
beams and is based on D/B and L/B Refer Fig 3.2
Green
» Fora square or round timber kgs) = 1
«Example : Design a round timber pole under a dwelling in
Henderson using standard radiata pine shaved and treated
poles to carry the following ultimate (1.26+1,5Q) load
conditions simultaneously
+ Length between lateral restraints 3.4 m
+ Axial Load N* = 84 kN
+ Bending Moment at Midspan M# = 7.2 ktm
+ Shear Force at Support VF = 48 KN CIVIL750 = 2016
Strength of Poles - Example
Try 200 SED Pole ~ min dia = 200 mm (175)
= Capacity in axial load ~ Adopt 200 dia at critical section
+ BNe= B itz Kare) Kao Kas fe A
6D = 0.8, ky Kk. = 0.84 (see below) (0.76),
# Kqgy = 1.0, Ky, = 0.8. fe = 21 MPa, A = 31.463 mm2
+ Given L/D = 240/200 = 17 (19) Wet, ke.) = 0.84
Given ul 19) Wet, Kec
+ Then @ Ne = 0.8x0,8x0.84x1.0x0,9x21x34.483
= 319 kN (221 KN)
«Capacity in Bending Strength - Adopt 200 dla at critical
sedtion
+ DM, =D lez ky kag Kos FZ
£2 0B, Kye 0.8, Key = 1.0, yy = 0.85, kay = 0.85.
+f, = 38 MPa, Z = 78SE3 mm3 (526E3)
+ Then 8 M, = 0.8x0.8xc1.0x0,85x0.85x38x785E3
= 13.8 kNm (9.2 kNm)
Note that Moment capacity is proportional to d° so be
‘Grelal wanen recycling Hot fo overcook the Selection
Example concluded -
« Capacity In Shear
+ By = B Ky Keo Kear fe Ae
+ B= OS, ky= 0.8, Kao = 1-0, Kay = 0.9. f, = 3.1 MPa,
+ A331 d? / 16 = 23.6E3 mm? (18.1E3 mm*)
© Then @ V, = 0.8X0.8x1,0x0.9x3.1x23,6E3,
=42KN (32 KN) >48KN OK
Combined bending & axial
84/319 + 7.2 / 13.8
0.79 < 1.0 0K
Try 175 dia (in brackets)
= 84/224 +7.2 (9.2 = 146 > 1.0 NG
ADOPT 200 SED Pole CIVIL750 ~ 2016
Pole Foundations
‘The most common structure Involving poles is when the
pole is buried in the ground to achieve capacity to carry
vertical loads by direct bearing or shaft resistance and often
lateral fixity to carry moment
Poles (driven or drilled & placed) are very cost effective in
bulldings on steeply sloping ground (pole houses), where
vertical capacity is used through shaft resistance
{sometimes called skin friction) and lateral loads under
wind and seismic are carried by the pole in cantilever or the
design and use of diagonal above-ground bracing
Poles are driven to a depth or a hole critled and concrete
poured around a pole In order to provide capacity in axial
load and ability to carry lateral loads in bending
‘The vertical carrying capacity of poles is covered in Prof
Penders Limit State Design of Foundations in Yrs 3 and 4
for short and tong term loading in clay and in sand
Pole Foundations under axial load
Supplementary Notes atthe nr of the pot presentation slides
Give some guidance on the capacty of driven or drilled und placed
pole foundations under ULS axel loees
For example the ULS capacity of a drilled and placed pole (sock
diameter 450mm, embedment depth 2.2m in material with an
tndrained shear strength of 65kPa Is calculated as! =
Shaft Resistance - a = 0.4 (fom Adhesion Factor Crt); ca = 26
ea; H= 22 "0.75 = Las; C= L4im; 0 = 05
“Then ULS Capacity (shaft resistance) = 26x LAS x 1.41 x0.5 =
2eekN
End bearing cout contribute = 0.5 x 9 x 26x 0.16 = 18.7 kN
{ignoring the soll weight component) CIVIL750 - 2016
Poles subject to Lateral Loads
» Dwellings founded on long pole foundations or on
short driven piles having to carry horizontal wind
or seismic loads are good examples of vertical
poles in bending
« Retaining walls are a classic example of poles
used efficiently in cantilever bending to resist
jateral loads from backfilled or cut materials and
surcharges from loads behind the walls (
x Two main considerations
+ Does the pole fail in bending?
* Does the pole rotate in the ground and fail
in major deformation?
Pole Behaviour under Lateral Loads
+ MIP provides guidance in Civil 323 Limit State Design of (
Foundations on the lateral capacity of poles in the ground
and we shall be summarizing his niotes here
» For the former failure regime, le the foundation strength
exceeds the capacity of the pole In bending, the pole will
fall at or below ground level depending on the type of.
construction and the type of founding materlal.
= With drilled and concreted foundation the concrete sock can
effectively provide fixity at the top of the sock provided the
sock is properly constructed with sufficient surround of
concrete to achieve fixity. If this occurs, the capacity of the
pole can be checked against the applied bending moment
at that level, Often this is NOT the case and engineers
should be careful in ensuring that the adequate and proper
drilling and placing of concrete socks Is achieved CIVIL750 - 2016
+ If the construction of the sock Is inadequate or the engineer
elects to specify a diameter of unreinforced concrete sock
which may not achieve fixlty for the pole at entry under the
soil conditions pravailing, then some allowance must be
made for assessing the depth to fixity. This could vary welt
be the subject of a Masters Thesis or Project as no guidance
Is currently available
+ Fora driven pole, fixity is some length below the ground
level and is dependent on the material of the ground ~ in
this instance the maximum bending moment Under the
applied design actions at that point should be assessed and
( not the bending moment at ground level or some other
assessed level
|
= The pressure distribution In the soil for a pole subject to ( |
1 lateral load is complex and Is measured in terms of the |
i undrained shear strength of the soil ¢y
= Broms (a Swedish Engineer, b1928) proposed a simple
' method of estimating the pressure distribution under 3
| laterally foaded pile and from there can determine the
ultimate capacity of the pile to fail ~ this method Is
recognised today as the accepted method for design and is
taught in MJPenders Geotechnical Classes
+ The actual pressure distribution is complex ~ Refer Fig 21.1
TDG and Is simplified for a cohesive soll, to a rectangular
distribution where the maximum stress at ultimate
conditions in the soll Is calculated as 9c,, given D as the
depth of embedment
Pole Fixity
|
{
{
}
|
|
|
: to CIVIL750 - 2016
Pole Embedment Analysis
Cohesive Soils
® Broms proposed an inactive zone for some 1.54, depth
where dy is the diameter of the pole of the diameter of the
Concrete sock surrounding the pole, Some practitioners
have found this assertion to achieve overdesign particularly
when the dlameter of the pole of sock Is larger than 300,
Inm. For this reason (for large poles)some Engineers adopt
a fixed e, of 250 ~ 350 mm which appears to be reasonable
and achiéve Safe pole embedment depths
+ Fig RW/3 & AWA in the aotes describes the geometry of the
pressure distribution and pages RW4 and 5 determines by
algebra and forming a quadratic equation an expression for
the maximum ULS Horizontal Force applied at the top of
pole at ecrentricity e” alven de Depth of embedment D and
&, the undrained shear capaclty of the founding material
Pole Spacing effects
‘= The Broms equation and in particular the value of 9c, is based on
no interference of the stress block from other poles. ‘If poles are
close together a reduction in the allowable value of 9c, ts required
= Broms proposed that provided the poles were 3d, spacing from
the centreline of each other (not clear distance), then the poles
did not interact with each other and affect each others founding
material ~ 9c, could be used
= He suggested a linear relationship when poles are closer than 3¢y
together from 9c, to a tower bound of 2c, when the poles are
butted (spacing 14,)
‘+ Subsequent research by MJP and deliberation In NZ has suggested
that a minimum poles spacing of 4d tor 9c, while being
conservative Is recommended. This course selects the more
conservative approach of 4d, being the minimum spacing for 9c,
before the reduction shown In the charts comes into play
dt CIVIL750 - 2016
Embedment in Cohesive Soils
The Broms equation (for the capacity of poles to carry
hotizontal loads) then applies to all poles placed in the
ground whether or not the poles are driven (without a
concrete sock) or placed In drilled holes with a concrete
sock ~ the only difference is the value of dy the diameter of
the pole or concrete sock
Hy = Seydef[(2e"+D2+D2]°5 ~ (2e/tD')} - Broms
Where e’ = ete and e, Is 1.5d,and D’ Is D - e,
Note 9c, may vary iF other poles are in close proximity and
5 may also vary see the previous two slides
‘The usual method of analysis is to quess an embedment
depth, calculate Hu as below and recycle where necessary
Pole Design and ®H,
Once a value of Hu has been found, to this should be
applied the Strength Reduction Factor © for interaction
between foundations and sotl
© = 05 for structural design of Industrial & Commercial
shallow foundations
Then OH, Is the Ultimate Horizontal Force which can be
applied to the pole at height e above ground level,
embedded as described
‘This figure should be compared to H* the ULS applied point
load at the given height above ground, If H*> OH, then
the embedment depth should be Increased. If H¥< OH,
then embedment depth could be decreased and the
calculation recycled ~ do NOT amend the pole diameter
12 CIVIL750 - 2016
Pole Design — drilled and placed
1 For celled and placed poles, the sizeof the pole principally Is based on tes
‘moment capacity. On the expectation that a large diameter unreinforced
‘concrete sock may provide solid bearing, the critical section For the pole
tan be where the pole enters the concrete encasing at ground level
‘There is conjecture with engineers on this point, There is no readily
Availale design guidance on the resistance by an unreinforced concrete
Sock In transferring lateral pressures from the pole through to existing
Ground. can the engineer have confidence the poles wll be concentric
wwithin the concrete sock?” Is the concrete and size of the sock able to|
Withstand the pressure without undue cracking? Plenty of engineering
Judgement ts necessary around this area
In this instance engineering judgement Is required ~ some enginaors
tonsure the comereta sock eametar Is well in excess of the pole dkameter
‘ahtch also allows for ease of construction In pouring concrete to depth
[bebween the sock and the driled hole
‘= On the other hand if confidence inthe Intearity ofthe sock to provide fhity
at the surtace Is low, engineers may adopt say a 200 ~ 300 depth before
fty is achleved
Example — Drilled & Placed
Example - Determine the critical features of a single vetical pole sunject
to-en ULS (Short term) Horlzontal Force (W or E) of 10kN applied 1200
above ground level, placed In cohesive material of undrained shear
‘Strength (at 600 min) depth greater than 65 kpa
Try 200mm [180}SED pole steam troated and shaved and accept the
Concrete sock is capable of providing fy at ground level
4 HES LOK x 4.2m = 12 kN (assuming Faity atthe top of the sock)
ole Capacity In Bending My = 2 ky Ky Kay Kn fy Z
were 8 = 0.8, Ky= 1.0, kag) = 1:0; Kap = 0.85, Koy = 0.85, fy 38MPO
land given d at'sey 1200 below SED 200 = 204 mm (pole usualy but
own In drited & placed poles)
Z=T@ / 32 8293 mn (57363)
Then @ Mt, = O.BKL.Ox.0x0.85x0,85x36x62969
© 18.2 kin > 12 kNrm Recycle [12.6 kim OK)
13 CIVIL750 - 2016
Drilled & Placed example cont'd
«Try sock diameter 400 and ernbedment depth 1400 [1500]
» 4.Sd;" 600 mm, then e’ = 600 + 1200 = 1800 mm
© 0 = 1400 ~ 600 = 800 mm [900]
» 2e’ + 0’ = 4400 mm [4500] ; and {( 2e'+D'P + DS = 4470
mm [4590]
Then Hy = 9.6, dy (4470 ~ 4400) = 9 x 65 x 400 x 70-6
16.4 KN [24.4]
‘Then OH, = 8.2 KN < 10 kN No good ~ tacrease depth [1500]
Then recycled! OH, = 10.5 kN > 10 kN OK
ADOPT 180SED pole placed in a 400dla concrete sock embedded
1500mm deep in S = 65kPa material ~ check shear
Drilled & Placed Design complete -
1 Also check that in changing the pole diameter the sock diameter
may also need to change, Note also that “standard” augers may
not give you much choice in hole diameters ~ you won't be able to
drill 2 467 mm dia hole, Augers are in SO ~ 100 mm increments
Check Shear ~
B ke Koy Kan FAS
0, yp = 1.0, kay = 0.9. f, = 3.1 MPa,
19,163 mm? (d= 180mrn)
8x1. 0x1,0x0.9%3, 119.163
42KN > 10 KN OK
© Then B Vp
‘Then 180 SED Pole can carry 10KN ULS horizontal E or W force at
‘maximum 1200 above ground level embedded in 400 di sock
1500 mm into ground (c, = 65 kPa)
14
|
| CIVIL750 - 2016
Poles without a Concrete Sock (Driven)
Where the pole Is driven and is founded within the
subgrade, the pole rotates and the maximum bending
moment on the pole is NOT at the surface as for a concrete
sock but some distance below - Ref Notes RWS & 6
= Dépth to maximum bending moment = e, + z where
« Z=H*/0 9c, d; and therefore Max Bending Moment M*
is given by
« MA = H* [ef + H¥ / 2 © 9 cy de] Noting that if the spacing
of poles is < 4d, then 9c, is reduced accordingly
» Example - Using the example given above calculate the
characteristics of a pole driven without a concrete sock.
= H¥ = 10KN (under W of B), € = 1200 mm above GL
«= bttps://www,youtube-
nocookie,com/embed/cFbOnLCKypg?rel=0
Example — Driven Pole
Try 200SED pole driven 1600 Into S=65kPa material
Go to embedment depth first ~
Hy = 9cudr{E(2e"+D’)?+07]9S ~ (2e"+D9} ~ Broms
Where e” = a,te and e, Is 1.5d and O’ is D - e
dy = 200, 1.5d, = 300 mm, then e’= 30041206 = 1500 mm
600 ~ 300 = 1300 mm
2e! +0"
Then Hy
4300 mm ; and [( 2e’+D’}? + D295 = 4490 mm
9G, d, (4490 ~ 4300) = 9 x 65 x 200 x 190E-6
2.2 KN
Then OH, = 11.1 Kn > Applied Ult Load H® = 10 kN
If this value was < H* increase depth not diameter
Depth to Max BM = e,¢z = 1.5d/$H*/ © 9 c,d; 471mm.
Max BM in Pole = H* Le’ + H* {20 9.cy dy]
OxL1.5+ 10/(2x0.5x9x65x0.200)
15.9 kNm ~ note this uses H* NOT Hy
15 CIVIL750 - 2016
Driven Pole Example concluded
= Pole dia at 1.13 above the bottom (200SED at the bottom
of the driven pile {butt at the top}) = 203mm
sz = 82163 mm?
# Then from above @ M,, = 0.8x1,0x0,85x0,85x38x0.821 I
«= 18kNm > M* = 15.9 kNm - OK
«Recycle calculation (change diameter) if needed but this |
looks OK
«Note that this is Analysis ~ generally Pole Design requires
Designer to select a pole diameter (and sock diameter If
appropriate) and embedment given the applied ultimate
loads
DESIGN PHILOSOPHY
» Students need to understand the different ways of (
calculating a pole and embedment between poles being
placed In a sock and poles belng driven
In placed construction, design the pole first (strength at the
position where the timber enters the concrete sock or at
some depth below that level based on Engineer's
judgement) then select the sock dia and check embedment
varying depth of embedment as necessary
= In driven construction, check the embedment first in order
to determine size of pole. This will determine the point of
‘max moment from which a strength check of the pole size
can be made ~ a different philosophy
16 CIVIL750 - 2016
Poles in Cohesionless Soils
«In cohesionless solls Broms proposes no Inactive zone and
the stress distribution as triangular from zero at the surface
to depth D, the maximum stress at the bottom of
embedment given by 3ky¢hy
1» Where y = unit weight of soll (drained) & coefficient of
passive pressure ky = (1+-sing)/(1-sing)
1 The expression for the nominal horizontal strength Hy 1s
then given by
a Hy = kydiyD2/[2(D+e)] and Max horizontal ultimate force (
which can be applied at distance e above ground level Is
given by © Hy where ® = 0.5
Cohesionless soils (cont'd)
+ To find maximum moment on the pile, find position of zero shear f i
below ground level given by f = V [ 2H/(@ Skqdy)] and
The maximum moment in the pole is given by M¥ = H (@ + 24/3)
«Example ~ Determine the horizontal ultimate force 1800mm
above ground which can be applied to a 275 SED pole driven
400mm into cohesioniess material of unit weight 18 kN/m? and
@ = 30" Calculate M® in pole
«The D = 2400 mm, € = 1800 mm, de= 275, Ky = 3.0
Then Hy ~ kydyD4/12(D+e))
3 30.275 18%2.49/(2x4.2)
= 24.4 KN and © Hy = 12.2 KN say = H*
+ Ca YL 2HAN0 ky Ae] = VL 2402.2/(05x2rI0.275408) »
osm
And M* = 12,2 (1.8 + 2*1,05/3) =
0.5 kN
17 CIVIL750 - 2016
Restraint at the Base of the Wall
+ Whether the pole is driven or drilled and placed in a
concrete sock : =
Hye 9 GG {D-e){D +e }/2E
Where
cy ls the undralned shear strength of the-founding material
dys the diameter of the pole or conerete sock at ground level
ls the embedment depth
Jong © 15 the helaht from the constraint to the applied horizontal
|e, = 1.5 dy ar a selected dimension at the discretion of the
Enginger
Restraint at Base continued -
= The max bending moment in the pole for an actual ultimate
force Hi*, Is at the level of the horizontal stiff constraint
Mt =H .e
and the Horizontal Reaction Force at the level of the
Constraint Is given by
RE=HE+Q
where
Q= 2H*e/ {D +e)
NOTES ~
+ for all formulae the value of Sc, is the assumed ultimate stress
whlch occu between the pole"and the subgrede, This assumes
Bale apacing is greater then 4 pole or sock lameters. ff poles are
Eloser than this, interaction of bearing failure surfaces is possible
and a downgraded value of 9c, is necessary
Check pole capacity In bearing against the restrant whatever it
may ba), and the ability of the restraint to sustain longterm forces
= Do example
18 CIVIL750 - 2016
Pole Retaining Walls
Pressures & Design Actions.
See Notes RW9 ~ For long term soll pressures
assume the pole attracts active pressures which
are a triangular distribution from zero at the top,
Surcharge Loads are modelled by assuming @
rectangular distribution of pressure applied at the back of the
wall ~ Ref Notes RW13
Given a pole retaining walll helght Hy and pole spacing s, the
base pressure due to retained material on the pole is Sk,YHy,
and the thrust at the back of the pole acting Hy/3 above the
base of the wall is 0.5 base x height = O.5sk,yHy? Ref Fig
RW13. The coefficient of active pressure ky IS given by Ky
(1-sin8)/(1+sin8)
Pole Walls continued
Ifa surcharge is applied to the wall such as a building
foundation, pedestrian footpath or a driveway then a
pressure q applied to the surface attracts a UDL pressure
fn the back of the wall of sk,q (not dependent on depth)
and a thrust at the back of the wall acting H,/2 above the
base of the wall of sq Hy
» Obtaining Ultimate moments and shear forces on the pole
at the critical positions (multiplied by load factor 1.6) the
design of the pole can bé achieved
= Using Broms equations, embedment depth can be
determined for the particular situation ~ refer to handout
worked example
= Always remember to check pole spacing to ensure the
proximity of other poles da or don't affect the value of 9C,
19 CIVIL750 - 2016
Alternative Embedment Equations
+ Alternative simplified formulae for embedment denth are
‘suggested by Rutledge and Is often used for preliminary design
purposes. Verity normally using Broms equations
+ Given a horizontal load P acting distance L above ground level in
‘material of shear strength S with a diameter 8 of either the pole
‘or the conerete sock
Embedment Depth H = ALL+V(1+2.48U/A)]
where A = 1.17°/SB
= This equation assumes poles in horizontal ground both above and
below the wall, and no base restraint
If there Is a slab oF foundation beam at the base of the wall, this
considerably stiffens the reaction at the base and forms a pivot
about which the pole can rotate ~ ie there is no transiation at
(ground level
In this instance an expression for embadment depth Is
H = 2.06V(PL/SB)
Pole Walls
Serviceability Limit State
= Generally pole walls do not attract a specific criterla for lateral
deflection at the top. All poles designed for active pressures wit
deflect some distance in order to have active pressures occur.
Provided the material behind the wall Is not affected by smell
deflections (such as cracking in surface finishes or unacceptable
movement) then this is acceptable, In order to allowr for the
varying and small deflections the vralls are normally sloped
backwards 1H:20V so that any deflection is taken up in rotating
back to a vertical. Varying deflections along the wall or large
movements are unacceptable and are usually caused by a change
in soll conditions around the embedment or unaccounted foad
pplication from behind the wall
= Where pole walls are against a boundary or required to provide
very small deflections, the walls can be designed for "at-rest”
pressures attracting a much higher standard and size
20 CIVIL750 - 2016
Pole Walls |
Serviceability Limit State
= Three components of displacement - Refer Fig RW14
* Bending of the Pole '
© Horizontal transiation at ground level
+ Rotation at the ground surface
= The latter two displacements are calculated by empitical
formulae relating the modulus of elasticity of the pole and
ground with the diameter of the pole or embedded sock
+ Bending of the pole is elastic PLY/3El alven a pole subject
toa serviceability force P at L above the bottom of the
inactive zone = e' = more rigorously calculations can be
done using moment area for 8 triangular pressure
aistribution acting to ground level note since thi
Fr
u deflection arises from bending ofthe pole, creep factors
a“ Should be taken into account. Apply K2 factor for duration
4 of load to take account of creep (usually for Soll pressures,
“4 wet conditions, long term
3) for seismic or wind forces, ,
i wet conditions, short term = 1
Rotation & Translation at Ground Level
« The rotation and translation within the soil is spoken of in
terms of an “inactive” zone and an “active” length, where
the active length is defined as 0,5d,K?6 where K is the
ratio E,/E, (E, being 300c, for clay), a ecu figure. )
and
If the foundation is a concrete sock use
1» For example if for a pole thé rriodified sac
kay) Is 7.9 GPa and c, = 105 kPa for the founding
ks 251
If the embedment is fess than the active length then the
displacements due to soil/pole Interaction (only) should be
increased by 25% 1
= Be vety careful in these calculations to maintain standard
Units ~ best to select N, mm, Nmm and MPa j
Creep snot a factor in tmber/sll interaction And therefore
creep factors (k,)do not apply in this Instance|
terial,
24 Explanation of Moment Diagram for rigorous deflection calculations in driven
timber pole situations
To illustrate the above point:
Deflections are based on serviceability forces NOT Ultimate Limit State
‘Assume fisity at €0 for elastic bending in the pole, and that rotation and transtation is also
calculated from this point
Soil and surcharge pressures start from the base of the wall and NOT at e0 — that isthe
‘moments at e0 are derived from taking the eatth pressures 2s zero up to the surface and
applied beyond that
Calculations for elastic bending in the pole attract K2 factors due to creep for long-term or
short term applied loads; these do NOT come into play for calculations involving pole/Soil
interaction
‘The earth pressure (triangular load) produces a cubic moment diagram from the base of the
wall to the top ~ based on the unfactored! resultant thrust at the rear of the wall of 43.98kN,
the moment at the base is 44 * 1.25 = S5kNm (thrust acts at a third the height)
‘The moment at eo (assuming no further load is applied from earth pressure from the base to
0) is 44 * 2=88kNm. The moment diagram from 55 to 88 is linearly trapezoidal made up of
a rectangle and a triangle and therefore produces the moment diagram as was shown on the
board
Given then the geometric properties of these shapes the sum of the areas of each moment
shape and the distances from the top of the wall to the centroid of the shape was able to be
calculated ~ using moment area this achieves a deflection glven Epole(modified) and Ipole
‘The same applies for the surcharge which is rectangular load shape and for an unfactored
load of 4.25kN gave moments and moment area as was shown, the resultant thrust acting at
half the height of the wall
‘Again there is no effect of load applied below the base of the wall and moments at e0 are
based on the forces applied above base of wall
| Any questions about this can be asked at our tutorial or next week's lecture
Colin Nicholas CIVIL750 - 2016
Coefficients for Serviceability
+ From finite element analysis the coefficients for calculating
soil/pole interaction are (See RW12) : -
© fag = 18K 49/ EC
© fan * fia = 2.2K O/B?
© Fegn = 902K O7%/ EA?
«And the equations for translation at the bottom of the
inactive zone (at e,) is given by i ~
+= fyPy + fum Mand the rotation
© 8 = fenPa + fom M
Where P, is the horizontal thrust and M [Is at €,
« All calculations should maintain @ canstant units regime,
that Is reduce all elements to N, mm, Nmm, MPa. ka
factors are not applied to these displacements
Design of Timber Rails
= Rails can be rough sawn green HS treated timber butted or
staggered or rounds of half rounds (VSG or No 1 Framing)
= Size (or designed thickness) is dependent on the depth
below the surface, whether or not a surcharge Is applied
and the distance between the poles
» Determine UDI. acting on the rail at the depth chosen for
say a 150 mm width and check strength against a 150 mm.
wide plank or 150 mm half round using normal timber or
pole properties
1 Note: it makes no difference whether you take a width of
timber 100 or 150 as the UDL applled is proportional to the
width and is resisted by a beam (in its weak direction)
using properties also proportional to width
+ Rails traditionally do not work together so ky generalily = 1
22 CIVIL750 ; 2016
More on timber rails -
Rails are beams spanning simply between posts and they
act in thelr weak direction ~ they can deflect or break end
look ugly (failure generally a weakness in the timber).
Deflection of rails should not dominate a design but should
be seriously considered only if the appearance of the wall is,
important
‘The most likely problem is adjacent timber rails deflecting
differently - this can be overcome by providing galvanised
shear connectors (deheaded nails) between rails
Check serviceability ~ Note different k2. factors apply for
permanent earth pressure loads (wat, long term = 3) and
transient surcharge loads (wet, short term = 1)
Common error In calculations Is to NOT use the correct
green Umber stresses for sawn timber rails
Properties of part round timber
Half round timbers may not be half round ~ so check that
the sections are not segments (see below)
Half round diameter D , radius r
+ Dex = 0.1098 14
* Dex = base ~ 0.258779
. crown = 0.190713
Segment is part of a circular pole of radius r and internal
(Subtended) angle 8. Refer to Steel Designers Manual or
charts of Geometrical Properties of Plane Sections for
complicated formulae of section modull and moments of
inertia for xx direction bending
|
|
23 CIVIL750 - 2016
—
Boundary Walls
= Normal walls designed under active pressures deflect at the
top and allow some movement for the active pressures to
develop
« Boundary Walls are a special case because there is’a
Fequirement that a neighbour should not allow movement
of material on the othet’s property
= Generally design poles and rails for strength using “at rest”
ressures, sometimes termed *k,” pressures ~ Ke = 0.5 ~
10 (instead of 0.3 ~ 0.35)
+ This method generates substantially higher lateral loads
than the active pressures and ensutes both poles and rails
are very stiff
«This Is why you find boundary walls with often very large
poles or heavy concrete cantilever construction
« Servicaability deflections can be obtained using normal
Betive pressure coefficient to determine serviceability forces
at the Fear of the wall
Poles under Wind Load
«= Polés often carry hoardings or signs which are subject to
wind forces. In addition they may carry flags or wind
shelter material (mesh of various grades) to protect
growing produce from adverse winds prior to the growing of
natural shelter belts like trees
= NZS 4170 provides guidance on "Net Pressure Coefficients"
on such structures (different from bulldings) where the
windward and leeward coefficients are combined into one
Value ~ refer Table D2(A) of Appendix D (copy enclosed)
given whether or not the sign reaches the ground or not
and its geometry. The assumption In terms of a sign or a
hoarding is that the full wind pressure Is carried by the solid
face of the sign
« If some openings are present within a solld sign a *Net
porosity factor” can be applied ~ refer Ci D1.4
Pod
24 CIVIL750 ~ 2016
Shade Cloth or Mesh
For “shade cloth” or a mesh the amount of wind pressure Is
much less because a high percentage of the wind passes
directly through the cloth, The amount which is “caught”
by the soitd parts of a cloth depends on the "shade
coefficient” which is a measure of the “solid area to total
area of the cloth. This is equivalent to the term “solidity
ratio defined as 3 in Cl D1.4
A shelter belt cloth with a shade coefficient of 0.5 is much
more dense than a cloth with a shade coefficient of 0.2 and
therefore attracts a higher wind force
‘The aerodynamic shape factor for the cloth is the
multiplication of the net pressure coefficient times the
shade coefficient
25 Pole Foundations under axial and lateral Load
© ‘The structural model for a laterally loaded pole is a fixed base
+ Axial loads can be carried into the founding material by end bearing and by skin
fiction
» Lateral loads are carried into the founding material via lateral forces on the pole,
modelled as rectangular stress blocks refer Figs RW3 and RW7 later Notes
© Laterally loaded poles can be placed (driven or drilled and placed in a concrete sock)
and can form part of a single foundation pole with axial and/or lateral loads or be part
of a frame (see sketches below)
\
A BMD
BMD
In both examples shown above the pole is subject to an axial load and a
triangular bending moment, In the bottom case, while substantially higher
moments act upon the pole at the top, the pole at the bottom and its
embedment only sees a moment and shear force commensurate with the
triangular bending moment shown
Ex Prof Michael Pender’s teaching in Year 3 and Year 4, Ultimate Limit state
capacity of piles foundations under vertical load rely on shaft resistance
(sometimes called skin friction) and base resistance. In most instances axial
load does not govern the design but each (in the design office) should be
| checked to ensure the correct size and embedment depth of the pole can
withstand the ULS imposed axial loads
Shaft Resistance is dependent on the circumference and depth of the pile (either
size of pile, if driven, and size of concrete sock, If drilled and placed). It is usual
to neglect the top 750mm of the embedment accepting that shaft resistance will
not develop until that depth
Assuming a uniform value of subgrade properties over the depth of the pile, the
Shaft Resistance in kN is given by
v,
He,
Where C is the circumference, H is the embedment depth (below 750mm from
the surface) and cy is the adhesion given by the equation
Where aris the adhesion factor (see graph below) and s, is the undrained shear
strength of the subgrade material
‘A comparison between ®.Vs, (where © is the strength reduction factor taken as
0.5) and N* can then be made
42
adhesion factor,
2
oo | -
penal H 1. .
° 100 200 300 400
undrained shear strength (kPa)
Figure 7.2 Adhesion factors for driven piles in clay (affer Sladen (1992)).(a~
‘American Petroleum Insive: D~Donals & Olson (1963): K-~Kersl (1965): M~ McCarthy (1972
PePeck (1958) S Sowers & Sowers (1970);7~ Tomlinson (1957): W— Woodward & Botano
cen) Base resistance of piles in clay can be considered as deep bearing capacity for
depths greater than 4 pile or sock diameters in which case the ULS bearing
capacity of the pile Is taken as
OF, = 4, Ay, Where 9, =95, +7.depth
In many instances the base resistance is Ignored 2014 Timber Engineering Pole Structures
Pole Design in cohesive material - BROMS Equations —
Refer attached drawings
Drilled and Placed Pole: -
Hy =9 sy df V[ ( 2’ + D'? + D?] = (26' + D')} - Where
Su is the undrained shear strength of the founding material at
600 mm depth or at a depth selected by the Engineer as being
representative of the material
d; is the diameter of the concrete sock
Confidence in the design of the unreinforced concrete sock -
The max bending moment in the pole for an ultimate applied
force H, can be at the point that the pole enters the concrete sock
provided you have confidence in the thickness of unreinforced
concrete between the surrounding soil and the pole.
Often the actual thickness specified is not achieved on site and there
is some risk in accepting this as the point of maximum bending
moment.
Currently no guidance is provided as to the interaction between the
sock and the surrounding material and to what may be prudent in |
specifying a suitable thickness and/or having the confidence that the
point of maximum bending moment is at the point the pole enters the (
sock or at some other depth to be assessed. t
Research is necessary to establish a suitable guideline for sock
diameter, and strength of surrounding material,
If we assume the point of maximum bending moment is at the point
the pole enters the sock the ultimate design action on the pole is
given by
Mt=H.e
Al 2014 Timber Engineering Pole Structures
Driven Pole : -
Hy = 9 su de{ V[ (2e' + D'? + D7] (2e' + D')}
Where
d; is the diameter of the pole at ground level and
The max bending moment in the pole for an actual ultimate
force H, is at a point below e, distance e, + z from the surface where
z= H/®9sydr
And the Maximum Moment in the pole is given by
M*=H{e' + 2/2}
| NOTE — for all formulae the value of 9s, is the assumed ultimate stress
i which occurs between the pole and the subgrade. This assumes pole
spacing is greater than 4 polo or sock diameters. If poles are closer than
this, interaction of bearing failure surfaces is possible and a downgraded
|
Refer Sketches for symbols and for assessment of e., |
|
value of 9s, is necessary DRILLED & PLACED POLE
WITHOUT RESTRAINT AT GROUND LEVEL.
ORIVEN POLE
WITHOUT RESTRAINT AT GROUND LEVEL
‘Timber Design Guide Ch 21 —
Norto Si
THLE JOB DRAWING REV
Broms Embedment Details - 2014 Timber Engineering Pole Structures
With Constraint at the base of the Wall whether the pole is
driven or drilled and placed in a concrete sock : -
H,=9s,d{D-eHD +e, }/2¢e
Where
dris the diameter of the pole or concrete sock at ground level
Dis the embedment depth
e is the height from the constraint to the applied horizontal load
@o = 1.5 d or a selected dimension at the discretion of the
Engineer ~ refer notes
and
The max bending moment in the pole for an actual ultimate
force H, is at the level of the horizontal stiff constraint
Mt=H.e
and the Horizontal Reaction Force at the level of the Constraint is.
given by
R*SH+Q
where Q=2.He/{D +e,)
NOTE — for all formulae the value of 9s, is the assumed ultimate
stress which occurs between the pole and the subgrade. This
assumes pole spacing is greater than 4 pole or sock diameters.
If poles are closer than-this, interaction of bearing failure
surfaces is possible and a downgraded value of 9s, is necessary
AS eee Ce eee eee eee eee eee eee ceca eee ‘|
Hu (Capacity) or H (Actual)
Restraint Reaction R* !
o
o
Wl
a ] {lg
Ut
|LI|
WITH CONSTRAINT AT THE BASE OF THE WALL
DRIVEN OR DRILLED & PLACED POLE
Timber Design Guide Ch 21 |
logo i Nor To St |
TITLE, JOB DRAWING REV |
Broms Embedment Details : | Lateral bearing capacity
will not interact when pole
spacing > 4d,
8
oO
oo
1s
g
3
8
2
a
<£
c
o
Ww
1 dg Ady
Pole Spacing
MODIFICATION to 9 Sy
451 Timber Design
WE
Nor'to ts
SOB DRAWING REV
Modification to Earth Pressure e
| %
y
g
els
a &
=| aye
i 8
| a
| | ’ |
SIHp, = regh PIHE = 1eqh
ainsseig HOS ¥/JH" sBg=y BH seg = |
HewWwep sy — (01qn0) wesBelp wa do By (@neupenb) weiderp yg
if | 5
| a 8 Zz
A IR 4
H
