International Journal of Civil Engineering

, Volume 17, Issue 2, pp 193–203 | Cite as

Undrained Shear Strength and Pore Pressure Changes Due to Prestress Concrete Pile Installation in Soft Clay

  • Xuepeng Li
  • Guojun CaiEmail author
  • Songyu Liu
  • Anand J. Puppala
  • Jinhuo Zheng
  • Tao Jiang
Research Paper


This study focuses on the changes of undrained shear strength (Su) and pore pressure (u2) due to the installation of prestress concrete pile (PCP) in Fujian marine soft clay in China. The changes of Su values due to PCP installation are measured by vane shear test (VST) investigation. The piezocone penetration testing (CPTU) is conducted for detecting the change of pore pressure when the PCPs are driven one by one according to the predesigned PCPs construction sequence. The results show that the Su-post values of Fuzhou soft clay are lost about 17% and the Su-post300 value is 1.36 times as much as Su-pre value. It is also shown that three fitting straight lines of Su-pre, Su-post, and Su-post300 are almost parallel which helps predicting the Su value with different depths. The relationship between the normalized excess pore pressure, ∆u/σv0, and the ratio of radial distance to pile radius, lg(r/R), is also proposed based on CPTU data, which can be used to predict the excess pore pressure from different distance.


PCP CPTU Undrained shear strength Pore pressure Soft clay 



Majority of the work presented in this study was supported by the following supporting funds Organization: (I) the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2016YFC0800201). (II) the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41672294). (III) the Foundation of Jiangsu Province Outstanding Youth (Grant No. BK20140027).


  1. 1.
    Park R, Falconer TJ (1983) Ductility of prestressed concrete piles subjected to simulated seismic loading. Precast/Prestress Concrete Inst J 28(5):112–144Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fam A, Pando M, Filz G, Rizkalla S (2003) Precast piles for route 40 bridge in Virginia using concrete filled FRP tubes. Precast/Prestress Concrete Inst J 48(3):32–45Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bjerrum L, Johannessen I (1961) Pore pressures resulting from driving piles in soft clay. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Randolph MF, Wroth CP (1979) An analytical solution for the consolidation around a driven pile. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 3(3):217–229CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Poulos HG, Davis EH (1980) Pile foundation analysis and design. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hwang JH, Liang N, Chen CH (2001) Ground response during pile driving. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 127(11):939–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roy M, Blanchet R, Tavenas F, Rochelle PL (1981) Behaviour of a sensitive clay during pile driving. Can Geotech J 18(1):67–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pestana JM, Hunt CE, Bray JD (2002) Soil deformation and excess pore pressure field around a closed-ended pil”. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 128(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sharafi H, Sojoudi Y (2016) Experimental and numerical study of pile-stabilized slopes under surface load conditions”. Int J Civil Eng 14(4):221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Housel WS, Burkey JR (1948) Investigation to determine the driving characteristics of piles in soft clay. In: Proceeding of 2nd international conference on soil mechanics and foundations in engineering, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, vol 5, pp 146–154Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Seed HB, Reese LC (1957) The action of soft clay along friction piles. Am Soc Civil Eng Trans 122:731–754Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Enokido M, Takahashi Y, Gotoh S, Maeda K (1973) The restoration of disturbed clay ground due to sand compaction pile driving. J Jpn Soc Soil Mech Found Eng 29:13–20Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fellenius BH, Samson L (1976) Testing of drivability of concrete piles and disturbance to sensitive clay. Can Geotech J 13(2):139–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aboshi H, Ichimoto E, Enoki M, Harada K (1979) The compozer—a method to improve characteristics of soft clays by inclusion of large diameter sand columns. In: Proceeding of International Conference on Soil Reinforcement, vol 1, pp 211–216Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hwang JH, Lee CC, Fang JS, Chang JZ (1994) Behavior of frictional driven pile in underconsolidated clay. In: 1st International symposium on structure and found, HangchowGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Asaoka A, Kodaka T, Nozu M (1994) Undrained shear strength of clay improved with sand compaction piles. Soils Found 34(4):23–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wang JH, Zhou XL, Lu JF (2003) Dynamic response of pile groups embedded in a poroelastic medium. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 23:235–242Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee FH, Juneja A, Tan TS (2004) Stress and pore pressure changes due to sand compaction pile installation in soft clay. Geotechnique 54(1):01–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sivakumar V, Jeludine D.K.N.M., Bell A, Glynn DT, Mackinnon P (2011) The pressure distribution along stone columns in soft clay under consolidation and foundation loading. Geotechnique 61(7):613–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim YS, Lee SR, Kim YT (1997) Application of an optimum design technique for determining the coefficient of consolidation by using piezocone test data. Comput Geotech 21(4):277–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chai JC, Hossain MJ, Carter J, Shen SL (2014) Cone penetration-induced pore pressure distribution and dissipation. Comput Geotech 57:105–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cai GJ, Liu SY, Puppala AJ (2015) Consolidation parameters interpretation of CPTU dissipation data based on strain path theory for soft Jiangsu quaternary clays. Marine Georesour Geotechnol 33(4):310–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Robertson PK, Sully JP, Woeller DJ, Lunne T, Powell J.J.M., Gillespie DG (1992) Estimating coefficient of consolidation from piezocone tests. Can Geotech J 29(4):539–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Burns SE, Mayne PW (1998) Monotonic and dilatory pore-pressure decay during piezocone tests in clay. Can Geotech J 35(6):1063–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shahnazari H, Jafarian Y, Tutunchian MA, Rezvani R (2016) Undrained cyclic and monotonic behavior of hormuz calcareous sand using hollow cylinder simple shear tests. International Journal of Civil Engineering 14(4):209–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cai GJ, Puppala AJ, Liu SY (2014) Characterization on the correlation between shear wave velocity and piezocone tip resistance of Jiangsu clays. Eng Geol 171:96–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jang WY, Chung SG, Kweon HJ (2015) Estimation of coefficients of consolidation and permeability via piezocone dissipation tests. KSCE J Civ Eng 19(3):621–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chai JC, Agung P.M.A., Hino T, Igaya Y, Carter JP (2011) Estimating hydraulic conductivity from piezocone soundings. Geotechnique 61(8):699–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Teh CI (1987) An analytical study of the cone penetration test. Oxford University, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sully JP, Robertson PK, Campanella RG, Woeller DJ (1999) “An approach to evaluation of field CPTU dissipation data in overconsolidated fine-grained soils”. Can Geotech J 36(2):369–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Teh CI, Houlsby GT (1988) Analysis of the cone penetration test by the strain path method. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on numerical methods in geomechanics, Innsbruck, pp 391–402Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Chai JC, Carter JP, Miura N, HinoT (2004) Coefficient of consolidation from piezocone dissipation tests. In: Proceedings of international conference on lowland technology, Bangkok, Thailand, vol 1, pp 1–6Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cai GJ, Liu SY, Puppala AJ (2012) Predictions of coefficient of consolidation from CPTU dissipation tests in quaternary clays. Bull Eng Geol Environ 71(2):337–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shen SL, Wu YX, Xu YS, Hino T, Wu HN (2015) Evaluation of hydraulic parameter based on groundwater pumping test of multi-aquifer system of Tianjin. Comput Geotech 68:196–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baligh MM, Levadoux JN (1986) Consolidation after undrained piezocone penetration. II: interpretation. J Geotech Eng 112(7):727–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Carter JP, Randolph MF, Wroth CP (1979) Stress and pore pressure changes in clay during and after the expansion of a cylindrical cavity. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 3(4):305–322CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hu X (1997) Soil mechanics and environmental geotechnique. Tongji University, ShanghaiGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran University of Science and Technology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xuepeng Li
    • 1
  • Guojun Cai
    • 1
    Email author
  • Songyu Liu
    • 1
  • Anand J. Puppala
    • 2
  • Jinhuo Zheng
    • 3
  • Tao Jiang
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Geotechnical EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringThe University of Texas at ArlingtonArlingtonUSA
  3. 3.Geotechnical Engineering Desing InstituteFujian Provincial Institute of Architectural Design and ResearchFuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations