Determination of Piles Bearing Capacity using Empirical Methods and (AllPile 6) Software -Cases studies Portsudan and Khartoum Cities

Abstract

Different methods have been used to determine the pile bearing capacity such as static equations, dynamic equations, empirical methods (EMs), numerical methods, computer software programs, and the pile static load test, these methods were giving different values for pile bearing capacity. In this paper, three empirical methods (Ems) have been selected (Brinch-Hansen, Chin-Kondner, and Decourt) and (AllPile 6) software (AP) has been applied to determine the capacity load of piles for six cases study of drilled concrete piles with a diameter ranging from 800 mm to 1500mm and embedded length ranged 10.5m to 26m. Four of those six piles are located at Portsudan city near the red seacoast and two piles are located in Khartoum city. The results of the pile bearing capacity (PC) calculations obtained using the above-mentioned different methods were compared with results produced by the pile load test. In all six cases study, the settlement of piles was limited, settlement failure was not reached. The results show that the AllPile 6 (AP) and the three mentioned empirical methods (Ems) gave reasonable piles bearing capacity, the (AP) and (BHM) gave the better result than the CKM and DM. While (DM) gave results similar to results determined using the (CKM). However, it was not preferred to use the (CKM) and (DM), unless the failure settlement has occurred in the pile load test.

Evaluation of the Bearing Capacity of the Board Pile in Collapsible Soil using A Laboratory Model

“…Brinch-Hansen, Chin-Kondner, and Decourt methods were selected to compare the result by software method. Both Brinch-Hansen, and software gave similar results to Chin-Kondner and Decourt methods, knowing that the last methods gave approximately similar results, but the study recommended that the Chin-Kondner and Decourt methods are not preferably unless the settlement failure occurred [17].…”