EUROPEAn

SPE 8084
OFFSHORE
PETROLEum
conFEREnCE
PREDICTING PILE DRIVEABILITY: I EXHIBITion
HEATHER AS AN ILLUSTRATION OF THE
"FR ICTI ON FATIGUE" THEORY
by Edward P. Heerema, Heerema Engineering Service

© Copyright 1978, European Offshore Petroleum Conference and Exhibition on behalf of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (U.K.) Limited

This paper was presented at the European Offshore Petroleum Conference and Exhibition in London 24-27, October, 1978. The material is subject to correction by the author. Permission to
copy is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words.

ABSTRACT At depths near to design penetration of the

piles, however, the clay had rather common
In the series of papers on the Heather shear strength values.
Field pile foundation, this paper presents It was therefore difficult to make a relia-
the backgrounds of the driveability pre- ble prediction of the driveability. By con-
diction made by Heerema Engineering Service. ventional means of predicting (i.e., through
The prediction was made according to the the use of ultimate static bearing capacity
"friction fatigue" theory, which is based calculations), it was to be expected that it
on the assumption that skin friction in was impossible to drive to the-required
clay is gradually lost along the pile shaft penetration of 46 m with the hammers availa-
as driving proceeds. ble.
A laboratory test is described which illus- The author's research group was nevertheless
trates this phenomenon. optimistic about the possibility to reach
A mathematical model is given for the design penetration. Their prediction was
shape of the horizontal stress distribu- that Lt should be possible to reach design
tion along the pile shaft; parameters penetration with the second-largest hammer
needed in thLs formulation have been empi- available, the Menck 8000. This proved to
rically determined, partly from laboratory be correct. Although the blow count was
tests and partly from computer post-analyses considerably higher than expected over most
of driving experiences. This was necessary of the piles' penetration depth, the expec-
as it is as yet not possible to quantify ted blow count range near design penetration
horizontal soil stresses acting on the was correct. (fig. 1; discussion in section
pile wall during driving on an analytical 7) •
basis.
The friction fatigue theory presented here This optimism about pile driveability was
proves to be consistent for all pile based on the recognition of a most interes-
driving experience in stiff and hard clay ting phenomenon observed a few years earlier.
in the North Sea investigated by the During driving of a series of ~ 24" test
author, and it is believed, therefore, that piles to a penetration of up to 23 m in
it will in general lead to improved pile stiff clay at Kontich, Belgium, in 1974 by
driving predictions as compared to other the author's research group, it was noted
available methods. that although the clay's shear strength
gradually increased with depth and therefore
the cumulative driving resistance should be
1. INTRODUCTION expected to increase progressively, the blow
count indicated through computer post-analy-
Pile driving at Heather Field was one of sis that the total driving resistance in-
the most interesting piling cases of the creased only less-than-linearly with depth
past few years in the North Sea. The soil of penetration. (If the clay's shear strength
consisted of very heavily overconsolidated were constant, the total wall friction
clay at shallow depths, with undrained should be expected to increase linearly).
shear strength values up to 800 KN/m 2 , The less-than-linear increase of total
twice the values encountered so far in the driving resistance would have meant that the
North Sea. unit skin friction decreased with depth,
although the clay's shear strength increased.
Of course, this would be an illogical
References and illustrations at end of paper

413
conclusion. A more sound interpretation of 3. FORHULATION OF THE "FRICTION FATIGUE"
the observed behaviour is then to conclude THEORY
that somehow skin friction was lost as the
pile progressed. However interesting this test result might
be, illustrating the "friction fatigue"
If friction is lost during driving, it is phenomenon, it cannot be used quantitatively
likely that the friction loss is caused to determine the unit skin friction profile
by wear of the slip surface. Then it is of a pile in the soil from which the sample
logical to assume that the clay exerts a was recovered.
peak friction on the pile wall near the It must be recognized that if there is a
tip, where the soil is least disturbed; friction decrease along the pile wall, this
and to assume that, while the pile pro- has to be a consequence of a horizontal soil
gresses downwards, the soil gradually stress decrease and cannot be caused by
loses its frictional effect on the pile remoulding only (Ref. 1). Thus it is
wall. necessary to think of "friction fatigue" in
Figure 2 shows schematically four unit terms of gradual horizontal soil stress
skin friction profiles versus depth accor- decrease during driving. This decrease may
ding to this suggestion. It is clear that be explained to be caused mainly by irregu-
the cumulative side friction increases larities of the pile wall pushing the soil
less-than-linearly, which would be in outwards and taking some soil downwards, and
agreement with the Kontich test pile re- by elastic expansion and transverse vibra-
sults. tion of the pile, pushing the soil outwards.
The soil is thus believed to form a tempo-
The common methods being used to determine rary horizontal arch around the pile.
friction resistance during driving adopt It is not possible to determine the in situ
the implicit assumption that all friction horizontal stress in the soil analytically;
which the pile wall picks up at the tip the horizontal stress that the soil exerts
remains constant while the pile continues on the pile wall is probably even less
to penetrate. accessible to an analytical approach. And
by no means can one expect that the horizon-
The author has named the phenomemon that tal stress the clay exerts on the blade
friction decreases during driving: inserted in the sample is directly related
"friction fatigue". After the Kontich tests to the horizontal stress the clay exerts on
it was reasoned that a mathematical formu- the actual pile wall in situ.
lation of the friction fatigue phenomenon The inability to quantify the horizontal
could be a significant step towards better soil stress acting on the pile wall analy-
pile driving predictions. tically and the lack 0= correspondence
between the horizontal stress state in the
2. LABORATORY TESTS tested sample 'and at the actual pile wall
have led to the conclusion that it is then
To obtain more insight into the fatigue necessary to evaluate horizontal stress
distributions indirectly from pile driving
phenomenon, a simple laboratory test was
experience.
devised in which the behaviour of a pile
wall in soil could be simulated.
By wave-equation (Ref. 2) computer post-
Figure 3 shows the apparatus used. Soil
analysis of recorded blow count values, one
specimens in the original steel sampling
can determine total driving resistance
tubes, cut to a length of approximately
values. It is however not possible to de-
19 cm, were loaded from above and from
termine the way the friction is distributed
below by plates, applying a vertical stress
to the soil. Through a narrow slot in the along the pile shaft by these post-analyses.
top plate, a roughened steel blade (12 mm Therefore, an assumption has to be made of
wide and 1.5 mm thick) was forced into the the shape of the unit skin friction profile.
soil by a hydraulic actuator. The blade Studying fig. 4, it would seem to be a good
was connected to the actuator through a approximation to assume an exponential func-
strain gauge and a displacement gauge, so tion for the unit skin friction profile. The
that all forces and displacements could be peak value should be assumed to be acting
continuously recorded. After penetrating at the pile tip (at zero oscillations), and
the blade into the sample, a cyclic dis- the shaft of the pile can be thought to lie
placement was imposed on the blade with along the horizontal axis of fig. 4.
(somewhat arbitrarily) an amplitude of
12.5 mm and a frequency of 1.6 cycles per
second. The cyclic motion was a fair simu- As stated earlier, one must think of fatigue
lation of the continuously reversing slip in terms of horizontal stress decrease.
action of an actual segment of pile wall Therefore, horizontal stress profiles should
along the soil during driving. be determined; although in principle the
This test showed that the initial friction calculation method could also be developed
in terms of "static unit skin friction
of the cyclically moving blade was high,
but decreased rapidly. Figure 4 shows a during driving", which is more conventional.
Ref. 1 states an expression of dynamic unit
typical test result. The friction decreases skin friction as a function of horizontal
until a certain low residual value is
stress, pile wall velocity, and cohesive
reached.

414
shear strength. Through this expression, A linear fit of the test data is given by:
which can easily be made part of the wave
equation computer program, it is possible ([0.7 0.25 c (4)
to post-analyze values of horizontal stress h. u
~
(not the distribution, but the total value
of the integrated horizontal stress over
the pile wall area). The referenced
(~ and Cu in KN/m2; 0.25 has units of
expression is an empirical one which makes (stress)-0.3 which must be noted in case of
use of the horizontal stress to the power
0.7; therefore, in the following the term conversion of units).
~0.7 is considered in preference to G£. The scatter is very large, which is however
customary in soil tests.
Figure 5 shows the assume~ 3xponential It should be noted that the friction values
function for Gih O.7 , in which for simplici- measured on the samples with the highest
ty of thought cr- O. 7 can be substituted by shear strengths seem to be relatively low,
t
unit skin frictlon. which may be caused by the fact that the
most highly overconsolidated samples tend
If we assume to be most susceptible to strength loss due
to the high negative pore pressures after
Ch O• 7 = m e
nd
and for d p:
<J:"'0.7
h
= \J:'0. 7,
h.
recovery.
hd d ~

then As long as it is fundamentally correct, a

possible inaccuracy of equation (4) will not
cr;:0.7 cr:-h.0 • 7 e
n(d-p)
.................................. (1) harm predictions made with the mathematical
model being developed, since the post-analy-
hd ~
sis of pile driving field data leads to
In this representation, n is the facBo, figures that work in practice, compensating
which influences the shape of the~d' for such inaccuracies.
curve: the rate of friction decrease. It can As mentioned before, computer post-analysis
be chosen to be solely dependent on the of a recorded blow count value yields a
clay's shear strength and the pile's pene- value of integrated horizontal stress over
tration depth, as most evident factors: the pile wall area (comparable to total
n = f (c ' p), .......•...•..............• (2) driving friction resistance). The integra-
u tion of expression (1) is :
which relationship must be determined by n-O.7

J\~0.7
systematic post-analysis of pile driving \J h.
~
field data. A = d(d) e (5)
hd n
rrO.7 d
If ~h. should have to be determined by
l
post-analysis as well, there would be too For example, in figure 8 this "area" A is
many unknowns. Fortunately, this value can then :
fairly reliably be derived from the labora- cr;::0.7
tory tests described in section 2. So far
the laboratory test had served only to
A h~ [1_en(d3-P)+en(d2-P)_en(dl-p)} .. (6)
suggest a shape for the unit skin friction
profile, since the stress conditions in the
sample could not be considered to be compa- In fact expression (6) can only be used if
rable to actual pile driving stress condi- the shear strength is constant over the
tions. However, the initial friction of the depth of penetration, as only then there is
blade (during first oscillation) appeared one value of n. If the shear strength pro-
not to be noticeably dependent on the super- file is complex, a "representative" shear
imposed load of the lever arm --- only on strength value should be taken.
the cohesive shear strength value of the In making predictions, when relationship (2)
clay. Recovery depth of the sample, for is considered known, A must be calculated by
example, did not seem to influence the taking as many intervals as the complexity
initial friction value either. That this of the Cu profile requires; or by calcula-
initial value would be predominantly deter- tingGh~·7 at many depths and then summa-
mined by the cohesive shear strength is not ting :
surprising, and enables us to determine a
relationship:
A Ad .•.•••..•••.••••••..•.•..•. (7)
<:r:h.0 . 7 f (c )
u
, ••••••••••••••.•••••••••••. (3)
~
Each interval has its own n value, which is
by the use of the friction/horizontal stress/ derived from relationship (2).
velocity/shear strength expression from Obviously the calculation of A according to
Ref. 1. Test measurements are shown in Eqns. (7), (1), (4) and (2) can best be
figure 6 whereas Bh, functional relationship carried out by computer.
between Cu and
figure 7.
Gh'
is indicated in

415
4. DETERMINATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP Note : in the calculation process described
n = f (c
u
' p) above, for reasons of simplicity of explana-
tion, the local friction reduction due to
internal driving shoes is left out. Actually
To develop relationship (2), it was the calculation was made not with A, but
necessary to post-analyze as many pile with L (AA x circumference x,assumed local
driving cases in clay at as many signifi- friction percentage).
cant penetrations as possible, to obtain a
formulation which is reliable due to the The complete procedure of wave-equation
large number of data which have built it computer post-analyses; determination of
up. preliminary n values; determination of the
"Significant" penetrations were those at preliminary n formula; systematic re-deter-
which the friction in clay was a large per- mination of representative Cu values; and
centage of the total resistance, so that
final dermination of the corresponding n
sand friction assumptions did not influence
values, was carried out for a range of pene-
the results too heavily. The pile tip had trations between 6 and 80 meters at almost
to be located sufficiently far beyond a
all the locations in the North Sea where
sahd layer which had been penetrated. piles have been driven through significant
Furthermore, the analyzed depth had to be
clay layers. These locations are : .Auk,
sufficiently far beyond a stop to ensure Brent A, Claymore, Forties FA and FD,
that friction set-up had been lost. Heather, K11 and K13 (Dutch shelf), Montrose,
For each post-analysis case and each pile and Ninian Southern. The Kontich test piles
penetration selected, a value of A was were also included. West Sole was left out
found from the wave-equation analysis. Then as the soil data ware considered unreliable.
a "representative" Cu value had to be Figures 9 and 10 are the final graphs of
chosen, which was a "weighted" average of n vs. Cu and n vs. p, respectively, showing
the Cu profile, placing more emphasis on
all the post-analyzed points as well as
the Cu values near the pile tip, as it is the formulation which was developed from
there that the main part of the friction them:
is acting. This representative Cu value
was needed in Eqn. (4) to determine the c
value of Gh?· 7 for Eqn. (5) which in turn -0 65 ud
l. n = O. 033 + (0.057 - 1. 02 P • ) In 790 •••. (8)
yielded the representative value of n for
that specific case.
This value of n was one of the many points Notes:
on the graph of n vs. Cu and the graph of
n vs. p, from which relationship (2) was 1. Range of validity (experience range):
to be deduced. 70 < Cu <
750 KN/m 2 ;
6 <p <
80 m.
-1
Once a preliminary form of relationship (2) 2. 0.033 and 0.057 have units of (length) ;
had been found in this manner, a more O 35
accurate final form of relationship (2) 1.02 has units of (lengthr • ;
could be determined through a systematic 790 has units of stress,
computation of representative Cu values,
which substituted the earlier, estimated which must be noted in case of conver-
representative Cu values. This systematic sion of units.
computation (described below) ensured that 3. Eqn. (8) is the final form of Eqn. (2);
representative Cu values (cur) were also it will only be modified slightly as
mathematically representative for the for- more pile driving data become available
mulated fatigue relationship, i.e. Eqn. (2). in the fpture.
The systematic computation of cur was as
follows : The scattering of the n values around the
1. Determine for each case (location, pene- averaged lines that represent expression (8)
tration) the theoretical value of A indicates that the separate cases do not
(A th ) by means of Eqns. (7), (1), (4), accurately correspond to the formulated
and the preliminary form of Eqn. (2) fatigue relationship. But even if a perfect
using the actual Cu profile. formulation could be found, there would be
2. Equation (5) and the preliminary form of many discrepancies - caused by a series of
relationship (2) are two equations with factors such as : the uncertainty of the
two unknowns (nth' Cur), as Ath is now hammer efficiency from case to case; short-
an entity known from step 1. Thus cur comings of the wave-equation computer
could be determined. program due to the various schematizations
With the new cur values, the n values were and simplifications made in it; and in par-
to be re-determined (as h?·7 is changed ticular the uncertainty about the correct
l.
by cur) from the already post-analyzed schematization of the cohesive shear
actual values of A. The graphs of n vs. cur strength profiles. The many shear strength
and n vs. 0 were then re-drawn, from which measurements in one boring profile usually
an accurat~ final formulation of (2) could show wide scatters at every level, so that
be deduced. it is often difficult to draw a represen-
tative average. Still more uncertain is

416
whether an available boring profile can be 6. PILE PLUGGING
considered to be representative for the
recorded driving results. It is necessary to motivate here why all
In figure 9, an increase of the given shear analyses have been made with non-plugging
strength profile of a location would mean piles during driving.
an increase of cur; to achieve the same It is the author's opinion that pile plug-
dynamic resistance post-analyzed for that ging during driving has little to do with
case, a higher degree of fatigue will be pile plugging in the bearing situation.
found, i.e. a larger value of n. It can Generally a pile will sooner be plugged in
thus be seen that the place of a pOint in bearing than during driving.
the graph is sensitive to the quantitative The explanation of this phenomenon is as
schematization of the cohesive shear folloll1S. The hammer impact induces a stress
strength profile which, of course, would and displacement wave in the pile. As it
be the case for any method that associates travels down, it effectuates a dynamic
resistance with cohesive shear strength. friction on the inside soil column, so that
a stress and displacement wave is also
Figures 9 and 10 exhibit the following induced in the soil column. The displace-
interesting phenomena : ment wave in the steel pile however travels
- The larger the clay's shear strength, the much more rapidly than the wave in the soil
smaller the value of n, i.e. the lesser column, due to the great difference between
the rate of friction fatigue. the elasticity moduli of steel and saturated
This is in agreement with the results of soil. The consequence is that the pile wall
the laboratory tests described in sec- shoots past the inside soil col~~n; the
tion 2 : in harder clay samples the rela- inside soil column lays behind. Only after
tive friction reduction was found to be the steel pile tip has reached more-or-less
smaller. its final set, the soil column determines
- The larger the pile's penetration, the its own final set dependent on the resis-
smaller the value of n, i.e. the lesser tance it encounters at the tip of the pile.
the rate of friction fatigue. In practice, this is almost always only a
This, also, is in agreement with the smaller part of the set of the pile tip
laboratory test results : if a greater itself; so one can only speak of "partial"
vertical stress was imposed on the plugging.
sample, resulting in a larger horizontal The static plugging equilibrium is quite a
stress on the blade, the friction reduc- different condition. It is very simply the
tion was less extreme. question whichever is smaller : the
accumulated inside friction, or the resis-
5. BLOW COUNT PREDICTIONS tance of the soil below the cross-sectional
area of the soil column.
To make blo1l1 count predictions, horizontal It is thus clear that plugging during dri-
stress profiles can nmv be determined ving and plugging in the static bearing
using expressions (7), (1), (4), and (8), condition are two quite different phenomena,
which can easily be written into a small and that a pile will sooner plug in the
computer program. With these profiles, wave static bearing condition than during driving.
equation computer runs can be made.
The following assumptions must be used in It is necessary to choose for either a
the wave equation program to obtain results plugged or a non-plugged pile in the wave-
that agree with the post-analyses that have equation program. The above reasoning justi-
led to expression (8) fies the choice of a non-plugged pile, i.e.
- Hammer efficiency of a single-acting making the wave-equation analysis with out-
drop hammer (e.g. Menck steam hammer), side friction, inside friction, and point
working at a nearly - full drop height resistance on the pile annulus.
and with a cushion block in average
condition: 70%. 7. THE HEATHER PREDICTION
- Elasticity modulus of bongossi hardwood
cushion: 2,000,000 KN/m 2 . Expression (8) is an empirical one, based
- Coefficient of restitution of bongossi upon field data including those obtained
cushion: 0.75. from Heather. Before the Heather platform
- Point and side quake : 4 mm. installation, however, no data were availa-
- "Damping" relationships : according to ble of driving in clay with shear strength
profiles beyond 420 KN/m 2 . As Hea her had
Ref. 1.
- Inside friction = outside friction in
1
shear strengths of up to 800 KN/m (Ref. 3),
clay, unless internal driving shoes are the extrapolation that had to be made was
used - in which case it is usually enormous. The registered blow count curves
assumed that inside friction above the (fig. 1) illustrate that the extrapolation
shoe = 50% of outside friction. made for the prediction at the time was
- It is assumed that piles do not plug only partly correct.
during driving. There were several additional factors that
caused the driveability to be worse than
It should be noted that different wave- foreseen :
equation computer programs may lead to
differences in blow count results.

417
- The hammers generally did not operate at 9. CONCLUSIONS
their full drop height; the Menck 8000
was 10% short of drop height on the ave- 1) The blow count recorded during Heather
rage. This was due to the inadequate steam Field pile driving built up rapidly and
supply on the derrick vessel Ocean Buil- then gradually tended to decrease. Unless
der I. Furthermore the steam temperature one accepts the assumption of a plugging
was too low, which probably resulted in pile during driving, which view is re-
condensation and hence further reduction jected by the author, this blow count
in hammer efficiency. tendency illustrates skin friction loss
- The platform was originally intended to during driving. This friction loss has
be set approximately midway between the been named "friction fatigue".
locations of the borings B2/2a, B4/4a, 2) The "friction fatigue" theory for descrip-
and B5. In the end it was however set tion of pile driving behaviour in clay,
beyond the location of boring B4/4a, where which is described in the text, assumes
the hardest clay was found. Therefore the that the friction experienced by the pile
shear strength profile of boring B4/4a wall is initially large (i.e., at the
should be considered determining. The pile tip), but decreases gradually due to
predictions, however, had been made from wear of-the slip plane along the pile
an average of the three borings. shaft while the pile proceeds downward,
- There was a difference between the shear as a consequence of the driving action.
strength values determined from the un- 3) The theory thus abandons the implicit
confined compression tests, pocket pene- assumption in commonly used methods of
trometer tests, torvane tests, and cone determining friction resistance during
penetration tests on one hand and the driving, that all friction the pile wall
undrained triaxial tests on the other. On picks up at the tip remains constant.
the average, the triaxial tests yielded 4) The gradual decrease of skin friction
23% higher shear strength values than the along the pile shaft as the pile pro-
other tests - which were mutually in good gresses downward cannot be caused solely
agreement. This difference could not be by clay remoulding (see Ref. 1); it must
explained at the time by the soil consul- be a consequence of horizontal stress de-
tant. We decided to disregard the triaxial crease of the surrounding soil. This de-
tests for the computation of the "expected" crease is attributed mainly to the effects
blow count curve; which was probably not of transverse vibration, elastic expan-
justified. sion, and surface irregularities of the
pile : the soil is considered to be
In the post-analysis of Heather made later pushed outwards and taken downwards to
on, the triaxial test (ruu) profile of some extent. Thus the surrounding soil is
boring B4/4a was chosen as representative believed to gradually form a temporary
and the assumed hammer efficiency was horizontal arch around the pile.
reduced. 5) It is not possible to quantify stress
conditions in the soil along the pile
More interesting than looking back at the shaft during driving in an analytical
old prediction, it is to look at the shape manner. In order to quantitatively use
of the theoretical unit skin friction the "friction fatigue" theory for drivea-
profile during driving (actually \JhO.7 bility predictions, it was therefore
profile) for Heather at a number of pene- necessary to complement the theory with
trations, calculated by the friction fatigue experience data, for which a large number
method using the new figures. Figure 11 of-pile driving cases in the North Sea
shows these profiles, illustrating clearly have been analyzed.
how it is possible that although the pile 6) The assumptions made in the theory, com-
would be expected, from an incorrect con- bined with the results of laboratory tests
ventional approach, to pick up more and more to determine friction in clay samples, and
friction as it goes down, the total friction combined with the results of many wave-
actually does not increase. equation computer post-analyses of driving
experiences, lead to the quantitative
8. NOTE ON STATIC BEARING CAPACITY description of the "friction fatigue"
theory through expressions (I), (4), and
The low average friction along the pile (8) •
shaft of a deeply-penetrated pile during 7) The "friction fatigue" theory proves to
driving could suggest that also the ulti- give consistent results for all pile
mate static bearing capacity of such a pile driving experience in stiff and hard clay
would be comparatively low. This is not the in the North Sea investigated by the
case, as the friction decrease during dri- author; it is believed that it will in
v:i,ng is caused by a loss of horizontal stress general lead to improved pile driving pre-
along the pile shaft which is only temporary. dictions as compared to other available
This is illustrated by the friction set-up methods.
phenomenon, well-known from driving inter- It does not lead to pile driving predic-
ruptions, and more clearly by the Kontich tions which are systematically optimistic
pile driving and load tests. It is, however, or pessimistic in comparison to common
beyond the scope of the subject paper to methods; this depends on the distribution
go into the details of these load test of shear strengths along the soil profile,
results. and therefore differs from case to case.

418
 10. NOMENCLATURE Heerema Engineering Service has performed
the laboratory tests and the many post-
A the integrated value of (horizontal analyses needed to develop the described
stress)0.7 over the pile's penetra- driveability prediction method.
tion depth. Gratitude is also due Mr. P.J. George
of Lloyd's Register of Shipping, London,
Cu cohesive shear strength of the clay.
for his review of the paper.
cur - representative Cu for the resistance
profile. 12. REFERENCES
d depth.
1. Heerema, E.P. : "Relationships between
i initial value before fatigue. Wall Friction, Displacement Velocity,
n "fatigue factor", parameter indi- and Horizontal Stress in Clay and in
cating sensitivity to fatigue. Sand, for Pile Driveability Analysis",
Ground Engineering, in press 1978.
p pile penetration.
Gh horizontal stress of soil against 2. Smith, E.A.L. : "Pile Driving Analysis
by the Wave Equation", Transactions of
pile wall.
ASCE, Paper No. 3306, Vol. 127,
11. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Part I, 1962.

The author wishes to express his appreci- 3. Parry, R.H.G. : "A Study of Pile Capaci-
ation for the dedication and enthusiasm ty for the Heather Platform", Proceedings
with which the soil mechanics team of of European Offshore Petroleum Conference,
London, Paper No. 49, 1978.

o u.s.f.
100 200 bl/ft
°
profile 1

10 pen. 1

profile 2

20
pen. 2 ~
profile 3

~
30 100
I pen. 3
I expected

40
,
I
I
upper
bound profile 4

~
I ------
\
150 \\ pen. 4
(m) (ft) \ expected
pen. lower bound expected average
blow count curve
(Hay 1977) pile penetration

Fig. 1 - Predicted blow count curve and observed results. Fig. 2 - Suggested schematic unit skin friction
(See discussion in Section 7). Pile: 91 60" x 2.5" w.th. profiles at four penetrations in a soil with con-
with shoe; Hammer: Menck 8000 (868.000 ft lbs). stant shear strength over depth.
 force and displacement
gauges

vleight
blade,
moving up and down

support for sample

base

~' slot
V for blade

top view of load plate

FIG. 3- TEST ARRANGEMENT (NOT TO SCALE).

200 Sample: Heather, 335 kN/m2

Depth o~ recovery 29 m \Jh,~

initial horizontal
stress, acting before
330 kN/m2 fatigue starts.
Superim~osed load
d depth
p pile's penetration

100

\hO.7
h,
~

500 pf------------"'''''-
nwnber of
oscillations d

FIG. 4- TYPICAL TEST REGISTRATION (ftMPLITUDE: FIG. 5 - ASSUMED EXPONENTIAL FUNCTION

FOR HORIZONTAL STRESS DISTIBUTION A-
12.5 MM). LONG THE PILE SHAFT.

r ® Heather Field 0
CJ;;' 0.7 ~kN/m 2J 0.7
[kN/m2] 0 ® Heather Field
I!l Ninian Field 0
o Ninian Field 0
o Claymore Field
0
$ Claymore ,'ield
& Kontich, Belgiwn £ Kontich, Belgium 0
0
0
,.
300 ®
0 0 ®
0

.. @ 0
100 •
..... Iil 0
• #0
.. 0 I!l
.. s 00

200 0" G
0
.,
® ..

'"
®
.
®
.. 50 .
'"
..•
{;]

.... GEl
. ... III

100
• EI
.. Measurements made
® IE

.. 0 G in : Dec. 1974,
Aug.-Oct. 1975,
Jan. 1976,
Nov. 1976.
200 400 600
Cu ~N/m~
200 400 600
cu~N/m~
FIG 6 - DYNAMIC FICTION DURING .1ST OSCILLATIO~J FIG. 7 - VALUES OF FIG. 6 DEDUCED TO A
()~ PENETRATED BLADE. VELOCITY =0.126 11'S. HORIZONTAL STRESS EXPRESSION.
 ° °
(sand)

Chh.O• 7
l

d
Fig. 8

n
p ::: 10 m

A Auk Field
B Brent A Field
C Claymore Field
0.4 FA Forties FA Field
FC Forties FD Field
H Heather Field - different hammers
Kll Kll Field (Dutch Shelf)diff. pile
• KB 6.3
K13 K13 Field (Dutch Shelf) types
M Montrose Field
N Ninian Southern Field
KB Kontich (Belgium) diff. pile tYEes
0.3 Figures following letters indicate
• KB 11.4
analyzed pile penetration in metres .

p == 20 m

• KB 12.2
0.2

.FD 27
P ::::I 30 m
• FD 31
• N 20
• KB 19
• KB 17
B 17
FA 27
'RB~
• FA 32

-M23 ~
•c
0.1

p ::: 60 m
FA 6lt -PO 64
FA-55 -K13 80
FOe 55

o 200 400 600

Fig. 9 - "Fatigue factor" n vs. representative cohesive shear strength.

n A Auk Field
B Brent A Field
C Claymore Field
FA Forties FA Field
FC Forties FD Field
H Heather Field different hamn1ers
Kll Kll Field (Dutch Shelf)diff. pile
0.<1
K13 K13 Field (Dutch Shelf) types
M Montrose Field
N Ninian Southern Field
KB Kontich (Belgium)diff. pile types
Figures following letters indicate
representative C u in kN/m 2 •

0.3

.U~.",
0.2
• FD 78

_FD 82

B ~'K~K2:r;~ -FA 91
-KB 44
• FA 92
c = 600 KN/m2 C 350 • Kil 120

0.1
u ~H618 :M~<>---- .N31~.FA95
.N319--------.::::::.::'9:
20

c~.~
~~:
-H 618
H 603
~~ 410
-H 594 •
H

--,... .8500 ,8460

1
F: 99
.Xll 132

~
FD 127
'FA " :

H 578 H 548 C 350 :=7-~

p (m)
o 20 40 60 80

Fig. 10 - "Fatigue factor" n v~ pile penetration.

500 0 a:hd0 . 7
0

5
:1t_ - - - - -
100

10 10 m 0_ - - - - -

~
C
u

20 20 m - -

30 30 m ~ __

~
40

45 .ra ____ _
pen.
(m) d

Fig. 11 - Boring B4/4a, Heather Field; cohesive shear strength profile (T ); computed unit
skin friction profiles at different penetrations, as the pile progresses HHwnwards.