142

Case study of a piled raft foundation constructed

using a reverse construction method and its post-
analysis
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15

Ryuuichi Sonoda, Tatsunori Matsumoto, Pastsakorn Kitiyodom, Hideo Moritaka,

and Toshihiro Ono

Abstract: A building and its foundation were constructed in sandy ground using a reverse construction method. The main
difference between a reverse construction method and a conventional construction method is that the piles are cast in place
and are partially loaded by the superstructure early during the construction process. It is only later that the raft (mat foun-
dation) is constructed to combine with the piles to bear the full building load. Therefore, the foundation is regarded as a
pile group in early stages of construction, while the foundation behaves as a piled raft after completion of the raft con-
struction. A simple conservative design approach was used for the design of the foundation. To examine the validity of
the design method, settlements of the foundation were observed during construction. The measured settlements were
smaller than those predicted in the design stage, satisfying the design requirements for the building. Post-analysis of the
deformation of the foundation was carried out using the results of the pile load test at the construction site, and the results
of the analysis are compared with the observed settlements of the foundation, aiming at an improvement in pile foundation
design.
Key words: piled raft, vertical pile load test, reverse construction method, deformation analysis, water pressure, sandy
ground.
For personal use only.

Résumé : Un bâtiment et ses fondations ont été construits sur un sol sablonneux selon la méthode de construction inverse.
La différence principale entre la méthode de construction inverse et la méthode de construction traditionnelle est que les
pieux sont installés et partiellement chargés par la superstructure au début de la construction. Ce n’est que plus tard que le
radier (tapis de fondation) est construit et combiné aux pieux pour soutenir toute la charge du bâtiment. Ainsi, la fondation
est considérée comme un groupe de pieux au début de la construction, alors que la fondation se comporte plutôt comme
un radier sur pieux une fois le radier construit. Une approche simple et conservatrice a été utilisée pour la conception de
la fondation. Afin d’évaluer la validité de la méthode de conception, le tassement des fondations a été observée durant la
période de construction. Les tassements mesurés étaient plus faibles que ceux prédits à l’étape de conception, ce qui cor-
respond aux exigences de construction du bâtiment. Une analyse de la déformation des fondations a été effectuée à partir
de résultats d’essais de chargement sur les pieux au site de construction; les résultats de cette analyse ont été comparés
avec les résultats d’observations de tassement des fondations, ceci dans le but d’améliorer la conception de fondations sur
pieux.
Mots-clés : radier sur pieux, essais de chargement vertical sur pieux, méthode de construction inverse, analyse de déforma-
tion, pression d’eau, sol sablonneux.
[Traduit par la Rédaction]

Introduction
In many countries (except for Germany), most pile founda-
tions for buildings are still designed as pile groups, in which
the contribution of the raft resistance is ignored even though
its contribution is relatively large, as shown by field monitor-
ing of actual buildings (for example, Kakurai 2003). If a pile
foundation is designed as a pile group with a conventional
safety factor (for example, 3 in Japan) using the framework
of the allowable stress design, the piles take the majority of
the load (Poulos 2001) and the designers do not need to con-
sider the settlement of the foundation in most cases. A pile
foundation designed as a pile group is thought to have an ad-
equate margin of safety; however, such a foundation design
is costly and construction work is time-consuming.
In recent years, since Burland et al. (1977) proposed the
concept of ‘‘piles as settlement reducers,’’ there has been in-
creasing recognition that the inclusion of the resistance of

Received 28 April 2007. Accepted 10 October 2008. Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at cgj.nrc.ca on 4 February 2009.
R. Sonoda. Yasui Architects and Engineers, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-0093, Japan, and Graduate School of Kanazawa University,
Kakuma-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa 920-1192, Japan.
T. Matsumoto1 and P. Kitiyodom. Graduate School of Kanazawa University, Kakuma-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa 920-1192, Japan.
H. Moritaka and T. Ono. Yasui Architects and Engineers, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-0093, Japan.
1Corresponding author (e-mail: matsumot@t.kanazawa-u.ac.jp).

Can. Geotech. J. 46: 142–159 (2009) doi:10.1139/T08-111 Published by NRC Research Press
 Sonoda et al.
the raft in pile foundation design can lead to a considerable
economy without compromising the safety or performance
of a foundation. The design concept of a piled raft can lead
to a rational reduction of the number or length of piles, be-
cause the raft resistance is also considered in the design. De-
signers need to estimate the settlement more accurately in
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
the framework of piled raft design, because each pile is
loaded close to its ultimate capacity.
Piled raft foundations have been used since the 1980s in
Japan (Kakurai 1987, 2003; Kakurai et al. 1987; Tanaka et
al. 1987; Yamada et al. 2001; Yamashita and Kakurai 1991;
Yamashita et al. 1994; Yamashita et al. 1998; Majima and
Nagao 2000), although the number of applications of piled
raft design is few. In most of the cases where piled raft
foundation design was applied and constructed, piles were
bell-bottomed type and were designed primarily as toe-
bearing piles. Two cases of piled rafts constructed using the
reverse (top-down) construction method were included in the
above cases. In the reverse construction method, piles are
constructed first, then construction of the basement floor(s)
and aboveground floors of a building progress simultane-
ously. Hence, a piled raft foundation constructed using the
reverse construction method leads to a greater economy (re-
duction of construction time and cost for the foundation).
Relatively many piled raft foundations have been con-
structed in European countries, and field measurements of
For personal use only.
settlement have been carried out during and after the con-
struction of buildings (for examples, Cooke et al. 1981;
Hansbo 1993; Hooper 1973; Katzenbach et al. 1998a;
Sommer et al. 1991, etc.). The piled raft foundation method
was applied to the foundation of high rise towers in Dubai
(Poulos and Davids 2005). Piled raft foundations constructed
using the reverse construction method are rare; an exception
is presented by Katzenbach et al. (1998b).
Reasons for limited use of piled raft foundations con-
structed using the reverse construction method may be at-
tributed to insufficient field observation data of such
foundations and complicated design procedures. The first,
fourth, and fifth authors were involved in the design of a
commercial building called Amuplaza (Fig. 1) constructed
in 2003 to 2004 using the reverse construction method. A
piled raft foundation was adopted for this building. In the
design, friction piles were used as ‘‘settlement reducers’’ as
proposed by Burland et al. (1977). A conservative design
approach was employed in the design stage. Hence, observa-
tion of settlements of the foundation and the pore-water
pressure distribution beneath the raft were carried out during
the construction work, to assess the validity of the design
approach and to provide useful information on the behaviour
of a piled raft constructed using the reverse construction
method. Furthermore, an auxiliary static load test on a test
pile was carried out during the construction work, to obtain
more realistic design parameters.
This paper first reviews the design approach adopted and
presents the results of the field observations. Then, post-
analysis of the foundation deformation is performed using
the results of the pile load test. In this post-analysis, a sim-
plified three-dimensional deformation analysis method (Ki-
tiyodom and Matsumoto 2002, 2003) was employed, taking
the construction procedure into account. The results of the
analyses are compared with the measured behaviour of the
143
Fig. 1. Amuplaza building in Kagoshima, Japan, after completion
of construction.
foundation, and the appropriate selection of soil parameters
used in design are discussed.
Outline of building construction
Outline of building
The commercial building investigated in this study was
constructed in Kagoshima City, Kyushu, Japan, in 2003 to
2004. The building has seven storeys and a basement, with
a building area of 9000 m2, a total floor area of 50 000 m2,
and a maximum height of 45 m (see Fig. 2). A Ferris wheel
was constructed on the roof of the building (Fig. 1). The
building has a composite structure consisting of steel-
reinforced concrete columns and steel beams. The average
contact stress on the raft disregarding the piles is 118 kPa.
The design requirements for the building were that the
(average) settlement was not to exceed 25 mm and the incli-
nation slope of the basement due to differential settlement
was not to be steeper than 1/1000. Several foundation design
options were considered, and a piled raft foundation was fi-
nally adopted.
Site conditions
Boreholes were drilled at five locations (EB-1 to EB-4
and B-1) within the construction site to characterize the soil
conditions (see Fig. 2). Boreholes EB-1 to EB-4 were car-
ried out in 1993 to explore soil stratification and to obtain
distributions of standard penetration test (SPT ) blow count,
N, to depths of 50 to 65 m. Detailed drilling and sampling
were carried out in 2002 at B-1, at the centre location of
the building. In the latter borehole, primary and secondary
elastic wave velocity (PS)-logging was carried out to deter-
mine velocities of the primary wave, Vp, and the secondary
(shear) wave, Vs, to a depth of 30 m below the ground level,
which was approximately the pile toe depth determined in
the design.
The results of borehole investigations showed that the
stratification at the construction site is almost horizontal.
The soil layers to a depth of 60 m are compressible sand or
sandy silt or silt. The SPT N-values are 10 to 20 to a depth
of 50 m. The layer from a depth of 50 to 60 m is sand or
sandy silt, in which N-values vary from 20 to 42, as can be
seen in the borehole EB-2 of Fig. 2. Gravel with N-values
larger than 50 exists below a depth of 60 m. It is common
practice in Japan to terminate the SPT when an N-value
Published by NRC Research Press
 144 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 46, 2009

Fig. 2. Elevation view of building, soil profiles, standard penetration test (SPT) N-values, and arrangement of piles. All dimensions in
metres.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.

greater than 50 is obtained, because the results from further Figure 4 illustrates the reverse construction method em-
penetration of the SPT sampler are thought to be not reli- ployed in the construction of the building and the foundation.
able. The time sequence of the reverse construction method
Figure 3 summarizes the results of SPT and PS-logging at was as follows:
B-1. The ground-water level was established to be a depth
of 3.0 m. The total density of the soil, rt, was estimated (1) Cast–in situ concrete piles were constructed below 6.5 m
from the soil samples. The undrained Poisson’s ratio, nu, from the ground surface (Fig. 4a).
shear modulus, G0, and undrained Young’s modulus, Eu0, of (2) Steel columns having a length of 7.5 m were attached to
the soil at a small strain level were estimated using the fol- the heads of piles (Fig. 4b).
lowing relations of elasticity: (3) Groundwater table was lowered from the original depth
of 3.0 to 7.5 m below the ground level for the excava-
ðVp =Vs Þ2  2
½1 nu ¼ tion work that followed.
2ðVp =Vs Þ2  1 (4) The ground was excavated to a depth of 2.5 m to expose
the tops of the steel columns, and steel beams for the
½2 G0 ¼ rt Vs2 ground floor were connected to the tops of the steel col-
umns (Fig. 4c).
½3 Eu0 ¼ 2ð1 þ nu ÞG0 (5) Concreting work was done to construct the ground floor
(Fig. 4d).
(6) The ground was again excavated to a depth of 6.5 m
Reverse construction method employed (Fig. 4e). Note that the constructed ground floor takes
A piled raft foundation constructed using a reverse (top- the role of a strut during this ground excavation stage to
down) construction method was adopted for the building. ensure the safety of the excavation work.

Published by NRC Research Press

 Sonoda et al.
Fig. 3. Distribution of SPT N-values and results of PS-logging at B-1.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.
(7) Steel columns and beams of the superstructure were con-
structed for the first floor to the roof (Fig. 4f).
(8) Construction of the raft (basement floor) on the piles and
construction of the superstructure progressed simulta-
neously, and construction of the raft structure was com-
pleted at the end of December in 2003 (Fig. 4g). It
should be noted that all increments of the load from the
superstructure were supported by the piles alone until
this construction stage, because there was no raft resis-
tance until this construction stage. Hence, the foundation
until this construction stage is referred to as ‘‘pile
group’’ in this paper.
(9) Construction of the basement floor and the above-ground
floors progressed simultaneously (Fig. 4h). Note that
further increments of the load from the building were
supported by the raft and the piles in this construction
stage. Hence, the foundation in this stage is referred to
as ‘‘piled raft’’ in this paper. Note that the groundwater
table was recovered to 3.0 m below the ground level at
the end of February 2004.
Tables 1 and 2 show the time sequence of construction of
the superstructure and the foundation structure, respectively.
Figure 5 shows the time histories of the total load from the
building and measured water pressure beneath the raft. As
mentioned above, the foundation was regarded as a ‘‘pile
group’’ until the end of of 2003. The foundation behaved as
a ‘‘piled raft’’ after that time. The lowered groundwater table
(7.5 m below ground level (G.L.)) was recovered to the
original groundwater table of 3.0 m at the end of February
2004. The increase in the water pressure of 35 kPa measured
at the raft base (6.5 m below G.L.) corresponded to this re-
covery of the groundwater table.
It is seen from Fig. 5 that the total load at the end of the
145
pile group stage was 70% of the final total load at the com-
pletion of the building. The remaining 30% of the final total
load was supported by the piled raft.
Figures 6a and 6b show the distributions of load incre-
ments on the foundation from the building in stages of the
pile group and the piled raft, respectively, while Fig. 6c
shows the distribution of the final loads at the completion
of the building. The load distributions of Figs. 6a and 6b
were used in the design of the foundation.
Design of foundation
According to the conventional foundation design concept
in Japan, the subject building structure would be supported
on 60 m long toe-bearing piles in the gravel below the com-
pressible soils without consideration of the raft base resist-
ance. However, such a design would be costly and
construction time-consuming. It was estimated that the cost
for the foundation would be reduced from US$9.9 million
to US$3.6 million, and the construction period reduced by
2 months, if a piled raft foundation constructed using the re-
verse construction method was adopted. Therefore, a piled
raft foundation constructed using the reverse construction
method was adopted as described below.
Design philosophy
The following design philosophies were adopted for the
foundation of the building:
(1) The raft consists of a mat having a thickness of 0.6 m
and beams having a height of 1.2 m to reduce differential
settlements and to reduce its weight, as shown in Fig. 7.
(2) The bearing capacity of the foundation is estimated dis-
regarding the existence of the piles, while the piles are
Published by NRC Research Press
 146 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 46, 2009

Fig. 4. Reverse construction method employed. (a) Construction of cast–in situ concrete piles. (b) Construction of steel columns to the
ground floor level. (c) First excavation work and construction of steel columns and beams of the ground floor. (d) Concreting work of the
ground floor. (e) Second excavation work to a depth of 6.5 m. ( f ) Construction of steel columns and beams of the superstructure, and the
foundation mat. (g) Construction of the foundation beams and concreting work of the superstructure. (h) Construction in stage of piled raft.
All dimensions in metres.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.

used as settlement reducers, according to regulations for
buildings in Japan.
(3) Cast–in situ concrete piles are used as the settlement re-
ducers.
(4) The ultimate capacity of the piles is designed to resist the
distribution of the loads shown in Fig. 6a that corresponds
to the maximum vertical loads in the pile group stage.
Design model for foundation
The model shown in Fig. 8 was employed to estimate de-

Published by NRC Research Press

 Sonoda et al. 147

Table 1. Time sequence of construction of superstructure in reverse construction method.

Area
Average floor
Floor level No. 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 load (kPa)
RF (Roof floor) — 20 Jan 2004 20 Feb 2004 17 Mar 2004 7.8
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15

6F 10 Dec 2003 15 Jan 2004 13 Feb 2004 10 Mar 2004 7.8

5F 2 Dec 2003 5 Jan 2004 3 Feb 2004 2 Mar 2004 7.8
4F 22 Nov 2003 25 Dec 2003 25 Jan 2004 22 Feb 2004 7.8
3F 12 Nov 2003 15 Dec 2003 15 Jan 2004 12 Feb 2004 7.8
2F 2 Nov 2003 5 Dec 2003 5 Jan 2004 1 Feb 2004 7.8
1F 22 Oct 2003 25 Nov 2003 25 Dec 2003 25 Jan 2004 7.8
GF 5 Aug 2003 20 Aug 2003 1 Sep 2003 5 Sep 2003 15.3
Note: Bold type indicates construction in stage of piled raft. Construction areas are defined in Fig. 13.

Table 2. Time sequence of construction of substructure in reverse construction method.

Area
Average floor
No. 1 Nos. 1 and 2 Nos. 2 and 3 No. 3 Nos. 3 and 4 No. 4 load (kPa)
B1F (basement) 12 Dec 2003 19 Dec 2003 8 Jan 2004 16 Jan 2004 22 Jan 2004 30 Jan 2004 7.8
Raft 7 Nov 2003 12 Nov 2003 19 Nov 2003 27 Nov 2003 4 Dec 2003 8 Dec 2003 24.0
Note: Bold type indicates construction in stage of piled raft. Construction areas are defined in Fig. 13.

Fig. 5. Time histories of the total load from the building and measured water pressure at the raft base. Construction areas are defined in Fig. 13.
For personal use only.

formation of the raft alone, the pile group or the piled raft.
The raft was modelled by the beams, the soil beneath the
raft was treated as springs connected to the beams, and the
piles were treated as the springs connected to the intersec-
tions of the beams. Interaction between the springs was not
taken into account, i.e., the springs were Winkler-type
springs where pile–pile interaction was also neglected. Note
that the bending rigidity of the beams was set equal to that
of the raft structure of Fig. 7.
Design of raft alone
The ultimate bearing capacity of the raft, qu, was esti-
mated using the following semi-empirical equation specified
in Recommendations for design of building foundations (Ar-
chitectural Institute of Japan 2001):
½4a qu ¼ acNc þ bg 1 BNg þ g 2 Df Nq
where a is an empirical parameter (a = 1.0 + 0.3B/L, where
B is the shorter length and L is the longer length of rectan-
gular raft); c is the soil cohesion; b is an empirical para-
meter (b = 0.5 – 0.1B/L); g1 and g2 are the unit weights of
the soil below and above the raft base level, respectively; Df
is the embedment depth; Nc, Ng, and Nq are the well-known
coefficients of bearing capacity as a function of internal
friction angle of the soil, f, which is estimated from an
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
empirical equation f ¼ 20N + 15 (8).
The allowable bearing stress, qa, was then determined by
dividing the ultimate stress by a safety factor of 3.0:
½4b qa ¼ qu =3
In the design of the raft alone, c = 0 and N = 10 (f = 298)
were used and the allowable bearing stress of the raft, qa =
200 kPa, was calculated by means of eqs. [4a] and [4b].
That is, it exceeded the average contact stress of 118 kPa
from the building.
The subgrade reaction of the raft, kv, was estimated on the
basis of Steinbrenner’s formula (Steinbrenner 1934). This al-
lows for multi-layer ground with finite depth.
In the estimation of kv, the values of shear moduli, G0, of
the soils estimated from PS-logging (Fig. 3) were reduced
by a factor of 5 to obtain the design values of shear moduli
Gdesign, because the strain level in soils beneath the founda-
tion is thought to be large compared with the strain level in

Published by NRC Research Press

 148 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 46, 2009

Fig. 6. Distributions of loads from the building. (a) Superstructure load increments in stage of pile group. (b) Superstructure load increments
in stage of piled raft. (c) Total superstructure loads at completion of the building.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.

Fig. 7. Raft structure composed of mat and beams. Fig. 8. Modelling of piled raft used in the design stage.

value of G0/Gdesign = 5 was adopted in the design of the raft

PS-logging. The drained Poisson’s ratio, n, was assumed to
be 0.3. Note here that it has been well known that the shear
stiffness of a soil reduces as the shear strain increases. For
example, it was shown by Atkinson (2000) that a typical
value of G0/Gdesign is about 4 for foundations. A conservative
foundation. The so-calculated value of kv was 5900 kPa/m.
Design of piled raft
In the design of the piled raft foundation, estimation of
the values of the pile springs was also needed. The follow-
ing procedure was adopted for estimation of the pile springs,

Published by NRC Research Press

 Sonoda et al.
Fig. 9. One-dimensional model to estimate load–displacement rela-
tion of a pile.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
because pile load testing had not been carried out in the de-
sign stage.
For personal use only.
Figure 9 shows the one-dimensional modelling of a pile
and soil used to estimate the load–displacement relation of
the pile. The pile is modelled as a series of linear elastic
springs while the toe and shaft resistances are modelled as
nonlinear springs expressing soil deformation.
The pile toe load, Pb, was related to the pile toe displace-
ment, Sb, by the following empirical relation (Yamakata et
al. 1983):
½5 Pb ¼ 0:757Esb AðSb =bÞ0:61
where Esb is Young’s modulus of the soil at the pile toe, A
is the cross-sectional area, and b is the diameter of the pile.
Hyperbolic relationship between the shaft resistance, f,
and the local pile displacement, S, as shown in Fig. 10 was
assumed for the non-linear spring of the shaft resistance.
S The pile arrangement shown in Fig. 2 was finally selected
½6 f ¼
S=fmax þ a
where fmax is the maximum shaft resistance and 1/a is the
initial tangent of the hyperbolic curve.
The values of fmax and 1/a were estimated from the fol-
lowing empirical formulas suggested by Uto et al. (1987)
for sandy soils (eq. [7]) and by Yamakata and Nagai (1981)
for clayey soils (eq. [8]):
½7 fmax ¼ 3:53N; 1=a ¼ 1:06N
½8 fmax ¼ 0:5quc  98; 1=a ¼ fmax =0:0025b
where fmax is in kPa, 1/a is in kPa/m, and quc is the uncon-
fined compression strength of the soil.
Figure 11 shows the load–displacement curves of piles at
the construction site as estimated for the design stage. The
spring value, KP, expressing the pile head stiffness was esti-
149
Fig. 10. Hyperbolic curve for shaft resistance versus local pile dis-
placement.
Fig. 11. Examples of load–displacement curves of piles in the con-
struction site estimated in the design stage.
mated as the secant stiffness corresponding to a target pile
head displacement. The target pile head displacement was
conservatively set at 20 mm, compared with the allowable
foundation settlement of 25 mm specified in Recommenda-
tions for design of building foundations (Architectural Insti-
tute of Japan 2001). For the target pile head displacement,
KP = 232 MN/m for piles with b = 1.5 m and L = 20 m,
KP = 278 MN/m for piles with b = 1.5 m and L = 25 m,
KP = 315 MN/m for piles with b = 1.8 m and L = 25 m,
and KP = 351 MN/m for piles with b = 2.0 m and L =
25 m. Note that various pile arrangements were considered
to satisfy the design requirement that the pile head displace-
ment should be less than 20 mm.
from various design alternatives considered.
Design of pile group
The foundation behaves as a pile group without the resist-
ance of the raft at early stages of the construction work in
the reverse construction method. Hence, design of the pile
group was also required.
The design procedure for the pile group was the same as
that for the piled raft except that the soil springs beneath the
raft were set as 0, because there is no raft base resistance in
the pile group stage. The response of the pile group was es-
timated against the load distribution in Fig. 6a.
Performance of the foundations estimated in the design
stage
Figure 12 shows the distributions of the calculated settle-
ment of the raft alone, the piled raft, and the pile group
Published by NRC Research Press
 150
Fig. 12. Distributions of settlements of various foundation types es-
timated in the design stage: (a) along section A-A’ and (b) along
section B-B’.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.
along A-A’ Fig. 12a and along B-B’ Fig. 12b (see Fig. 2).
The maximum settlement of the raft alone was 29 mm and
the maximum differential settlement was 14 mm. In the
case of the piled raft, the maximum settlement was reduced
to 20 mm and the maximum differential settlement was re-
duced to 13 mm. The settlements of the foundation at the
end of the pile group stage were smaller than those at the
end of the piled raft stage, because the total vertical load on
the pile group was about 70% of that for the piled raft (see
Fig. 6). It was judged from Fig. 12 that the piles had suffi-
cient performance to suppress the settlements of the founda-
tion below 25 mm during the pile group stage in the reverse
construction method.
Field observations and pile load test
In the design of the foundation, conservative values of the
shear moduli of soils were used, i.e., the values of shear
moduli of the soils estimated from PS-logging were reduced
by a factor of 5. To confirm that the design parameters used
in the design are appropriate to satisfy the design require-
ments, and to provide useful information of the actual be-
haviour of the foundation for improvement of the design
procedure in the future, field observations including meas-
urements of settlements of the foundation and pore-water
pressure beneath the raft and a pile load test at the construc-
tion site were planned at the design stage.
Field observations
Figure 13 shows the plan view of the arrangement of field
observations. The field observations included measurements
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 46, 2009
Fig. 13. Arrangement of measurements and names of construction
areas. All dimensions in metres.
Fig. 14. Distribution of measured settlements at completion of the
building.
of the settlement of the raft at 45 points and pore-water
pressure beneath the raft at a depth of 6.5 m. A track level
was used to measure the settlement of the raft relative to a
bench mark with a precision of 0.5 mm.
The results of the measurements of settlements at the
completion of the building (Fig. 14) showed that the settle-
ments of the foundation were smaller than those estimated
in the design stage, which confirmed that the design of the
foundation was appropriate. Details of the results of the field
observations are presented in the section entitled ‘‘Post-
analysis of deformation of the foundation’’, together with
the results of the post-analysis.
Pile load test
A test pile was constructed additionally at the location in-
dicated by the ‘‘star’’ symbol in Figs. 2 and 13. The test pile
was a cast–in situ concrete pile having a length of 32.0 m
and a diameter of 1.0 m. Shaft friction of the pile to a depth
of 7.5 m was cut off by installing a double steel tube to this
depth. Axial forces were measured at six levels of the pile
(Fig. 15a) and shaft resistance at sections between the strain
gauge levels was derived from the measured axial forces.
Four working piles having a length of 25 m were used for
the reaction piles as shown in Fig. 15b, where the distance
Published by NRC Research Press
 Sonoda et al.
Fig. 15. Conditions of axial pile load test. (a) Seating of test pile, soil profile, and SPT N-values obtained at borehole EB-2. (b) Arrange-
ment of test and reaction piles.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.
Fig. 16. Load on pile head with elapsed time.
between the reaction piles and the test pile was 4.3 m. A
maintained load test with a multi-loading stage was em-
ployed and each initial load was held for 30 min, as shown
in Fig. 16.
Figure 17 shows the results of the axial pile load test. Fig-
ure 17a shows the relationship between the pile head load,
Ph, and the pile head displacement, wh. The pile displace-
ment almost ceased at the end of the load holding period of
30 min. Hence, it was judged that the measured load–
displacement curve corresponded to a ‘‘drained’’ condition.
Figure 17b shows the measured relationships of the mobi-
lized shaft resistance, f, and the local pile displacement for
each section of the test pile (see Fig. 15a for pile sections).
The shaft resistance, f, of each section tends to increase even
at a local pile displacement beyond 12 mm. However, the
measured maximum value of f was taken as the maximum
shaft friction, fmax, of each section in the back-analysis of
the pile load test.
Figure 17c shows the distribution of fmax with depth, to-
gether with the profiles of SPT N-values and the effective
151
vertical stresses in the ground. It can be seen from the figure
that the distribution of fmax is related to neither the SPT N-
values nor the effective vertical stress in the ground. This
fact encourages us to perform pile load tests to obtain the
pile performance at each pile construction site.
The results of the pile load test were effectively utilized
in the post-analysis of the deformation of the foundation.
Post-analysis of deformation of the
foundation
Analytical method
The post-analysis was carried out using a simplified de-
formation analytical program ‘‘Pile Raft Analysis with Bat-
ter piles’’ (PRAB) that has been developed by Kitiyodom
and Matsumoto (2002, 2003). This program is capable of es-
timating the deformation and load distribution of piled raft
foundations subjected to vertical, horizontal, and moment
loads, using a hybrid model in which the flexible raft is
modelled as thin plates alone, beams alone or a combination
of thin plates and beams; the piles act as elastic beams and
the soil is treated as springs (Fig. 18). Both the vertical and
horizontal resistances of the piles as well as the raft base are
incorporated into the model. Pile–soil–pile, pile–soil–raft,
and raft–soil–raft interactions are taken into account based
on Mindlin’s solutions (Mindlin 1936) for both vertical and
horizontal forces.
For soil profiles that are arbitrarily layered and (or) under-
lain by a rigid bed stratum, the vertical soil spring, KzR , at
raft nodes, the vertical soil spring, KzPb , at pile base nodes,
and the vertical soil spring, KzP , at pile shaft nodes are esti-
mated to include the influence of finite layered soils follow-
ing Lee (1991).
Published by NRC Research Press
 152 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 46, 2009

Fig. 17. Results of axial pile load test. (a) Relationship between pile head load and pile head displacement. (b) Relationship between shaft
resistance and local pile displacement. (c) Distribution of maximum shaft resistance, fmax, together with profiles of SPT N-values and effec-
tive vertical stresses in the ground.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.

Fig. 18. Hybrid modelling of raft, piles, and soil.

 
4Ga 1
½9 KzR¼
1  ns 1  expðh=2aÞ
 
Pb 4Gb ro 1
½10 Kz ¼
1  ns 1  expðh =2ro Þ

2pGDL
½11 KzP ¼
lnðrm =ro Þ
where
2 np 3
X
6 Gi Li rffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 7
6 i¼1 Gm 7
½12 6
rm ¼ 2:56 cLð1  ns Þ7
G L G 7;
4 m b 5

c ¼ 1  expð1  h=LÞ
where a is the equivalent radius of the raft element, ns is the
Poisson’s ratio of the soil, h is the finite soil depth, h* is the
distance between the pile toe and the rigid bed stratum, ro is

Published by NRC Research Press

 Sonoda et al. 153

the pile radius, np is the total number of soil layers along the Fig. 19. Modelling of the test single pile and ground.
pile length, and DL and L are the pile segment length and
the pile length, respectively. Gb is the soil shear modulus
below pile toe, G is the soil shear modulus, Gm is the max-
imum soil shear modulus, and Gi and Li are, respectively,
the shear modulus and the length of pile embedded in soil
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15

layer i. G is the equivalent shear modulus that can be deter-

mined following Fraser and Wardle (1976):
Es
½13 G¼
2ð1 þ ns Þ

1 Xn
1
½14 ¼ DIi =DItotal
Es E
i¼1 si

where E s is the equivalent Young’s modulus, Esi is the

Young’s modulus for soil layer number i in the n-layered
system, and I is the vertical settlement influence factor that
is given by Harr (1966). DIi ¼ Iðzitop Þ  Iðzibottom Þ where zitop
and zibottom are, respectively, the depths below the surface of
the top and bottom of layer number i and DItotal = I(0) –
I(h), where h is the finite soil depth as defined earlier.
The horizontal springs, KxR and KyR , at raft nodes, and hor-
izontal springs, KxPb and KyPb , at pile base nodes are esti-
mated by means of eqs. [15] and [16], and the horizontal
soil springs, KxP and KyP , at pile shaft nodes are estimated by
For personal use only.

means of eq. [17]. As for loading in the horizontal direction,

the near-surface soil layers tend to be the most influential.
Hence, the soil shear modulus Gr, which is the shear modu- Fig. 20. Comparison of measured and analysed load–displacement
lus of the soil layer just beneath the raft, is employed in the curves of the test pile.
estimation of the horizontal springs at the raft nodes.
32ð1  ns ÞGr a
½15 KxR ¼ KyR ¼
7  8ns

32ð1  ns ÞGb r0
½16 KxPb ¼ KyPb ¼
7  8ns

½17 KxP ¼ KyP ¼ zEs DL

where z = pb/rEs in which p is the lateral distributed force
acting along the pile element and r is the corresponding lat-
eral displacement at each pile node calculated using the in-
tegral equation method by Poulos and Davis (1980).
When using PRAB to analyse the problem of a pile
group, no contact stress is assumed to act beneath the raft.
Back-analysis of axial pile load test
To determine the soil parameters appropriately, back-
analysis of the axial static load test of the test pile was car-
ried out prior to the analysis of the whole foundation. The
PRAB program was used for this back-analysis.
Figure 19 shows the modelling of the test single pile and
the ground. The ground below the friction cut area was
modelled. A Young’s modulus of the pile of Ep =
2.27  107 kPa was used. As mentioned earlier, the distance
between the reaction piles and the test pile was 4.3 m (see
Fig. 15b). In this case, it was shown by Kitiyodom et al.
(2004) that the influence of the reaction piles on the test
pile is small. Therefore, the effects of the reaction piles are
not taken into account in the back-analysis of the pile load
test.
Figure 20 shows comparison of the analysed and meas-
ured load–displacement curves of the pile head and the pile
toe. Good matching was obtained when the shear modulus
of the soil obtained from PS-logging was reduced by a fac-
tor of 2 for the soils surrounding the pile shaft and by a fac-
tor of 5 for the soil beneath the pile toe. These reductions in
the shear moduli of the soils may be reasonable, if we con-
sider disturbance of the soils around the pile and the differ-
ence in strain levels between the pile load test and PS-
logging, i.e., large strains occur in the soil around the pile
in the pile load test.
Such reductions in the shear moduli of the soils around

Published by NRC Research Press

 154 Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 46, 2009

Fig. 21. Modelling of foundation and ground. Fig. 22. Construction areas of superstructure in stages of pile group
and piled raft, and foundation model.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15

cient (Table 3), and St is parameter depending on soil type

(Table 4).
SPT N-values at points B-1 and EB-2, Vs measured by
means of PS-logging at point B-1, and Vs at point EB-2 esti-
mated using eq. [18] are indicated in Fig. 21. SPT N-values
For personal use only.

at points B-1 and EB-2 are very similar to a depth of 30 m,

and it is seen that Vs measured by means of PS-logging and
estimated using the empirical eq. [18] are almost identical to
Table 3. Properties of geological time coefficient Yg. a depth of 30 m. Based on these results, the variation of the
shear modulus at small strain levels, G0, to a depth of 63 m
Alluvial formation Diluvial formation
was estimated by means of eq. [19] and indicated in Fig. 21.
Yg 1.000 1.303
½19 G0 ¼ rt Vs2
Table 4. Properties of parameter St. where rt = 1.6 Mg/m3 was assumed for depths greater than
30 m.
Sand Note that interaction factors and soil springs at the raft
Coarse nodes were calculated using the shear moduli, G0, at small
Clay Fine Medium Coarse Gravel fragment strain level shown in Fig. 21, while the reduced shear mod-
St 1.000 1.086 1.066 1.135 1.153 1.448 uli estimated from the back-analysis of the static pile load
test mentioned in the previous section were used for estima-
tion of the soil springs at the pile nodes.
the pile are also considered in the post-analysis of the whole
foundation. Figure 22 shows a side view of the building and the three-
dimensional expression of the foundation model. In the
modelling of the foundation structure, the raft was modelled
Analyses of the whole foundation system by a combination of thin plates and beams. The raft base
Figure 21 shows the modelling of the foundation and the was located at 6.5 m below the original ground surface. In
ground. It was judged that modelling of the ground to the the analysis, the construction of the superstructure was div-
depth of 63 m is needed when analysing the whole founda- ided into two stages in which the foundation acted as a ‘‘pile
tion, because the influence of the wide length of the raft of group’’ and as a ‘‘piled raft.’’ The area of the superstructure
156 m reaches to deeper depths. Note here that SPT N-values that was constructed in the stage of piled raft is indicated by
for depths greater than 63 m were very large and the depth of the hatching.
63 m was assumed to be a bed stratum where no settlement
In the deformation analysis of the whole structure, rigidity
occurred. As mentioned earlier, PS-logging was carried out
of the superstructure was neglected and vertical loads from
to a depth of 30 m at point B-1. Hence, shear wave velocities,
the superstructure (see Fig. 6) were directly applied on the
Vs (in m/s), of the soils deeper than 30 m were estimated us-
raft nodes. The analysis was carried out in two stages. The
ing an empirical eq. [18] proposed by Ohta and Goto (1976).
first stage was the deformation analysis in the pile group
½18 Vs ¼ 68:79N 0:171 H 0:199 Yg St stage where the raft resistance was not considered. The dis-
tribution of load increments of Fig. 6a was applied on the
where H is depth from G.L. (m), Yg is geologic time coeffi- raft in this analysis. The deformation analysis in the piled

Published by NRC Research Press

 Sonoda et al.
Fig. 23. Calculated and measured settlements of the raft (at y =
16.2 m). (a) Increments of settlements in pile group stage. (b) In-
crements of settlements in piled raft stage. (c) Total settlements at
the completion of construction.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.
raft stage was carried out after the end of the first stage, tak-
ing into account the existence of the raft resistance. The
stress conditions at the end of the first stage were used for
the initial conditions in the second stage. The distribution of
load increments of Fig. 6b was applied on the raft in the
analysis of the piled raft, and a uniform uplift water pressure
of 35 kPa due to the recovery of the lowered groundwater
table with respect to the original ground water table (3.0 m
below G.L.) was also applied to the raft.
155
Fig. 24. Calculated and measured settlements of the raft (at y =
40.5 m). (a) Increments of settlements in pile group stage. (b) In-
crements of settlements in piled raft stage. (c) Total settlements at
completion of construction.
Figures 23 to 26 show the comparisons of the calculated
and measured settlements of the raft. Figure 23 shows the
distributions of calculated and measured settlements of the
raft in the x-direction at y = 16.2 m. Increments of settle-
ments in the pile group stage are shown in Fig. 23a, those
in stage of piled raft are shown in Fig. 23b, and the total
settlements at the final construction stage are shown in
Fig. 23c. Similar results are shown in Fig. 24 for distribu-
tions of settlements in the x-direction at y = 40.5 m, in
Published by NRC Research Press
 156
Fig. 25. Calculated and measured settlements of the raft (at x =
34.8 m). (a) Increments of settlements in pile group stage. (b) In-
crements of settlements in piled raft stage. (c) Total settlements at
the completion of construction.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.
Fig. 25 for distributions of settlements in the y-direction at
x = 34.8 m, and in Fig. 26 for distributions of settlements in
the y-direction at x = 132.0 m. It is seen from Figs. 23 to 26
that although the analysis tends to overestimate the meas-
ured settlements in the the pile group foundation stage and
underestimate the measured settlements in the piled raft
foundation stage, the analysis predicted the measured total
settlements fairly well.
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 46, 2009
Fig. 26. Calculated and measured settlements of the raft (at x =
132.0 m). (a) Increments of settlements in pile group stage. (b) In-
crements of settlements in piled raft stage. (c) Total settlements at
the completion of construction.
Figure 27 shows the three-dimensional expression of the
calculated settlements of the raft. It is seen that dish-shaped
settlement patterns occur in pile group and piled raft,
although the average settlement is less than 10 mm and the
flexure of the raft is less than 1/2000. The use of the con-
cept of ‘‘centred piles’’ proposed by Horikoshi and Randolph
(1998) may reduce differential settlements more effectively.
Figure 28 shows the calculated pile head loads at the
Published by NRC Research Press
 Sonoda et al.
Fig. 27. Calculated distribution of settlements of the raft. (a) Increments of settlements in pile group stage. (b) Increments of settlements in
piled raft stage. (c) Total settlements at the completion of construction. Disp., displacement.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
For personal use only.
Fig. 28. Calculated pile head loads at the completion of the build-
ing.
completion of the building. In the design stage, the ultimate
bearing capacity of the piles was estimated as 10 MN typi-
cally. The results of the analysis suggest that the pile head
loads on all the piles are less than the ultimate bearing ca-
pacity of the piles.
157
Conclusions
A case study of a piled raft foundation for a building con-
structed using the reverse construction method was pre-
sented. The foundation system acted as a pile group in
earlier construction stages and then acted as a piled raft in
later construction stages in the reverse construction method.
A conservative design method was used to design the foun-
dation system. Detailed field measurements including settle-
ments of the raft and the pore-water pressure beneath the
raft as well as a static load test of a test pile were carried
out during the construction work. The field measurements
revealed that the average and differential settlements were
sufficiently less than the allowable values.
Post-analysis of the foundation system was carried out us-
ing a simplified three-dimensional deformation analysis
method. The shear moduli of the ground at small strain lev-
els were estimated from PS-logging and shear moduli at
large stain levels were estimated from back-analysis of the
static pile load test. The shear moduli at large strain leves
were used to estimate soil springs at the pile nodes, whereas
the shear moduli at small strain levels were used to estimate
the interaction factors. The calculated results predicted the
measured settlements of the foundation well in both pile
group and piled raft stages.
Published by NRC Research Press
 158
It should be noted here that the shear moduli of the soils
at small strain levels estimated from empirical equations us-
ing SPT N-values were used in the post-analysis. Hence, re-
liability of the calculation results depends on the reliability
of the empirical equations.
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
This case study suggests that estimation of shear moduli
of the soils at small strain levels via PS-logging and estima-
tion of reduced shear moduli of the soils surrounding piles
via back-analysis of static pile load tests at the site are key
points in calculation of deformation of the foundation when
a simplified analytical method is used.
Acknowledgements
The authors deeply thank Kyushu Railway Company and
Kagoshima Terminal Building Corporation for their permis-
sion to use the valuable field measurement data.
References
Architectural Institute of Japan. 2001. Recommendations for design
of building foundations. Architectural Institute of Japan, Tokyo.
[In Japanese.]
Atkinson, J.H. 2000. Non-linear soil stiffness in routine design.
Géotechnique, 50(5): 487–508.
Burland, J.B., Broms, B.B., and de Mello, V.F.B. 1977. Behaviour
of foundations and structures on soft ground. In Proceedings of
For personal use only.
the 9th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Founda-
tion Engineering (ICSMFE), Tokyo, 10–15 July 1977. Japanese
Geotechnical Society, Tokyo. Vol. 2. pp. 495–546.
Cooke, R.W., Bryden-Smith, D.W., Gooch, M.N., and Sillet, D.F.
1981. Some observations of the foundation loading and settle-
ment of a multi-storey building on a piled raft foundation in
London Clay. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers,
70(1): 433–460.
Fraser, R.A., and Wardle, L.J. 1976. Numerical analysis of rectan-
gular rafts on layered foundations. Géotechnique, 26(4): 613–
630.
Hansbo, S. 1993. Interaction problems related to the installation of
pile groups. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Geotechni-
cal Seminar on Deep Foundations on Bored and Augered Piles,
Ghent, Belgium, 1–4 June 1993. Edited by W.F. Van Impe. A.A.
Balkema, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. pp. 59–60.
Harr, M.E. 1966. Foundations of theoretical soil mechanics.
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Hooper, J.A. 1973. Observations on the behaviour of a piled raft
foundation in London clay. Proceedings of the Institution of Ci-
vil Engineers, 55(Part 2): 855–877.
Horikoshi, K., and Randolph, M.F. 1998. A contribution to opti-
mum design of piled raft. Géotechnique, 48(3): 301–317.
Kakurai, M. 1987. Field measurements of load transfer in piled raft
foundation. In Proceedings of the 8th Asian Regional Confer-
ence on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering
(ARCSMFE), Kyoto, 20–24 July 1987. Vol. 1. pp. 327–329.
Kakurai, M. 2003. Study on vertical load transfer of piles. Ph.D.
thesis, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo. [In Japanese].
Kakurai, M., Yamashita, K., and Tomono, M. 1987. Settlement be-
havior of piled raft foundations on soft ground. In Proceedings
of the 8th Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering (ARCSMFE), Kyoto, 20–24 July 1987.
Vol. 1. pp. 373–376.
Katzenbach, R., Arslan, U., and Reul, O. 1998a. Soil-structure-
interaction of a piled raft foundation of a 121 m high office
building on loose sand in Berlin. In Proceedings of the 3rd Inter-
Can. Geotech. J. Vol. 46, 2009
national Geotechnical Seminar on Deep Foundations on Bored
and Auger Piles, Ghent, Belgium, 19–21 October 1998. Edited
by W.F. Van Impe and W. Haegeman. A.A. Balkema, Rotter-
dam, the Netherlands. pp. 215–221.
Katzenbach, R., Moormann, C., and Quick, H. 1998b. A new con-
cept for the excavation of deep building pits in inner urban areas
combining top/down method and pile raft foundation. In Pro-
ceedings of the 7th International Conference and Exhibition on
Piling and Deep Foundations, Vienna, Austria, 15–17 June
1998. Deep Foundation Institute, Hawthorne, N.J. Paper 347.
pp. 5.17.1–5.17.13.
Kitiyodom, P., and Matsumoto, T. 2002. A simplified analysis
method for piled raft and pile group foundations with batter
piles. International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Meth-
ods in Geomechanics, 26(13): 1349–1369. doi:10.1002/nag.248.
Kitiyodom, P., and Matsumoto, T. 2003. A simplified analysis
method for piled raft foundations in non-homogeneous soils. In-
ternational Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in
Geomechanics, 27(2): 85–109. doi:10.1002/nag.264.
Kitiyodom, P., Matsumoto, T., and Kanefusa, N. 2004. Influence of
reaction piles on the behaviour of test pile in static load testing.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 41(3): 408–420. doi:10.1139/
t03-098.
Lee, C.Y. 1991. Discrete layer analysis of axially loaded piles and
pile groups. Computers and Geotechnics, 11(4): 295–313.
doi:10.1016/0266-352X(91)90014-7.
Majima, M., and Nagao, T. 2000. Behaviour of piled raft founda-
tion for tall building in Japan. In Design applications of raft
foundations. Edited by J.A. Hemsley. Thomas Telford, London.
pp. 393–410.
Mindlin, R.D. 1936. Force at a point interior of a semi-infinite so-
lid. Physics, 7: 195–202. doi:10.1063/1.1745385.
Ohta, Y., and Goto, N. 1976. Estimation of S-wave velocity in
terms of characteristics indices of soil. BUTSURI-TANKO. So-
ciety of Exploration Geophysicists of Japan, 29(4): 31–41. [In
Japanese.]
Poulos, H.G. 2001. Piled raft foundations – design and applica-
tions. Géotechnique, 51(2): 95–113.
Poulos, H.G., and Davids, A.J. 2005. Foundation design for the
Emirates Twin Towers. Dubai. Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
42(3): 716–730. doi:10.1139/t05-004.
Poulos, H.G., and Davis, E.H. 1980. Pile foundation analysis and
design. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Sommer, H., Tamaro, G., and DeBenedittis, C. 1991. Messe Turm,
foundations for the tallest building in Europe. In Proceedings of
the 4th International Conference on Piling and Deep Founda-
tions, Stresa, Italy, 7–12 April 1991. Balkema, Rotterdam, the
Netherlands. pp. 139–145.
Steinbrenner, W. 1934. Tafeln zur Setzungberechnung. Die Strasse,
1: 121–124. (as referenced in Poulos and Davis 1980). [In Ger-
man.]
Tanaka, T., Segawa, T., Katoh, Y., Kakurai, M., and Tomono, M.
1987. A design of foundation and the behaviour of a tall build-
ing at Kobe Port Island. In Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Geotechnical Engineering of Soft Soils, Mexico
City, Mexico, 3–14 August 1987. Edited by M. Mendoza and L.
Montańez. Mexican Society for Soil Mechanics, Mexico City.
pp. 389–396.
Uto, K., Okahara, M., Ikeda, K., Maeda, Y., and Matsui, K. 1987.
Bearing properties and reliability of friction piles. In Proceed-
ings of the 32nd Symposium of the Japanese Society of Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, 9 November
1987. Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engi-
neering, Tokyo. pp. 17–22. [In Japanese.]
Published by NRC Research Press
 Sonoda et al.
Yamada, T., Yamashita, K., Kakurai, M., and Tsukatani, H. 2001.
Long-term behaviour of tall building on raft foundation con-
structed by top-down method. In Proceedings of the 5th Inter-
national Conference on Deep Foundation Practice, Singapore,
5–6 April 2001. CI-Premier Pte Ltd., Singapore. pp. 411–417.
Yamakata, K., and Nagai, K. 1981. Approximate equations for re-
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15
lationships of skin friction and settlement of piles and their sta-
tistics. In Proceedings of 1981 Annual Meeting of Japan
Architectural Institute, Fukuoka, Japan, 28–30 September 1981.
Architectural Institute of Japan, Tokyo. pp. 2315–2316. [In Japa-
nese.]
Yamakata, K., Tominaga, K., and Ko, K. 1983. A consideration on
base load-base settlement relations of cast-in-situ concrete piles.
In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of Japanese Society
of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Kooriyama, 9–
11 June 1983. Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and Founda-
tion Engineering, Tokyo. pp. 1001–1004. [In Japanese.]
For personal use only.
159
Yamashita, K., and Kakurai, M. 1991. Settlement behavior of raft
foundation with friction piles. In Proceedings of the 4th Interna-
tional Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, Stresa, Italy,
7–12 April 1991. Balkema, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
pp. 461–466.
Yamashita, K., Kakurai, M., and Yamada, T. 1994. Investigation of
a piled raft foundation on stiff clay. In Proceedings of the 13th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation En-
gineering (ICSMFE), New Delhi, 5–10 January 1994. A.A.
Balkema, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Vol. 3. pp. 543–546.
Yamashita, K., Yamada, T., and Kakurai, M. 1998. Simplified
method for analyzing piled raft foundations. In Proceedings of
the 3rd International Geotechnical Seminar on Deep Foundations
on Bored and Auger Piles, Ghent, Belgium, 19–21 October
1998. Edited by W.F. Van Impe and W. Haegeman. A.A. Balk-
ema, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. pp. 457–464.
Published by NRC Research Press
 This article has been cited by:

1. Yaru Lv, Hanlong Liu, Charles W.W. Ng, Xuanming Ding, Anthony Gunawan. 2014. Three-dimensional numerical analysis of
the stress transfer mechanism of XCC piled raft foundation. Computers and Geotechnics 55, 365-377. [CrossRef]
2. V.A. Sawant, S.V. Pawar, K.B. Ladhane. 2012. Parametric study of piled raft for three load-patterns. Coupled Systems Mechanics
1, 115-131. [CrossRef]
Can. Geotech. J. Downloaded from www.nrcresearchpress.com by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY BOMBAY on 10/15/15

3. PASTSAKORN KITIYODOM, TATSUNORI MATSUMOTO, RYUUICHI SONODA. 2011. APPROXIMATE

NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF A LARGE PILED RAFT FOUNDATION. SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS 51, 1-10.
[CrossRef]
For personal use only.