.
SPE 6285
Pullout Tests of Piles in Sand
L. C. Reese, SPE-AIME, U. of Texas
W. R. COX, Tern, Inc.
Introduction
Pullout tesk on open-steel pipe piles in sand vveIErun at
the Shell Oil Co. Tank Battery on Mustang Island, Tex.
The map in Fig, 1indicates the test site. About 5 ft of fill
was excavated at the site so that the water table would be
at ground surface. Two instrumented test piles were
driven and pullout tests were performed before and aiter
lateral loading.
Test Equipment and Test Piles
Test Setup and Teat Piles
The test setup and test piles are shown in Fig. 2. Two
reaction beams, one on each side of the tes. pile, rested on
timber mats. Two hydraulicjacks with pumping units and
pressure gauges rested on the reaction beams. A 10-ft
section of 24-in.-diameter pile was specially made and
welded ro the top of the test pile. Two small-diameter
piles were driven to support deflection gauges used to
measure movement of the pile top. Cables from deflec-
tion and strain gauges were run from the pile to the
instrumentation system housed in a van parked beside the
excavated area.
Two test piles were manufactured from seamless steel
pipe (ASTM A-53, Grade B) with 24-in. OD. The wall
was -%-in. thick and,weighed 94.6 lb/ft. The piles were
composed of a 10-ftloading section, a 32-ft instrumented
section, and 38-ft anchor section (Fig. 2). The in-
strumented section was sealed off by diaphragms at the
top and bottom of the section to prevent moi..ture from
0149.2136/78/C&13.6285W,2i5
c 1976 Soctelyof F8troleumEngineers01AlME.
Three pullout tests on two instrumented 24-in .-diameter, steel-pipe piles were performed in a
deep sand deposit at Mustang Island, Tex., to determine the tension capacity of a pile and to
assess the Sfects of lateral loading on puliout resistance. Test equipment and procedures are
described and results of strain data and load vspile-top movement are presented. Skinfriction
parameters are determinedfiom these results.
MARCH, 1978
@
damaging the strain gauges. Wires from these gauges
were passed through pressure-packing glands in the dia-
phragm at the top of the instrumented section.
Each pile had 40 strain gauges — 34 active and 6
unstrained dummies. The 120-ohm strain gauges were
0.50- x 0,50-in, metal foil, Strain-gauge spacing in the
32-ft section is indicated in Fig. 2.
Both test piles were driven with a Delmag-12 diesel
hammer, The 38-ft open-ended, uninstrumented section
was driven until its top was about 3 ft above the soil
surface. Next, the soil plug inside the section was au-
gered out completely to keep it from driving against the
diaphragm in the bottom of the 32-ft instrumented sec-
tion, After welding the 32-ft section to the 38-ft section,
driving was resumed and the pile was driven to grade,
with the pile flange approximately 1 ft above the soil
surface. The pile was embedded 69 ft.
Measurementof Load, Strain, and Deflection
During the pullout tests, readings were taken of the ap-
plied load, the deflection of the top of the pile, and the
axial strain along the pile, The applied load was obtained
by reading bourdon-tube pressure gauges that measured
the hydraulic pressure in the jacks. The pile deflection
was obtained from dial indicators and by use of linear-
displacement transducers. Output from the displacement
transducers and f~omstrain ga~ges was recorded with a
digital recording system.
To increasethe magnitude of the strain measurements,
active strain gauges on opposing diameters of the piles
343
were wired as opposite arms of a Whetstone bridge. This
technique doubles the recorded strains and also cancels :’
.
out strains resulting from bending moment in the pile.
Two unstrained dummy gauges, common to all the EX:A;W:ED i
strain-gauge input channels, completed the bridge. The
set of dummy gauges was wired in from inside tie piles PILE 2 I
through two 2-pole, 20-position switches so that the
m-wl;:lffl
dummy gauges could be switched along for ail the active
gm.tgeinputs. PILES
I
I >
‘Mlections at the pile top were measured by both !4%” , # ,{ - 4?’
eh trical gauges and dial indicators. These electrical +- I
gauges were Iinear transducers set to a sensitivity of p= 3’-0”
T ~— —x\
0.004 in. The two dial indicators used as backups were 17’2
accurate to the nearestO.001 in. One gauge of each type 9:4 ‘.
was used on either side of the pile. Deflections recorded L’ -L —.
by these gauges were averaged to get the pile-top PILE I ‘i-5’- -jk
~ 5’ 1’
movement. iLDPE
~:~
I

~
u% \ /
— -:
l%rt Aransas,
\ m?%?-
● 6’. ● -26’ ●.6’
Fig. 3—Location of borings and piles inside excavation.

TYPE 3.D@omsomptera 2. SSWI.

SC+UW ,- _

Fig. 1—Location of tfiYStsite.

0’ SECTION-. ELECTRICAL LEADS FROh:

E-!kkz7
Eli M-w
1a
an fme $and with $twll frWnEf3SI
orgmc
fmtwr
-sandY C!aY wafm~5’f68’ ~ ;;’ I -o

“‘1
F
+Io -

Jl!-J
STRAIN GIIGES TO DIGITAL 10 ,6.-
JACK ~~CT,ON y$,slTlm 16!

la H
[ .,
~ -l@t Q?OYbdow 15’
t 29,
-10

- SYSTEM o
i !, 1
I 5%- i ‘7 -20

E
f;-’’’ys’’ys’’’y o’’z$’ ;! ,!
. 35 1
30 a .x
1!
1: 69.
, (1
L
~;;
79! b!
i -30

y
40 33 ‘

-f,
,:,
%
--t~=-
@mn qroydoywtishdli - ‘~ - i .-
1,

~“~&&’ :Q”Y CIOYWQmS

41 , IIllr”

t60.,’;~ 90/10” ~“’--~ i I I I

-LMW-!-H;
.7 ;! ,Z

b 1
.!~lx
-70 , 8
. L.. —..
~

I —
‘F, fmgraychy 13” —
00 -——. —..-

—,

-30 I M_-’ >DIApFIRA~

-32 ‘-.:
L
~
-69[ ;,, I I I El I i___ sxv4v..._L. I I i I I I iJ_L.L
02 7— 12 14 19 2426
tiWZC+JTAL DISTANCE IN FEET
Fig. 2—Schs?maticdrawingbf test setup. Fig. 4-Log of Boring 1.

344 JOURNALOF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY

 Description of Tests
LOG OF BORING NO. 2
MUSTANG ISLAND
Soil Investigation and Soil Borings
Two soil borings were made at the test site before exca-
vating the test area and installing the test piles, The
location of these borings is shown in Fig. 3.
In Boring 1, samples were taken continuously to 65 ft
by alternating a 2-in. spilt-spoon sampler with a 3-in.
piston sampler. Below 65 ft, samples were taken at about
5-ft intervals to 80 ft. The piston sampler was used
because it can recover sand below the water table with a
minimum of disturbance, As piston samples were taken,
volume measurements of the samples were made before
sending them to the laboratory to determine natural densi-
ties. Standard penetration tests were performed with
split-spoon samples fmm Boring 1. Blows per foot from
these tests are shown in the log of Boring 1 in Fig. 4.
d
A
60
‘t
SoftQroy—--
clay
..-+&fio ,,
‘ ~ Also shown are unconfined compression strengths of
cohesive samples determined in the field with a hand
\.4c
~:’:!
~: ? penetrometero
5
—...
6,
In Boring 2, most sampies were taken with a 2-in,
*~: -c...w,., ..!. ” ,.”. ...rnl. -1 ,*
u .,,,, ,,,,. ;42
-shall fra monfn ~ sandy cloy “- r II 4.% split-spoon attached to a wire-line sampler.1 Samples
q::,
❑
nams, 5 1’to95 .- ..J I i:: were taken using the conventional method as in Boring 1
I@ ! “’” : l-––––– ---—+----’
to 15ft, but a wire-line sampler was used from 15to 85 ft.

+&-
--: Samples were taken at approximately 5-ft intervals, The
?0.. ■

I3?
gray my
FIEM
lermc,a
?3 S’to 75’ +-+-jy””-p-.
fed mrd a sandy clay,

-iraq of shjll fragmcms Mow * ;. ~

number of hammer blows required for penetration of the
split spoon attached to the wire !ine was reeorded, While
the wire-linesampling procedure is unlike that used in the
conventional standard penetration test, both procedures
% _ ..:@, . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . _.*~
‘* -7’5- - ---- “ —
appear to give about thfisame driving resistancc in blows
,30:” .- --& .--~——
—. !, per foot, A log of Boring 2 is shown in Fig. 5.
—
— ,, --9( Laboratory tests were run on all piston samples fmm
1’G
—. -.——.—4——
.--. --. — Boring 1to determine minimum, maximum, and natural
, densities. The results are presented gmphically in Fig. 6.
- .- :,, 1 ..10(
1
— .
---
,of* W:l,,,,.,
.—-.
1
. . J. .l...LA_ 1’ _J_.~. .
The relative densities computed from those indicated in
cCUPLET [91, CXPTII .95 DATE A,Qu’t 20.196! Fig. 6 are compared with driving resistance of the sam-
pler in Fig. 7.
Fig. 5—Log of Boring 2. In addition to density determinations, a mechanical

RESISTANCE IN BLOWS PER FT

~0 20 40 60 60 100
.5,15
DENSITY IN LB PER CU FT ,........... -’””””””w ‘
% w:; ,,,...
10 t

/
30 — +
20
t-

60
GORING

?0 /

60 {
80 -y a -?4.8s
~lNG

70
900~-84.85

RE?:TIVE 6&NSl#
soL_ .I .-L. l_.J_J-7411 Fig, 7—Results of standard penetrationtest G,d relative-density
Fig. 6—Results of density tests on piston samples. values determinedfrom piston samp@s.

MARCH, 1978 345

 US STAN~D SIEVE GRAIN SIZE CURVES

+
1- =
~
$’
$ i%
z ;
g a
u
c s
+ l--
i% z
u
!5
a
a
E u
a

GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS

GRAvEL I SAND
S1LT or CLAY
II COARSE FINE ]COiRSd MEDIUM FINE { I
Fig. 8—Range of grain sizes.

analysis test was run on selected piston samples to deter-
mine their groin-size distribution. Six mechanical anal-
yses we~ run.1 Grain-size ranges from these tests are
shown in Fig. 8.
Summary of Soil Investigation
The sand striitum at the site was underlain by two layers
of clay. The upper layer was from – 35- to - 45-ft.
elevation, and the second layer began at a – 65-ft eleva-
tion and still was evident in the last sample at -80 ft.
Sand at the test site varied from uniformly graded, fine
sand to uniformly graded, silty, fine sand, with from Oto
15 percent of the fines passing the No. 200 sieve. Clas-
sification of the sand based on N values~ indicated a
medium dense sand from Oto 20 ft and a dense sand from
20 to 40 ft and from 50 to 70 ft. Classification of the
material based on the relative density values~ from
Boring 1 indicated a medium sand from 5 to IOft. while
the rest of the material was a dense sand. Relative densi-
ties of the sand were high. ranging from 85 to 100
percent.
Classification of material from Boring 1 compared
with Boring 2 shows a slight variation in the sand deposit
AXIAL LOAD , lbS X 103
I
in the top 40 ft. At Boring 1this stratum was classified as
fine sand, while the same stratum in Boting 2 was cktssi-
fied as silty fine sand. These differences appear to pro-
duce only a slight difference in the pullout capacity of
Piles 1and 2.
Pullout Test Procedure
Before loads were applied to the pile, each s~ain-gauge
channel was balanced and the zero-load readings were
recorded. Loads then were applied in 20,000-lb incre-
ments. As a particular load was reached, it was held
constant for 1 minute before strain and deflection read-
ings wem taken and during the 90 seconds required to
record the strain data and to read the dial indicators.
Loads then were incremed to the next load level in a
period of about 30 seconds. After the pile had failed, that
is, started moving excessively for a very small increase in
load, the load was decreased, Strain readings were taken
at convenient load levels until all the load was removed.
During all the pullout tests, the water table was main-
tained several inches above the ground surface to simu-
late offshore conditions.
Pullout Teats
TWOpullout tes~,were performed on Pile 2. The first test
was conductedApril 4, 1966, before lateralloading of the
pile; the second was performed April 18 and followed a

-.
series of static- and cyclic-load tests on the pile.1
Only one pullout test was conducted on Pile 1. It was
done April 20, 1966, after all lateral-load tests on the pile
had been completed.
.. . Summary of Pullout Test Data
Fig. 9 shows load vs deflection for each test, The de-
flection used in these plots was obtained from linear-
dispiacement transducer data.
+’
Analysis of Test Data
i—_L__l_.J_J__LJ_L-J ‘ – 1 Pile Failure L~ds
In these tests, the failure load was selected at the point on
Fig. 9—Load-ffeflection cuwes.

346 JOURNALOF PETROLEUMTECHNOLOGY

the load-deflectioncurve where a further increase in load TABLE l—PULLOUT FAILURE LOADS
would cause a significant increase in deflection. Failure Load
The failure load .is the result of the dead weight of the . ..-.Pile
-. Test Sequence (kips)
pile, tile soil plug inside the pile, water inside the pile, Mustang2” P&t6;al ,Load Tests 387
buoyancy at the bottom of the pile, and soil friction on the Mustang2 Postlateral-LoadTests .391
outside of the pile. The adjusted failure load is defined as Mustang 1 Postlateral-LoadTests 445
the amount of failure load resisted by skin friction along
the outside wall of the pipe pile. The adjusted failure load TABLE 2-COEFFICIENTS OF LATERALEART I QRESSURE
for each test is tabulated in Table 1, FOR ENTIRE DEPTH OF SAND
The curves shown in Fig. 9 and the data in Table 1 Pile ..-. Sequence K Values
show that lateral loading had little or no effect on the Mustat~g2 Prelateral-LoadT&t 0.78”
failure load. The difference in the shape of the two Mustang2 Postlateral-LoadTest 0.79
curves, for prelateral loading and postlateral loading, is Mustang 1 Postlateral-Lear!Test 0.91
unexplained,
TABLE 3-COEFFICIENTS OF LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE
Load-Distribution Curves FOR EACH SAND STRATUM
Typical load-distribution curves are shown a!ong the K Values
instrumented pile section for the prelateral-load test of Sand Strata
Pile 2 in Fig, 10, Apparently, most of the scatter shown in Pile Sequence oto35ft 45 to 65 ft
the data resulted from misalignment of the strain ga~ges, Mu&ang2 Pr61ater&Load Test O.i?f) 1.05
variations in gauge constants, and variations in the pilc- Mustang2 Postlateral-LoadTest 0.30 1.06
wall thickness. These effects could have been canceled Mustang 1 Postlateral-LoadTest 0.34 1.23
by calibrating the piles with axial loads.
An interesting characteristic of these curves and of all Using the second assumption, the unit load transfer or
load-distribution curves for the iristrumentedupper 29 ft skin fraction at any depth on a steel pile maybe expressed
of the piles was the small amount of load removed by the by the foilowirtgequation:
soil, In every case, the load removed accounted for only ~:= K,p:tanc&’, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1)
about 20 percent of the applied load. After cyclic lateral
loading, a smal! additional amount of the applied axial where
load was removed by the soil in the upper 29 ft. K: = coefficient of lateral earth pressure at
depth z,
Discussion of Transfer of Load From Pile to Soil
p: = effective overburden pressure at depth:,
Considering a section of an axially loaded pile and the
surrounding sand when the maximum load trmtsfer is 4:’ = angle of friction between the sand and the
present between pile and soil, the section of pile appar- pile at depth z.
ently must have moved to cause the load-transfer In general, the parameters K: and @:’vary with depth,
development. The .esuiting sand-grain movement is in- but their evaluation is not possible from the available
determinate: however, there are two assumed limiting data, However, an approximate analysis can be made to
conditions that lead to a simple analytical procedure. determine average values of K: (called K) if the value of
First, it ctm be assumed that the wall of the piie is rough +’ can be inferred from laboratory data,
and that some sand grains are likely to be carried along as The Iateraiearth-pressure coefficients shown in Table
the pile moves. In this case, a failure surface develops in 2 were computed by assuming that K is constant along the
the soil near the pile face. Second, it can be assumed that entire length of the pile portion embedded in sand. The
the wall of the pile is relatively smooth, in which case the load transferredfrom the pile into the sand was computed
failure surface is at the interface of the pile and the sand. by subtracting from the failure ioad that portion of the
The Ia..t assumption is more consewative and more load assumed to be trdnsfemed to the ciay, There were
nearly agrees wii available experimental evidence. clay strata between an elevation of -35 and -45 ft and
beiow -65 ft. Severai pile experimefiLsreported in the
AXIAL LOAO, pounds n 103
technicai Iiterature established that load transfer in a
cohesive soii is approximated by a fraction of the undis-
turbed shear strength of the soil. An estimated load of 41
kips was transferred to the ciay.
The coefficients in Table 3 were computed in much the
same way as before, except that experimental data from
strain-gauge readings were used to obtain the portion of,
the ioad transferred to the upper layer of sand. The load
transferred to the iower sand iayer was obtained by sub-
traction, with the load tmnsferred to the clay strata com-
puted as before. We wanted to use the strain-gauge data
to obtain the ioad distribution as a function of depth,
allowing the K vaiues to be computed as a function of
depth. Unfortunately, these data did not provide that
degree of discrimination.
Hg. 10—Load-distribution, Pile 2: prelateral-loadtests. Fig. 1i shows a psotof theK values from Table 3 vs the
MARCH, 1978 347
 ., ..
corresponding mid-de~f$s”~fde Wsp&tiVe~~~ sirata,
The solid line indicateslhe bes~kitfor the MustatmIsland
data, while the dashed iine k the lower,boun~ of the
Mustang Island data. The data suggest d.$alueof zero for
K at the ground surface.
Using the experimental evidence, the value of K for
open-pipe piles driven’ into sand like that at Mustang
Island can k found with the following equation:
K= KLZ, . .,.,,.,,. . .,,.,.,., . . . . . . . . . . (2)
where
KI =0,0167, ft-’,
and
z = depth below ground surface, ft.
This equation is indicated by the dashed line in Fig. 11,
Discussion
Considering the phenomenon of the interaction of a pile
and the surrounding sand during pile driving allows
speculation about the increase in K with depth, As a
section of pile is driven into soil, there are two explana-
tions for the soil “sbehavior in accommodating the em-
bedded volume.
1, There is a bearing-capacity failure, and a soil vol-
ume equal to the volume of the embedded pile is heaved
above the original ground surface.
2. There is a decrease in soil volume near the pile
caused by densification and there is little or no heave, or,
more commonly, the ground surface actually may settle,
showing a total volume change in the soil even greater
than the embedded pile volume.
The first phenomenon described normally is observed
for piles driven into saturated clay. The volume of the
saturated clay cannot be changed rapidly because it can-
not drain readily. Little change in volume is associated
with any possible increase in total stress.
The second phenomenon described above normally
is observed for piles driven into sand. A conical-shaped
depression was observed around the piles. i The pore
spaces in a sand are relatively large, permitting rapid and
easy waterpassage. A decrease in the void ratio can occur
bemuse of vibration and a consequent decrease in the
K Acknowledgments
I .0
I I 1 I
o - MUSTANG ISLAND
. Co., Chevron Oil Field Research Co., Exxon Production
20 -
I Limit of Gperience
Fig, 11—Variation of the coefficients of lateral
with depth.
3-W
w -L
.
sand volume, if the grains have been placed by nature
with anything less than the densest packing,
Further, imagine the pile as a vibrator, vibrating both
longitudinally and laterally. Sand grains in the vicinity of
the pile are set in motion and probably move downward
and outward, relative to their original positions. As the
pile tip moves pmt a given position, the sand grains
undergo their maximum displacement. After much of the
pile has moved past a given position, the sand grains are
relatively motionless, except for a possible small in-
and-out movement resulting from the lateral vibrationsof
the pile.
When pile driving is stopped, the pressurebetween the
sand and the pile wall probably will be much less than the
lateral pressure among sand grains at some distance from
the pile wall, Because of arching, the lateral soil stresses
flow around the pih~instead of impinging against it. The
result is the same as if a right circular cylinder was
embedded somehow in a sand stxatumand then forced to
decrease slightly in diameter. A natural arch develops in
the sand grains, and is stabilized by light pressure from
the cylinder, The earth pressure follows the stiff arch in
the sand grains, rather than acting directly on the pile
wall.
As points are considered along the pile at increasing
depths, it can be assumed that the additional overburden
pressure acts to hold the sand grains closer to the pile
wall. Thus, the lateral pressure relative to the overburden
pressure increases with depth, In other words, the value
of K increases with depth, as observed in these
experiments.
Conclusions
No adequate explanations can be given for the effects of
pile driving on the sand properties, for the stress condi-
tions in the pile and sand following the installation of the
pile, and for the interaction of the pile and sand under
load. Therefore, it is not possible now to present a ra-
tional theory for the design of axially loadedpiles in sand.
The data obtained in these expenmermsshould be use-
ful to designers, The analysis of the data presented in Fig.
11 is interesting, but is by no means conclusive, Addi-
tional load tests of instrumented piles installed in sand are
needed.
1.5
I I I Francis D. Koop and Berry R. Grubbs participated
actively in the experimental studies and data reduction.
These studies were sponsored by Amoco Production
Research Co., Mobil Research and Development Corp.,
and Shell Development Co. Shell Development Co, was
the operator of the project.
References
1. Cox, W. R. and Reese. L. C.: “Field Testingof Latemlly Loaded
Piles in Sand. “’ paper OTC 2079 presented M the Sixffr Annual
OffshoreTechnologyConference,Housmn,Miay6-8.1974.
65 ft - I 2. Peck, R. B., Hanson, W. E., and Thornbum, T. H.: Fowtdwiw
.!i%gimvift.~, John Wiley& Sons, Inc. t New York ( 1953).
3. Terzaghi. Karl: “Evaluation of Cwfticien[s of Subgmdc Reac-
!ion, ” Geokdwiqm ( Dec. 19S5) 5,297-326. Jl?T
OWnal Paper racwved n Socrnryof Pelroleun Engnaers oflce March 19, 1976.
Paper a~pled for publ[cetonAwI 4, 1977. Rewed manuacnpt recmed June 14.
earth pressures 1977, Pa~r &iPE 6285) fmsl presented al the E@dh Annual offshore Temobw
bnfereMW,Md in Houston, May 3.6,1976.
JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY