FOUNDATION ANALYSIS

Table of Contents

Chapter Title Page

1. Introduction 3
1. Location ___________________________________________________________________________ 3
1.1 Report Scope _______________________________________________________________________ 3

2 Soil Investigation 4
2.1 Soil Investigation in the Field ___________________________________________________________ 4

3 Design Criteria and Soil Parameters 6

3.1 Design Criteria ______________________________________________________________________ 6
3.2 Parameter Correlation ________________________________________________________________ 6

4 Analysis Methodology 12
4.1 Axial Bearing Capacity of Foundation ___________________________________________________ 12
4.1.1 American Petroleum Institute Method (API) RP2A _________________________________________ 12
4.1.1.1 Cohesive Soil : _____________________________________________________________________ 12
4.1.1.2 Cohesive Soil : _____________________________________________________________________ 13
4.1.2 Reverse lambda method _____________________________________________________________ 15
4.1.2.1 Cohesive Soil ______________________________________________________________________ 15
4.1.2.2 Non cohesive soil ___________________________________________________________________ 15
4.1.3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Method (USACE) __________________________________________ 16
4.1.3.1 Non cohesive soil ___________________________________________________________________ 16
4.1.3.2 Cohesive Soil ______________________________________________________________________ 17
4.1.4 Federal Highway Administration Method (FHWA) __________________________________________ 18
4.1.4.1 End Bearing _______________________________________________________________________ 18
4.1.4.2 Side Friction _______________________________________________________________________ 19

5 Foundation Analysis 20
5.1 Bearing Capacity of Foundation________________________________________________________ 20
5.1.1 Bearing Capacity ___________________________________________________________________ 20
5.1.2 Lateral Bearing Capacity _____________________________________________________________ 23
5.1.3 Spring Constant ____________________________________________________________________ 29
List of Figures
Figure 1. 1: Site Plan planning plan and location of soil investigation point ______________________________3
Figure 3. 1: Correlation of Undrained Shear Strength to N-SPT value __________________________________7
Figure 3.2: Correlation of Friction Angle to N-SPT _________________________________________________7
Figure 4. 1: αx Values Recommended by RP2A API (1986)_________________________________________12
Figure 4.2: Pile Load Transfer Curve (t-z) based on the RP 2A-WSD API ______________________________14
Figure 4.3: Relationship between  and Undrained Shear Strength___________________________________17
Figure 4. 4: Values of 1 and 2 Apply to Pile ___________________________________________________17
Figure 4. 5: N'q Coefficient and Bearing Capacity Factor Graph for FHWA Method_______________________18
Figure 4. 6: Graph of the Relationship between Maximum units Pile Point Resistance and Friction Angle for non-
Cohesive Soils (Meyerhof 1976) _________________________________________________19
Figure 4. 7: Adhesion Factors for Piles on Loams (Method a) (Tomlinson,1980) _________________________19
Figure 5. 1: Results of axial Bearing capacity analysis by various methods (Ultra Rapid Coagulation) ________20
Figure 5. 2: Results of axial Bearing capacity analysis by various methods (Filters Area) __________________21
Figure 5. 3: Results of axial Bearing capacity analysis by various methods (Receiving Well) _______________22
Figure 5. 4: Lateral bearing capacity analysis results (Ultra Rapid Coagulation) _________________________23
Figure 5. 5: Lateral bearing capacity analysis results (Filters Area) ___________________________________24
Figure 5. 6: Lateral bearing capacity analysis results (Receiving Well) ________________________________25
Figure 5. 7: Pile group sketch ________________________________________________________________26
Figure 5. 8: Output the group analysis (service load) ______________________________________________27
Figure 5. 9: Output the group analysis (earthquake load) ___________________________________________28
List of Table
Table 3.1: Correlation of Unit Weight Parameters Soil ______________________________________________6
Table 4. 1: δ Value for Non-Cohesive Soils _____________________________________________________13
Table 4. 2: Load Transfer Curve Definition Based on API 2A-WSD ___________________________________14
Table 4. 3: N q Value for Non Cohesive Soils ____________________________________________________15
Tabel 4.4: Critical Depth (Dc) Recommendation on Sand Soils ______________________________________16
Table 4. 5: Recommended d Value ____________________________________________________________16
Table 4. 6: Common values for Corrected K (K c and Kt) ___________________________________________16
Table 5. 2: Recapitulation of Lateral Bearing Capacity based on the specified Maximum Deflection (Ultra Rapid
Coagulation) _________________________________________________________________23
Table 5. 1: Recapitulation of Lateral Bearing Capacity based on the specified Maximum Deflection (Filters Area)
___________________________________________________________________________24
Table 5. 2: Recapitulation of Lateral Bearing Capacity based on the specified Maximum Deflection (Receiving
Well) _______________________________________________________________________25
Table 5. 3: Pile and soil properties for Group analysis _____________________________________________26
Table 5. 4: Pile and soil properties for Group analysis _____________________________________________29
Table 5. 5: Resume of group analysis __________________________________________________________29
Table 5. 6: Recapitulation of Lateral Bearing Capacity Tbased on the specified Maximum Deflection. ________29
1. Introduction

1. Location

In the construction of the Ultra Rapid Coagulation area, Receiving Well and Filters , there are several soil
investigations around it. In planning, drilling test result data (BH-03) and Cone Penetration Test S.9 is used.
detailed site plan soil investigation point is used shown in Figure 1.1

Here are the Site Plan figure, the location of the soil investigation point and soil stratification:

Figure 1. 1: Site Plan planning plan and location of soil investigation point

1.1 Report Scope

The scope of work in the CSP foundation study is described as follows.

1) Determine the soil coating of the design based on the results of soil investigations in the Ultra Rapid
Coagulation area;
2) Interpretation of soil investigation results in the form of determining design parameters for each soil
layering based on soil investigation data;
3) Conducting single pole analysis using several analysis methods, namely FHWA Method, USACE,
Revised Lambda and API method.
2 Soil Investigation

2.1 Soil Investigation in the Field

The soil investigation work in the URC (Ultra Rapid Coagulation) and Filters area used in the design was
BH-03 and the Receiving Well S.9, where the drill was closest to the review site. The results of the BH-03
drilling test can be seen in Figure 2.1 and for the S.9 can be seen in Figure 2.2.

Figure 2. 1: BH-03 drilling test results

Figure 2. 2: S.9 Cone penetration test
3 Design Criteria and Specification

3.1 Reference

Reference for geotechnical calculation, we reference by: SNI 8460-2017 Geotechnics

3.2 Requirement for Design

Design Criteria for geotechnical specification, it is:

a) The deep foundation system must be able to carry all the loads that work on it and be able to transfer
those loads to the subsoil below without any failures.
b) The pile foundation system used should also be planned to bear negative skin friction (if any) that may
occur as a result of a larger base subsidence of the mast.
c) The safety factor used for the axial bearing capacity of service conditions is SF = 2.5 for end bearing
and skin friction.
d) Lateral deformation is based on concrete spun pile class and moment crack of spun class.
e) The axial bearing capacity on the pile foundation must be verified by conducting pile testing in
accordance with SNI 8460:2017.

3.3 Parameter Correlation

Soil correlation is carried out to obtain design parameters based on the results of field tests. The following
are the soil correlations used in this report.

a) Unit Weight Parameters

The unit weight parameter is obtained based on the consistency of the drilling soil as shown in the
following figure.

Table 3.1: Correlation of Unit Weight Parameters Soil

3
Unit Weight (kN/m )
Tanah Kohesif Tanah Non kohesif
3 3
Konsistensi  (kN/m ) Kepadatan  (kN/m )
Very Soft 14 - 15 Very Loose 15 - 16
Soft 15 - 16 Loose 16 - 17
Medium 16 - 17 Medium Dense 17 - 18
Stiff 17 - 18 Dense 18 - 19
Very Stiff 18 - 19 Very Dense > 20
Hard > 19
 b) Cohesion Parameter (Su)
To obtain the undrained cohesion parameter, a correlation of the N-SPT values is used, which
refers to Terzaghi & Peck 1967, while the correlation of undrained cohesion can be seen in the
following figure.

Figure 3. 1: Correlation of Undrained Shear Strength to N-SPT value

c) Friction Angle Parameters

The deep shear angle parameters for sand soils are correlated based on soil consistency with
reference to the correlation proposed by Peck as in the following table.

Figure 3.2: Correlation of Friction Angle to N-SPT

3.4 Specification for Precast Prestressed Pun Pile

3.4.1 Ground Condition

The contractor shall check the existing site condition including levels, slopes, drainage, presence of
obstacles such as foundation, tree stumps, etc and shall allow in hos rate for completing the work as
intended, no claims whats ever n respect of any discrepancies shall be enterntained.

3.4.2 Obstruction

All material shall be new. Materials workmanship conditions for the manufacture and installaton of piles
foundation shall be structly in accordance with the relevant clauses of specification.

3.4.3 Setting Out

The Constructor shall be responsible for setting out final positions and levels of each pile from some given
baselines and datum levels on the site agreed by the engineer, and shall be responsible for the accuracy of
the setting out. He shall employ a licensed surveyot approved by the engineer to do the work.

3.4.4 Tolerance

The maximum permissible deviation of the centre of each finished pile from the correct centre point as
approved by the engineer is 75 mm in any direction. Allowable deviation of the centre of pile for any single
pile group or single line of piles carrying structural load shall not be more than 25 mm laterally from its correct
position

The verticality of each pile shall not deviate at any position the contractor shall bear the cost of any additional
work which in the opinion of engineer, is necessary due to any pile being installed I aposition not within this
tolerance

3.4.5 Adjacent Piles

Piles shall be driven in such a mannel as to ensure that no damage and minimum disturbance is caused to
previously driven pieles in adjacent positions.

3.4.6 Stripping or cutting of piles to cut – off levels

Upon completion pf piling, the contractor shall strip off the piles to the required cut off level as shown in the
drawing provide. The piling contractor should allow for the above work in the contract price. From cut of
levels, pile starter bars should be constructed to not less than 40 times the bar diameer as per drawings, for
an adequate embedment into the pile cap.

Stripping should be done carefully by the contractor to avoid shattering and damage to the pile. Any cracked
or defective concrete should be cut away and made good with new concrete properly bonded to the old one.
The edges should be cut square unless the pile head is to be encassed in a cap. The contractor shall follow
up directly by checking the levels and giving accurate details of the pile positions as compared with the
positions as indicated on the pile layout drawings.

After stripping of pile to cut of level by the contractor, the pile shall be inspected by the engineer. If in the
engineer’s opinion, the pile is defective, the contractor shall be responsible to carry off necessary remedial
work as required by the engineer. Also, the eccentricity of all piles shall be checked by a licensed surveyor,
eployed by the contractor, at cut of level. If the eccentricity exceeds the allowable limit, all expenditure to
remedy the work shall be borne by thecontractor. The engineer’s decision in this regard shall be final.
3.4.7 Cleaning up

Te contractor shall remove from the site at intervals during the course pf the work and on completion all
unnecessary materials, plant, cut off piles, rubbish and debris resulting from te piling operations

3.4.8 Equipment and labour

The contractor shall provide all frames, equipment, lifting devices and labour necessary for the driving of
piles. He shall only use the type of piling rigs approved by the authority for the work.

Before the commencement of works, the contractor shall submit to the engineer full details of his working
programme, including the type of hammer which he intends to use.

The engineer shall order the removal or replacement any equipment whenever he thinks that such equipment
and staff are not suitable for the works.

3.4.9 Handling, pitching and driving of piles

The greatest care, to the statisfaction of the engineer, shall be taken in handling and slinging of piles and no
pile shall be lifted other than by slinging from approved lifting holes or points. Piles shall be pitched accurately
in their positions and on the appropriate lines and levels. No pile which has deflected from its course or
wrongly aligned shall be forcibly brougt back to alignment.

Before commencing the driving of each pile, the leaders or guides of the pile frame shall be checked for
plumb in any two directions and shall be maintained plump during dricing to the statisfaction of the engineer.
At o time during driving operation shall the centre of the pile monkey (or hydraulic ram) be more than 40 mm
off centre in respect to the pile being drivien in any given direction.

During driving, the heads of pile shall be protected by helmets of cast or mild steel, fitted closely around the
pile heads. A packing of coiled hemp rope or asbestos-free fibre, 25 mm thick, covering the head of the pile
and cushioning it, shall be placed within the helmet. The top of the helmet shall be recessed and fitted with
a stub dolly 300 mm long. The packing and stub dolly shall be renewed as often as necessary or as directed
by the engineer to prevent any damage to the pile.

Driving of the piles shall be continuous without interruptin. Ydraulic hammers are to be used to drive each
pile to the required oenetration length or the required set so as to provide the required load carrying capacity
as pre-determined.

Any pile damaged during handling, pitching, driving or at any other times shall be replaced with new piles at
the contractors expense, even if piles of bigger capacity are required

The pre-determined weight, type, and the height of fail of the hydraulic hammer to be used and the final set
to which the pile shall be driven, shall be strictly observed and shall be to the approval of the engineer

For pile to set : use of extension dolly or diesel hammer for driving piles to the required set as determined
shall be strictly disallowed.

No driving shall be carried out without the presence of the engineer or his representative who reserves the
absolute right to take measurements as and when he deems fit and necessary. Sequence of driving of pile
shall be to the approval or as directed by the engineer.
Any pile which is cracked or damaged during driving shall be cut off and recast or rejected as the engineer
may decide. The welding/cutting and/or replacement of piles shall be at the constractors expense.

3.4.10 Pile driving record

The contractor is to keep a complete continuous record for the actual penetration of each and every pile
driven and shall furnish copies are to be submitted daily to the engineer.

The piling records shall include data on the pile diameter or size, length, location, type, weight of hammer,
calculated safe working load, rate of penetration and nnumber of blows for every 300 mm penetration,
penetration under the last thirty blows of the pile, temporary compression and set, cut off level and final
penetration and any other relevant information which the engineer may require. The proposed thype of
recording forms to be used by the contractor shall be approved by the engineer prior to the commencement
of the piling works.

3.4.11 Re-driving

Observation and measurement shall be made at the site dlung the progress of driving piles, by any suitable
method approved by the engineer, to determine wheter a driven pile has been lifted from its original seat
duing the driving operation of adjacent piles. The contractor shall provide the necessary tools, instruments,
and any other assistance to record these measurements.

Where such observations r measurements indicate that a pile has been unseated, it shall be re-driving to the
specified set as determined by the engineer. No payment shall be made for re-driving of heaved piles. The
egineer reserves the right and authority to acceptor rejectet any pile unseated and heaved piles rejected
under this circumstance shall be considered as “failed” and shall be replaced at the contractor’s expense as
directed and to the satisfaction of the engineer.

3.4.12 Preboring

Preboring work before erection is necessary if based on the soil test results there is a lens or a thin hard soil
layer that does not allow it to be used as an end bearing, but the lens cannot be penetrated by direct erection
so a preboring process is needed to punch holes in the lens so that it can be penetrated by the pile during
erection, and the depth of the pile is obtained according to the pile foundation planning

After the preboring process reaches the depth of the lens and it is confirmed that the lens has been
penetrated by the drill bit, the drilling is stopped until it penetrates the lens. Furthermore, the erection process
is carried out.

For the use of the size of the drill bit is adjusted to the size of the pile, ideally the size of the drill bit is smaller
than the size of the pile in order to obtain maximum pile friction, but there are times even though the size of
the drill bit is the same as the size of the pile, however, when the erection was carried out, the pile could not
penetrate the lens, this was caused by several possibilities, including an avalanche in the borehole or indeed
the condition of the ground was quite harsh. This creates a new problem, namely, the condition of the
embedded pile becomes hanging because the drilling depth is deeper than the embedded pile so that the
pile must be replaced, by shifting the point according to planning calculations. Because the hanging piles
cannot be counted for their contribution to withstand the weight of the building.
4 Analysis Methodology

4.1 Axial Bearing Capacity of Foundation

Calculation of the axial bearing capacity of pile foundations using the APILE program. In this program,
the axial bearing capacity of the foundation can be calculated using 4 methods, namely the FHWA
Method, USACE Method, Lambda Method and RP2A API Method. In this study, the carrying capacity
of piles was used on average from some of these methods.

4.1.1 American Petroleum Institute Method (API) RP2A

The theoretical basis of the RP2A API Method is described as follows:

4.1.1.1 Cohesive Soil :

A. Skin Friction
The calculation of the skin friction for cohesive soil can be expressed in the formula:
𝐿
𝑄𝑠 = ∫ 𝑓𝑥 𝑑𝐴𝑥
0
Of
𝑄𝑠 = 𝑓 𝑥 𝐴
Where:
f = Friction Angle
A = Cross-sectional area
Skin friction is calculated using the following formula:

fx = αx . cx
Where :
αx = Shear strength coefficient of undrained soil
cx = Shear strength of undrained soil (tsf)
αx value obtained from the chart recommended by the RP2A API (1986), it can be seen in the
following figure.

Figure 4. 1: αx Values Recommended by RP2A API (1986)

B. End Bearing Capacity
For cohesive soils used formula;
𝑄𝑝 = 𝑞 𝑥 𝐴𝑝
Where:
q = End Bearing Capacity
Ap = Cross-sectional area of the pile
The end bearing capacity of the pile is calculated using the following formula:
q= 9.c
Where :
c = Undrained Shear Strength

4.1.1.2 Cohesive Soil :

A. Skin Friction
The calculation of skin friction pile on non-cohesive soils uses the following formula:
𝑄𝑠 = 𝑓 𝑥 𝐴
Where:
F = Skin Friction
A = Cross-sectional area
Skin Friction is calculated using the following formula:
𝑓 = 𝑘 𝑥 (𝑡𝑎𝑛𝛿 ) 𝑥 𝑝̅𝑜 = 𝛽 𝑥 𝑝̅𝑜
Where:
k = Ground pressure coefficient. For k = 0.8 it is recommended for open-ended pipe piles,
for k = 1 it is recommended for full displacement piles.
𝑝𝑜 = Effective pressure overburden
̅̅̅
δ = Skin Angle between the end and the skin pile
The δ values can be seen in the following table:

Table 4. 1: δ Value for Non-Cohesive Soils

Note: on APILE the value of the friction angle between the ground and the pile wall δ =
ɸ - 5o

The load transfer curve against blanket resistance based on API RP 2A can be seen in the
following Figure and Table .

13
 Figure 4.2: Pile Load Transfer Curve (t-z) based on the RP 2A-WSD API

Table 4. 2: Load Transfer Curve Definition Based on API 2A-WSD

B. End Bearing Capacity

The calculation of the bearing capacity of the pile on non-cohesive soils uses the following
formula:
𝑄𝑝 = 𝑞 𝑥 𝐴
Where:
q = Skin Friction
A = Cross-sectional area
For end bearing capacity on non-cohesive soils, it is calculated using the following formula
recommendations from the API:
𝑞 = 𝑝̅𝑜 𝑥 𝑁𝑞
Where:
𝑝𝑜 = Effective pressure overburden
̅̅̅
Nq= Bearing capacity factor
The value of Nq can be seen in the following table :

14
 Table 4. 3: N q Value for Non Cohesive Soils

4.1.2 Reverse lambda method

The Lambda method was developed for clay soils, where the method is recommended that subsurface
soils consist of 75% or more of the clay soil.

4.1.2.1 Cohesive Soil

A. Skin Friction
Vijayvergiya dan Focht (1972) propose the following equation for the skin friction:
Qf = (pm +2cm) As
Where:
Qf = Axial load capacity in friction of the blanket;
l = The function of the coefficient of pole penetration;
pm = Average vertical effective stress between the ground surface and the end of the mast;
cm = Average undrained shear strength along the mast; and
As = Area of the side surface of the pole

B. End Bearing capacity

The Lambda method does not propose an end bearing capacity. Therefore, the APILE
program uses the API equation of tip resistance as in the following equation:
𝑄𝑝 = 𝑞 𝑥 𝐴𝑝
q= 9.c
Where:
q = Skin friction
Ap = Cross-sectional area of the pile
c = Shear strength of undrained soil

4.1.2.2 Non cohesive soil

A. Skin Friction
The sand layer is not part of the Lambda Method. In the Lambda Method, each layer of sand
in the model is converted into "equivalent" clay by using the following equation:
Equivalent cx = Effective stress * Ko * tan(phi)
Where:
cx = undrained shear strength on depth x

B. End Bearing Capacity

15
 The Lambda method does not propose an equation for the sand layer at the end resistance.
Therefore, the APILE program uses the API equation of tip resistance (previously described
in Section 4.1.1).

4.1.3 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Method (USACE)

4.1.3.1 Non cohesive soil

A. Skin Friction
USACE establishes that the friction of the pile in the sand increases linearly at an assumed
critical depth (Dc). The critical depth varies between 10 to 20 pole diameters or widths (B).
Critical depth recommendations for sand as in the following table.

Tabel 4.4: Critical Depth (Dc) Recommendation on Sand Soils

Sand Density Critical Depth Dc

Loose 10 B
Medium Dense 15 B
Dense 20 B
The friction of the pile can be determined by the following equation:
fs = K’v tan 
’v = ’D untuk D < Dc
’v = ’Dc untuk D ≥ Dc
Qs = fs As
Where:
K= Lateral ground pressure coefficient (Kc for compressive poles and Kt for tensile posts)
s'v = Effective overburden pressure
d = Angle of friction between the ground and the pole
g' = Weight of the effective contents of the soil
D = The depth along which the overburden pressure is effectively calculated
Dc = Critical Depth
As = Side surface area of the pile

Table 4. 5: Recommended d Value

Table 4. 6: Common values for Corrected K (K c and Kt)

B. Skin Friction
The carrying capacity of the end of the unit can be determined as follows:
q = s'v Nq
s'v = g'D for D < Dc
s'v = g'D c for D ≥ Dc

16
 Where:
q= End holdunit
g'= Weight of the effective contents of the soil
D= The depth along which the overburden pressure is effectively calculated
Dc = Critical Depth

4.1.3.2 Cohesive Soil

A. End Bearing Capacity
Although it is called skin friction, such resistance is caused by cohesion or adhesion of clay
on the pile:
fs = ca
ca =ac
Q s = f s As
Where:
ca = Adhesion between clay and pile;
a = Adhesion factor;
c= undrained shear strength of clay soil from quick Q test
The alternative developed by Semple and Rigden (1984) is given in the following.

Figure 4.3: Relationship between  and Undrained Shear Strength

Figure 4. 4: Values of 1 and 2 Apply to Pile

B. End Bearing Capacity

The bearing capacity of the ends of the pile units for pile on clay soils can be determined from
the equation:
q=9c
Q p = q Ap
Where:
q = units of end bearing

17
 c = Undrained shear strength at the end of pile, taken as an average at a distance of 2
diameters below the end of the mast
Qp = pile end bearing capacity
Ap = Cross-sectional area of the end of the pile

4.1.4 Federal Highway Administration Method (FHWA)

4.1.4.1 End Bearing

a) Cohesive Soil
For end resistance on cohesive soils, the following equation is recommended:
Q p = Ap c N c
Where:
Nc = Pdimensionless arameter that depends on the angle of the soil geser .
C = soil cohesion
Q = Vertical voltage at pole base level
b) Non Cohesive Soils
Nc values are recommended to be between 7 and 16, although Nc=9 values are commonly
used. For the resistance of the tip in the ground without cohesion, the FHWA method uses
the following:
Qp = Ap 𝑞̅ t N'q
Where:
N'q = Carrying capacity factor
t = Dimensionless factor depending on the depth-width relationship of the pole

Below are the recommended parameters of Meyerhof (1976) based on the size of the shear
angle of the soil.

Figure 4. 5: N'q Coefficient and Bearing Capacity Factor Graph for FHWA Method

18
Figure 4. 6: Graph of the Relationship between Maximum units Pile Point Resistance and Friction Angle for non-
Cohesive Soils (Meyerhof 1976)

4.1.4.2 Side Friction

a) Cohesive soil
For cohesive soils, the skin friction equation canuse the following equations:
F s = ca
Where the adhesion ca corresponds to the undrained shear strength cu in the following
equation:
Ca = cu
Where  is an empirical coefficient of adhesion that depends on several factors, such as the
nature and strength of the soil and the type of pole.
b) Non cohesive soil
The skin friction on non-cohesive soils is calculated as follows:
fs = 𝑐̅a + K̅vtan ()
Where:
fs = Skin friction
𝑐̅a = Pile – soil adhesion
d = friction angle of the pile – ground

Figure 4. 7: Adhesion Factors for Piles on Loams (Method a) (Tomlinson,1980)

19
5 Foundation Analysis

5.1 Bearing Capacity of Foundation

5.1.1 Bearing Capacity

The foundation usedin the design is a pile with a diameter of 600 mm with an adjustable depth based
on the carrying capacity obtained. In the calculation of the carrying capacity of a single axial used
Safety factor of 2.5. The calculation of carrying capacity is assisted using the program from Ensoft A
pile while for lateral it uses Ensoft Lpile.

Here is the calculation of the bearing capacity of a single pile.

Figure 5. 1: Results of axial Bearing capacity analysis by various methods (Ultra Rapid Coagulation)

20
In the Filter Area, cut off level is 1 m from ground level. Here is the calculation of the bearing capacity
of a single pile

Figure 5. 2: Results of axial Bearing capacity analysis by various methods (Filters Area)

21
Figure 5. 3: Results of axial Bearing capacity analysis by various methods (Receiving Well)

22
5.1.2 Lateral Bearing Capacity

The lateral bearing capacity is determined based on its maximum deflection, in this project deflection
of 0.25" (0.00635 m), 0.5" (0.0125 m) and 1" (0.025 m) are used. Here is the calculation of the bearing
capacity of a single lateral.

Table 5. 3: Recapitulation of Lateral Bearing Capacity based on the specified Maximum Deflection (Ultra Rapid
Coagulation)

Figure 5. 4: Lateral bearing capacity analysis results (Ultra Rapid Coagulation)

23
Table 5. 1: Recapitulation of Lateral Bearing Capacity based on the specified Maximum Deflection (Filters Area)

Figure 5. 5: Lateral bearing capacity analysis results (Filters Area)

24
Table 5. 2: Recapitulation of Lateral Bearing Capacity based on the specified Maximum Deflection (Receiving
Well)

Figure 5. 6: Lateral bearing capacity analysis results (Receiving Well)

25
5.1.3 Group Analysis (Receiving Well)

Table 5. 3: Pile and soil properties for Group analysis

Bot. Layer Soil Type N-SPT ' Su f p-y Mod. e50

Layer #
(m) ID Desc. (bpf) (kN/m3) kPa (o) (kN/m3) (-)
Layer Bot. LayerGP-SID USCS N-Used Gamma Su Phi k e50
1 1 1 CH 3 5 15 0 0 0.02
2 4 2 CH 6 6 30 0 10860 0.01
3 5 2 CH 19 8 95 0 54300 0.006
4 6 4 SW 30 7 0 36 22900 0
5 7 4 SW 45 9 0 40 31100 0
6 10 4 SW 60 10 0 43 33900 0
7 11 4 SW 39 9 0 38 27900 0
8 12 2 CL 17 8 85 0 54300 0.006
9 13 4 SM 24 7 0 34 19400 0
10 14 4 SM 31 9 0 36 23500 0
11 18 4 SM 19 7 0 33 16300 0
12 20 4 SM 37 9 0 38 26800 0
13 23 4 SM 56 10 0 42 33900 0
14 24 4 SM 48 9 0 41 32600 0
15 39 4 SP 59 10 0 43 33900 0
16 40 4 SP 50 9 0 41 33900 0

Figure 5. 7: Pile group sketch

26
Figure 5. 8: Output the group analysis (service load)

27
Figure 5. 9: Output the group analysis (earthquake load)

28
 Table 5. 4: Pile and soil properties for Group analysis

1 Load Case : LC 1 Servis

EQUIVALENT CONC. LOAD AT ORIGIN DISP. OF GROUP PILE FOUNDATION AT ORIGIN
VERT., KN HOR. Y, KN HOR. Z, KN MOM X,KNm MOM Y,KNm MOM Z,KNm VERT., mm HOR.Y, mm HOR.Z, mm ROT.X,rad ROT.Y,rad ROT.Z,rad

1771.4 -0.7291 -82.383 -0.086 55.1728 -5.8251 1.04646 0.001715 -0.92384 -1.7E-07 -0.00011 -2.6E-06
EXTREME VALUE OF PILE TOP DISPLACEMENTS AND REACTIONS
Axial, KN VERT., mm HOR.Y, mm HOR.Z, mm ROT.X,rad ROT.Y,rad ROT.Z,rad HOR. Y, KN HOR. Z, KN MOM X,KNm MOM Y,KNm MOM Z,KNm

483.96 1.1523 -0.00104 -0.80901 -1.7E-07 -0.00011 -2.6E-06 -0.1979 -22.485 -0.00301 31.428 -0.4751

2 Load Case : LC 2 Gempa

EQUIVALENT CONC. LOAD AT ORIGIN DISP. OF GROUP PILE FOUNDATION AT ORIGIN
VERT., KN HOR. Y, KN HOR. Z, KN MOM X,KNm MOM Y,KNm MOM Z,KNm VERT., mm HOR.Y, mm HOR.Z, mm ROT.X,rad ROT.Y,rad ROT.Z,rad
1681.31 79.6931 -306.767 1.2415 -386.904 -12.251 1.0461 1.02416 -4.56672 -1.3E-05 -0.00084 -0.00016
MAXIMUM VALUE OF PILE TOP DISPLACEMENTS AND REACTIONS
Axial, KN VERT., mm HOR.Y, mm HOR.Z, mm ROT.X,rad ROT.Y,rad ROT.Z,rad HOR. Y, KN HOR. Z, KN MOM X,KNm MOM Y,KNm MOM Z,KNm
753.43 1.9478 0.87706 -3.7358 -1.3E-05 -0.00084 -0.00016 21.34 -84.486 -0.2397 96.057 27.198

Table 5. 5: Resume of group analysis

PERBANDINGAN ANTARA KAPASITAS DENGAN REAKSI AKIBAT BEBAN

AXIAL, kN LATERAL, kN MOMEN, kNm DISPLACEMENT TIANG (mm)
Foundation
SI Name Location Desc. Axial Shear Moment Keterangan
Type Moment Displacement
Axial Reaction Shear Reaction Reaction Displacement
Ratio Ratio Capacity Ratio From Group Ratio
Capacity (kN) From Group Capacity (kN) From Group From Group Limit (mm)
(kNm) Analysis
Analysis Analysis Analysis
Spun Pile Service 2025 484 4.18 -22 4.9 31 7.0 -0.81 5.3
0.6 m
BH-01 Receiving Well 109 220 4.28 OK
Earthquake 2430 753 3.2 -84 1.29 96 2.3 -3.74 1.1

5.1.4 Spring Constant

The behavior of the foundation is assumed to be a spring, the following is a recapitulation of the spring
constant analysis can be seen in Table 5.6.

Table 5. 6: Recapitulation of Lateral Bearing Capacity Tbased on the specified Maximum Deflection.

----------- the End of the Report-------------

29