Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica, 2024; 46(3): 164–175

Original Study Open Access

Paweł Siemaszko*

Pile–Soil Interaction during Static Load Test

[Link]
received August 31, 2023; accepted May 15, 2024.
solutions. In this approach, the following mathematical
descriptions are applied:
Abstract: This study highlights the possibility of 1. dN=πD∙τdz (1)
determining the shear stress distribution along the skin 2. Pile–soil interaction is described using Kirchhoff’s
of a pile, which represents skin resistance. Geotechnical principle [22] in accordance with the graph shown in
engineering is plagued by the challenge of designing Fig. 1.
appropriate piles as a sufficient foundation construction
while being economically justified solution. Static load
testing facilitates verification if the pile satisfies these
requirements. In most cases, the pile skin resistance
is undervalued. This study first introduces the general
approach based on static load test results using an
appropriate mathematical approach in the presence
of linear, vertical shear stress distribution boundary
conditions as well as phenomena such as pile shortening
and Kirchhoff’s principle. Moreover, a scientific approach
for pile compression and shear stress distribution is
presented. Further, the study expands upon previous work
by applying mathematical calculus to displacement piles.
The promising results indicate that further work on greater
number of piles may lead to a better understanding of
pile–soil interaction and a more accurate design process.

Keywords: pile–soil interaction; skin resistance, pile-

bearing capacity; load–settlement curve.

1 Introduction Figure 1: Graphical description of the loads acting on a pile in the

presented approach. D – Pile diameter [m]; h – Pile length [m]; N2
– Load acting on the head of the pile [N]; N1 – Soil reaction at the
Pile–soil interactions have been discussed since the 1940s
toe [N]; T – Pile skin resistance [N]; s2,1 – Settlement value of the
[2; 30]. The bearing capacity of piles can be estimated
head and base of the pile [mm]; σ1 – Stress under the base of the
using various methods [1; 3; 8; 26; 32]. The most widely pile [Pa]; τ – Stress acting on the skin of the pile, representing the
known are based on static load test results [4; 5; 18] and skin resistance [Pa]; l – Arm of the soil deformation according to
transformational functions [12; 13; 19]. The author of the Kirchhoff’s principle [m].
present study developed a method based on the Meyer–
Kowalów (M–K) curve [20], which includes the static load 3. The relationship between the pile rigidity and the soil
test results and allows the vertical distribution of the elasticity modulus Es,v/Ec is represented by a constant
skin shear stress as a boundary condition in numerical a. For the convenience of further calculation, it is
introduced in the mathematical calculations. The pile
dimensions, pile material, and soil properties can be
used to estimate the relevant values:
*Corresponding author: Paweł Siemaszko, Zachodniopomorski
Uniwersytet Technologiczny w Szczecinie, Szczecin, Poland, E-mail:
[Link]@[Link]

Open Access. © 2024 Paweł Siemaszko, published by Sciendo. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution alone 4.0 License.
 Pile–Soil Interaction during Static Load Test 165

4𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺
2 Description of Static Load Test
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎2 =
𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝐷 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ∙ 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
(2)
Experiments and Results
𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠,𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣 The additional static load tests conducted were part of a
𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 = (3)
2 1 + 𝜐𝜐𝜐𝜐)
( project conducted in Northern Poland, Szczecin, Leona
Heyki 3, near the Odra River. The approximate location is
shown in Fig. 2.
G – Shear modulus of the soil along the skin of the pile
material [Pa]; Ec – Elastic modulus of the material [Pa]];
Es,v – Soil elasticity modulus along the pile skin [Pa];
υ – Poisson’s coefficient of the soil along the skin of the
pile [-]
4. These assumptions can help determine the linear
distribution of the pile skin resistance, which is
presented later herein.

In contrast to the approaches presented in literature,

which discuss, for example, skin resistance calculations
based on a centrifuge model [7], the method used in this
study describes the mechanism of pile skin resistance
mobilization as a result of the soil deformation under the
load applied to the head of the pile and the axial force
variation in the pile. Author intentionally decline to define
the skin resistance as the result of the friction occurring
between the pile and the soil. This friction is considered
Figure 2: Location of a static load test project in Northern Poland,
to occur after the boundary skin resistance value is
Szczecin, Leona Heyki 3 street.
surpassed when the soil starts to slide along the pile skin,
which may decrease the actual pile-bearing capacity. It Static load tests were designed to determine the
has been suggested that the residual stress should be boundary-bearing capacity of the piles with an axial
included when calculating the pile-bearing capacity [6]. force distribution along the pile shaft. For this project,
The omission of this effect is considered a mistake. This approximately 1,000 piles were ordered from a local
study did not directly use the force of the soil friction. developer [35]. Piles were designed with diameter D=0,4
Instead, it considered the mechanism of the bending of [m] and length L=14,0-16,0 [m] depending on the placement
the soil space around the pile according to Kirchhoff’s in the area.
principle, which allowed to consider the entire soil body. The test piles were equipped with extensometers to
An analysis of the experimental results showed that the determine the axial distribution of the force N(z) under
applied mathematical description validates the presented a load N2 applied to the pile head. Figure 3 shows the
approach [28]. The verification of the static load test results extensometer cables placed in the pile and the manner in
showed a positive correlation between the calculation and which it is protected from damage.
the field investigation results [22]. Multiple studies have Shown below are part of the results obtained during
been conducted on specific soil geotechnical parameters static load tests. Figure 5 presents the distribution of
based on static load testing [9; 14; 15; 25; 33]. Piles the axial force along the pile shaft and deformation
technology affects the surface of pile skin, which should measured during the static load test. In the scheme, there
be considered in the design approach [29; 31]. are placements of extensometers presented, along the
Because the analysis is based on a set of piles, the reinforcement basket of the analyzed pile. Each of the
research is extended to more field tests, including static analyzed pile had prefabricated reinforcement baskets
load tests equipped with extensometers, to measure the with measurement devices attached, and they were placed
pile-length shortening and verify the possibility of using in the pile after it was bored.
the method in a wider range of cases. The piles that are The author was present during the preparation period
considered have been the subjects of two notable studies and static load process. I believe that performing natural-
[16; 17] and appear to be the most reliable for verification. scale tests in field environments is the best way to verify
166 Paweł Siemaszko

Figure 3: Pile designed for testing with visible extensometers

attached to the reinforcing steel while casting (image captured by
the author).

Figure 5: Distribution of the axial force along the pile shaft and
deformation of the pile shaft measured during the static load test
with extensometers [36].

Figure 4: Part of the site prepared for static load testing (image
captured by the author).

the theoretical assumptions. Figure 4 shows one of the

static load test stations after the casting of necessary piles Figure 6: Completed static load test site ready for testing (image
to perform a single test. All the piles used to perform the obtained from authors’ library).
tests needed to achieve their design before constructing
the stand are shown in Fig. 6.
 Pile–Soil Interaction during Static Load Test 167

Table 1: Load–settlement values obtained from the static load test; Pile Heyki 1.

N [kN] 0 145 289 432 576 720 863 1007 1150 1295 1438 1581 1726 1890

s [mm] 0,00 0,57 1,14 1,86 2,64 3,69 4,82 6,54 8,38 10,83 13,38 16,41 20,28 26,08

N: measured load applied to the pile head [kN]; s: measured settlement [mm]

Table 2: Load–settlement values obtained from static load test for Pile Heyki 2.

N [kN 0 145 293 431 575 720 864 1006 1151 1294 1438 1582 1726 1896 2013 2156 2300

s [mm] 0,00 0,71 1,27 1,88 2,57 3,49 4,48 6,04 7,77 10,24 13,24 16,13 19,59 23,20 27,14 31,73 36,42

N: measured load applied to the pile head [kN]; s: measured settlement [mm]

Figure 7: CPTu investigation results for Pile 1 [27].

Figure 8: CPTu investigation results for Pile 2 [27].

168 Paweł Siemaszko

Table 3. Geotechnical parameters of the soil profile [27].

qc svo ID Ic qn βq Nm Ф’ C’ Su(Cu) M0
[m] [-] [-] [MPa] [KPa] [%] [-] [MPa] [-] [-] [ ]
O
[kPa] [kPa] [MPa]

0,0

1,8 Mg(hgrcFSa) nN(Pd+H+c+ż) 2,20 35 20 - 2,19 0,02 - 29° 30’ - - 9,5

2,3 Mg(grchclSa) nN(Pg+H+c+ż) 1,30 42 - 0,54 1,27 0,01 11,1 22° 10’ 6 98 9,2

2,5 Mg(grchFSa) nN(Pd+H+c+ż) 2,20 57 15 - 2,14 0,00 - 29° - - 9,4

3,8 Or(Nm) Nm 0,45 92 - 0,50 0,38 0,04 3,7 13° 10’ 3 20 1,1

6,6 Or(Nm) Nm 0,65 117 - 0,60 0,58 0,12 5,1 15° 50’ 4 31 2,5

7,0 Or(Nmp)/HFSa Nmp/PdH 1,10 133 - 0,44 1,00 0,01 6,8 18° 50’ 5 71 7,9

8,2 FSa Pd 3,30 149 20 - 3,18 0,00 - 29° 20’ - - 14,2

8,6 FSa Pd/Ps 6,40 177 40 - 6,25 0,00 - 32° 10’ - - 28,4

11,1 FSa Pd 13,20 208 65 - 13,03 0,00 - 35° 10’ - - 64,9

11,8 FSa Pd 7,30 220 40 - 7,12 0,00 - 32° 20’ - - 32,4

12,4 saSi Πp 2,60 236 - 0,74 2,40 0,00 11,1 22° 10’ 7 171 21,8

13,3 FSa Pd 7,00 250 35 - 6,80 0,00 - 31° 50’ - - 31,1

13,8 FSa Pd 11,10 268 55 - 10,88 0,00 - 33° 50’ - - 54,6

15,2 saSi/siSa Πp/Pπ 3,40 292 - 0,82 3,17 0,00 12,2 22° 50’ 7 226 28,5

16,2 FSa/MSa Pd/Ps 14,00 320 60 - 13,74 0,00 - 34° 30’ - - 70,3

18,0 FSa Pd 7,00 342 30 - 6,73 0,00 - 31° - - 31,2

18,4 FSa Pd 10,50 353 45 - 10,22 0,00 - 33° - - 51,8

19,1 FSa/MSa Pd/Ps 15,40 400 60 - 15,08 0,00 - 34° 30’ - - 75,9

Displacement piles were used to determine whether following equation is used to extrapolate the static load
previous calculations could be applied to other piling test curve in the M–K method:
technologies, as previous work focused on CFA piles [22].
Tables 1 and 2 present the static load test results. Figures 7
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 −ν
and 8 present the results of the CPTu investigation. Table �1 − � −1
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔
3 presents the geotechnical parameters of the soil profile. 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐶 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 ∙ (4)
ν
s – Settlement of the head of the pile [mm]; C – Reversed
3 Mathematical Description of the aggregated Winkler modulus [m/MN] [21]; Ngr – Axial

Problem force, M–K curve vertical asymptote [MN]; k - Parameter

showing the proportions of base and shaft resistances [-]
The M–K curve exhibits a vertical asymptote:
3.1 Meyer–Kowalów Curve Concept
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 = 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 and diagonal (5)
The Meyer–Kowalów curve concept has been introduced
and widely applied [20; 23; 24]. It is based on soil mechanics 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 (6)
principles [10]. This method allows the extrapolation of a
static load test curve to estimate the boundary-bearing It can be proven that:
capacity of the pile (Ngr). The curve can be described using
C, Ngr2, and k. Parameter C is introduced as an aggregation lim 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁) = 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 and (7)
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁→0
of the toe and skin resistances during pile settlement. The
 Pile–Soil Interaction during Static Load Test 169

pile head caused by its settlement. Kirchhoff’s principle

can be expressed as follows:

𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠,𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣
𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 = (10)
2(1 + 𝜐𝜐𝜐𝜐)

G – Kirchhoff’s modulus of the soil along the skin of pile

[Pa]; Ec – Elasticity modulus of the concrete piles [Pa];
Es,v – Soil elasticity modulus along the pile skin [Pa]; υ –
Poisson’s coefficient for soil along the skin of the pile [-].
Furthermore:
Figure 9: Example of the M–K curve graph [20].

𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏(𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏) ∙ 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙
𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏) = (11)
lim 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠(𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁) = ∞ (8) 𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁→𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔
Another phenomenon that must be considered in the
calculations is the pile-shortening effect caused by the
Figure 9 shows an example of the M–K curve graph.
axial force N(z) from a depth z=0 to z=h, assuming an
The M–K curve depicts the physical aspects of pile
elastic deformation of the pile:
settlement as an effect of the axial load acting on the
pile head. For N⟶0, a small displacement and linear 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧
characteristic of the load–settlement relationship could 4
𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠∗ (𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏) = ∙ � 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁(𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏 (12)
be observed. For N⟶Ngr, the settlement increased 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷2 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
0
uncontrollably, and the pile lost its bearing capacity. The
M–K curve parameters were estimated statistically using a
It is assumed that pile–soil interaction can occur without
set of load–settlement values {si; Ni}.
soil slipping along the pile skin, which has been verified
The principle behind the M–K curve approximation is
in previous research [21]:
the estimation of the Ngr value and the prediction of the
mobilization of the pile base and shaft capacity. The curve
s(z)-s*(z)=0 (13)
presented by Chin [5] is a variation of the M–K curve,
where k = 1.
Pile skin shear stress τ(z) is unrelated to the phenomenon
The M–K curve facilitated the estimation of the
of soil slipping along the pile shaft and the soil stress
extreme value of the skin resistance of the pile. Briaud
component perpendicular to the shaft. This depends on
and Tucker [2] concluded that estimating the boundary
Kirchhoff’s principle of the bending space around the pile.
resistance of a pile yields better results than predicting
Surpassing the maximal static friction between the skin
the settlement.
of the pile and the soil results in a terminal skin resistance
and soil-slipping effect. The proposed mathematical
model is based on the following assumptions:
3.2 Pile toe and skin resistance formation
- Skin resistance is presented as the shear stress τ(z).
- Shear stress along the pile’s skin is described using
It is assumed that the skin resistance can be expressed
Kirchhoff’s principle.
using the shear stress τ(z), which is the result of the axial
- Pile shortening is described as an elastic deformation
force acting on the head of the pile and its variation along
process.
the shaft.
- There is no slipping effect of the soil along the pile’s skin.

dN=πD∙τdz (9)
With these assumptions, a differential equation for
the axial change in the shear stress against the vertical
This is the result of the equilibrium of the axial forces in the
coordinate “z” can be obtained:
pile. The shear stress τ(z) in the soil around the pile is the
result of bending the soil body in the range of “l” from the
170 Paweł Siemaszko

Figure 10: Least-squares graphs of the results obtained for the analyzed piles.

Figure 11: Relationship between the load acting on the head of the pile and the shear stress at the head level (t2) and base level (t1) for the
pile taken from Heyki 1 [by author].

The boundary conditions of the solution are z=0; τ=τ2 and

𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏 4𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺
= ∙ 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏 (14) z=h; τ=τ1. A detailed analysis of the solution presented in
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏 2 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 ∙ 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 ∙ 𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐
previous research [22] showed that the influence of the
a coefficient, expressed in (2), does not have a carryover
The a coefficient, defined in Eq. (2), yields: effect on the shear stress distribution. This verification
confirms the possibility of applying such a simplification.
The author estimated the value of constant a in a practical
environment, producing results close to 0.05 [1/m].
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑2 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏
− 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏 = 0 (15) Considering these results, the linear distribution of τ(z)
𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑(𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 ∙ 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏)2
along the skin of the pile can be obtained as follows:

The solution to this equation can be expressed as follows:

𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏
𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏(𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏) = 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 − (𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 − 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 )∨� � (17)
ℎ
𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏(𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏) = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 sinh(𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏) + 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴2 cosh(𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏) (16) The axial change in N(z) can be expressed as follows:
 Pile–Soil Interaction during Static Load Test 171

Figure 12: Relationship between the load acting on the head of the pile and the shear stress at the head level (t2) and base level (t1) for the
pile taken from Heyki 2 [by author].

δ2– Squared sum of the differences between the measured

𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏 1 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏 2
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁(𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏) = 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 − 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷ℎ ∙ �𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 ∙ � � − (𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 − 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 ) ∙ � � � (18) and calculated results—values of the load N(z) from the
ℎ 2 ℎ
static load test and calculated using Eq. (18).
xi,m – Measured values [mm]
This equation was used to verify the τ(z) axial distribution xi,c – Calculated value [mm]
in the analyzed case and was applied to the experimental In this study, the results of the least-squares method
analysis of the field experiments. In previous studies [22; analysis showed extreme values and normal distributions,
28], it was important to determine if there is a possibility as shown in Fig. 10.
of omitting the influence of the a value and assuming This analysis allowed to draw graphs of the shear
a=const. The verification results showed that including stress distribution using the mathematical approach
the value constant a produced a good correlation with presented by Siemaszko [28]. Figures 11 and 12 show the
the graphs, where its influence was omitted. Meyer graphs obtained for the piles analyzed in this study.
and Siemaszko [22] and Siemaszko [28] reported this
correlation.
4.1 Values of τ1(N2) and τ2(N2) estimated by
practical calculations
4 Analysis of the Field Static Load The author proposed an equation for the practical
Test Results calculations of τ1 and τ2. Following the shear stress
τ1 calculations conducted in a previous experimental
Siemaszko [28] performed an essential analysis of the analysis by [11], the following equation is included:
results obtained from static load testing based on (18).
Least-squares graphs were obtained to verify whether 2 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙
4 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 tan �45 − 2 �
the static load test results can be presented as a linear 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 = ∙ 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (20)
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋2 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙
distribution. The general form of the least-squares method tan2 �45 + �
2
is as follows:
In this equation, f is the kinematic friction coefficient,
and ϕ is the internal friction angle of the soil in its natural
2
𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿 2 = ��𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 − 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖,𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 � = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (19) state.
172 Paweł Siemaszko

Figure 13: Soil under and around the pile base forming a sphere,
where the parameters vary significantly [22, 28].

This analysis showed that influencing the force

applied to the soil by the pile base results in changes
within its structure, and therefore, its geotechnical
properties. The changed properties can be represented as
f⟶f* and ϕ⟶ϕ*.

𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙∗
tan2 �45 + � = �1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 (21)
2
Figure 14: M–K curve and static load test results compared for Pile 1
(left) and Pile 2 (right).
This yields the following:
𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙
𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙∗ = 2 ∙ [arctan��1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 � − 45𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 ] (22) 4 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 tan2 �45 − 2∗ �
𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 = ∙ 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (24)
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋2 ∗ tan2 �45 + 𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙∗ �
2
For the practical purpose of performing engineering
The equation that includes both f⟶f* and ϕ⟶ϕ* can be
calculations with sufficient accuracy, Equation (22) can
presented as follows:
be expressed as follows:

4 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑓 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓2

𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 = ∙ (25)
𝜙𝜙𝜙𝜙∗ = 18,31 ∙ 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅20,715 (23) 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋2 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )4

Equation (25) is the primary relationship, including

where ϕ* is in degrees.
the phenomena at the base of the pile with varying soil
For the soil under the pile base, both the internal
properties, as shown in Fig. 13.
shear angle and the dynamic friction coefficient vary.
Another calculated value is τ2, which is the shear
With these changes applied, the following equation for
stress at the head of the pile. The following boundary
the shear stress τ1 can be used:
 Pile–Soil Interaction during Static Load Test 173

Table 4: Equation (42) results, left side and right side.

𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 (33)
Left side EQ. (42) Right side Eq.(42)
𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴2 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 (34)
Pile 1 0,83 0,803

Pile 2 0,85 0,84

The coefficients A1 and A2 were estimated using the least-
squares method for both the piles. For both the piles,
conditions were assumed: for z=0, there is τ(z)=τ2; for z=h, statistical calculations were performed to obtain the M–K
there is τ(z)=τ1. The vertical force equilibrium is expressed curve parameters N2, C2, and κ2. The results of the Q-s
as follows: curves obtained using the M–K curve method are shown
through the graphs in Fig. 14.
A comparison was made between the values A1 and A2
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 − 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁1 (26) calculated from the experimental results obtained under
natural conditions and the values obtained using the M–K
curve method.
From the linear distributions of the shear stress and pile
skin resistance, the following can be assumed: 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 ∙ 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 ∙ 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2
𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 = ∙ = ∙ (35)
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷(1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )4 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷(1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )4
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋(𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 + 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 )
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 = (27)
2 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋
𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼 = (30)
𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷
Using the M–K curve theory, the following relationships
can be obtained for rough calculations: 2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼
𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 = ∙ ∙ �2 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 − � (36)
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁1 = (28)
(1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2
The experimental results can be described as follows:

2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 1 2 ∙ 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼

𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 + 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 = ∙ ∙ �2 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 − ∙ � (29) 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 = ∙ (37)
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )4

For further analysis, the α coefficient is substituted into (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 �2 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 −

2 ∙ 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 1 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼
the equation: 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴2 = ∙ �2 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 − � = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 ∙
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )4 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼
(38)
2𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼
𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼 = (30) (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 �2 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 − �
2 ∙ 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 1 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴2 = ∙ �2 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅 2 − � = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 ∙
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2
The final equations for τ2 and τ1 are as follows:
(1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )4 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼

4𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑓 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓2 4.2 Verification of the linear relationships

𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 = ∙
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )4
2 (31) τ1(N2) and τ2(N2)

The author attempted to verify the linear dependency

2𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 𝛼𝛼𝛼𝛼
𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 = ∙ ∙ �2 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 − � (32) between the head load N2 and the skin shear stresses τ1
𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 (1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2
and τ2. The following solutions were used based on the
experimental field test results:
Thus, the relationships presented above were verified.
Figures 11 and 12 show the values of τ(z)=τ2 and τ(z)=τ1.
As the distributions presented in the graphs suggest a 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 = 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 (𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2) = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 (39)
linear correlation between τ2(N2) and τ1(N2), the following
relationships can be applied:
174 Paweł Siemaszko

the skin resistance, which is based on τ1 and τ2, is also

𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 = 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2 (𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 ) = 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴2 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 (40) linearly dependent on N2. Presented study results may be
useful in solving geotechnical problems using numerical
solution packages. Linear differential equations have
Here, A1; A1=const. As for the equilibrium of the axial been solved using the method proposed by Leibnitz in
forces, it is: 1852. However, to solve these differential equations, the
distribution of the function along the boundary of the
figure of solution must be known. The linear distribution,
𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏1 + 𝜏𝜏𝜏𝜏2
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 − 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁1 = ∙ 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (41) which is the result of the research presented in this study,
2
can be used as a boundary condition to solve the strain
distribution problem using numerical methods. The
The equations include the linear characteristic of the shear analysis showed a positive correlation between the M–K
stress acting on the skin of the pile τ(z), which represents method parameters, calculated statistically based on {si;Ni}
the skin resistance [22]. Based on the analysis previously values, and the approach based on the pile-shortening
conducted based on the M–K theory, Eq. (28) is valid. This effect, which allows the determination of the shear stress
can be used to obtain the following relationship: along the pile skin. The research focused on verifying the
applicability of a linear distribution of the shear stress to
soil displacement piles, similar to that applied to CFA piles,
1 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 + 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴2 ∙ 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁2 ∙ �1 − �= ∙ 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (42) which has been verified in previous research. The results of
(1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 2
this study can be improved by analyzing a greater number
of piles. The performance of static load tests until failure
Therefore: using additional measurement devices is financially
demanding and limits the acquiring of sufficient amount
of these results. Currently, there is ongoing preparation of
1 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 + 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴2
1− = ∙ 𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝜋𝜋𝜋𝜋 (43) a suitable construction methodology that will facilitate
(1 + 𝜅𝜅𝜅𝜅2 )2 2
the conduction of static load tests close to the natural
scale environments within a shorter time frame. Initial
The values obtained for Piles 1 and 2 are presented in attempts have yielded promising results. Future work will
Table 4. be focused on the analysis of a greater number of piles to
Using the above equation, the κ2 parameter value for achieve a better understanding of the pile–soil interaction
the results can be verified, including the value of the pile- and further improve the developed calculus.
shortening effect. However, the value of the κ2 parameter
may not be equal to κ2 derived from {si;Ni} obtained using
statistical calculations. This suggests that the principles of
earlier research [34] require further verification.
References
[1] Azzouz, A. S., M. M. Baligh, and A. J. Whittle. 1990. “Shaft
resistance of piles in clay.” J. Geotech. Eng. 116(2): 205–221.

5 Conclusions [2] Briaud, J. and L. Tucker. 1984. “Piles in sand: A method

including residual stress.” J. Geotech. Eng. 110(11): 1666–1680.
[3] Briaud, J. L. 2013. “Geotechnical engineering: Unsaturated and
This study presents an analytical approach verified by saturated soils.” Wiley, New Jersey.
conducting field experiments at a natural scale. Studies [4] Brinch Hansen, J. 1970. “A revised and extended formula
have focused on describing the mechanisms of the for bearing capacity.” Danish Geotechnical Institute, Bull,
Copenhagen.
formation of skin resistance. Piles were designed and
[5] Chin, F. K. 1970. “Estimation of ultimate load of piles not
executed as soil-displacement piles. The study results carried to failure.” Proceedings 2nd Southeast Asia Conference
confirmed that the pile-shortening effect may be applied to on Soil Engineering: 81–92.
calculations, resulting in a linear shear stress distribution, [6] Di Donna, A., A. Ferrari, and L. Laloui. 2016. “Experimental
which represents the pile skin resistance. The experimental investigations of the soil–concrete interface: Physical
mechanisms, cyclic mobilization, and behaviour at different
research and analytical evaluation showed that τ1 and τ2
temperatures.” Can. Geotech. J. 53: 1–14. [Link]
exhibited a linear dependency with the load acting at the
org/10.1139/cgj-2015-0294
head of the pile N2. This further led to the conclusion that
 Pile–Soil Interaction during Static Load Test 175

[7] Fioravante, V. 2002. “On the shaft friction modelling of non- [27] N-Geo. 2018. “Soil geotechnical parameters based on
displacement piles in sand.” Soils Found. 42(2): 23–33. CPTu investigation.” Part of the “Nowa Przystań” project
[8] Fleming, W. G. K. 1992. “A new method for single pile documentation.
settlement prediction and analysis.” Géotechnique 42(3): [28] Siemaszko, P., PhD. 2022. “Analysis of the pile shortening
411–425. effect on skin resistance formation.” West Pomeranian Institute
[9] Galvis-Castro, A. C., D. Tovar-Valencia Ruben, R. Salgado, and of Technology in Szczecin, Szczecin.
M. Prezzi. 2019. “Compressive and tensile shaft resistance of [29] Tehrani, F. S., F. Han, R. Salgado, M. Prezzi, R. D. Tovar, and
nondisplacement piles in sand.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. A. G. Gastro. 2016. “Effect of surface roughness on the shaft
145(9): 04019041. resistance of non-displacement piles embedded in sand.”
[10] Glazer, Z. 1977. “Mechanika gruntów” in Polish. Wydawnictwa Géotechnique 66(5): 386–400.
Geologiczne, Warszawa. [30] Terzaghi, K., and R. B. Peck. 1967. “Soil mechanics in
[11] Gumny, K., PhD. 2021. “Soil-structure interaction in single pile- engineering practice.” Wiley and Sons, New York.
raft foundation.” West Pomeranian University of Technology in [31] Thilakasiri, H. S. 2007. “Qualitative interpretation of load-
Szczecin, Szczecin. settlement curves of bored piles.” Eng.: J. Inst. Eng. (Sri Lanka)
[12] Gwizdała, K. 1996. “Analiza osiadań pali przy wykorzystaniu 40(4): 61–68.
funkcji transformacyjnych” in Polish. Zeszyty Naukowe [32] Tomlinson, M., and J. Woodward. 2008. “Pile design and
Politechniki Gdańskiej, Nr 532, Budownictwo Wodne Nr 41. construction practice.” Taylor and Francis London, New York.
[13] Gwizdała, K., and M. Stęczniewski. 2015. “Wykorzystanie [33] Zhang, C., G. D. Nguyen, and I. Einav. 2013. “The end-
metody funkcji transformacyjnych do analizy nośności i bearing capacity of piles penetrating into crushable soils.”
osiadań pali CFA” in Polish. Inżynieria Morska i Geotechnika Géotechnique 63(5): 341–354. [Link]
2015(3): 433–437. geot.11.P.117
[14] Ismael, N. F. 1989. “Skin friction of driven piles in calcareous [34] Żarkiewicz, K., PhD. 2017. “Analysis of pile shaft bearing
sands.” J. Geotech. Eng. 115(1): 135–139. capacity formation in non-cohesive soils based on laboratory
[15] Jardine, R. J., R. Standing Jr., and F. Chow. C. 2006. “Some model investigation” in Polish. West Pomeranian University of
observations of the effects of time on the capacity of piles Technology in Szczecin, Szczecin
driven in sand.” Géotechnique 56(4): 227–244. [35] Project documentation by FBA for “Nowa Przystań” address
[16] Lee, C. Y., and H. G. Poulos. 1991. “Tests on model Leona Heyki 3 Szczecin.
instrumented grouted piles in offshore calcareous soil.” J. [36] Scientific description of the static load test results with
Geotech. Eng. 117(11): 1738–1753. extensometers for “Nowa Przystań” address Leona Heyki 3
[17] Lehane, B. M., R. J. Jardine, A. J. Bond, and R. Frank. 1993. Szczecin.
“Mechanisms of shaft friction in sand from instrumented pile
tests,” J. Geotech. Eng. 119(1): 19–35
[18] Le Kouby, A., J. C. Dupla, J. Canou, and R. Francis. 2013. “Pile
response in sand: Experimental development and study.” Int. J.
Physical Model. Geotech. 13(4): 122–137.
[19] Mazurkiewicz, B. 1966; “Sprawdzanie dopuszczalnej nośności
pali w terenie. Cz. 2” in Polish. Inżynieria i budownictwo nr 6:
214–218.
[20] Meyer, Z., and M. Kowalów. 2010. “Model krzywej
aproksymującej wyniki testów statycznych pali” in Polish.
Inżynieria Morska i Geotechnika 3: 438–441.
[21] Meyer, Z., and P. Siemaszko. 2019. “Static load test analysis
based on soil field investigations.” Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci.: Tech
Sci. 67(2): 329–337.
[22] Meyer, Z., and P. Siemaszko. 2021. “Analysis of the pile skin
resistance formation.” Studia Geotechnica et Mechanica 43(4):
380–388.
[23] Meyer, Z., and K. Stachecki. 2018. “Static load test curve (Q–s)
conversion in to pile of different size.” Ann. Warsaw Univ. Life
Sci. – SGGW 50: 171–182.
[24] Meyer, Z., and K. Żarkiewicz. 2018. “Skin and toe resistance
mobilisation of pile during laboratory static load test.” Studia
Geotechnica et Mechanica 40: 1–5.
[25] Miller, G. A., and A. J. Lutenegger. 1997. “Influence of pile
plugging on skin friction in overconsolidated clay.” J. Geotech.
Geoenviron. Eng. 123(6): 525–533.
[26] Mochtar, I. B., and T. B. Edil. 1988. “Shaft resistance of model
pile in clay.” J. Geotech. Eng. 114(11): 1227–1244.