The authors have addressed an important design problem: examining the uplift side resistance of drilled shafts in gravelly soils. Their approach was to use several series of tests they conducted in Utah and other data available in the literature. They took these field data, many of which had only limited field documentation such as only SPT N values and gradations, and compared their results with predictions that would be made from three different design models for side resistance. The first was the empirical Meyerhof model, which correlates N directly to side resistance, with different coefficients depending on whether the foundation is a driven pile or drilled shaft; the recommended drilled value is exactly one-half the driven value. The second was the empirical Reese and O’Neill method, which correlates the drilled shaft side resistance only to depth and no other ground property. The third is the Kulhawy method, which, as they say, “is based on basic soil mechanics principles with allowance for variations in soil properties based on construction procedures.” With their interpretation of the field data and their use of the design methods, all three methods fail miserably to predict the results. So they then present empirical modifications to each of the three design methods. The resulting prediction quality with the “new” empirical correlations may be closer to the means of the data, but the results vary greatly, by at least a factor of plus or minus 2 to 2.5. The authors never gave any statistics, so these quantifications are only visual. They also make the statement that the side resistance of drilled shafts in gravelly soils is much higher than that in sandy soil profiles, suggesting something special in the coarser soils. The discussers also have examined the problem of drilled shafts in gravelly soils in great detail Chen 2004 . We have little interest in the empirical methods selected by the authors, so we will leave them at this time. However, we will focus on the Kulhawy method that “is based on basic soil mechanics principles.” This method is very much dependent on the soil strength and the state of stress, in addition to the construction method. Obviously, these have to be evaluated properly for the method to “work.” The discussers do not believe the authors have done a proper job of evaluating the basic geotechnical properties of these soils.
Read full abstract