Vepese/ ee (ay Design of Piled Foundation 1. General Design Requirement Rl Part 1 Clause 9.1 specified that foundations should be assessed in accordance with the principles set out in BS8004 (R2) with XY ., and , = 1 as design load factors for the verification of strengEk of the pild. Hovever, structural design of pile cap should be carried out in accordance with the limit states of Rl Part 4. (Refer to R2 Clause 7.3.7) 2, Liaison with Geotechnical Section and Establishment of Basic Design Data At the commencement of preliminary design of a bridge, it is essential to carry out a detailed search on existing/proposed utilities and ground investigation information. Additional drill holes and tridi trenches should be agreed with the Geotechnical Section and the Project Team should be requested to arrange for the works to be carried out. A design statement including soil parameters, proposed pile type etc.s is then prepared based on the available existing information for agreement with the Geotechnical Section. The basic design data should then be verified or amended in light of the additional ground investigation ordered prior to the detailed design of s project. Input by Geotechnical Section The Geotechnical Section should be asked to estimate the pile length, the fouiiding condition at the toe of the pile, the differential settlement between adjacent pier and the negetive skin friction on pile. Close liaison is essential to avoid abortive or duplication of effort. The magnitude of differential settlement depends on the difference in vertical load between piers and the variation in soil profile. The Engineer should consider whether or not an accurate assessment is required. Calculation of Vertical Load on Piles RL Part 4 Clause 5.7.3 allows the pile caps to be designed either by bending theory or by truss analogy. However the truss analogy is only applicable to a maximum of a-5 piles cap and that the compression truss must be not less than 45° to the horizonatal (R11 p.187 - p.189). In addition, the truss analogy does not account for the effect of bending moment. R11 p.192 suggested a simplified method but such an assumption appeared illogical. Therefore, it is recommended that bending theory be used for the assessment of pile load provided that the pile cap is sufficiently rigid to distribute the load linearly across the piles. A general equation for pile load assessment is given in R11 p.192 which is only applicable to symmetrical pile cep. The SWK program 'PILELOAD' is a general pile reaction analysis piogram allowing for asymmetrical pile layout and should be used. The thickness of the pile cap is usually determined from consideration of shear capacity end the thickness adopted can, in general, be classified as a rigid pile cap.5a 5.2 5.3 If it is considered necessary, the combined effect of vertical and horizontal load can be analysed using the program ‘PIGLET’ available on the VAK. The minimum spacing of different types of piles is given in R2 Clause 7.3.4.2. In general, friction piles should be spaced at least three times the equivalent pile diameter, end bearing piles cauld be spaced at two times the equivalent pile diameter. The ultimate bearing capacity of a group of piles should be considered carefully (R2 Clause 7.3.4.5 and R8 Section 3.3) in conjunction with the Geotechnical Section. R13 suggested a few economical pile group layout. Horizontal Load Effect on Pile Horizontal Subgrade Reaction (N, ) The value of the horizontal subgrade reaction (N,) provided by the Geotechnical Section is applicable to a single pile. To account for the influence of adjacent piles the recommendation in p.7.2 - 241 of R3 which is reproduced below should be followed Pile Spacing Subgrade in Direction Reaction of Loading Reduction DiBile Diameter Eactor R 8p 1.00 6D 0.70 4D : 0.40 3D 0.25 Since the piles are spaced more than 3 x lateral dimension in order to ensure that the influence of adjacent piles on vertical load capacity can be ignored, it is usually not necessary to consider modification of subgrade reaction in the direction normal to the applied load (R9 p.251). Design Chart For preliminary design or when the soil adjacent to the pile is relatively uniform, the design charts in RB and R9 can be used to assess the design moment and deflection of a laterally loaded pile. Computer Program Computer program *PIGLET', as mentioned in paragraph 4, can be used to analyse the combined vertical and horizontal load effect. However, this is not flexible enough to account for changes or grouping of design. It is, therefore, preferable to use computer program 'LUSAS' to carry out unit load analysis to investigate the horizontal load effect with variation in soil profile and to design for typical values. Any error in the assessment of the load effect can be rectified easily.5.4 Horizontal Resistance Provided by Pile Cap In case where the design of a piled foundation is controlled by the horizontal load (usually correct for footbridge), it is recommended to consider the resistance provided by the pile cap. The procedure to be followed is outlined below: 5.4.1 Evaluate the stiffness of pile cap in resisting horizontal load (Refer to R5 p.97 attached). The assumed surface of overburden should start from 1 m below the proposed formation level to account for the possibility of the removal of the formation for the installation of utilities. A factor of safety of 2 should be employed to that evaluated in accordance with R5 to arrive at an assumed pile cap stiffness (K_) to be used for subsequent analysis. Appendix A provide§ further details on the evaluation of the pile cap stiffness. 5.4.2 Evaluate the pile stiffness (K,) using the same level of overburden assumed in 5.4.1 P 5.4.3 Equate displacement and force equilibrium FIR, EUR.) oo ro) FoF eeneeraer set (a: co TEE, (2) where F = Total external force B= Force resisted by pile cap F,= Force resisted by one pile 5.4.4 Equations (1) and (2) can be solved to obtain the force resisted by the pile cap and pile respectively. 5.4.5 Alternately, the soil resistance acting on the pile cap can be evaluated using a series of soil spring. The two methods have been confirmed to give similar result and the simpler method on Section 5.4.3 is recommended. Design of Piles 6.1 Load combinations The design load effect should be calculated to the underside of pile cap. However, it should be noted that the effect of negative skin friction is not additive to the effect from transient live load, Hence the design vertical load shall be the larger of je spl : i) Dead Load + Permanent Live Load + Transient Live Load ii) Dead Load + Permanent Live Load + Negative Skin Friction The evaluation of negative skin friction should not only account for the increase in overburden on marine deposit, but also the possibility of future development, such as piling, basement construction etc, which could give rise to the need for dewatering and hence induce negative skin friction on the piles.6.2 6.4 When checking for uplift of pile, the overturning effects must be multiplied by Yq X Yq while the unfactored load must be used for the restoring effects‘tri Pafe 2 Clause 4.6) Resistance Provided by Soil and Rock Piles are generally classified as friction pile, end bearing pile or a combination of both. Geotechnical Section will evaluate the required resistance to be provided by soil or rock based on the specified working load given by the Bridges Section. The specified working load is the nominal load acting at the top of the pile. Structural Design of Reinforced Concrete Piles R2 Clause 7.4.2 stated that structural design should follow BS8110. Therefore, in the case of bridgeworks, Rl Part 4 should be followed. Structural Design of Steel Piles The resistance of the steel piles shall be evaluated in accordance with R2 Clause 7.4.6.3 which also provide the allowable working stress for steel piles (0.3fy for axially loaded piles, 0.5fy for piles subject to combined bending and axial effect). If the steel pile is designed as a fix headed pile in resisting horizontal load effect, the pile should be sufficiently embedded into concrete to ensure that the permissible concrete bearing stress is not exceeded. For H-piles bending about the major axis, both faces of the _ flanges can be used to transfer stresses from steel to concrete. Pile/Rock Adhesion R8 Clause 3.4.2 suggested that the magnitude of the pile/rock adhesion could be taken as 0.05 times the lesser of the characteristic strength of concrete or the compressive strength of rock (R8 Table 3.5). A reduction factor of 30% should be adopted for piles resisting uplifting force. A conservative value of 0.2 MPa has been used previously and should be followed unless agreed by the’Geotechnical Section in writing. atlowable velwe Corrosion Protection R2 Clause 10.3.5 and R7 provide guidance on the requirement of corrosion protection for steel piles. For SWK works, R7 should be followed. Sometimes it may be more economical to provide a concrete jacket to protect the steel pile than to use the corroded section for design, The Engineer should consider either option prior to the detailed design. R2 Clause 10.4 suggests the method of protecting concrete from different types of corroding environment. It is emphasised that dense compacted concrete and adequate cover is the best defence. Structural Design of Pile Cap 9.1 Flexural Design a-4-9.1.1 Critical section As discussed in Section 4, pile cap should preferably be designed by bending theory. ‘The restoring moment contributed by self weight of cap and the surcharged soil (if included in the evaluation of pile load) should be allowed for. The critical section for the flexural design is not clearly give in Rl Part 4. The following clauses are extracted from RI Part 4 and RIS. RI Part 4 Clause 5.7.2: The critical section in the design of an isolated base may_he taken as the face of the column or wall. RLS Clause 3.11.22 The critical section in design of an isolated pad footing maybe taken as that at the face of the column or wall support. In the case of bending theory the maximim moment“is not located at the face of column or wall. However. the presence of column or wall increases the stiffness of cap at this location significantly and, therefore, both design codes allow the critical section to be located at the face of column or wall. Provided that the width of the cap is less than 1.5 (bcol + 3d), the critical section can be taken at the columa face. Othervise, the calculated maximum monent using bean theory should be used. For a pile cap supporting multiple columns, the pile reaction can be calculated as suggested in Section 4. The design moment can then be read at face of each column, if appropriate, as illusttate below: Dengan wane paeretenn ple coe pia ote Bending Moment Dragarn (Aceene (oes ack at centre of colu 5S9.1.2 Load Combination When designing flexural reinforcement for a cap, it is not necessary to use the maximim pile reaction due to the vertical load and moments in two orthogonal axis. Reinforcement should only be designed to resist the appropriate vertical load combining with the corresponding monent in the bending axis being considered. The reasons being: (i) Reinforcement should be distributed evenly across the width of the section considered (R2 Part 4 Clause 5.7.3.1). & (ii) The stress across the section is uniform at ultimate limit state, the moment at the orthogonal axis will cause variation in stress distribution only with no net increase. (iii) From consideration of curvature, moment at the orthogonal axis wili not cause deflection at the plane being considered . 9.1.3. Recommended Design Procedure 9.2 (4) Calculate appropriate design load effect acting at the base of the pile cap. (i) Check width criteria-as suggested in Clause 9.1.1 and evaluate design moment at critical sections accordingly. (iii) Design flexural reinforcement and check crack width accordingly. Shear Design The design of flexural shear and punching shear shall be in accordance with R2 Part 4 Clause 5.7.3.2 for pile cap. For flexural shear, the whole width shall be considered (i.e. the sum of the pile reaction outside the critical section less the weight of the pile cap and surcharge, the load factors shall be those used to evaluate the pile reaction). In the case of punching shear, critical perimeter around coluams and piles shall be considered. The requirement of maximim shear stress at the perimeter of the column as specified in RIS Clause 3.11.4.5 shall also be checked. R14 provides some guidance on the design of punching shear reinforcement. eet10. RL R2 R3 RA RS R6 RT RB Ro R10 RIL R12 R13 R1a RIS References 1885400 + Steel, Concrete and Composite Bridges' BST Part 1 : 1988, Part 2: 1978, Part 4 : 1984 "888004 : Foundations’ BSI, 1986 "Design Manual - Soil Machnics* DM 7.2, NAVEAC, *LUSAS User's Manual", Finite Element Analysis, 1987 HG Poulos and EH Davis 'Elastic Solutions for Soil and Rock Mechanics" John Wiley & Sons 1977 SWK Technical Circular 7/85 - Guidelines Concerning Horizontal Subgrade React ion SWK Technical Circular 3/85 ~ Corrosion of Steel Pile in Soil WG Poulos & BH Davis "Pile Foundation Analysis and Design™ Jobn Wiley & Sons 1980 W Tomlinson 'Pile Design and Construction Practice’ Viewpoint Publication 1977 Buildings Ordinance Office, Practice Notes for Authorized Persons and Registered Structural Engineers : PNAP : 92, 102 and 107 AH Allen, ‘Reinforced Concrete Design to BS8110, Simply Explained’, E & FN Spon 1988 'PILELOAD User's Manual’ SWK Program RT Whittle 'Standard Pile Caps' Concrete January and February 1972 Bridges Section Project Note 19/88 - Design of Punching Shear Reinforcement. "BS8110: Structural Use of Concrete' Part 1 and 2 1985 COH/tE Date : 2nd April 1990 eteAppendix A to PN 33/894 : 7 The evaluation of pile cap resistance is discussd in detail to provide guidance on the calculation (R5). Consider a rectangular block under uniform horizontal pressure ?, as shown below: Formbren bevel the deflection (¢) at corners C and PB ~(G3-4v)rl 4P2 + 401 - av) GQ -wP3} -) 32m6(1 - v) (Ref RS P.97) . WO como A and Bo Where G = shear modulus eee : p+ £8 f aebupert E44 4lrae)(tev)Fe | yarali-v) 20 + v) and E = 1.5N (R6) = SPT values Poisson Ratio = Average pressure P= FL, F2 and F3.= £ (Cl, C2, b) If total horizontal force = a H Then P = - B (ol - ¢2) From equation (1) 4 e (3 = avyeL + #2 + 4G ~ OC = avye3] -(2) © same(e1 ~ ¢2)(1 ~ v) Since CH] = CKILC] Therefore, the stiffness of the rectangular block (pile cap) at C and D is 32aG(1 ~ v)(Cl - C2) -G) (3 -4v)FL + F2 + 4(1-v)(L -2v)R3 -8-From equation (3), it cam be seen that the stiffness of cap depends on: (i) Geometrical Parameters : Cl, C2 and B (ii) Poisson Ratio (iii) Standard Penetration Test, N values, ive, E and G In order to investigate the characteristic of the stiffness of the pile cap, KB, different sets of Cl, C2, B and v are used but keeping the SPIN value constant (N= 1). The following conclusion can be drawn: (a) The cap stiffness, KB is insensitive to the poisson ratio within the normal range [v = 0.2~0.3] [Fig-1 J. (b) The cap stiffness, KB increases with cap breadth, B as shown in Fig. 2. (c) The cap stiffness, KB also increases with the cap thickness, (C1 = 2) as shown in Fig. 2. (e), For a constant breadth and thickness of cap, the cap stiffness, KB increases with the depth of overburden. [Fig. 2]. From equation (3), the cap stiffness depends upon the shear modulus, 6 Cor the SPT N value] at a particular location. Therefore. the cap stiffness can be readily determined if the SPT N value is known fron site investigation. A minimum safety factor of 2 should be applied to the calculated cap stiffness. Equation 1 is based on the assumption of uniform pressure on the whole cross-section which may not be correct. However, it would be sufficiently accurate to use the average stiffness Ke (KB + KT)) shown on Table PN 33/89A.1 to PN 33/89A.5 as the pile cap stiffness for design since the variation of KI and KB is small.144 B 2 1 4+ “ ~ 4 Be, C1 =20,C2205, Nat PEEreet EE 0,C2=05,N=1 Beeereee eee ere cee eee B=3,C)=20,C2=05, N= 822, 0) 2.0,02205,NE1 02 025 03 Fig. 1— Graph of KB Vs" - 10 -KB Fig. 2-Graph of KB 6B -u- 03 03 03 03 Bim)ca c2 B Kl K2 Kl200 2a. Ka KS K6 2.000 4500 2.000 2.000 .500 2.500 1.500 3.202 2.500 2.236 1.11 Fi F2 ¥3 Fa FS v sprog xr KB Ke 3.034 1.242 456 1.993.825 «300 2.000.577 7.268 8.443 7.85 ce. cz B Kl 2 Riz 2.3 Ka KS x6 2.000 500 3.000 1.333 .333 1.667 1.000 2.603 2.236 1.667 1.05 Fi F2 Fa Fs v spre G Rr KB Ke 1.700.762 = «300 1.000.577 8.846 10.207 9.52 El Kal K3. RA KS 2-000 500 4.000 1.000 .250 1.250 .750 2.358 2.136 1.414 1.03 Fi F2 ¥3 Fa FS v spr G RT EB Ke 2-014 1.047 4425 1.482 = .705 = -300 1.000 = .577 10.326 11.830 11.07 cn c2 B KI 2 Ki200 21 KS. Ka KS x6 2.000 .500 5.000 .800 .200 1.000 .600 2.236 2.088 1.281 1.02 Fi F2 ¥3 FA PS v sprog Rr KB Ke 2.743.963) 6408 1.317 5 656.300 1.000 577 11.737 13.364 12 cL c2 B KL 2 Ki200 223 Ka KS Ks 2.000.500 2.000 2.000 .500 2.500 1.500 3.202 2.500 2.236 1.11 FL F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G xT KB Ke 3.034 1.241 .456 1.993.825 .250 1.000 .600 7.298 8.490 7.89 cr c2 B Kl Re Ki200 21K. Ka 5 6 2.000.500 3.000 1.333 333 1.667 1.000 2.603 2.236 1.667 1.05 FL F2 F3 F4 FS v spr G RT EB Ke 2-406 2.141 .442 1.700 762 «250 1.000 .600 8.864 10.258 9.56 cn c2 B KL Re Ki200 K21_— 3 Ka KS K6 2.000.500 4.000 1.000 .250 1.250 .750 2.358 2.136 1.414 1.03 Fl F2 ¥F3 Fa FS v sPT Gc ..KT EB Ke 2.014 1.047.425 1.482.705 .250 1.000 =. 600 10.331 11.880 11.10 c. c2 B xl Ka Kl200 2.3 Ka KS 2-000 .500 5.000 .800 200 1.000.600 2.236 2.088 1.281 1.02 F2 F3 Fa FS v 6 xT KB Ke 08 1.317 56.250 600 11.727 13.409 12.56 e1 cz B Ki 2 Ki200K2l_K3. Ka KS KS 2-000 500 2.000 2.000 .500 2.500 1.500 3.202 2.500 2.236 1.11 ‘2 F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G xr KB Ke 3-034 1,241 | .456 1.993 .825 .200 1.000 625 7.354 9.577 7.96 cr cz B Kl K2 Kl20-K21—K3. Ka KS K6 2.000 500 3.000 1.333 333 1.667 1.000 2.603 2.236 1.667 1.05 Fi F2 F3 F4 Fs v SPT «4 Er KB Ke 2-406 1.141.441 1.700 «762.200 1.000.625 8.916 10.354 9.63 cn c2 B Kl 2 Ki200 X21. Ka KS 6 2.000 4500 4.000 1.000 .250 1.250 .750 2.358 2.136 1.414 1.03 Fl F2 F3 Fa FS v Rr KB Ke 2.014 1.047 1425 1.482 .705 200 +625 10.375 11.981 11.17 cz B Ki R2 Kl200 21 K3. Ka KS KG +500 5.000 .800 200 1.000 .600 2.236 2.088 1.281 1.02 FL F2 ¥3 Fa FS v SPT ¢ Kr KB Ke 1,743 4963 .408 1.317.656 = .200 1.000 = .625 11.762 13.510 12.63 Table PN33/89A.1 ‘The value of Ke shown on this table should be divided by a Factor of Safety 2 when applying to Clause 5.4.3 -12-cn c2 B KL 2 Ri200 K21 3. Ka KS Ks 2.000 «500 1.000 4.000 1.000 5.000 3.000 5.385 3.606 4.123 1.41 FL F2 F3 Fa PS v spr G Kr EB Ke 4.265 1.325 .466 2.365 .886 .300 1.000 .577 5.519 6.394 5.95 ca c2 B KL 2 Ri2 213. Ka KS KS 2.000 500 2.000 2.000 .500 2.500 1.500 3.202 2.500 2.236 1.11 FL F2 F3 F4 ¥5 v sPr og RT EB Ke 3.034 1.241 .456 1.993.825 300 1.000.577 7.268 8.443 7.85 2 B RL Ra Kl200 K21— 3 RA KS 6 =500 3-000 1.333 333 1.667 1.000 2.603 2.236 1.667 1.05 F3 Fa FS v spr Gg RT EB Ke :441 (1.700.762 -.300 1.000 .577 8.846 10.207 9.52 ca cz B Kl R2 Ki200 R23. Ra KS K6 2.000.500 4.000 1.000 .250 1.250 .750 2.358 2.136 1.414 1.03 Fi F2 F3 Pa FS v SPT G xT KB Ke 2.014 1.047 425 1.482.705 300 1,000 = .577 10.326 11.830 11.07 ca c2 B KL Ka Ki200 R213. Ka KS Ks 2.000.500 5.000 .800 .200 1.000 .600 2.236 2.088 1.281 1.02 F3 Fa FS v spr RT KB Ke +408 1,317 4656 .300 1.000.577 11.737 13.364 12.55 c2 B Ki r2 R120 K21 3 Ka KS K6 +500 6.000.667 4167-833 6500 2.167 2.062 1.202 1.01 F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G RT KB Ke 890-392 14187 .614 = 300 1.000.577 13.095 14.834 13.96 cz B KL K2 Ki200 213 Ra KS K6 2-000 «500 7.000 «572514327140 1429 «2.324 2.045 1.152 1.01 FL F2 F3 Fa FS v SPT G xT KB Ke 2,387 -827 377 -1.083 577.300 1.000.577 14.410 16.252 15.33 cn cz B KL R2 Ki200 Kaa. Ka KS 2.000 .500 8.000.500 .125 625 «375 2.095 2.035 1.118 FL F2 F3 FA FS v spr Rr xB Re +363 997.544 300 1.000 .577 15.689 17.629 16.65 Rig K21—K3 x4 RS K6 +556 «333 2.076 2.028 1.094 1.00 v SPT G Rr KB Ke +300 1.000 .577 16.937 18.972 17.95 Kl200 2a KS Ka KS K6 2-000 500 10.000 .400 «100 «500.300 2.062 2.022 1.077 1.00 Fl F2 ¥F3 FA FS v spr G Rr KB Ke 2.078.685 «337-864 «4916300 «1.000 577 18.159 20.284 19.22 Table PN33/89A.2 The value of Ke shown on this table should be divided by a Factor of Safety 2 when applying to Clause 5.4.3. -43-cL c2 B KL K2 Kl200 K21 3. Ka 2.500 1.000 1.000 5.000 2.000 7.000 3.000 7.280 3.606 FL F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G Rr 4.265 1.034 .355 1.578 .553 300 1.000 .577 6.167 ce. cz B KL K2 Ki200K2l KB. Ka KS K6 2,500 1.000 2.000 2.500 1.000 3.500 1.500 4.031 2.500 2.693 1.42 FL F2 F3 Fa FS v spr Gg xT KB Ke +350 1.443.536 © .300 1.000 577 8.115 8.896 8.50 x1 K2 Kl2- 0 K22_—K3. x6 1,000 3.000 1.667 .667 2.333 1.000 3.073 2.236 1.944 1.20 F2 F3 Fa ¥5 v e xr KB Ke +936 6343 1.299.514 +577 9,813 10.776 10.29 300 c2 B Ki R2 Ki20 0 K21— 3. Ka KS Ks 1.000 4.000 1.250 .500 1.750 .750 2.658 2.136 1.602 1.11 F2 F3 F4 FS v SPT G Kr Ke +877 6335-14173 490 = «300 1.000.577 12.389 12.486 11.93 ce. c2 B Kl R2 Riz X21 K3 Ka KS 2.500 1.000 5.000 1.000 .400 1.400 .600 2.441 2.088 1.414 1.07 Fi F2 F3 Fa FS v SPT G Rr KB Ke )1.743 821.325 1.066 «= .467 300 1.000 577 12.884 14.091 13.48 c1 c2 B Kl K2 Ki200 K21 3. KA KS 6 2.500 1.000 6.000 .833 .333 1.167.500 2.315 2.062 1.302 1.05 F1 F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G xr EB Ke 1.542.769 «316.977 446 = 5300 -1.000 = .577 14.319 15.621 14.97 c2 c2 B KL K2 i200 213. Ka KS K6 2.500 2.000 7.000 .714 .286 1.000 .429 2.236 2.045 1.229 1.04 FL F2 F3 Pa FS v So ET KB Ke 1.387.722, 307, .903 426 = 6300 :1.000 * .577 15.707 17.093 16.40 ca cz B Kl K2 Ki200 K21_—K3. Ka KS Ks 2.500 1.000 8.000 .625 .250 .875 375 2.183 2.035 1.179 1.03 Fi F2 ¥F3 Fa 5 v spr G ET KB Ke 1.264 680.297.839.408 = 300 1.000 = .577 17.054 18.521 17.78 cL cz B Kl K2 Ki200K21_—K3. Ka KS K6 2-500 1.000 9.000 .556 .222 .778 .333 2.146 2,028 1.144 1.02 WF F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G RT KB Ke 1.162.643 «289 785-391-300 1.000.577 18.369 19.910 19.13 cr c2 B Kl R2 Ki200 K21_—K3. Ka KS 6 2.500 1.000 10.000 .500 .200 .700 .300 2.119 2.022 1.118 1.02 FL F2 F3 FA Fs v spr G xT KB Ke 2,078 = 610.280 «738 = «376.300 1.000 577 19.654 21.266 20.46 Table PN33/89A.3 ‘The value of Ke shown on this table should be divided by a Factor of Safety 2 when applying to Clause 5.4.3. eriecn cz B Rl 2 Ki200 -K21_—K3 Ka KS K6 2.500 .500 1.000 5.000 1.000 6.000 4.000 6.325 4.472 5.099 1.42 FL F2 ¥F3 FA FS v SPT G RT EB Ke 4.812 1.441 .508 2.824 1.066 .300 1.000 .577 6.404 7.609 7.00 cL 2 B Rl K2 Ki200 Kal K3. RA RS 6 2.500.500 2.000 2.500 .500 3.000 2.000 3.606 2.828 2.693 1.11 FL F2 F3 F4 FS v SPT Gc Rr KB Ke 3.525 1.375 .500 2.419 1.000 .300 1.000 .577 8.214 9.805 9.01 ce. ez B KL 2 Ki2- 0 R213. Ra KS K6 2.500 500 3.000 1.667 333 2.000 1.333 2.828 2.404 1.944 1.05 Fi F2 F3 Pa FS v SPT G ET KB Ke 2.843 1,291 488 2.089 .930 .300 1.000 .577 9.844 11.673 10.75 c2 B xl 2 Ki2= 0 K21_—K3. Ka KS K6 +500 4.000 1.250 .250 1,500 1.000 2.500 2.236 1.601 1.03 F2 F3 FA FS v SPT G RT KB Ke 1,204 .475 1.836 .866 .300 1.000 577 11.376 13.384 12.38 c2 B KI 2 i200 22K. Ra RS K6 +500 5.000 1.000 .200 1.200 .800 2.332 2.154 1.414 1.02 F2 ¥F3 Fa FS v srr G RT EB Ke 2.223.460 1.641 810 © -300 1.000 = .577 12.839 14.997 13.92 2 B KI K2 Kl200 22K. Ra KS K6 2.500.500 6.000.833 167 1.000.667 2.236 2.108 1.302 1.01 FL F2 F3 Fa P5 v srr G Rr KB Ke 1.867 1.049.446 1.486 «761 300 1.000 «577 14.248 16.541 15.39 c1 c2 B R120 K21—K3. Ka KS Ks 2.500 .500 7.000 +857 «571 2.176 2.080 1.229 1.01 Fl F2 F3 v spr G Kr. EB Ke 1.687.983 + .432 +300 1.000 877 15.613 18.031 16.82 ca c2 B Ki200 K21_— 3. Ka KS K6 2.500.500 8.000.625 «125.750.002.136 2.062 1.179 1.00 Fi F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G Rr KB Ke 2.542.925 418 «(1.256 679-300 «1.000.577 16.941 19.477 18.20 ca c2 B Kl K2 Kig20 0 K21_ 3. Ra KS K6 2-500 500 9.000.556 «111.667 1444 «2.108 2.049 1,144 1.00 ra F2 F3 F4 FS v spr Gg. RT KB Ke 1.423 874 = 404 1.169.645 6300 1.000 =. 577 18,238 20.887 19.56 c. c2 B Kl R2 Ki2, 0 -K21_—K3. Ka KS Ks 2-500 500 10.000 .500 «100.600» «400 2.088 2.040 1.118 1.00 Fa F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G RT KB Ke 2.322.828 = «392 «1,094 .615 300 1.000 .577 19.508 22.265 20.88 Table PN33/89A.4 ‘The value of Ke shown on this table should be divided by a Factor of Safety 2 when applying to Clause 5.4.3. talecn c2 B Kl R2 Kl200 2a KS. x4 KS Ks 3.000 2.000 1.000 6.000 2.000 8.000 4.000 8.246 4.472 6.083 2.23 Fi F2 F3 ra PS v sPT «G xr KB Ke 4,812 1.173.404 1.943.686 ©6300 1.000.577 7.140 7.893 7.52 cr c2 B xl R2 Kl200 2.3. xa Ks x6 3.000 1.000 2.000 3.000 1.000 4.000 2.000 4.472 2.828 3.162 1.41 F2 ¥3 Pa FS v spr G xr EB Ke 1.137.400 1.791 666 = 300 1.000.577 9.141 10.239 9.69 B Eli. Ra Kiz- 9 K2a_—K3. Ka KS K6 3.000 2.000 .667 2.667 1.333 3.333 2.404 2.236 1.20 F3 ra F5 v srr Rr EB Ke 394 1.625 641 4300 1.000 577 10.882 12.219 11.55 B Kl K2 Kl200 22 K3. Ka KS 6 3,000 1.000 4.000 1.500 .500 2.000 1.000 2.828 2.236 1.803 1.11 FL F2 ¥3 Fa Fs v spr G RT KB Ke 2-406 1.030 .386 1.476 .614 300 1.000 .577 12.502 14.015 13.25 ca cz B Kl K2 Kl200 R223. Ka KS x6 3-000 1.000 5.000 1.200 .400 1.600 .800 2.561 2.154 1.562 1.07 F2 F3 PA FS v SPT G Kr KB Ke +974 --378 1.349 «587.300 1.000 =—.577 14.042 15.696 14.86 ca c2 B KL Re lz K2i_ 3 Ka KS Ks 3.000 1.000 6.000 1.000 .333 1.333 .667 2.404 2.108 1.414 1.05 F2 F3 Fa FS v spr RT EB Ke +920 369 +300 1.000 .577 15.522 17.298 16.41 c2 B Ki 2 Ki200 2.3. Ra KS K6 3,000 1.000 7.000 .857 .286 1.143.571 2.304 2.080 1.317 1.64 F2 F3 Fa FS v spr G RT RB Ke +871 6359 1.149.538 © .300 1.000 577 16.955 18.839 17.89 cn c2 B Kl R2 Kl200 R213. Ka KS Ks 3,000 1.000 8.000 .750 .250 1.000 .500 2.236 2.062 1.250 1.03 Fl F2 F3 Fa BS v SPT RT KB Ke 1.542.825 4350 1.071.516 = .300 1.000 577 18-347 20.331 19.33 ct c2 B Kl Ra Riz K21_—KS3. Ka KS K6 3,000 1.000 9.000 .667 222.889 .444 2.189 2.049 1.202 1.02 Fl F2 F3 Fa FS v spt ¢ RT EB Ke 2.423° «784-341 1.004 1496 = «300 1.000 © .577 19.706 21.783 20.74 cr c2 B Ki 2 K12 K21 3 Ka KS K6 3,000 1.000 20.000 .600 .200 .800 .400 2.154 2.040 1.166 1.02 FL F2 F3 Fa FS v SPT G RT KB Ke 2:322 747-6333, 69456477300 1.000.577 22.035 23.202 22.11 Table PN33/89A.5 The value of Ke shown on this table should be divided by a Factor of Safety 2 when applying to Clause 5.4.3, sary act