July-August 2001 1

Kent A. Harries, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor
Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering
University of South Carolina
Columbia, South Carolina
Michael F. Petrou, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Civil and
Environmental Engineering
University of South Carolina
Columbia, South Carolina
This investigation studied the capacity of square
pile-to-pile cap connections where the precast,
prestressed pile is simply embedded in the cast-
in-place pile cap. Both experimental and analytical
results are presented. It is shown that the plain
embedment can develop the flexural capacity of the
pile without distress to the pile cap or connection
region provided that a sufficient embedment
length is furnished. Equations for determining the
required embedment length are provided. For
design purposes, it is recommended that a plain
embedment length equal to the width of the
embedded pile be used.
P
iles, particularly those embedded in soft soils, may
be subjected to large lateral deflections in the event
of an earthquake. The lateral deflections can result in
high local curvature and moment demands at various loca-
tions along the pile length as shown in Fig. 1. Of particular
concern is the behavior at the pile-to-pile cap interface.
At this location, very high moment demands result from
the assumed fixity of the pile-to-pile cap connection. In
order for this behavior to occur as assumed, the connection
must be able to transmit lateral forces to the pile and remain
essentially rigid. For this discussion, it is assumed that the
pile cap may translate but not rotate. If rotation is permitted,
the demands on the connection are reduced.
Behavior of Precast, Prestressed
Concrete Pile to Cast-in-Place
Pile Cap Connections
82 PCI JOURNAL
July-August 2001 83
Severe pile damage has been ob-
served in past earthquakes.
1,2
Pile de-
sign for seismic loading assumes that
the pile can develop and maintain its
moment capacity through large de-
formation demands. Indeed, signifi-
cant research
1,2
has shown that well-
detailed precast, prestressed piles can
develop and maintain large moments.
Although a pile may be detailed to
resist large forces, it is also necessary
that the pile-to-pile cap connection be
able to transfer these forces. There are
only a few published investigations
which report the behavior of the pile-
to-pile cap connection. These stud-
ies are summarized further on in this
paper.
The objective in designing the pile-
to-pile cap connection is to provide a
connection capable of developing the
moment demands on the pile while
remaining essentially rigid. Conser-
vatively, this requires the connection
to be able to develop the theoretical
capacity of the pile while remaining
elastic. In this paper, the specific case
of precast, prestressed piles embedded
in cast-in-place pile caps is considered.
PILE EMBEDMENT DETAILS
There are a number of options for
detailing pile-to-cap connections. Fig.
2 shows the connection detail currently
used by the South Carolina Depart-
ment of Transportation (SCDOT). It is
reported that this detail costs close to
$800 per pile to fabricate. The objec-
tive of the study presented here was to
address this issue and determine if less
expensive details could provide ad-
equate lateral load resisting capacity.
There are a variety of details pro-
posed and used in the embedment re-
gion of piles in cast-in-place pile caps.
Fig. 3 shows a number of these details
which are described as follows:
A. No treatment; the pile is simply
embedded in the pile cap.
B. Roughening the exterior of the
pile (using a rotary or chipping ham-
mer, for instance) to provide additional
mechanical bond between the pile and
pile cap.
C. Grooving (cut or cast in place)
the pile surface to provide additional
mechanical bond.
D. Embedding vertical dowels in the
driving head of the pile (after driving).
Fig. 1. Bending of long piles due to horizontal ground motion (adapted from Joen
and Park,
1
1990).
Fig. 2. Pile anchorage detail required by SCDOT.
E. Drilling horizontal dowels
through the pile.
F. Confining the immediate embed-
ment region with hoop or square spiral
reinforcement.
G. Confining the immediate em-
bedded region with round spiral
reinforcement.
H. Exposing the strands and em-
bedding them in the cast-in-place
concrete. Often, the wires will be
broomed (separated) or twisted
open to form an annular space (a
so-called olive anchorage) to im-
prove their development.
Typically, embedments will include
a combination of these details. For
example, the SCDOT detail shown in
Fig. 2 incorporates Details B, D, and
G. Each additional detail has an as-
sociated cost in terms of both money
and time.
84 PCI JOURNAL
Studies of Pile Embedment Details
Joen and Park
1
reported tests of six
pile-to-pile cap connection types. The
piles were tested under combined axial
load and reversed cyclic lateral loads.
The axial load was kept constant at
0.2A
g
f
c
for all tests. All piles tested
were 16 in. (406 mm) octagonal piles.
Two specimens were provided with
a 32 in. (813 mm) embedment having
Details B and G (see Fig. 3). Another
two specimens had 24 in. (610 mm)
embedments with Details G and H
(exposed strand left straight). A fifth
specimen had a 36 in. (914 mm) em-
bedment with Details G and H (ex-
posed strand provided with an olive
anchorage). The final specimen was
provided with only a 2 in. (51 mm)
embedment and Details D and G.
The theoretical capacity of the pile
was obtained in each test and only the
sixth detail showed significant distress
to the pile cap and the embedment re-
gion, which led to a significant decay of
the load-deflection response of the pile.
1

Sheppard
2
summarized the results of
both experimental and post-earthquake
field investigations. Two embedment
details were presented as being ad-
equate for the pile-to-pile cap connec-
tion to behave in a desirable manner.
The first suitable detail is H; the sec-
ond is D. It is implied that confining
Detail G is also provided.
Curiously, the details presented by
Sheppard show minimal embedment
of the pile, similar to the sixth speci-
men described by Joen and Park.
1

As such, it would appear that the
details recommended by Sheppard
may be inadequate for severe seis-
mic loading. No experimental results
concerning this aspect are reported
by Sheppard.
PLAIN PILE-TO-PILE CAP
EMBEDMENT
The objective of this study is to in-
vestigate the behavior of a plain em-
bedment (Detail A in Fig. 3). In this
detail, the capacity of the pile is de-
veloped along the length of the em-
bedment. The pile-to-pile cap connec-
tion should be designed such that it
is adequate to develop the theoretical
moment capacity of the pile. Note that
the scope of this study is restricted to
driven precast, prestressed piles em-
bedded in cast-in-place pile caps.
There are two proposed models,
namely, Mattock and Gaafar
3
and
Marcakis and Mitchell,
4
for determin-
ing the capacity of the pile-to-pile cap
connection. Both models assume that
a rigid body (pile) is embedded in a
cast-in-place concrete monolith (pile
cap). Both models are based on the
mobilization of an internal moment
arm between bearing forces C
f
and C
b

as shown in Fig. 4.
Mattock and Gaafar
3
A parabolic distribution of bearing
stresses is assumed for C
b
, and C
f
is
computed by a uniform stress equal to
0.85f
c
. The bearing stresses are distrib-
uted over the width of the embedded
pile, b. Following these assumptions
and calibrating the calculated stresses
against experimental data, the required
embedment length, L
e
, may be deter-
mined from:
Fig. 3. Proposed pile embedment details.
July-August 2001 85
V f
b
b
bL
a
L c
V f
b
b
bL
a
L
u c e
e
u c e
e

j
(
,
\
,
(

,
,
,
,
]
]
]
]
]
]

j
(
,
\
,
(

54
0 58 0 22
0 88
4 5
0 58 0 22
0 88
0 66
1
1
0 66
1
1
.
.
. .
.
( )
.
. .
.

psi units
(1a)




MPa units
(1b)
c
,

,
,
,
,
]
]
]
]
]
]
( )
V f
b
b
bL
a
L c
V f
b
b
bL
a
L
u c e
e
u c e
e

j
(
,
\
,
(

,
,
,
,
]
]
]
]
]
]

j
(
,
\
,
(

54
0 58 0 22
0 88
4 5
0 58 0 22
0 88
0 66
1
1
0 66
1
1
.
.
. .
.
( )
.
. .
.

psi units
(1a)




MPa units
(1b)
c
,

,
,
,
,
]
]
]
]
]
]
( )
where a is the shear span of the pile
(distance from pile cap to assumed
point of zero moment) and
1
is the
concrete stress block factor defined in
ACI 319-99, Section 10.2.7.3.
5

It is suggested that the shear span be
increased by an amount equal to the
concrete cover, c, to account for pos-
sible spalling of the soffit of the pile
Fig. 4. Analytical methods for determining capacity of embedment.
cap as shown in Fig. 4. The value of
b is given by Mattock and Gaafar as
the width of the element into which (in
this case) the pile is embedded.
This value is intended to account
for the spreading of the compressive
stresses away from the embedment as
indicated in Fig. 4(b). For a single pile
in a pile cap, this value is taken as the
width of the pile cap. For a pile group,
this value may be conservatively taken
as the pile spacing.
Marcakis and Mitchell
4

Using slightly different assumed stress
distributions shown in Fig. 4(b), Marca-
kis and Mitchell
4
proposed the following
expression for determining the required
embedment length, L
e
. This expression
has also been calibrated against experi-
mental data:
V
f b L c
e
L c
u
c e
e

( )
+

0 85
1
3 6
.
.




(consistent units) (2)
where e is the eccentricity from the
point of zero moment to the center of
the effective embedment as shown in
Fig. 4(b).
Marcakis and Mitchell define b
based on a strut-and-tie approach
as being the effective width to the as-
sumed tie steel, limited by a value
of 2.5b [see Fig. 4(b)].
Eq. (2) has been adopted in Chap-
ter 6 of the PCI Design Handbook
6

for the design of embedded structural
steel haunches or brackets in precast
concrete. The same method has also
successfully been applied to the de-
sign of moment-resisting connections
for steel beams embedded in concrete
core walls
7
and may be reasonable
extended to the embedment of any
essentially rigid body in a concrete
embedment.
EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
The objective of this experimen-
tal program is to demonstrate that no
special details are needed when em-
bedding prestressed piles into cast-
in-place pile caps provided that the
embedment length is sufficiently long.
86 PCI JOURNAL
The pile-to-pile cap connection must
be adequate to develop the probable
moment capacity of the embedded pile
without significant deterioration.
The connection must remain stiff
enough so that rotation of the pile
within the embedment does not con-
tribute significantly to the overall drift
of the pile-to-pile cap assembly. Ad-
ditionally, the deterioration of the con-
nection region should not allow the
expected hinging of the pile to migrate
into the embedded region.
In this program, piles are embed-
ded into cast-in-place pile caps. The
embedded portions of the piles are
not prepared in any particular way;
they are simply placed within the pile
cap forms and the pile cap concrete
Fig. 5. Prestressed concrete pile [18 in. (450 mm) square] used in present study.
Fig. 6.
Detail of
24 in. (610 mm)
embedment.
is placed around them. No dowels or
confinement reinforcement beyond
that provided by the cast-in-place pile
cap are provided.
Pile Details
Two 18 in. (450 mm) square by 18
ft (5.49 m) long piles were fabricated
simultaneously in the 40 ft (12.2 m)
prestressing bed located in the Univer-
sity of South Carolina Structures Lab-
oratory. These piles were prepared for
an ongoing study of strand slippage.
8

The piles used in this study had the
lowest observed strand end slip of all
22 piles available to this experimental
program.
The 28-day concrete compressive
strength of the Type I ready-mixed
concrete was 6700 psi (46.2 MPa). The
piles were prestressed with eight
1
/
2

in. (12.7 mm) diameter low-relaxation
strands. Each strand had an initial pre-
stressing force of 31 kips (138 kN),
equivalent to 0.75f
pu
. The strands were
released 43 hours after casting when
the concrete compressive strength was
4500 psi (31 MPa). The strands were
confined with W6 (0.276 in.) plain
wire spiral. The strand layout and spi-
ral details are shown in Fig. 5.
The predicted nominal moment ca-
pacity of the piles corresponding to
an axial load of 200 kips (890 kN)
is 285 ft-kips (386 kN-m). All pre-
dictions presented in this paper were
made using the plane section analysis
program RESPONSE-2000.
9
Pile Cap Details
Each pile was embedded in a 7 x
3 x 7 ft (2.14 x 0.92 x 2.14 m) cast-
in-place pile cap. Each pile cap was
reinforced with No. 7 bars on the top
and bottom and No. 3 ties at 6 in. (152
mm) spacing in the transverse direc-
tion and through the depth of the pile
cap (see Fig. 6).
The concrete compressive strength
and primary reinforcing details of each
pile cap was different for each test.
The details of the first pile test are rep-
resentative of what may be expected in
the field in South Carolina. The details
for the second test were purposely se-
lected to represent very poor in situ
conditions. Pile cap data are provided
July-August 2001 87
in Table 1.
Embedment Details
The embedment length of Pile No.
1 was selected to be 24 in. (610 mm),
the value desired by the SCDOT. The
embedment length of Pile No. 2 was
18 in. (457 mm). This value was felt
by the SCDOT to be the minimum ac-
ceptable embedment length. Required
embedment lengths calculated from
Eqs. (1) and (2) are shown in Table 1.
Based on current practice, and as-
suming typical pile cap material
properties and details, an embedment
length of approximately 12 in. (305
Fig. 7. Test setup to simulate seismic loading of pile-to-pile cap assembly.
Concrete EmbedmentRequiredembedmentlength
compressive length
Specimen Primarysteel strength provided Eq.(1) Eq.(2)

Pile No. 1 6 - No. 7 bars 5000 psi 24 in. 12.4 in. 11.9 in.
top and bottom (34.5 MPa) (610 mm) (316 mm) (303 mm)
Pile No. 2 4 - No. 7 bars 3000 psi 18 in. 14.0 in. 14.8 in.
Table 1. Pile cap and embedment details and requirements.
mm) is required to develop the 285
ft-kip (386 kN-m) capacity of the piles
used. These calculations are based on
a shear span (a in Fig. 4) equal to 12
ft (3.66 m). Based on these calcula-
tions, it is expected that the embed-
ment lengths provided are sufficient to
develop the piles used. A photograph
of the embedment region of Pile No.
1 prior to casting the pile cap is shown
0.1f
c
A
g
88 PCI JOURNAL
in Fig. 6.
Test Setup
The pile-to-pile cap assembly was
tested as a cantilever beam in the
horizontal position. The test setup is
shown in Fig. 7. Each pile-to-pile cap
assembly was tested under constant
axial load and reversed cyclic lateral
load. The 200 kip (890 kN) axial load,
equal to 0.092A
g
f
c
, was applied using
a load following mechanism that does
not impose secondary moment effects
on the column.
The axial load was kept constant
throughout the test using a regulated
hydraulic power supply. The reversed
cyclic lateral loads were applied at a
distance of 146 in. (3.7 m) from the
soffit of the pile cap. This loading is
representative of a pile having a shear
span of 146 in. (3.7 m) or point of fix-
ity approximately 24 ft (7.3 m) below
the pile cap soffit.
This shear span was thought to be
typical of partially exposed 18 in. (457
mm) piles [see Fig. 1(a)]. Shorter piles
will place less demand on the embed-
ment region and longer 18 in. (457 mm)
piles are not common. Pile deflections
were recorded at the point of application
of the lateral load.
Load History and
Experimental Observations
The lateral load is cycled three times
at each load or displacement level.
The load-deflection response of each
pile is shown in Fig. 8. The predicted
pile moment capacity of 285 ft-kips
(386 kN-m) is shown as a horizontal
dotted line. The piles were cycled at
two elastic load levels; 7 kips (85
ft-kips) and 14 kips (170 ft-kips)
Fig. 8. Applied load versus deflection responses for piles tested.
[(31 kN (115 kN-m) and 62 kN
(230 kN-m)].
In each test, the piles were first ob-
served to crack at the pile-to-pile cap
interface at an applied load of 13.9
kips (62 kN), corresponding to an ap-
plied moment of 169 ft-kips (230 kN-
m) at the crack location. The predicted
load to cause cracking of the piles is
136 ft-kips (185 kN-m).
Loading continued to the yield
load level. Yielding was defined as a
significant change in the load-deflec-
tion response of the pile. The yield
displacement, , was found to be ap-
proximately 1 in. (25.4 mm), corre-
sponding to a pile drift of 0.7 percent.
The applied load to cause a deflection
of = 1 in. was 20.2 kips (90 kN) or
246 ft-kips (332 kN-m) and 17.8 kips
(79 kN) or 217 ft-kips (293 kN-m) for
Pile No. 1 and No. 2, respectively.
The predicted moment to cause sig-
nificant nonlinearity of the pile section
response is 240 ft-kips (326 kN-m). At
this load, cracks were observed in the
piles at approximately 12 and 26 in.
(305 and 660 mm) from the pile cap
soffit.
Beyond yield, the piles were cycled
three times each to displacements
equal to 1.5, 2 and 3. Pile No. 2
was also cycled to 2.5 in sequence.
No lateral or axial load capacity
decay or stiffness degradation was
noted through these cycles as can be
seen in Fig. 8. The peak load val-
ues recorded during testing were 24.9
kips (111 kN) or 303 ft-kips (410
kN-m) and 21.5 kips (96 kN) or 262
ft-kips (354 kN-m) for Pile No. 1 and
No. 2, respectively.
While attempting the initial cycle to
4, Pile No. 1 experienced a flexural
failure due to crushing of the extreme
compression concrete (see Fig. 9). At
this point, the axial capacity of the pile
was affected. The axial load regulator
was unable to sustain the 200 kip (890
kN) axial load without further driv-
ing the compressive failure. The final
monotonic load response to a peak
deflection of approximately 5 in. (127
mm), corresponding to a 3.4 percent
drift, is shown in Fig. 8(a).
Pile No. 2 was cycled once at 3.5
and twice at 4 before failing while
being pushed to 5 for the first time.
In this case, the failure appeared to be
0.1f
c
A
g
0.1f
c
A
g
July-August 2001 89
rupture of at least one of the strands.
After testing, the pile was broken off
from the pile cap and no strand rup-
tures were evident. It is believed, in
this case, that the loud noise and ac-
companying decrease in lateral load
that occurred on the cycle to 5 may
have resulted from the catastrophic
slipping of a strand. Two views of
Pile No. 2 near the end of testing are
shown in Fig. 10.
Pile No. 2 behaved somewhat dif-
ferently from Pile No. 1. Most of the
deflection of Pile No. 2 was accounted
for by the significant opening of the
crack at the pile-to-pile cap interface
as shown in Fig. 10(a). The deflec-
tion of Pile No. 1, on the other hand,
derived from the more uniform open-
ing of cracks at the interface and at 12
and 16 in. (305 and 406 mm) from the
pile-to-pile cap interface. It is believed
that this differing behavior is entirely
due to the piles and is not related to
the pile-to-pile cap connections.
Pullout Test
It is possible that piles may experi-
ence tensile loads during a seismic
event. It is clearly undesirable for the
pile to separate from the pile cap in
these instances. The question arises as
to whether the cyclic loads imposed
on the embedment region causes a
Fig. 10. Pile No. 2 near end of test.
Fig. 9.
Pile No. 1
[24 in. (610 mm)
embedment] at
displacement of
+5 in. (127 mm)
(3.4 percent
drift).
ratcheting induced degradation of
the embedment region resulting in the
possibility of the pile pulling out of
the pile cap.
To test this hypothesis, an ad hoc
pullout test was devised. After the
completion of the reversed cyclic load
tests, Pile No. 1 was fitted with a col-
lar and an attempt was made to re-
move the pile from the pile cap. A di-
rect axial tension of 75 kips (334 kN)
was applied to the pile. There was no
evidence of distress or movement of
the pile away from the pile cap at this
load. This test was not repeated for
Pile No. 2 since it was assumed that a
strand had been ruptured.
SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTAL
RESULTS
Each pile behaved very much as was
expected. Observed cracking, yielding,
and ultimate capacities were very close
to those predicted for the 18 in. (457
mm) piles. There was no observable
damage to the embedment region in
either test. Pile curvature data mea-
sured relative to the pile cap indicated
that neither rotation of the pile cap nor
(a) Pile No. 2 [18 in. (457 mm) embedment] at
displacement of -4.5 in. (114 mm) (3.1 percent drift).
(a) Pile No. 2 [18 in. (457 mm) embedment] at
displacement of +5.5 in. (140 mm) (3.8 percent drift).
90 PCI JOURNAL
rotation of the embedment region had a
significantly measurable effect on the
recorded deflections of the pile.
In essence, the pile cap provided the
desired rigid end condition for the can-
tilevered pile. It is clear that the 24 and
18 in. (610 and 457 mm) embedments
provided were sufficient to develop the
capacity of the piles with no special
embedment details. This conclusion
was expected based on past research
of embedded members in cast-in-place
concrete.
3,4,7
For practical reasons, it is not be-
lieved that embedment lengths shorter
than 18 in. should be specified. The
SCDOT expects the tolerance on em-
bedment lengths to be 6 in. (152
mm). Similarly, embedment lengths
longer than 24 to 30 in. (610 to 762
mm) are also impractical without sig-
nificantly affecting the design and
construction of pile caps. For instance,
pile caps in South Carolina have been
standardized to be 36 in. (914 mm)
deep, making the longest practical em-
bedment length approximately 30 in.
(762 mm).
Application to Other Pile Sizes
The experimental program has indi-
cated that practical construction issues
are more likely to control the specified
embedment length than are capacity
requirements. Fig. 11 shows curves
generated from Eqs. (1) and (2) for
the moment capacity of the embed-
ment for varying embedment lengths
and square pile sizes. Figs. 11(a) and
(b) show the capacity to embedment
length relationships for piles having
a shear span of 12 ft (3.66 m) [similar
to Fig. 1(a)], while Figs. 11 (c) and
(d) show the similar relationship for
piles having a short shear span of 4 ft
(1.22 m) [Fig. 1(b)].
Note that for all calculations shown
in Fig. 11, the concrete compressive
strength, f
c
, of the pile cap has been
assumed to be 5000 psi (34.5 MPa),
the load spreading factor [see Fig.
4(b)] is 2 (thus b = 2b) and 3 in. (76
mm) of concrete cover has been as-
sumed.
Both Eqs. (1) and (2) yield simi-
lar results. Eq. (2) tends to result in
slightly more conservative embedment
capacity values.
The calculated embedment capaci-
ties are lower for shorter shear spans,
where the shear-to-moment ratio at the
pile-to-pile cap interface is high [see
Figs. 11(c) and (d)]. As the shear span
increases, the embedment capacity in-
creases at a decreasing rate. For the
geometry shown in Fig. 11, increasing
the shear span beyond 12 ft (3.66 m)
has little effect on the capacity of the
embedment.
Fig. 12 shows the same results
from Eqs. (1) and (2) for 18 and 36
in. (457 and 914 mm) square piles.
Superimposed on these relationships
is the range of probable pile moment
capacities.
Based on the data shown in Figs.
11 and 12, it is proposed that provid-
ing a minimum embedment length
equal to the width of the pile will
conservatively result in an embed-
ment having sufficient capacity to
develop the pile. Furthermore, such
an embedment may reasonably be
assumed to provide a rigid end condi-
tion for the top of the pile. Certainly,
the pile embedment requirement may
be significantly reduced for piles hav-
ing a long shear span.
Additional Embedment Details
The inclusion of additional embed-
ment details, such as those discussed
previously and shown in Fig. 3, will
increase the capacity of the embed-
ment to some extent. For instance, the
method for designing embedded steel
Fig. 11. Embedment capacity predictions of varying pile sizes having varying embedment lengths.
f
c
f
c
f
c
f
c
July-August 2001 91
haunches contained in the PCI Design
Handbook
6
includes guidance for de-
termining the additional embedment
capacity resulting from the inclusion
of horizontal dowels [see Fig. 3(e)]. It
is felt, however, that these additional
details will not significantly enhance
the capacity of the embedment even
though they may be beneficial in pro-
viding post-failure continuity in the
event of extremely large lateral deflec-
tions of the pile.
Application to Other Pile Shapes
The previous discussion applies to
square piles. It is felt, however, that
the discussion may be extended to
other typical pile shapes using the pro-
jected pile width in place of the square
pile dimension b. It is cautioned, how-
ever, that unlike square piles, round or
octagonal piles will develop bearing
forces directed radially from the em-
bedment. This may result in greater
deterioration of the pile cap and em-
bedment region.
It is not believed that this discussion
can be extended beyond prestressed
concrete piles. For instance, it is not
advocated that the analyses presented
here are applicable to large caisson-
to-pier cap connections despite the
geometric similarities. No analysis or
experiments of other pile shapes or
sizes has been carried out. Data from
embedment tests on smaller embedded
sections
6
having a width less than 12
in. (305 mm) do correlate well with
the presented equations.
Strand Development Length
In this study, it has been assumed
that the design capacity of the pile-to-
pile cap embedment is based on devel-
oping the capacity of the pile. Implicit
in this assumption is that the capacity
of the pile is actually attainable at the
pile-to-pile cap interface. This requires
full development of the prestressing
strand at this location.
Fig. 12. Comparison of embedment capacity and pile capacity.
With relatively short embedment
lengths this may not be possible.
8
It
has been suggested that a pile should
have an embedment length equal to
the strand development length to en-
sure that the capacity of the pile is
available at the face of the pile cap.
10
It is felt that the provision of an
embedment length equal to the strand
development length is impractical in
most cases because it would result
in very deep pile caps. Note that the
maximum moment demand on a pile
may not occur at the pile-to-pile cap
interface
1
(see Fig. 1), in which case
full development of the strand at the
face of the pile cap may be unneces-
sary.
The embedment calculations pro-
posed here will result in a conserva-
tive pile cap design. This is desirable
because it leads to a weak pile, strong
pile cap behavior that permits easier
inspection and repair in the event of
damage from an earthquake.
CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the results of this investi-
gation, the following conclusions and
recommendations can be made. These
conclusions apply to square prestressed
piles smaller than 36 in. (914 mm) em-
bedded in cast-in-place pile caps.
1. The simple plain embedment of a
precast, prestressed pile into a cast-in-
place pile cap can be designed to de-
velop the required capacity of the pile.
2. The required plain embedment
length may be conservatively deter-
mined from either Eqs. (1) or (2). Eq.
(2) is proposed in Chapter 6 of the PCI
Design Handbook
6
for the design of
embedded steel haunches or brackets in
precast concrete. This is analogous to
the embedment of precast, prestressed
piles in cast-in-place pile caps.
3. Conservatively, the required em-
bedment length to develop the flexural
capacity of a pile may be taken as the
width of the pile. A minimum absolute
embedment length of 12 in. (305 mm)
is recommended.
4. Due to the prestressing strands
not being developed at the pile-to-pile
cap interface, the flexural capacity of
the pile may not be available at this
location. This condition must be in-
f
c
f
c
92 PCI JOURNAL
vestigated by the designer.
5. The pile-to-pile cap embedment
length proposed here should be inter-
preted as the minimum embedment re-
quired to attain the theoretical capacity
of the pile. The flexural capacity at the
pile-to-pile cap interface is determined
from the flexural capacity of the pile,
which is affected by the strand develop-
ment length provided at this location.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This investigation was funded by the
South Carolina Department of Trans-
portation (SCDOT).
The authors would like to thank the
entire staff of the USC Structures Lab-
oratory for their assistance in prepar-
ing the piles, pile caps, and assisting
with the tests; and SMI-Owen Steel
for assisting with the fabrication of the
reaction frame.
The authors would also like to ac-
knowledge Terry Koon, the Seismic
Special Projects Engineer at SCDOT,
Jeff Mulliken, a Project Engineer at
the LPA Group in Columbia, South
Carolina, and Lewis Ryan of United
Contractors in Chester, South Caro-
lina. Their assistance is greatly ap-
preciated.
Lastly, the authors wish to thank the
PCI JOURNAL reviewers for their
helpful and constructive comments.
T h e o p i n i o n s , f i n d -
i n g s , a n d c o n c l u s i o n s e x -
pressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the South Carolina
Department of Transportation.
REFERENCES
1. Joen, P. H., and Park, R., Simulated Seismic Load Tests on
Prestressed Concrete Piles and Pile-Pile Cap Connections, PCI
JOURNAL, V. 35, No. 6, November-December 1990, pp. 42-61.
2. Sheppard, D. A., Seismic Design of Prestressed Concrete Pil-
ing, PCI JOURNAL, V. 28, No. 2, March-April 1983, pp. 21-49
3. Marcakis, K., and Mitchell, D., Precast Concrete Connections
with Embedded Steel Members, PCI JOURNAL, V. 25, No.
4, July-August 1980, pp. 88-116.
4. Mattock, A. H., and Gaafar, G. H., Strength of Embedded
Steel Sections as Brackets, ACI Journal, V. 79, No. 2, March-
April 1982, pp 83-93.
5. ACI Committee 318, Building Code Requirements for Struc-
tural Concrete (ACI 318-99), American Concrete Institute,
Farmington Hills, MI, 1999.
6. PCI Design Handbook: Precast and Prestressed Concrete, Fifth
Edition, Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute, Chicago, IL, 1999.
7. Harries, K. A., Mitchell, D., Cook, W. D., and Redwood,
R. G., Seismic Response of Steel Beams Coupling Re-
inforced Concrete Walls, ASCE Journal of the Struc-
tural Division, V. 119, No. 12, December 1992, pp.
3611-3629.
8. Wan, B., Petrou, P., Harries, K. A., and Hussein, A. A., Top
Bar Effect in Prestressed Concrete Piles, submitted for publi-
cation to ACI Structural Journal.
9. Bentz, E. C., and Collins, M. P., RESPONSE-2000 Rein-
forced Concrete Sectional Analysis Using the Modified Com-
pression Field Theory Computer Program, Release 1.0.0.1,
University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
10. Shahawy, M.A., and Issa, M., Effect of Pile Embedment on the Development Length of Prestressing Strands, PCI JOUR-
NAL, V. 37, No. 6, November-December 1992, pp. 44-59.
APPENDIX NOTATION
a = shear span of pile taken as distance from pile cap soffit
to point of zero moment
b = effective width of concrete compression block
b = width of pile, also bearing width of the embedment
c = depth of concrete cover
C
f
= resultant bearing (compressive) force in embedment
e = eccentricity from midspan of beam to center of
embedment
f
c
= specified concrete compressive strength
L
e
= embedment length of pile inside pile cap
V
u
= shear force on pile
x
b
= length of compression block at back of embedment
July-August 2001 93
x
f
= length of compression block at
front of embedment

1
= ratio of average concrete com-
pressive strength to maximum
stress
= deflection at yield stress of pile