SavedAdd your journal

Journals / ALKÜ Fen Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 1

Cost Analysis of Pile Groups Used as an Alternative to Single Piles for Piled Pier Foundations in Different Soil Types

Farklı Zemin Tiplerinde Kazıklı İskele Temelleri İçin Tekil kazığa Alternatif Olarak Kullanılan Kazık Gruplarının Maliyet Analizi

Mehmet Yusuf Erbisim(İSTANBUL TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0002-8796-5878
Ümit Karadoğan(İSTANBUL TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6584-2389
Pages
61–74
Publication Date
2026-02-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

For micropile group scenarios, two operational assumptions are additionally considered to represent the cost impact of site organization, namely conventional driving and simultaneous driving.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, alternative foundation configurations for a recreational piled pier, namely a single pile and a multiple micropile group, are compared with a cost focused perspective under an adequacy check based on vertical bearing capacity in cohesionless (sand) soils.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For scenarios that satisfy the adequacy requirement, the total cost is obtained by separately computing mobilization, preparation and fabrication, and pile driving components.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:For micropile group scenarios, two operational assumptions are additionally considered to represent the cost impact of site organization, namely conventional driving and simultaneous driving.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kazıklı iskele · kazık grubu · mikro kazık

Abstract

In this study, alternative foundation configurations for a recreational piled pier, namely a single pile and a multiple micropile group, are compared with a cost focused perspective under an adequacy check based on vertical bearing capacity in cohesionless (sand) soils. Using a scenario based approach, pile alternatives with different diameters, materials, and layout arrangements are defined. For each scenario, the allowable vertical bearing capacity is calculated and verified against a constant design vertical load demand. Since cohesion is assumed negligible in sandy soils, the evaluation is conducted based on shaft (skin) friction resistance. For scenarios that satisfy the adequacy requirement, the total cost is obtained by separately computing mobilization, preparation and fabrication, and pile driving components. Unit prices are taken from the coastal and port structures unit price schedule published by Turkey’s General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments (AYGM). For micropile group scenarios, two operational assumptions are additionally considered to represent the cost impact of site organization, namely conventional driving and simultaneous driving.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, rekreatif amaçlı kazıklı bir iskelenin temel sistemi için tekil kazık ve çoklu mikro kazık grubu alternatifleri, kohezyonsuz (kum) zeminlerde düşey taşıma gücü esaslı bir yeterlilik kontrolü altında maliyet odaklı olarak karşılaştırılmıştır. Senaryo yaklaşımıyla farklı çap, malzeme ve yerleşim düzenlerine sahip kazık alternatifleri tanımlanmıştır. Her senaryo için izin verilebilir düşey taşıma gücü hesaplanmış ve belirlenen tasarım düşey yük talebini sağlayıp sağlamadığı kontrol edilmiştir. Kum zeminlerde kohezyonun ihmal edilebilir kabul edilmesi nedeniyle değerlendirme çevresel sürtünme direnci üzerinden yürütülmüştür. Maliyet analizi için mobilizasyon, hazırlık ve imalat ile çakma bileşenleri ayrı ayrı hesaplanarak elde edilmiştir. Birim fiyatlar AYGM’nin kıyı ve liman yapıları birim fiyatları listesinden alınmıştır. Mikro kazık grubu senaryolarında saha organizasyonunun maliyet etkisini karşılaştırmak üzere normal çakım ve beraber çakım olmak üzere iki operasyonel varsayım ayrıca değerlendirilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Erbisim, M. Y., Karadoğan, Ü. (2026). Cost Analysis of Pile Groups Used as an Alternative to Single Piles for Piled Pier Foundations in Different Soil Types. ALKÜ Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Sayı: 1, 61–74. https://doi.org/10.46740/alku.1846403

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. B. M. Das, Principles of Foundation Engineering, Boston: Cengage Learning, 2010.
  2. M. H. Elgabaly, M. M. Shahien, A. M. Nasr and A. Farouk, “Soil Improvement with Micropiles: A Case Study of Fully Loaded Container Rafts at Dekheila Port, Alexandria,” Transportation Infrastructure Geotechnology, pp. 12, 295., 2025.
  3. S. Ghassemi, S. S. Ekraminia, M. Hajialilue-Bonab, H. R. Tohidvand, M. Azarafza and R. Derakhshani, “Innovative insights into micropile seismic response: Shaking table tests reveal critical dependencies and liquefaction mitigation.,” Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, pp. 84, 206, 2025.
  4. A. Y. Abd Elaziz and M. H. El Naggar, “Group behaviour of hollow-bar micropiles in cohesive soils,” Canadian Science Publishing, pp. 1139-1150, 2014.
  5. C. Letsios, N. D. Lagaros and M. Papadrakakis, “Optimum design methodologies for pile foundations in London,” Case Studies in Structural Engineering, pp. 24-32, 2014.
  6. V. E. Komurka, “Foundation Support Cost—Applications to Driven-Pile Design,” in IFCEE 2015: International Foundations Congress and Equipment Expo, San Antonio, TX, 2015.
  7. M. J. Tomlinson and J. Woodward, Pile Design and Construction Practice, Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2007.
  8. O. Yagci, I. Yildirim, M. F. Celik, V. Kitsikoudis, Z. Duran and V. O. Kirca, “Clear water scour around a finite array of cylinders.,” Applied Ocean Research, pp. 114-129, 2017.
  9. AYGM, “2025 Yılı Liman ve Deniz İnşaatı İşlerine Ait Birim Fiyat Listesi,” Altyapı Yatırımları Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara, 2025.
  10. V. Kumbasar and F. Kip, Zemin Mekaniği Problemleri, İstanbul: Çağlayan Kitabevi, 1999.
  11. H. Abushama, E. Khoury, A. Sayed and M. Younis, “Integrated sustainability assessment of pile foundations: A comparative optimization framework.,” Buildings, pp. 15(5), 1431., 2025.