27 - Pile Raft Foundation (Yasser)

International course for Experienced Plaxis Users, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands 21 - 25 March 2004
International course for Experienced Plaxis Users, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands, 25 March 2004
Piled Raft Foundation
Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy,
ARCADIS Consult, Germany
Contents
What is a piled raft ?
Why a piled raft ?
Numerical model
Development of high rise buildings
foundations in Frankfurt, Germany
Recent development of piled rafts
Design concept of piled rafts
Conclusion and comments
Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 1/35

The Main Concept of Piled Raft L = QP / Qt

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Qt 0,0
0.0
0.5
qsj Pl
Pk
1.0
Piled raft
S foundation
Pk Pl
qsj
Traditional raft Traditional pile
foundation foundation
m L
L : Pile load share

D
Qb
S = Settlement of piled raft

Settlement of corresponding raft
Example
Q tot = 1000 MN
Q pile (failure) = 10 MN / pile
I- Traditional piled foundation II- Traditional piled foundation

L = 0.5
pile = 2
pile = 1
Q allowable = 10 / 2 = 5 MN / pile
Q pile = 1000 x 0.5 = 500 MN
No. of piles = 1000 / 5 = 200 piles
No. of piles = 500 / 10 = 50 piles

Interaction aspects
Qt
Raft/soil (x,y) Raft/Piles
Y
Z Q R aft = Pile/ Z
(x,y) dA
Q P,i,1 Q P,i,m
Soil

Pile/
Piles/ Soil
Piles
s s
a a
D
Q Raft = (x, y) dA
i =n
Q Piles = Q p,i n : No. of piles
i =1
Advantages and Objectives of a Piled Raft Foundation( PRF)
- Limitation of settlements,
differential settlements and tilting
- Avoidance of large settlement drop

between differently loaded parts of
the foundation
(avoidance of settlement joints)
- Reduction in foundation tilting

either due to load eccentricity or
due to irregularities in the subsoil
- Reduction in raft internal stresses

Determine the load settlement behavior
Load-settlement behaviour of single piles, pile groups and piled-rafts
Numerical modelling Observations
- Constitutive laws - Laboratory tests (1g & ng)

- Numerical procedure - Field tests
- Monitoring the performance
of actual structures
Simplified methods
- Empirical methods
- Equivalent simpler forms
- Methods based on theory
of elasticity
- Method of constant reaction
supports
Numerical analysis of piled raft
Mathematical procedures
Finite diference method Finite element method Boundary element method

(FDM) (FEM) (BEM)
- One dimensional analysis
- One dimensional analysis - Using superposition
- Two dimensional analysis
(Load transfer method) technique
Plane strain
Axisymmetry
- Two and three dimensional - Complete boundary element
- Three dimensional
analysis structure
analysis
Mixed technique
- Hain and Lee (1978)
- Hybrid model (O'Neill et al. 1981)
- Modified hybrid model (Chow 1986)
- El-Mossallamy (1996)

Foundation of High Rise Buildings (Frankfurt/Germany)

300 m 300 m
First generation (Raft foundation)

200 m 200 m
1971 1972 1972 1974 1978
1973 1973
1969 1970 1970
100 m 100 m
1959 1962
I II
0m 0m
-50 m -50 m
Commerzbank Landesbank Dresdner Bank Deutsche Bank
Zrichaus AfE (alt) SGZ Marriott Hessen-Thringen FBC BFG(alt) (alt) (neu)
300 m Second generation (mainly Piled-Raft foundation) 300 m

1988
1994
1989 1990
1996
200 m 200 m
1983
1994 1994
1991
100 m 1998 100 m
0m 0m
-50 m -50 m
American Forum Japan- Commerzbank Romantik Dresdner

Torhaus Messeturm Trianon Westendstr. 1 Express (Pollux/Kastor) Center (neu) Maintower Turm Bank Solmsstr.
(Gallileo)
The exceptional position of Frankfurt for the development of an improved

Foundation technique
c u [kN/m]
0 200 400 600
Ground surface
GW
0
10
20
30
Sand/Gravel(Quaternary) 40
Frankfurt Clay FrankfurtClay(Tertiary) 50
Limestone banks 60
Soil parameters
70
c = 20 kN/m cu = 127.16 + 3.93 z (kN/m)
= 20 z (m)
Modulus of deformation
For reloading Es = 70.0 [MN/m]
For primary loading Es = 7.0 + 2.45 Z [MN/m]

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 L Traditional raft foundation

0 1 = Commerz Bank (old)
8 7 1 2 = Dresdner Bank (old)
5
4 and 6 3 = SGZ Bank
5
10
3 4 = Marriot Hotel (Plaza)
Settlement (cm)
15 1 2 1 Piled raft foundation

20 2
X1 = Torhaus
X2 = Messeturm
25
4 X3 = Westendstr. 1 (DG Bank)
30 X4 = Japan Center
3
35 Piled raft X5 = Kastor/Pollux
X6 = Congress Center Messe
Conventional raft Conventional piled X7 = Main Tower
foundation foundation
X8 = Eurotheum
L =
Pile load share Traditional piled foundation
Total load 1 = Commertz Bank (new)
1 = Commertz Bank
(new) RF P RF PF
X2 = Messeturm H (m) 100 256 259
256 m 259 m A (m) 680 3460 2700
s (kN/m) 400 420 520
s (cm) 31.0 14.4 2.0
(-) 1 : 300 1 : 2400 1 : 28000
3 = SGZ Bank RF: Raft foundation, SGZ Bank

100 m PRF: Piled raft, Messeturm
PF: Piled Foundation, Commertz Bank
H: Height up ground surface
A: Foundation area
1
: Average applied effective stresses at foundation level
1 = (Applied loads Uplift) / Foundation area
1 2 1 Frankfurt Clay
s: Max. observed settlement
2
2 Frankfurt Rock : Max. observed tilting
2

Torhaus Messe Frankfurt
b) section
m
2 4. 5
a) view
17.5 m
c) plan
200
Effective load
160
80 %
120
80
Pile load share
40
Raft load 20 %
0
1984 1985
d) load share


17.5 m
m
Q
.5
24
e = 0.5 m
0
1
2
Tp6 Tp2 3
0 4 MN
Tp1 1
2
Tp5 Tp3 3
0 0 4
1 1
2 2
3 Tp4
3
4
e) Pile loads dependent on pile position
f) Load settlement
relationship

h) Development of skin friction with depth
Torhaus Messe,
Frankfurt

256
Messeturm, Frankfurt
a) View
Totalstructuralload=1880MN
5.0 G.W.T
9.0 3.0 6.0m
Outer pile ring

Middle pile ring
Inner pile ring
b- Longitudinal section
of the foundation
58.8m
58.8
c- Cross section of the tower

above the foundation

1400
Effective load 1000 55 %
Piles load share

600
45 %
200 Raft load share
0
1988 1989 1990
d) Load share
Pile force (MN) Skin friction (kN/m)
C B A 16 12 8 4 0 40 80 120 160
A Outer ring
B A B Middle ring
C Inner ring
C
A C B
26.9 m
30.9 m
34.9 m
e) Skin friction and pile forces dependent on depth

.
Westendstrae 1, Frankfurt Main tower

Side building
+ 60
208 m
Quaternary
14,5 m
Frankfurt clay
30 m
Section
89.9 m
38.4 m
Settlement joint
N
Inner core
I
64.5 m
Main tower
47.5 m
Plan

Settlement joint
Westendstrae 1, Frankfurt EXT / INK II
SDG 1
PWD 1
Pile Layout and Position of PI

Measuring Devices SDG 12
SDG 13 SDG 2
P IV
47.5 m
EXT III
SDG 3
PWD 2
P II
P VI
PV SDG 7 P III SDG 4
PWD 3
SDG 10 SDG 5
SDG 8 PWD 4
Legend
SDG 6
SDG 9 SDG 11 PWD 5
Piles (L 30 m, D = 1.3 m)
EXT / INK I
PI to PVI measured piles
64.5 m
PWD1 to PWD5 pore water pressure gages
SDG1 to SDG13 raft contact stresses gages
EXT / INK I to III, Extensiometers and Inclinometers
Westendstrae 1, Frankfurt
Main Tower
Measuring Devices
Side building
EXT / INK I
14.5 m
EXT III
EXT / INK II
87,3
SDG / PWD 80,8 Pile head

80,2
load cell
Integral-
DMS
71,8
70,7 71,2
30.0 m
62,8
61,7 62,2
52,7 53, 2 53,8
D = 1.3 m
40,8
39,7 40, 2
27,8
26,7 27,2

20
Measuring the pile load with time

18
P II
16
P IV
14
PI
Pile load [MN]
12 PV
P III
10
P VI
]
N
ileoad[M
P
PI
6
P IV Mefpfahl
MesspfahlP I, Rand
Mefpfahl
MesspfahlP III, Rand
4 P II Mefpfahl
MesspfahlP II, Innen
Mefpfahl
MesspfahlP IV, Innen
P III Mefpfahl P VI
PV MesspfahlP V, Ecke
2
Mefpfahl
Messpfahl VI, Ecke
P
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Time [days]
Measuring raft contact stresses

qs qs
420 q
s : Raft contact stresses (kN/m)
420
280
280
140
140
0
01.06.90 01.06.91 31.05.92 31.05.93 0
Time 01.06.90 01.06.91 31.05.92 31.05.93
SDG 1 SDG 6 SDG 9 SDG 11 Time
SDG 2 SDG 3 SDG 4 SDG 7
q s 420 SDG 13
280
140
0
01.06.90 01.06.91 31.05.92 31.05.93
Time
SDG 5 SDG 8 SDG 10 SDG 12

Measuring water pressure beneath the raft
GW
95
Average Ground water table (GW = 92.5 mNN)
92
89
86
83
80
01.06.90 01.06.91 31.05.92 31.05.93
Time
PWD 1 PWD 2 PWD 3 PWD 4
PWD 5
Load-settlement behavior of piled raft
0.6
L
0.5
0.4
Q Piles
0.3
Q Raft, effective
Load [MN]
Q Uplift 0.2
Q
Total 0.1
DG Bank
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Time [days]
b- Development of pile load share w ith time

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Time [days]
a- Load-time development

Load cell
Wire
Instruments,
Flange Integral strain gages
3m
V
Strain gauge
element
3m
IV
Electrical resistance Protected plastic

strain gage material
3m
III
Brass tube
Welding
Frictionless paint
protected by
3m
II rolled fabric
Steel pipe
3m
a- Measure devices along b- Details of integral strain gage

the pile shaft
Determine the pile concrete elastic modulus

1.3 m
0.9 m 35
Receiver
E stat [10 MPa]
PVC tube Sender
30
25
Reinforcement
20
15
30 35 40 45 50 55 60
v [10 MPa]
1- Ultra sonic measurements 2- measured wave velocity 3- Determine the relationship between
along the pile shaft wave velocity and elastic modulus of
pile concrete

Development of pile skin friction by piled raft

Skin friction (kN/m) Normal force (MN)
0 40 80 120 160 0 3 6 9 12 15
0 0
(1)
6 6
(2)
(1)
Depth (m)
12 (1) Calculated 12
(2)
18
(2) Observed 18
24 24
30 30
Comparison between observed and calculated behavior of piled raft

Load [MN] Load [MN] Load [MN]
0 400 800 1200 1600 0 400 800 0 400 800
0 0 0
Observed Ob served
behavior Ob served behav ior
4 4 behav ior 4
Calculated,
undrain ed
Settlement [cm]
Settlement [cm]
Settlement [cm]
8 8 8
(a)
(b)
12 12 12
Calculated,
Calculated, drained
16 16 drained 16
Calculated,
drained
20 20 20
(a)1 year after end of construction
(b) End of construction
24 b- Pile load share c- Raft load share
a- Total load

20
Measuring the pile load with time

18
Different load settlement relationships

P II
16
P IV
14
PI
Pile load [MN]

12 PV
P III
10
P VI
8
Load [MN] 6
PI
P IV Mefpfahl
MesspfahlP I, Rand
Mefpfahl
MesspfahlP III, Rand
0 4 8 12 16 20 4
PV
Messpfahl
P II Mefpfahl
Messpfahl
Mefpfahl
P III Mefpfahl
Messpfahl
P II, Innen
P IV, Innen
P V, Ecke
P VI
0 2
Mefpfahl
MesspfahlP VI, Ecke
(1) 0
0 500 1000 15
1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Time [ days ]
4 Legend
(2)
(a ) (4) (1) Single pile,
8 (2) Average behavior of the same pile a s a member
Settlement [cm]
(b)
12 of an equally loaded free standing group,
(3) Average behavior of the same pile a s a member
16 (3)
of the pile group below the raft of the DG Bank
20
(piled raft foundation)
(4) The obse rved average beha vior of
10 MN
18 MN
24 the piled raft piles.
(a): End of construction
(b): 1year afte r end of construction
Domain of measured pile loa ds
Comparison between measured and calculated settlement

Main Tower Side buildings
0
4
Settlement (cm)
8 1 I I
12
2
16
20 Settlement joint
3 Settlement joint
Settlement trough along section I-I
1 Measurements, piled raft 2 Calculation, piled raft

3 Calculation, raft without piles

Instruments, Extensometer, Settlement with depth of piled raft
Settlement [cm]
10 87.3
0. 20
0 82.8
80.2 mNN
Depth below foundation level [m]
10 71.2 mNN
Calculation
20 62.2 mNN
Observation 53.2 mNN

30
40
40.2 mNN
5o
27.2 mNN EXT III
60
Distribution of bending moments of the piled raft and of the corresponding raft
without piles
Main tower Side buildings
Settlement joint

Contour lines of normalized vertical stresses beneath the center line of the piled raft
and of the corresponding raft without piles
Main Tower Side Building Main Tower Side Building
0.9
0.3 0.4 0.8
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.5 0.4 0.3
0.6
0.5 0.3 0.2
0.2 0.1 0.1
0.4
Piled Raft Foundation Unpiled Raft Foundation
n
1.0
0.9
0.8 n = z
0.7
o
0.6
0.5 n :Normalized vertical stresses

0.4 z :Vertical stresses Settlement joint
0.3
o :Average applied stresses of the main tower
0.2
0.1
0.0
Westendstrae 1, Frankfurt
208 m

Recent development of piled rafts (large load eccentricities)

Japan - Center
Tower
0.0
-9.0 Q
-15.75
T
Settlement [cm]
obs. 1
cal.
52.7 m
Sec. B - B
B B
36.9 m
Legend:
Observation at the end of construction
Calculation (total settlement)
Japan - Center


Forum (Kastor/)Pollux
Pollux Kastor
0.0
-8.0
-13.5
Settlement [cm]
obs. 1
cal.
Secion C-C
Pollux Kastor
Legend:
Observation at the end of construction
Calculation (total settlement)
Basement
Annex
120.5 m

Gallileo High-Rise Building

z Height 136 m
z Area: 3.286 m2
z Load: 892 MN
z Eccentricity: ex = 8,9 m
ey = 5,0 m
z Subsoil: Frankfurter clay
Neckar Street
Neighboring
building
Tower
A A
Load eccentricity
~1
lage
0m
C.G. area
Gallusan
Neighboring
ing
building
u ild
eb
S id
Kaiser Street
Neighboring High-rise building
Building Gallileo Gallileo
High-Rise Building
GW -5.2
-13.95
-17.45
-16.45
Foundation piles Foundation piles

ly
rankfutC
F
D = 0.9m D = 1.50m
(also as heat exchanging
elements)
Frankfurt Limestone


High-rise building Gallileo
Neighboring Tower Side
Building Building
3
0 1 Raft foundation
4
2
Settlement [cm]
8 1
12 2 Piled raft foundation
Tower
16 Side
Building
I I
20 Section I-I Neighboring
Building
3 Piled foundation

Pile types:
Core No. of piles Length

24 1.5 m 27.5 m - 30.0 m
23 1.5 m 25.0 m - 26.0 m
42 0.9 m 11 m
Tower A
Tower B


Load [MN]
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
0
Settlement [cm]
2 Working load (DL + LL/3 - Uaverage )
4
6
8
10
2 (DL + LL) - Uaverage
12
14
16
DL : Dead loads
LL : Live loads
U average : Average uplift
Total load
Pile load share
Raft load share

Piled raft foundation on soft clay (catering building in Zurich airport)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
A A
B B
C C
D D
54 m
E E
F F
G G
H H
I I
J J
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
86 m
Section 8-8
J I H G F E D C B A
High shelves
G.S. = 423.3 mM
Foundation = 420.52 mM GW cal.= 421.0 mM
0.5 m
Middle plastic clay

17.0 m
Piles
403.0 mM
High plastic clay

14.0 m
388.8 mM
Moraine

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Pile dimensions
A A
D = 60 cm D = 45 cm
B B
8.0 m C C
Constant D D
E E
F F
Conical
shape G G
8.0 m
H H
I I
D = 48 cm D = 33 cm
J J
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
No. of piles = 216 piles
Load (MN)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0
10
20
Settlement (mm)
30 Total load
40 Pile load share
50 Raft load share
60
70
80
Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy


Pile diameter = 45 cm Pile diameter = 60 cm
Load (kN) Load (kN)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
0 0
10 10
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
20 20
30 30
40 40
50 50
60 60
70 70
80 80
Corner pile (141) Corner pile (5)
Edge pile (145) Piled raft Edge pile (9) Piled raft
Center pile (204) Center pile (117)

Single pile Single pile
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
G G
H H
I I
J J
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Settlement (mm)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
A A
b = 3,0 m ks = 2,0 MN/m
B B
C C
D D
E E
ks = 0,6 MN/m
F F
G G
H H
I I
J J
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Distribution of raft subgrade reaction modulus
Piled raft for bridge foundation
Bridge Reichenbachtal - A71

Variety 1 Variety 2
Silt Alluvium
15m
D = 1,30 m
Piled raft foundation

50m
Conventional
D = 1,50 m
piled foundation Highly weathered rock
acc. to DIN 4014
Moderately weathered rock

Load-settlement relationship
0 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 Q [kN]
<
Pilel 1 Pile 2
2
4
6
8
10 Q2
Q r2
Qs2 12
20 20 14
16
L=12 m 18
20
L=20 m
22
24 Q1
Qs1
26
0,9m Qr1
28
30
0,9m s [mm]
Pile 1 = Q 1 Skin friction =Qr
Pile 2 = Q 2 Base resistance = Q s
<

~ 2 cm
S=
~ 5 cm
S=
~ 10 cm
S=
~ 15 cm
S=
Design requirements
- Maximum settlement
S zul 4 cm
- Differential settlement
s 2 cm
- KPP = 0,75
Reichenbachtalbrcke
Pier 10

Measuring devices
1400
130 285 285 285 285 130
130
I.1 ca.180 IV.1 ca.180 VI.1
SDG SDG
I.3 I.2 3 IV.3 IV.2 10 VI.3 VI.2
ca.185
ca.185
ca.275
185
ca.210 ca.210
SDG SDG
SDG PWD SDG SDG PWD
1 7 11
ca.105
4 14
ca.185
30
185
ca.90
Mess- und
II.1 30 bertragungs- ca.180 VII.1
120 ca.180 station
SDG
1000
ca.90
II.3 II.2
PWD VII.3 VII.2
8
ca.185
30
ca.105
30
185
ca.15
ca.210
SDG SDG
PWD SDG SDG PWD SDG
2 5 9 12 ca.210 15
ca.185
ca.185
ca.275
185
ca.180 V.1 ca.180
III.1 VIII.1
SDG SDG
III.3 III.2 6 V.3 V.2 13 VIII.3 VIII.2
130
130 285 285 285 285 130
Raft thickness d = 3,0 m
Legend
SDG Contact stress gages Strain gages
PWD Water pressure gagesr
Piled raft for railway bridges
Traditional Piled raft foundation

pile foundation
10 20 30 40 50
23.47 m 41.4 m 45.84 m 32.76 m

Piled raft for railway bridges

20.8 MN 21.2 MN 20.8 MN 21.2 MN
Working load
Load (MN)
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0
10
Piled Foundation
Average settlement [mm]

sPFPF = 18.2 mm
20
s PRF
PRF = 23.0 mm
18 m
30
23.5 m
40
50
60
Piled raft foundation
70
Stiffness of piled raft

Re lative stiffness = = 80 %
Stiffness of pure piled foundation
Piled raft foundation (PRF) Pure piled foundation (PF)
Settlement behavior of different foundation systems of bridge abutment
Classic pile foundation Piled raft foundation
Stabilized dam
Rock Rock
Settlement trough Settlement trough
Reducing the dam

Settlement Settlement settlement

Lab testing (e.g.

Triaxial tests) Pile load test,
Field tests(e.g. SPT) Prototype
Soil model Back-calculation

Comparison
Model Simulation
soil-structure interaction
Foundation design
Geotechnical engineers
Serviceability limit state

Ultimate Limit state
Optimization analysis Determine the required structural parameter

- economic conditions 1- pile stiffness depending on pile position
- serviceability
2- soil subgrade reaction modulus for the raft
requirements
Structural
engineers
Structural design

Requirements of a realistic numerical model:
The model should be able to consider the three dimensional behavior of PRF.
The applied constitutive laws should be able to take into account the nonlinear
pile/soil behavior at pile shaft and pile base. The stress strain behavior of the
soil depends on the applied stress path and strain level. Therefore, the applied
model should be able to take these effects into account.
The model should be able to simulate the behavior of a single pile to check its
reliability and to adjust the applied parameters depending on the chosen pile
type.
The applied model should be able to consider the different interactions that
govern the behavior of piled raft.

27 - Pile Raft Foundation (Yasser)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

27 - Pile Raft Foundation (Yasser)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International course for Experienced Plaxis Users, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands 21 - 25 March 2004

Piled Raft Foundation

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy,

ARCADIS Consult, Germany

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 1/35

The Main Concept of Piled Raft L = QP / Qt

L : Pile load share

S = Settlement of piled raft

Q pile (failure) = 10 MN / pile

I- Traditional piled foundation II- Traditional piled foundation

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 2/35

Advantages and Objectives of a Piled Raft Foundation( PRF)

- Avoidance of large settlement drop

- Reduction in foundation tilting

- Reduction in raft internal stresses

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 3/35

Determine the load settlement behavior

Load-settlement behaviour of single piles, pile groups and piled-rafts

Numerical modelling Observations

- Constitutive laws - Laboratory tests (1g & ng)

Numerical analysis of piled raft

Finite diference method Finite element method Boundary element method

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 4/35

Foundation of High Rise Buildings (Frankfurt/Germany)

First generation (Raft foundation)

300 m Second generation (mainly Piled-Raft foundation) 300 m

American Forum Japan- Commerzbank Romantik Dresdner

The exceptional position of Frankfurt for the development of an improved

For primary loading Es = 7.0 + 2.45 Z [MN/m]

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 5/35

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 L Traditional raft foundation

15 1 2 1 Piled raft foundation

3 = SGZ Bank RF: Raft foundation, SGZ Bank

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 6/35

Torhaus Messe Frankfurt

Torhaus Messe Frankfurt

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 7/35

Torhaus Messe Frankfurt

e) Pile loads dependent on pile position

Torhaus Messe Frankfurt

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 8/35

Torhaus Messe Frankfurt

h) Development of skin friction with depth

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 9/35

9.0 3.0 6.0m

Outer pile ring

c- Cross section of the tower

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 10/35

Effective load 1000 55 %

Piles load share

e) Skin friction and pile forces dependent on depth

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 11/35

Westendstrae 1, Frankfurt Main tower

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 12/35

Pile Layout and Position of PI

SDG / PWD 80,8 Pile head

52,7 53, 2 53,8

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 13/35

Measuring the pile load with time

Measuring raft contact stresses

Dr.-Ing. Yasser El-Mossallamy Page 14/35

Measuring water pressure beneath the raft