GeoSS

FOUNDATION FOR TALL BUILDINGS IN

CORALLINE LIMESTONE

Chua Tong Seng, Lim Kim Chiew, Dr.Wong KS, Dr.Wong IH, Stephen
Choo, CP Seh, T Sagae, PB Ng, Edward Koh, Edward Fajar, LP Wu, J
Rudi, LT Arturo, Marisca, PL Teo, PY Pang, Khairi, KJC Lab, Dr.Tan TH
 Location of Project
Geology Peak Ground Acceleration (m/s2)
with 10% Probability of Exceedance
in 50 Years (USGS)

Saudi Arabia: 0 - 1.6 m/s2 (low to moderate hazard)

Jeddah: Design Zone 2A, 0.1-0.15 g
Project site and the Red Sea
The Project Site The Red Sea

site
Corniche
Waterfront

Red Red Sea

Sea

Red Sea

Northernmost tropical sea with plenty of Coral

Soil investigation at Project Site
 Boreholes
Original
BH-01 BH-02
BH-03
Additional
P-01
ND-01 BH-05 ND-03
BH-04
CN-01 & ND-02 SD-03
P-02
SD-01 BH-07
BH-06
SD-02
NS-02
NS-01
BH-09 SS-02
BH-08 SS-01
ND-04 ND-05
CS-01 SD-05
NS-03 SD-04
BH-10 BH-11
ND-06
BH-12 SD-06 BH-14
SS-03
K-01
NS-04
SK-01
BH-13
K-04 SS-04
P-04 CS-02
K-02 K-03

SD-07

BH-15 P-03
BH-17
P-05
BH-16

BH-19

BH-18

Tower T1 Tower T2
The Red Sea↓
Pressuremeter
Standard Penetration Test
Rock Core Samples
Cross Hole Seismic Survey

ASTM
D4428

Source Borehole
Seismograph

R1 Down-hole impact hammer

Geophone

Source Borehole
R2
Down Hole PS Logging Seismic Survey
 Tower T1
CN-01 &
BH-18 BH-15 ND-07 NS-04 BH-12 ND-06 NS-03 BH-9 ND-02 P-01 BH-1

Zone 1: Fill
Zone 2: N<50, Weak Zone, Coralline Limestone
Zone 3: N>50, Weak to Moderately weak zone,
Coralline Limestone
 Tower T2
SK-01 SS-04
P-03 BH-17 SD-07 K-02 BH-13 K-01 SD-06 BH-11 SS-03 SD-02 P-02 BH-3

Zone 1: Fill
Zone 2: N<50, Weak Zone, Coralline Limestone
Zone 3: N>50, Weak to Moderately weak zone,
Coralline Limestone
What is the porosity of this sample?
Determination of Porosity
Experiment to determine
porosity is conducted in Lab.

Wet sample mass: 733.06g ; Dry sample mass: 729.34g

Sample particle density: 2.76Mg/m3
Paraffin wax is used to seal up the sample so that no water will enter it.
Total mass of wax used is recorded: Mwax = 18.14g; ρwax = 0.912Mg/m3
Volume of water displaced = 543.23cm3
Volume of sample = (543.23/1)-(18.14/0.912)=523.34cm3
Volume of solid = 729.34/2.76=264.25cm3
Porosity = (523.34-264.25)/523.34=49.5%
 Saturated Density

T1
T2
Unconfined Compressive Strength, qu (kPa)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 11000 12000
0

20

40

60

80
Depth (m)

100

120

140

160

180

200

T1
North Tower T2
South Tower
 Young’s Modulus, E50 (Mpa)
Young's Modulus E50 (MPa)
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
0

20

40

60

80
Depth (m)

100

120

140

160

180

200

North Tower
T1 T2
South Tower
Spatial Variation of Properties to be adopted in 3D FEM
Tower T1

North East South East

West
 Cavities SPT "N"
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
0 0.0

SPT, RQD & Cavities at

Tower T1
20 20.0 South East Zone

40 40.0
Depth (m)

BH-5
BH-9
ND-02
60 60.0 ND-03
ND-05
NS-02
NS-03
80 80.0 P-01
RQD-ND02
RQD-ND03
RQD-ND05
RQD-NS02
100 100.0
RQD-NS03
RQD-P01
RQD-BH5
RQD-BH9
120 120.0
-200 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200
RQD (%)
 Ep and Eur (MPa)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
0
5
10
15
Modulus from
20 Pressuremeter Tests
25
30 at Tower T1
35
40
45
50
Depth (m)

55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
ND-02 ND-06 NS-02 ND-02 Eur
ND-06 Eur NS-02 Eur BH-5 BH-12
Dynamic Modulus from Down-Hole Seismic Survey
Dynamic Modulus (MPa)
2000 4000

NS-03

Down-Hole
RQD (%)
Dynamic Modulus from Cross-Hole Seismic Survey

BH-09
Soil Modulus changes with Strain
Liquefaction during Earthquake
2011, Japan

1964, Niigata
Foundation System: Bored piles
Layout of Foundation
Tower T1 Tower T2
3D FEM Model and Soil profile

Mesh
Uniform soil layers, T1

Piles
Non-uniform soil layers, T2
 Interaction and Interation
Plaxis 3D Foundation V2 ETABS V9.7
Loadings

Springs

Initial spring constant

 FEM 3D Output
Ground deformation Movement and stresses on piles
Deformed Shape of Raft
 Pile Load Tests
Original
BH-01 BH-02
BH-03
Additional
P-01 NU-1
ND-01
BH-04
BH-05 ND-03 SU-1
CN-01 & ND-02 SD-03
P-02
SD-01 BH-07
BH-06
SD-02
NS-02
NS-01
BH-09 SS-02
BH-08 SS-01
ND-04 ND-05
CS-01 SD-05
NS-03 SD-04
BH-10 BH-11
ND-06
BH-12 SD-06 BH-14
SS-03
K-01
NS-04 SK-01

P-04
SU-2 BH-13
CS-02
K-04 SS-04

K-02 K-03

NU-2 SD-07

BH-15 P-03
SU-3
BH-17
P-05
BH-16

BH-19

BH-18
Instrumented Pile Load Test
Cavities
NU-2

fs = 173 kPa

RQD
(%)

62.2m

fs = 388 kPa
North Tower
ND-07
Cavities
SU-1

fs = 205 kPa

RQD
(%)
fs = 239 kPa
56.3m

South Tower
BH-07
FEM 3D Simulation of Pile Load Test
Simulation of Pile Load Test, NU-01

Single Pile, UPLT, NU-01

Deformed Mesh, During Load Test

Single Pile, UPLT, NU-01

Comparison of Results
Behaviour of Single Pile vs Pile Group

Pile Group Single Pile

Deformation behaviour under loading

Pile Group Single Pile

 Mesh, Before loading

Pile Group Single Pile

Deformed Mesh, After loading

Pile Group Single Pile

 Settlement Profile

Pile Group Single Pile

 Stress Zones

Pile Group Single Pile

 FOS
Single (PLT), 2.7 Group > 3
Experiments in Lab
Groutability of Coralline Limestone
Grouting Mix Design
 Conclusions
• Coralline Limestone found in Jeddah poses a challenge in
foundation design
• The design of foundation of the high-rise building requires
interation of structural analysis and geotechnical analysis
• Close working relationship between geotechnical
engineers and structural engineers is important
• 3D Foundation analyses provided Engineers greater
insight into behaviours of pile-raft foundation
• Pile load tests provided data for verification of design
parameters and for this project validation of 3D
Foundation model
• Foundation in Coralline Limestone requires additional
measures like grouting to fill up cavities
GeoSS Acknowledgements

Red Sea

Kepple Land International Limited, Keppel Al Numu Development Ltd (A Keppel Land – SEDCO Joint Venture),
Saudi Diyar Consultants, Kiso-Jiban Consultants Co Ltd, WKS Geotechnical Consultants, MITIC, TYL Int. Pte Ltd