Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Theoryandpracticeoffoundationdesignreadable 131111103422 Phpapp01 PDF
Theoryandpracticeoffoundationdesignreadable 131111103422 Phpapp01 PDF
AND PRACTICE OF
T h.1e On e
Copyrighted material
Theory and Practice of
Foundation Design
N.N. SOM
Prof.ssor of Civil Engin<ering
Jadavpur Univ~rsity, Kolkala
S.C. DAS
Professor of Civil Eng inuring
JiUUJvpur UniverJ;ry, Kolkalo
0 2003 by Prentic&>Hall o1 India Private limited., New Delhi. All tigh!S resetved. No part ol tNs bOOk
may be reproduced il 8frJ fonn, by mimeograph or any other meens, vNiout permission h writing
from the J)l.C)Iistwtr.
ISB,..._I1-203·2191)..1
The export l"ighls ot this book are vested solely with the publiShet.
Published by Asoke K. Gh0$h. Prentice-Hall ot India PMte Umited. M-97, COnnaught Circus,
New Oelhl-1 10001 and Printed by Jay Print Pack Private Limited, New Oelhi-110015.
Copyrighted material
To
Professor NOEL E. SIMONS
and
Indian Geotechnical Society
Copyrighted material
Contents
Prtau
Copyrighted material
Contellls + ix
Copyrighted material
Coments • xi
Appendix 393-394
lntfu .195 .!99
Copyrighted material
Copyrighted material
Preface
Over long years of association with the profession of teaching and research in civil and
geotechnknl engineering. our experiences sugges1 that foundations arc ofte-n designed without
lllking all the ess<:nlial parameters into consideration particularly those with regard to geology
of the site. soi.l dara! ground conditions. type of structure. and )and use pattern in the vicinity of
the construction area. Though the theoretical aspects of foundation design are well understood.
the fie ld situations are usually not given the due imponance. As a c·o nsequence, the
implementation of the proposed design runs into problems necessilllting changes in constrUction
methodology or in some cases. even the design.
The book covers the essentiaJ features of foundation design through fourteen chapters.
The foundation design requires underslJinding of the soil type, its strength and deformation
characteristics. ground wate-r tab1e, and other details of the site and the structures. We have
striven to incorporate all these criteria so as to acquaint the reader with all necessary aspects or
foundation design. This treatment begins with Chapter I that details the engineering properties
of soil as required for the design of sound foundations. Chapter 2 discusses site investigation as
lhe next step towards foundation design. This chapter elaborates on the various methods of soil
exploration and testing. The design parameters and the importance of proper interpretation of
the data collected from soil i11vestigation arc described in Chapter 3 while Chapter 4 introduces
different types of foundations and lheir charac.tetistic-s.
Chapters S through 7 offer de<ailed study of the mechanical prope11ies of soil including
the stress distribution, the bearing capacity of foundations, and settlement. The effect of non~
homogeneity and nonlinearity of the stress-strain relationships on the stress distribution in soils
is elucidated and the concept of streSS-path method of settlement analysis is introduced in these
chapters. The imponant considerations for obtaining the design parameters from a Jarge amounl
of soil test data are highlighted. The design procedures for shallow and deep foundations. a..;;
also for well foundations are presented in Chapters 8 through 10. The special requirements of
expansive soils are covered and the earthquake response or soils and foundations are empha..;;ized
in Chapters II and 13 respectively. The ground improvement techniques commonly used in
practice and the constJUCtion problems generally encountered at site are adequately dealt with in
Chapter 12. The reader should also find in the book a comprehensive treatment or the design
procedures vis~ a ~vis the construction problems and practices (as discussed in the final chapter).
The chapters on analylical aspects are followed by worlced-out examples taken from real-life
problems which make the reading bolh topical and interesting. Besides, numerous references
have been made to actual cases of foundations for better clarity and understanding of the topics
covered.
XV
Copyrighted material
xvi • Preface
N.N. SOM
S.C. DAS
Copyrighted material
Soil as an Engineering
Material
1.1 INTRODUCTION
From an engineering viewpoint. soils and sof1 rocks comprise all the loose ond fra-gmented
materials that are fou nd in the em1h's crust They arc distinguished from solid rock. i.e., the
hnrd ond compnct mass i n the earth's body, which cannot normally be excavated by manual
means. Soils 3re fonned by disintegr:uion or decomposition of a parent rock by weathering
or they moy be depOsited by cr:mspOnation from some other soun.·e.
Soils which are formed by the disintegration of 3 parent rock and remain 01 their place
of formation are known as re.sidual soils. The disintegration of the. parent rock is caused by
physical agents such as tempcroture changes. freezing. thawing etc. or by chemic.al agents like
ox.id:.uion, hydration etc. When the soil is transpOned from its original bed rock by forces of
gravity. wind, water or ice and re-deposited at another location it is known as tra11sporttd
soU. Tmnsported soils arc gcnerully sorted out according to their gmin s ize as the velocity of
the transporting medium gets reduced away from the source. A fter deposition at a new place,
these soils may be subjected to further weathering with the passage of time.
Tnmsported soils tare c lassified into differe nt types according ro their mode of
1ransponmion. r.>eposits of soil thar nre formed by willd 11re called Aeolian deposi1s. Sand
dunes and loess are examples or these de.positS. Loose sand is geJle.rally swept by wind and
transported close to the surface. If the motion is stopped. it is depOs ited in the form of sand
dunes. The common lrllllSported soils are, however, those which have been carried by water
or ancient glaciers. Mariue soils which have been can·ied by sea w:atcr and Alluvial soils
which have been carried by rivers 3nd streams constilute probably the largest group of
transpor1ed soils on earth. These deposits may also be called sedimemary deposits ns they
hnve be.en formed by deposition from e ither standing or moving water. The deposilion is
primarily caused by the graduaJ decrease in \'elocity or river carrying the sedi ment~. A larger
part of the great Indian plains is made up of alluvial deposits. Gltrcinl deposit~ are remnants
of the icc age thai were carried along by the moving ice. They are generally found as big
boulders at places away from their parent rock and nrc heterogeneous in nature with linle or
no stratification. Other sedi mentary deposits :;ti'C the Lacustrine .soils which are depos ited on u
lake bed and the Esluaritre soils which arc deposited at the mouth of ::tn estuary.
1
Copyrighted material
2 • Theory and Practice of FoutJdatiou Desig11
Properties of soil are complex and variable, being primarily infl uenced by the geological
environment under which they have been deposited. An understanding of soil composition is
important in appreciating the mechanic.al behaviour of the soil. Natural soil consists
essentially of discrete solid particles which are he.ld together by water and/or ga.< filling the
pore space. These particles are. however. not bonded as strongly as the crystals of a metal are
and can. therefore. move freely with respect to one another. The si?.e :md shape of grains and
the minemlogical composition of soil panicles varies widely in nature. However. in c.oarse-
grained soils the most important propenies do not depend on the constituent minerals
although locally, the minerals may control the frictional c-haracteristics of the individual
grains. In these soils, the panicles are so large that the forces between the grains other than
those due to externally applied forces and gravity are smaJI. The non.day minerals suc.h as
mica. feldspar, and quanz which constitute sand and silt do not render any plasticity and
cohesion to the soil. Thus. the influence of the constituent minerals becomes appreciable with
the decrease in size.
Clay minerals are hydrated aluminium silicates in crystalline form. These are generally
of three different types (Scott 1965):
Kaolinite A 14 Si0 4 0 1o(OH)a
Montmorillonite : (AI~.67 MgNao.33)Si,0 10(0H)1.H20
Ulile K,(AI4 Fe4 Mgu)(Si8_7.A I y)0 20(0 H),
Kaolinite has a very stable struciUrc. h generally resists the ingress of water and
consequently, undergoes little volume chan,ge whe,n in contact with water. On the other hand,
Montmorillonite auracts water and undergoes large swelling and expansion when saturated
with water. Most of the black cotton soils of India contain clay minerals of this variety. Illite
is less expandable than montmorillonite.
A s ingJe panicle of clay consists of many s heets of clay mine,rals piled one on another,
as shown in Fig. 1. 1. As each sheet has a definite thickness but is large at right angles to itS
thickness. clay particles are believed to be plate shape:d. The Oat surfaces carry residua)
4
negative charges, but the edges may carry either positive or negative charges depending upon
the environment
":w=o::::oooc:o=; Potasslum
' molecules
Weak
bOOd
( ) =weak
I <:Jooc::c:c:~ Potassium
~ molecules
(a) Kaolinite
'(b) Montmorillonite (c) tulle
Copyrighted material
Soil as 011 E.11ginetri11g Maten'al • 3
(a) (b)
Fig. 1.3 Structure of eohesl~ SOilS.
Copyrighted material
4 + Tlteory and PmCiice of Foundation De.sigu
1.3.1 Definitions
(a) Unit weigh~ Water r.. =
W..,IV.,
Solid particles r,= WsfV1
Specific gravity : Gs = rirw
= W,IV"y_.
(b) Water conte.nt. IV = (W.IWJ x 100%
(c) Void ratio, e = Vl'IV_, = (V., + V8 )/V"
(d) Porosity, n = V,JV = V/(V, + V,)
(c) Degree of sawnuion. S = V.JV, = V.I(V. + V1 )
G - I
. r'= t.f+ e x y_.
The range over which the typical values of the above parameters vary are as follows:
(i) G,= 2.60-2.75
(ii) r
= 1.60-2.25 glee
(ii i) r,
= 1.30- 2.00 glee
(iv) " = 0.25-0.45 (for sand)
(v) S =
0 (for dry soil}-100% (for fully saturated)
As already menrioned. the clay minerals in fine-grained soils have sufficient surface forces to
attract water molecules to the clay particles. The interaction between the clay minerals, water.
and various chemicaJs dissolved in the water is primarily res ponsible for developing the
consistency of these panicles.
Pure water mainly consisL.:; of molec-ules of H1:0 but a few of them get dissocialed iniO
hydrogen ions, H+ and Hydroxyl ions. 0 11. If impurities such as acids and bases are present.
Copyrighted material
SoU as au Eugiuuring Maltrial + 5
they also dissociate into cations and anions. Sail. for example. breaks up into Na• and CJ- .
Since plane surfaces of the clay mineials carry negative charges, cotions including H+ from
water are attracted towards the surface of these particles. The water molecules closest to the
clay particles. called the adsorbed water. are tightly held to the clay and exhibit propenies
which are somewhat different from those of ordinary wa:er. This adsorbed water is believed
to give cohesive and plastic propertie~\ to clayey soils. It is obvious, therefore. that the
amount of water present in a clay will determine its plasticity characteristics and. in tum. ilS
engineering properties. The Atterberg limits are designed to serve as an index of the
plasticity for clayey soils. refer Fig. 1.5.
SemiSOidPlastic 5em1Uquld
Solid state, state state stale
! - - - - + - - -;.....----;.....--+Increase of moisture
content
Legend
Sl-Shri'lkage limit
PL~astic limit
U -4.iquid limit
Moisture content
Slarting with a low water content a clayey soil first appears to be a solid and moves to
the plastic state with increasing water contenl. The word plastic here refers to the ability of
a soil to be moulded into different shapes without breaking up. At even a higher water
content. the soil begins to flow as a viscous fluid. The Atterberg limits. that is, the liquid
limit (LL), the plastic limit (PL), and the shrinkage limit (SL) indicate the limits of water
content at which the consistency of clayey soil changes from one state to another.
The Atterberg limits along with the natural water content give useful indication of the
nature of the clayey soil. A natural water content close to the liquid limit indicates a soft
compressible soil while a natural water content close to the plastic limit is characteristic of a
stiff and Jess compressible c lay.
Plaoticlty Index, PI
The range of water content over whic-h a soil remains plastic is called the plastic limit.
i.e. PI = U - PL(%) ( 1.1 )
Liquidity Index, LI
It is the ratio of natural water content, w of a soil in excess of its plastic limit to its plasticity
index and is indicative of the state of the water c.ontent in relation 10 the liquid limit and the
plastic limit of the soil.
IV - PL
U= X 100% ( 1.2)
LL- PL
Copyrighted material
6 • 11r~ory and Practice of Fourul.arion De.sigll
~ 50
U-lino
PI • 0.9 (LL - 8}
/ /
Ci: / CH /
~ 40
~
'> /
OH
or
/'
/
i 30 CL
/
l 20
/
/ or
OL / A-tine
PI • 0.73 (LL - 20)
/,
Cl-ML v,;L MH
10
' / or or
0
0
. /!
10
v
20 30 40
OL
50 60 70
OH
60 90 100
Liquid limit, LL (%)
Fig. 1.8 Plasticity chart
Clay Minerals
Illite 100 45
Kaolinite so 25
MontrooriJJonite 500 50
Copyrighted material
8 • Tlu~ory and Practice of Fouudatio11 Desig11
60 \ Silty
ne s*nd
\ \ Oispeo>ed
\kaolinite
t'
~
~
"() Ctaye~
& sandy silt
!'I Gra¥elty\ I
' ....
"'
c sand
..
~
~
20
I'-
Flocculated
-.... kj'"'j I .......
0
6 2 0.6 0.2 0.06 0.02 0.006 0.002 0.0006
10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
Particle diameter {mm)
Fig. 1.8 Grai~size distribution w rve.
whe.re Dro is the diameter of panjcles correspOnding to 60% fi ner and D 10 is the diameter or
the panicle corresponding to 10% finer. The gradation of soil is detennined by the following
criteria:
Uniform soil c11 = l
Poorly-graded soil I < c. < 4
Well-graded soil c. > 4
It must be considered, howeve,r. that the pilrtic1e size alone is not an adequate criterion for
the classification of a soil. as the shape or grains and clay fraction may vory widely depending
upon the constituent minerals. More elaborate soil classification systems. making use of the
Auerberg limits. in addition to che particle size distribution. have since been evolved.
The roost comprehensive of lhese systems are the Unified Soil classification system and
the Indian Standard Classification System. The Unified Soil Class(ficotio" System divides the
soil.into coarse-grai ned soil (having more than 50% retained on number 200 sieve) and 6 ne
grained soil (more than 50%. passing through number 200 sieve). Further subdivisions are made
according to gradation for coarse-grained soils and plasticity for fine-grained soils and each soil
type is given a group symbol (Table 1.3). The Indian Standard Classification System (lS 1498)
is simii3C in some respeccs except that the fine-grained soils are divided into three ranges of
Jjquid limit as opposed to only two in the unified soil classification system.
Density. void ratio. and water content are fundamental soil parameters which help to identify
·and assess-at least qualitatively, the nature of the soil deposit. For example, a high void
ratio of a sandy soU would indicate a loose state of compaction while a clayey soil with high
water content is likely to be more compressible than one with low water content Table 1.2
gives the density, void ratio, and the water content of some common soil deposits.
Table l.l Density, void ratio, and water content of some soils
Soil
Mexioo City
Shd lhav~n clay. En~and
Volcanic
Eslultrine
Marine
Void
m1io
9.0
1.6
0.7
BW.t dms#y
(8/<c)
1.0
1.8
1.9
WaJ~I'
contmt (Sf!)
350
60
35
Boulder Clay. England Glacio! 0.4 2.0 20
Nonnal Calcutta CJay (UJ>Pef) Alluvlal 1.3 1.7 so
Nonnal Colcuua Clay (Lower) AlluvW o.s 2.0 30
Bangkok Cwy (Soft) Marine 2. 1 1.5 80
B:;mgkok Clay (Still) Marine 0.8 2.0 30
Norwegian Quick CWy Morine 1.0 1.9 38
Soil consisJs of solid grains that have various sizes ranging from coarse grained
particles such as boulder. gravel and sand down to the fine g.rajned particle$ like, siJt and
clay. The grains are classified according to their sizes. The most common system of
classification is the M.I.T. system as illustrated in Fig. 1.7.
Natural soil generally consists of mixture of several groups and the soil, in such cases,
is named after the principal constituent present. For example. a soil that is predominantly
clay but also contains some silt is called silty clay.
The grain-size distribution of a soil is best represented by the grain-size distribution
curves. refer Fig. 1.8. The shape of the curve indicates whether the soil is uniform or poorly
graded. or well-graded.
llte unifonnily coefficient of the soil is defined as
D
c., = !:12. ( 1.3)
D,o
Copyrighted material
Soil as an Engineering MateriDI • 9
Apart from the common soil types that may be identified by the different soil classification
sY1(ems, cenain natum soils are characterized by the properties of their chemical and mineral
constituents. Such soils exhibit characteristic features with regard to their streJigth and
compressibility and need particular care when used to support a foundation.
Or1anic soilJ are those which contain large quantity of organic/vegetable matter in
various stages of decomposition. Natural soils may contain varied percentages of organic
matter and only a small percentage may be sufficient to affect its properties. In organic clay,
vegetable matter is intermixed with the predominant clay mineral while P<Qr consists almost
wholly of vegetable matter. Peat is characterized by high liquid limit and sponzy mucture
with low specific gravity. The top 10-12 m of the normal Calcutta deposit is a common
organic clay of the Bengal basin. A thin layer of peat is often encountered in this depoait at
many locations as shown in Fig. 1.9.
Dosa1ption ol strata
Expamive soils are found in many pans of India, Africa, and the middle-east. The
black cotton soils of India and Africa are lhe most common types of expansive clays. These
soils have high expansive potential because of the predominant presence of montmorillonite
minerals. They are apparently stiff when dry but undergo swelling when saturated with
water. e.g .• due to seasonal fluctuation of ground water table. The Atterberg limits along
with the percentage of solid particles less than 0.001 mrn is taken as criteria for identification
and classification of the expansive soils. Table 1.4 gives the classification of expansive clays.
Table 1.4 Classification of expansive clays
28 3S II 30 Vesy hish
20-31 2S-41 7-12 20-30 Hlsh
13- 23 IS-41 10-16 10-20 Low
IS 18 IS 10 Low
1.8 GROUNDWATER
The water which is available below the ground surface is termed as groundwatu or
subsurface water. Practically all ground water originates from the surface water. The process
by which the s~rface water infiltrates into the ground surface and percolates deep into the
ground is termed as natural ruluJrge and artificial recharge. Main sources of natural
recharge of groundwater include precipitation, rivers, lakes, and other natural water bodies.
Artificial recharge of groundwater occurs from excess irrigation, seepage from canals,
leakage from reservoirs or tanks, or from water purposely applied on the ground surface to
augment groundwater storage. Water from any of these sources infiltrates into the ground and
percolates downwards under the action of gravity through soil pores and, rock crevices until
further movement is prevented by an impermeable stratum. It is then stored as groundwater.
The groundwater exposed to atmospheric pressure beneath the ground surface constitutes the
wat~r table. Water table rises and falls based on the amount of precipitation, the rate of
withdrawal or recharge. and climatic conditions. Groundwater held by the geolog.ical
formation is. however, not static but moves slowly in the lateraJ ctirecdon towards some point
of escape and appear as springs, infiltration galleries or wells, or reappears to join the river,
or lake. or the sea.
ln~a1e
zone
Pellicular and
grv....tional
water
!
Cooilary cap111ary
zone wale<
1-
f
Wolef .:le
Ground water
1-
lmpermeoble
FJg. 1.10 Zones of subsutface water.
Soil-water zone
The soil- water zone extends from the ground surface to the major root zone. The soil in this
zone becomeS saturated either during irrigation or rainfall. The water in the soil- water zone
is gradually depleted by evaporation from within the soil and by transpiration by vegetal
growth on the ground surface and if it is not R:plenished. the water content may be reduced
to such an extent that only thin fi1m of moisture known as hygroscopic warer remains
adsorbed on the surface of the soil particles.
Copyrighted material
12 • Th.ory and Practice of Foundntion D.sign
IAtermedlate zone
1be intermediate zone occupies the space between the lowe.r edge of soli-water zone and
upper limit of the capillary zone. This zone usually contains static water which is held by
molecular and surface tension forces in the form of hygroscopic and capillary water.
Temporarily. though. this zone may also contain some excess water which moves downward
as gravitational water. The thickness of this zone may vary from zero when the water table is
high to more than 100 m under deep water table conditions.
Capillary zone
The capillary zone extends from the water table upto the limit of capillary rise of water. In
this case, the pore space may be considered to represent a capillary and hence, just above the
water table almost all pores contain capillary water.
Zoae of oaturattou
In the zone of saturation, all the interstices are filled wi!f! water under hydrostatic pressure.
The zone of saturation is bounded at the top either by the ground water table or an overlying
impermeable stratum, and stntches upto underlying impermeable strata (or bed rock).
Generally, all soils below ground water table are fully satunoted.
The flow of water through the pores of a soil under a pressure gradient or under a
differential head is a common engineering phenomenon. ~epage of water through earth
dams and consolidation of clay under a building foundation are some instances where
percolation of water through the soil plays an imponant role on the performance of the
foundalion. The ease with which water can flow through a soil, called permeability, is
therefore. of fundamental importance in soil mechanics.
Ducy'alaw
Darcy' s law which governs the flow of fluid through porous media is also found to be
applicable to soils when now is due to a combination of pressure and positional gradient.
With the exception of flow through coarse gnovels, the flow of water through soils is
streamiined, and can be expressed as:
v = ki ( 1.5)
where.
"' = average rate of now of water in unit time.
i = hydraulic gradient. i.e., head loss per unit length of soil measured in the direction
of flow. and
k = coefficient of penneability of the soil.
Copyrighted material
Scil as an Engineering MateriiJl • 13
*
For any given soil, depends on the porosity of the soil. the struCtural amngement of
panicles. the size of panicles. the propenies of pore fluid (e.g. density and viscosity) ciA:.
(Taylor 1948). The temperature of the pore fluid should theorelically have some effect but
for practical purposes. the variation of k with the range of temperature normally encountered
in the soil is small.
The coefficient of permeabili[)' of a soil can be meuured from the laboratory constant
head test. variable head test. or the field pumping test. In view of the hetrogeneity and non-
homogeneity of natural soi~ field pumping tesiS give a better measure of the permeability of
the soil in the field. Typical values of permeability for different types of soil are p ven in
Table 1.5.
Tillie 1.5 Pameobility of cliff.- !ypes of soil
Soill)p<
Grsvd t
C>ane sand t- to-'
Medium sand tcr•- ur'
-Fine 5aDCl tO"'-to-' Oood
Slllysand tcr'-tcr' Poor
Sllllweuta.d clays to-'- tcr'
lntiCl days tcr'-tcr' Very poo<
Darcy's Jaw is valid only for laminar flow. Since Reynolds number serves as a criterion to
distinguish between laminar and turbulent flow. the same may be employed to establish the
limit up<o which Darcy's law holds good. Reynolds number for this case Is expressed as
R .- _ pvd
Jl
(1.6)
provides a Slltisfactory basis for understanding the deformation and strength characteristics of
a soil under an applied load. This can be simply be stAted as:
(a) The volume change of a soil is controlled not by the total normal stress applied on
the soil, but by the difference between the total normal stress and tile pressure in the
nuid in lhe void space. termed the pore pressure. For an all-round pressure increase.
this can be expressed by the relationship.
6V
-- = C (6<7. - 6u) (1.7)
v ' •
where.
6 V/V = volume change per unit volume of soil
6.G,. = change in total normal stress/pressure
6u = change in pore pressure
ct' = compressibility of soil skeleton
This relationship can be illustrated by a simple teSt where a Sllturated soil sample is subjected
to undrained loading followed by drained compression as shown in Fig. 1.11. Not until tilere
is a change of effective stress. is there a change of volume of the soil. This is the primary
cause of long term consolidation se-ttlemenl of foundation on clay. This also explains the
settlement or an area due to ground water tabJe Jowering, either for construction work or for
water supply.
Undrained
--
Time - -+
Fill, 1.11 Pnndplo ol olloeiMo ......
(b) The shear strengtil of a soil is determined by tile frictional forces between tile solid
panicles. These are clearly a function of the component of normal stress that is
carried by the solid grains rather than the total nonnal stress on the plane considered.
This ·may be expressed by tile equation.
r = c' + (cr. - u) tan f (1.8)
where,
c' = apparen1 cohesion
(l = angle of shearing resistance
o;. = total normal pressure
u = pore-pressure.
Copyrighted material
Soil as an Engineering Matuial • IS
In Eqs. (1.7) and (1.8). lhe tenn (u,- u ) is tenned lhe effective stress and is denoted
by the symbol u', that is,
o' = o - u ( 1.9)
In most engineering problems, the magnitude of total normal stre..c;s can be estimated
from considerations of statics while the magnitude of pore pressure depends on the hydraulic
boundary conditions. Bishop (1955) has shown that the effective stress in a soil can be
related to the intergranular pressure at the points of contact.
For a unit area perpendicular to the plane X- X through a soil rru~ss, the total s tress, u
acting on lhe plane of contact can be divided into two components, (refer Fig. 1.1 2) .
lll l l l l l
"'
u 1 ll l l 1 t 1
Fig. 1.12 EffectlYe stress and lntergranular pressure.
a = o' + u ( 1.10)
where.
u = Pore water pressure and
u• = Effective stress
If a = effective contact area per unit area of the plane and O; = average intergranular
pressure, then, for a unit area
u x I = u1 x I + (I - a)u
or o-1 = ( U- u) + au (1.1 I)
But a is small (!hough not equal to 0) and hence.
o-1 = (u- u) ( 1.12)
From Eqs. ( 1.11) and ( 1.12)
o1 = a' (1.13)
Thus, for practical purposes, effective stress may be considered equal to the intergranular
pressure. the average pressure between the solid gains.
In a natural soil deposit, (refer Fig. 1.13), the total stress at any depth is given by the
overburden pressure at that depth while the pore pressure. in the absence of any artesian
condition, is given by lhe hydrostatic head of water at that deplh. The distribution of total
and effective stress in the soil is shown in Fig. 1.13.
Copyrighted material
16 • Tlr~ory and Practlce of Foundntion Design
G.~t ___j'___ -
z
Depth Poro
pressure
T- tlrMS
VQ/u of A aJ failun
Sensiti~ clay 1.2-2.S
Normally consolidated clay 0.7-1.2
0\'erconsolidakd day 0.~.7
Heavily overconsolidatcd cLay -0.~.0
~
.!!
•
••"
eli
4 '
Normal stress
Ffg:. 1.14 Mohr-Coulomb faJiure criterion.
In Eq. (1.19). the shear strength parameters c and 9 for any panicular soil depend on several
factors, the most important being the condition of drainage. Therefore, Eq. (1.19) expressed
in tenns of the total normal s-tress on the plane considered may be used to study the shear
behaviour of soiJ under undrained condition. A more general expression may be written in
terms of effective stress (Bishop 19SS) as:
r: c' + (a. - u ) tan 9'
or -r' = c' + a' tanf' (1.20)
where c' and f are the shear strength parameters in terms of effective stress.
lleuuremeut of ahear IOtteueth
While the Vane shear test (Cadling and Odenstnd 1950) or the Pressuremcter test (Menard
1956, 1969) may be used to determine the undrained shear strength or soils in the field, the
shear behaviour of soils is best understood from the laboratory triaxial test. figure 1.15
Luclte chamber
Chamber fluid
Sol
specimen
To drainage and!Of'
pcwe watet preuure
Copyrighted material
Soil 41 an Enginuri.ng Mat~n·al + 19
shows triaxial test set-up. Here, a cylindrical soil specimen is enclosed in a thin rubber
membrane with rigid caps at top and bouom. The soiJ is placed inside a triax.ial cell which is
then filled with water. Pressure is applied to the specimen through water and deviator stress
is applied through the end caps until lhe specimen fails in compression. Drainage or waler
from the pores or the soil may be conttolled through suitable valves at the base or lhe
triaxiaJ ceiJ. If required~ volume change and/or pore water pressure can be measured. Tile
details of the triaxial apparatus and various tests that can be performed with it have been
described by Bishop and Henkel (1962).
There are, in general, three conditions of drainage under which the triaxial lest is performed,
namely unconsolidaled undrained (UU). consolidaled undrained (CU), and consolidated
drained (CD).
In the unconsolidated undrained (UU) test, dte sample is first subjected to an all round
pressure a3 and !hen to a deviator sttess (a 1 - a 3) under undrained condition. The deviator
stress is applied rapidly-usually at a rate of strain of 1-2% per minute, ana failure is
achieved in 10:.20 minutes. For saturated soil, lhe Mohr envelope remains hOriZ9ntal giving
;, = 0. The shear strength obtained from lhe UU test is called lhe undrained shear strtntrh
or the soil c., see Fig. 1.16. The sbear sttength obtained from lhe UU lest is used in the
study of bearing capacity of foundations on clay or in the rapid construction of embankments
on clay. The unconfined compression test is a special case or UU test, where no confining
pressure is applied to the specimen prior to shear.
She•
Sire»
Normal
stress
Fig. 1.1S Unoonsolictated undrai'led (UU) test on sah.nled clay.
In the consolidoled undrained (CU) leS~ the sample is allowed to consolidale under an
all round pres..~ure a3 but no drainage is allowed during shear. If pore pressure is measured
during the test, both the pore pressure parameter A and 8, and the shear strength parameters
c' and , can be determined. Figure 1.17 depicts consolidated undrained (CU) test on
saturated clay. The data from CU test may be used in the analysis of stability for stage
conslruction of embankments on clay.
Copyrighted material
2t • nu~ory and Praclice of FoUJuiaticn Design
•. u·
______ __,_
\.
... -- ---
~ -~-- -- ··7.5"
'I
u
_., ...
3.01P"q u_.,. •.o .,,,
."
Namal - (lcQicm')
Fig. 1.17 Consolidaled ..-!nod {CU) - on oalura1ed day.
The consolidated drnined (CD) test diffen from the cOIISOiidated undrained test in the
way that both, the initial all round pressure and the subsequent shear stresses are applied
under fully drnined condition. The test, therefore, gives the shear strength parameteiS of a
soil in terms of effective stress, as given by Fig. 1.18. The results of this test can be used in
the study of long tenn stability problems.
Different types of triaxial test find their applications in specific field problems but, the most
important strength parameters required for the analysis of foundations on clay are those
obtained from the quick unconsolidated undrained (UU) triaxial test. For saturated clays, this
shear strength is expressed by the undrained cohesion c. · '" should theoretically be zero. if
the soil is fully saturated (Skempton 1948). Therefore, the shear strength of the clay in this
condition may be expressed as
( 1.21)
Although the UU test is easy to perfonn in the laboratory. application of the test data
to field problem has to be done with care. Facton such as anisotropy, rate of shear, sample
size. and so on affect the test results significantly (Skempton and L. Rochelle 1955). For
stiff-fissured c lays, in particular. the shear s tre ngth of the clay mass in the field may be
Copyrighted malerial
Soil as an Eng;neering Material • 21
considerably less tlw1 the strength obtained from conventional labonltory tests on small size
samples (Biihop 1966).
Seu!ttnty
Most clays have been found to lose a part of their strength when remoulded. This remoulding
may be caused by physical or mechanical means such as pile driving. However, with time,
the clay may regain this strength either wholly or partly, by a phenomenon known as
thixotropic hanl•ning (Skempton and Northey 1952). From the point of view of sensitivity
towards remoulding, clays may be classified as fol lows (Table 1.7):
SensHivity. in chis context. is defined as lbe ratio of tbe undrained shear strength of lhe
undisturbed soil to that of the fully remoulded soil.
1.9 .5 ConsoUdatlon
The gradual squeezing out of water from the pore space of a soil skeleton under the
influence of externally awUed load or gravity is called co•solidation. The process results in
a net change in volume of the soil and is time-dependent
When an element of soil is subjected to an increase of rotal suess under undrained
condition, the pressure is distributed among the solid grains and water depending on the
rclarive comprcssibililies of the two phases and lbeir boundary conditions. For a confined
saturated clay- water system with no drainage, the compressibility of the mineral skeleton is
so large compared to that of water alone that virtually all the applied pre&&ure is transmitted
as an excess pore water pressure. If drainage is now permitted. the resulting hydraulic
gradient initiates a flow of water out of the clay and the soil consolidates. There is a
consequent transfer of the applied load from the water 10 the mineral skeleton.
The mechanism of consolidation and the factOI'S that govern lhe process of consolidation
of c layey soils are studied experimentally in the laboratory in the consolidation test or the
oedometer test The arrangement for nedometer test is shown in Fig. 1.19. A sample. usually
76 mm dia x 20 mm thick, is enclosed in a mel2l ring and sandwiched between two porous
stones placed at top and bottom. A load is awlied to the sample through the porous stones
using a lever anangemenl. As the sample consolidates., thickness of the sample decreases.
Being laterally confined within the metal ring, the sample is prevented from expanding
laterally and the entire volume change takes place in the venical direction. The flow is,
therefore, one dimensional and the tate of consolidation is governed by the permeability of
Copyrighted material
l l • T1reory and Pracrict of Foundation Dt.sign
the soil in the vertical direction only. However, consolidation is not always oneoodimensional
in rhe field and the consolidation test as performed in the laboratory represents the field
condition only under certain boundary conditions.
Olal
..
~ ....
' 0.
1!> ~ ... ~
--·----~-----
.,: ... ;-
6P :
p,, ,P, Po: p, :
Pressure Pressure (log scate)
Fig. 1.20 p,_...-wlcl ratio retotionohlp.
The coefficient of volume decrease is defined as the volumetric strain per unit increase of
effective pressure and this can be expressed. in terms of void ra6o, as
de I
m., = dp 1 + •o
(1.22)
where.
t.o = in.itia.l void ratio for dte s.tress increment considered.
Copyrighted material
Soil as an Engineering Material • 23
For the linear void ratio versus effective stress relationship on the semi-log plot, the
compressibility of the soil is gjven by the compression index. C, defined as
de
c, : d(logp) (1.23)
and
dV
- : c, log 12. (1.24)
v I+~ Po
The compressibility of a soil is a measure of its consistency. The greater 1he
compressibility, the softer is the soil and vice versa. Again. the compressibility of a soil is
not a constant propeny. lt decreases with increasing effeetive stress, as is evident from the
decreasing slope of the pressure-void ratio relationship with increasing pressure. But for the
range of stresses usually encountered in practice~ Table I .8 gives one dimensional
compressibility of some representative clays.
Table 1.8 <Joe.<timemioo.al compmsibifity of some cl.tys
(Dau from St cmptoa aDd Bitbop (19S4). Onammcr (1976) and Author's fikl)
Erosion
p '---~--~-- log p
Po p,
Fig. 1.21 stresses in en etemenl soil below ground surface. Copyrighted material
24 t Theory Olld Practice of Founda1io11 Design
Now, if some pan of the overburden is removed by, say. erosion and the remaining height of
deposition is only H. conuponding to which the pressure is Po- the e lement of soil will
undergo swelling and the void ratio will increase to e. This means that the soil in its past has
been subjected to a pressure greater than that exists now. Many <:lays and clay shales. for
example, London clay and Bearpaw shale, are heavily ovcrconsolidated in nature. The
strength and deformation characteristics of a soil depend to a large extent on it being
normally consolidated or overconsolidated. Soft clays are normaJiy consolidated and their
behaviour diffe.rs from overconsolidated c lays and clay shales. Structures founded on
normally consolidated clays. in general, experience much more settlement than those founded
on overconsolidated clays.
Although erosion of overburden has been identified as one of the causes of
overconsolidation. many residual and alluvial soils near the ground surface are rendered over..
consolidated by desiccation. Alternate wetting and drying due to seasonal Ouctuation of water
table and changes of temperature intrOduce capillary forces in the soil and the latter develops
a pseudo overconsolidation effect. This results in increased strength and decreased
compressibility of the soil. Depending on the severity of changes during desiccation, the over
consolidation effect may be quite appreciable. Most residual soils of India and occasionally
the alluvial soils near the ground surface appear overconsolidatcd due to desiccation.
Rate of eo.....Uclatl on
....,.
Z Ground
z• H - --- --
z =0
(a) (b)
ou
- ;--
k o2u
(1.2S)
St r.m., sr.z
where u is ihe pore pressure at a depth z from the free drainage surface, at a time 1 after the
pressure increment; and k and m,. are the permeability and compressibility of the soil for a
particular pressure increment. Both k and m,, may vary with pressure but their ratio remains
Copyrighted material
Soil •s an Engintering Mauritll + 25
approximately constant (Skempton and Bishop 1954). Conse<juently, Eq. (1.25) may be
writte.n as.
liu ~ C li u
1
(1.26)
lit • liz'
where C" is defined as the coefficient of consolidation.
Solving Eq. (1.26) for the appropriate boundary conditions, we get the distribution of
excess pore pressure with depth at a given time t as shown in Fig. 1.22(b). Then, integrating
the area of the pore pressure dissipation diagram at a given time and expressing it as a ratio
of the initial pore pressure diagram, we get the average degree of comolidation, U of the soil
as a function of the time factor T~ Thus, the degree of consolidation, U can be conveniently
expressed as,
U = /(T,) ( 1.27)
where.
( 1.28)
and H = length of the drainage path, to be taken as full depth of c lay when drainage is from
one end and half the depth of clay when drainage is from both ends.
The coefficient of consolidation is governed primarily by the size and nature of
particles as reflected by tbe water content or whether the soil is nonnally consolidated or
overconsolidated. C" is determined from laboratory consolidation test by curve fitting
methods (Taylor I 948). The relationship between the U and T. for tbe most common
boundary conditions of single or two-way drainage is ploned in Fig. 1.23.
1.0
Send I Send
0.8
2H = IT·41 H,}H /
Sand
~- -~~;:,
Rod< j+-4u,.j
...
v
v
/
0.2
0 10 30
--- 50 60 70 80 90
A""rage degree of consolidation, U{%)
This g.ives the C., value for one-dimensional consolidation or small size specimens. U.S.
Department of Navy (1971) proposed nn empirical relationship between C11 and liquid limit
ror determining che field c" for proclical use and lhis is shown in Fig. 1.24.
Copyrighted material
l6 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
• \
' \
.... \
•
••
• "\.
' \. '\ / Undisturbed samples; -
Cv in range or >nrgin ccmpres.sion _
'
~"
] / c., in range of rec::ompression lies
<5 •
• " ' \.
••
' "'
['..
• ~ I'.. '-..
' ~lely remouldod.L~: .... f"--
lies below this - Uml
t'--- ~
• ....... .......
••
.. .. ., '"'
LIQuid limit I.L
, .. ...
Fig. 1.24 Yal'iation of C., with lquid limit (after U.S. department of Navy (1971)).
Pine-grained eoUa •
Soils containing clay-size particles and large proportion of silt have low permeability and
their propenies vary wilh the rate of load application. Under undrained condition. their
sttength is derived almost exclusively from cohesion. These soils oflen possess low shear
strength and high compressibility, lhus mal<ing !hem poor foondation materiaL
A cohesive soil is described as ve:ry soft. soft. medium. stiff, and so on according to its
shear s1rength as determined from the unconfined compression test or from !he undrained
uiaxial test. Attempts have also been made to correlate thC standard penetration resistance (as
above) with the shear strength of cohesive soils. Table 1.10 gives the classification of
cohesive soils on !he basis of their shear strength (ferzaghi and Peck 1967).
Table 1.10 Shear $lTCngth of cohesive soils
(l'erughl and Peck 1967)
Undrained $hMt' N
<AnsUttncy strtngth. c. (Blows ptr 30 em)
(lfm:)
Very Son ~1.25 ~2
Son 1.25-2.50 2-4
Medium 2.5()-S.OO 4-8
Sliff S.~IO.OO 8-16
Very Stiff 10.~20.00 16-32
Hllld > 20.00 32
Stiff clay often possesses cracks and fissures which affect the shear slrCngth of 1he clay
mass. These fissures are planes of weakness and an: prone to softening by water. Laboratory
tests on small specimens do not often give lhe propenies of the soils in~·situ (Bishop 1966,
Burland et al. 1966, Man;land 1971).
Elaatlc: parametera
Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio are impOrtant soil parameters thai are required to study
the defonnation behaviour of a soil. When a saturated clay is loaded rapidly. no volume
change of the c lay occurs during loading and Poisson's ratio can be taken as 0.5. When there
is volume change. typical values of Poisson 's ratio may be 1aken as those in Table: 1.11
(Barkan 1962).
Tablt 1.11 Poisson's nuio or di.fferent soils
(Barkan 1962)
Copyrighted material
28 • Theory mui Practice of Foundation Design
ln·eltu compreselbllity
The pre.ssure versus void ratio relationships of natural clays are vuy sensitive to sampling
disturbanc.e s and the linear e versus Jog p relationship is not always obtained even for a
nonnally consolidated clay. Also, there is a pseudo overconsolidation effect on the sample
because of the removal of in-s itu stresses by sampling. Consequently, e versus )og p
relationship obtained from laboratory consolidation tests on undisturbed samples geniraiJy
takes the shapes as shown in Fig. 1.25. The curves move downwards as the sampling
disturbances are increased. Schmertman (1953) observed that. irrespective of sampling
disturbances. the straight Jine portions of all the curves meet at a void ratio equal to 0.42 ~0•
where e0 is the in-situ void ratio of the sample. Then joining this point with that
=
corresponding to t 0 and Po (where Po in·situ effective overburden pressure) would give the
virgin consolidation curve. For norma11y consolidated soil, the e.0 -p0 point lies to the right of
the extension of the straight line in the laboratory e versus log p curve while for over-
consolidated samples. the point would lie to the left. The field • versus log p relationship for
the overconsolidated range is obtained by drawing a line parallel to the laboratory rebound
curve and the point of intersection of this line with extended straight line of the laboratory
curve would give the pre-consolidation pressure (Fig. 1.25).
Void ratio, e
---- ' Po=Pt;
''
•• -'~~,~ VW'gin ~ression
LabOratory \ curve. slope c f:
oonsoCidalion 1 \
., curve
---- -- ~-
• \
1 '
I I
I I
OA2~;to ------~ -+-
1 I
I I
_ _,__;__~ Pressure, p (tog scale}
p, P2
Fig. 1.25 Laboratory e versus log p relationship.
Copyrighted material
1. 10 SOJL DEPOSITS OF INDIA
Tile soil deposita of lncha m:~y be classified under most of lhe ~minant aeological
formations (dcscnbed earlier). namely
(a) Alluvial oolls (b) Marine depositS (c) Sleek cotton ooll
(d) Laterite soil (c) Dcsen ooll (f) Boulder depositS
Figure 1.26 shows the di01ribution of predominant soil deposits in India (Ranjan and Rao
2000).
32°
2$. 2&·
z•· 23.$.
zo•
18" ~AA.MIIt .-a•ll tr
mo.-.-
12"
m---
r;m~on~~-
IZ3-~
& ' ! ] - dopoOIII
54· aa· 1'2" 16· eo- 54· aa· 92" ga· 1ocr
Fig. 1.26 Soil deposits of lndta.
Allu..W aoUa
Large parts o( northern and CIStern India lyina; in the lndo-ao.naetic plains and the
Brahmaputra valley arc covered by the sedimentary deposits of the river> and their
tributaries. Tiley often hove thickness greater than 100 m above lhe bed rock. Tile deposits
..-ly constitute layer> of sand. sdt. and clay depending on lhe pDOJtion of lhe river away
from lhe soun:c.
llarlDe depoe.IU
India has a long coast line extending along lhe Arabian sea. Indian ocean, ond lhe Bay of
Bengal. n.e deposits along the coast are mostly laid down by lhe sea. 11leiC marine c lays of
India are generally soft and often contain organic matter. 'They pOCSC$$ low shear strength
and high compresSibility.
<..opynghted matenal
30 • Theory and Practice of Fomtdation Design
The central p:lrt of India has extensive deposits of the exp:msive soil known as black couon
soil. This covers wide areas of Maharas tra, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh,
Tamil Nadu. and U11ar Pradesh. The soil contains montrnOrillonile clay mineral which has
high swelling potential.
Laterite IOU
This soil covers wide areas of Kerala. Karnati.lka. Maharasua, Orissa. and pans of West
Bengal. Lalerites are residual soils fonned by decomposition of rock which fonns oxides of
iron and aluminium.
Desert IOU
Large areas of Rajasthan in lhe Thar desert are composed of wind blown deposits of desert
soil. like loess. The sand dunes are often 15 m high and are formed under highly arid
conditions.
Boulder depoetto
Boulders are deposited is hilly rerrains where the rivers flow wilh high velociry and carry
large size boulders. These deposits are found in the sub-Himalayan regions of Uttar Pradesh
and Himachal Pradesh.
Barkan. 0.0 (1962), Dynamics of Bases and Foundations, McGraw Hill Book Co., New
York.
Bishop. A.W . (1959), The Principle of Effective Stress, Teknisk Ukebald, Vol. 106, No. 39,
pp. 859-863.
Bishop, A.W. ( 1966), Strength of Soils as Engineering Materials, Geoteclrnique, Vol. 16,
pp. 89-130.
.
Bishop, A.W. and OJ. Henkel ( 1964), The Meilsuremeni of Soil Prop<rtus in the Triaxial
Tw, Edward Arnold, London.
Bjerrum. L. (1964). R~lasjon M~lom Malte og Berengnede Serninger av Byggverk pa Leire
og Sa11d, Norwegion Geotechnical Institute, Oslo, Norway.
BoWZ<~k ond G.A. Leonards (1972), The G/oucnt<r Test Fill. Proeee&ngs ASCE Speciality
Conference on performance of earth and eanh retaining Sln.lctures, Lafayette. Indiana.
USA.
Burlond, L., F.G. Buller. and P. Ouniean ( 1966), The Behaviour and Design of lArge
Diometu Bored Piles in Stiff Clay, Proceedings SympOsium on Large Bored Piles. The
lnslilUtion of Civil Engineers. London, pp. 51- 71.
Copyrighted material
Soil as arr fngineerirrg Material • 3 1
Copyrighted material
II
II
Site In estigation
2 .1 INTRODUCTION
ll is essential to carry OUt site investigation preparing the design of civil engineering
works. The investigation may range in from simple examination of the surface soils.
with or without a few shallow lrial pits. a detailed s1udy of the soil and ground water
conditions for a considerable depth below ground ·surface by means of boreholes and in·
situ and/or laboratory tests on lhe soils :~~~~~!. 1be extent of the investigation depends
on the imponance of the stNCture. the c• 1
of the soil conditions. and the infonnation
already available on the behaviour of foundations on similar soils. Thus, it is not the
normal practice to sink boreholes and soil leSLS for single or two-storey dwelling
houses since normally. there is adoquale of the safe bearing pressure of the soil in
any particular locality. Only in soils such as peat or loose fill would it be
necessary to sink deep boreholes. supplemented · by soil tests. More extensive
investigation for light st~tures is needed structures are buih on filled·up soil or in
ground conditions where there is no available on foundation behaviour of similar
structures. A detailed s ite investigation deep boreholes and laboratory testing of
soils is always a necessity for heavy such as bridges~ multi-storeyed buildings or
industrial plants.
Thus. the major objectives of site inveftigatuon are:
(a) Knowing the general suitability of site for proposed works.
(b) Assessing local conditions and proj>lems likely to be encountered in foundation
construction.
(c) Acquiring data for adoqua1e and ecxf>otmic design of foundlltion.
Copyrighted material
Sile lnvesn'gation t 33
2. Location of buried services such as power lines, telephone cables, water mains,
sewers pipes and so on.
3. General geology of the area with particular reference to the principal geological
formations underlying the site.
4. Previous history and use of the site including information of any defects and failures
of struc.turcs built on the site.
5. Any special features such as possibility of earthquake, flooding, seasonal swelling etc.
6. Availability and quality of local construction materials.
7. A detailed record of soil or rock strata, ground· water conditions within the zone
affected by foundation loading and of any deeper strata affecting the site conditions
in any way.
8. Design data which comprises strength and compressibility characteristics of the
different strata.
9. Results of chemical analysis on soil or ground water to detennine pos.'ible deleterious
effects on foundation structures.
2 .S . l ReeonnaisaaDee Study
Roconnajssancc study involves the preliminary feasibility study that is undertaken before any
detailed planning is done-mainly for the purpose of selection of site. This is to be done at
minimum cost and no large scale exploratory work is usually undertllken at this stage. The
required data may be obtained from:
Copyrighted material
34 t TI1eory and Practice of Fou11dation Design
Pedolo~cal dot&
Many areas have been surveyed for agricultural purposes-usually to depths of 2 or 3 m.
Materials arc often classified according to colour, texture, chemical composition, and so on.
Aerial photocrapha/aateWte lmageo
Photographic representation of a portion of earth· s surface taken from the air or space.
Geophya.lcal methodo
Applica6on of the methods and principles of physics to detennine the propenies of
s ubsurface materials. These methods are particularly useful for identifying bed rock. Seismic
refraction method or electrical resistivity tests are usually done for this purpose.
Test pit
Brownish grey
silly (jay
Soil Strata
down or romted by hJind in the borehole. Water or mud now carries the soil up the onnular
space between the wosh pipe ond the cosing. ond it overflows ot ground level where the soil
in suspension is allowed to settle in a tank and the fluid is re·circulated or discharged to
waste as required. Samples of the settled soil can be retained for identification purpOses.
Figure 2.2 shows the arrangement for wash boring.
Waktr
Winch._ awiveJ
Pump
Engine
Sump
Wash pipe
'
Flg. 2.2 Wash boring,
The method is simple and cheap. The structure of the soil below the boring apparatus is not
disturbed and thus, both disturbed and undisrurt>ed samples can be obtained.
1- Dril rod
- -~
....
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
:''•
I
II
' I
Post.flole auger-
2 .4 .4 Rotary Drllling
Rotnry drilling is done by rapidly rotating drilling bits attached to the bottom of the drill rod
to cut and advnnce chc borehole. Rmary drilling can be used in sand, clay or inl,act rocks
wilh warer or drilling mud being circulnted through che drill rod to remove the cuttings as
the mud returns u pwards chrough che annular space between the drill rod and the side of the
hole. Core bnrcls wilh diamond bits may be used in r01ory drilling co obtain rock cores.
Copyrighted material
Sit~ l11~srigation + 37
Exccpr when undisrurbed samples ore required in ~nsitive clays. !he casing is genernlly
driven by repeUicd blows of a drop hammer. Casing prevcnrs side caving, bur nor always
bottom caving. This can be achieved by filling the casing with water or driiJjng fluid.
However. casing should nor be filled wirh warer if bonom of casing is above ground warer
table and undisturbed samples are required.
2.5 SAMPLING
The different types of sample obtained from boreholes are shown in Table 2.2.
Table l..l Types of sample
SampJ~s
OiSIWI>cd Undisrurbed
I
RtmdUidcd R~ve
(The structure of the soil is disturbed (Retains as closely as practicable.
to a consjderable degrte by che action lhe true in-shu structure and
of boring toots and ucavation equipment.) water cornen1 of the soiJ.)
Drift rod
Open drive samplers consist of thin-walled tubes which are pushed or driven into the
soil at the bottom of the hole and then rotated to detach the lower end of the sample from
the soil as shown in Fig. 2 .6. Most soft or moderately stiff cohesive soil can be sampled
without extensive disturbance in thin·walled seamless steel tubes having diameter not less
than 50 mm. The lower end of the tube is sharpened to from a cutting edge and the other
end is machined for attachment to drill rods. The entire tube is pushed or driven into the soil
at the bonom of the hole and is removed with the sample inside. The two ends of the tube
are then sealed and the sample shipped to the laborntory.
Good quality undisturbed samples are obtained from piston samplers which use thin-
walled sampling tubes with a piston inside. While the tube is being lowell:d to the bouom of
the drill hole, the piston rods and the piston are held at the boltom of the sampler by means
of a drill rod which rises to the top of the borehole. A pislOn sampler ls shown in Fig. 2.7.
The presence of the piston prevents excess soil from sequeezing into the tube and thus.
maintains the integrity of the sample.
--
Fi9- 2.7 f'lsiDn sampler.
Table 2.3 lists the requirements of a good sampling tube (ll:fer Fig. 2.8) as follows:
• :Z..J'h
'Tbis dearance is provided to mluce &he drivlog fOl"Cle requlttd to penetrate the sampler into the soil.
DiametO" of samples should 001 be less !han 38 mm. In gcn<nl. SO. ISO mm diamelel' undUwrb<d samples
are obtained from boreholes.
Undisturbed samples which ""' to he tested after some time should he maintained in such a
way that the natural water content is reraincd and no evaporation is allowed.
Usually. two C·o ats of 12 mm thick paraffin wax. and pelrolcum jelly are applied in
mohen state on either end of the sample to keep the water content unchanged for
considerable time when the sample is preserved in o humidity controlled room. In the
absence of such fa<:ili ties, the sampling tubes should he covered by hessian bags and sprinkled
with water from time to time. Block samples may he coated with 6 mm thick paraffin wax
and kept in air·tight box w:·h saw dust filli ng the annular space between the box and the
sample. Figure 2.9 shows sol..e typical arrangements for preservation of samples.
Cover
Paraffin coat
~b'a<allin coat
(Paraffin wax +
P&ttOiel.wnjelly)
Saw dust
$ample Wooden box
(a) Block sample (b) Tube sompte
Copyrighted material_
40 + Theory a11d Practice of Foundation Design
RID
TyfH of tat
I. Relative densiry (granular soils) (a) Standard penetration lt$l
(b) Dynamic cone cest
2. Shear strength (cohes:ive soil) (a) Vane test
(b) Direct shear test
(c) Sialic cone test
3. Bnring capacity and seu.Jement Plo<e bearing teSI
4. Permeabilily (a) Borehole/pumping tes1
(b) Pierometer teSI
S. Testing of piles load cest
6. Compaction conU'OI (a) Moisture-density rel;nion
(b) In-pioce density
(c) C.B.R. test
7. ln·situ strength and deformation (a) Prts.suremeLcr test
ch!ln•cteriscics or soil (b) Dilotomctcr tt:sl
Copyrighted material
Siu lnvestigalion • 41
2 . 7 FJEI.D TESTS
To dril rod
SIOOI somplng
. _ 2"(5(1).8)
(split klngiludinally)
For cohesive soils. a simple correlation between the slllndard penetration resistance (N)
and the undrained shear strength, c, has been proposed by Stroud (1974),
c, = kN (2.0)
when: k is a constant having an average value of 4.5 kN/m2. Similar relationship has been
obtained by SengupUI (1984) who studied the correlation for some cohesive soils and
obUlined a value of 4.2 for the consUlnt k. Terugbi and Peek's relationship has been widely
used to obtain the consistency of cohesive soils in terms of the undrained shear strength, as
shown in Table 1.9 (Terzaghi and Peck, 1967).
In granular soils, the SPT blow count is affected by the effective overburden pressure,
u.;. So. N value obtained from the field should be corrected to correspond to a standard
vaJue of a...'. Accordingly,
(2.1)
Copyrighted material
42 • T1reory and Practice of Foundation Design
where
Ncvt = corrected N value for a standard value of a.,' (1 00 kN/m2)
C,. = correction factor
Nr = N value obtained from field
The correction factor C,. may be taken from the empirical relationship given by Skempcon
( 1986).
2
C, = I + O.Olcf, (2.2)
Many attempts have been made to obtain empirical correlation between NC!OI and the angle of
shearing resistance of sand. The most recent attempt by Halanakar and Uchida (1996) appears
to agree well with laboratory test data, which gives
Copyrighted material
Sitt lm·estigotUm • 43
A similar correlation between the compression modulus E and the SPT blow count N
has been obtained by Papadopoulos (1992). This is given by
E = 75 + 8N (kglcm2) (2.4a)
Bowles (1988) also gives useful relations to evaluate the srress~strain modulus of sand
from SPT blow count, as shown in Table 2.8. But they generally give very conservative
values.
Table 2.8 Stress-strain tNXlulus of sand (Bowles. 1988)
Fig. 2.11 Strie cone penettomeetr (tltettic:al). 1. Conical point (10 crn2): 2. lOid ctll; 3. Strain gauges;
4. Friction sleoYO {!50 an'); 5. Adjuslment ring; 6. Walerpf<>Of bushing;
7. Cable; 8. connection with rods
The test measures the cone resistance. q~. developed against the penetration of the cone and
the frictional resistance, /, developed between the sleeve and the surrounding soil as in
Fig. 2.12.
,,~hn'l o, kNJm'
2.5 0 1000 2000
,)
;
:
S_ ..,_
·' 5 _...
t ~
..
~._
\ -
1
b:·-'~
-~y "' 'l::..
.--'••... $
•
1:
~ ~ ;;;;;.: '
20
,s
25
!
Fig. 2.12 Static oone penetrometer data.
Copyrighted material
Site Investigation • 45
Typical penetrometer test data give a continuous variation of the cone resistance and the
frictional resistance with depth. In recent years. the static cone penetrometer has been
modified to incorporate an electrical piezo-cone to give simultaneous measurement of tip
resistance. side friction and the pore pressure as the cone is advanced in lhe soiL The
development of pore pressure makes the interpretation of soil type more accurate in terms of
permeability of che soil.
Lancellotta (1983) and Jamilkowski et al. ( 1985) proposed an empirical correlation
belween the relative dens-ity of nonnally consolidated sand. D, and q,..
where a' := verticaJ effective stress at depth considered and both qt' and a' are in units of
tonnes per sq. m.
This relationship is based on che oorrelation obtained from several sands as depicted in
Fig. 2.13.
95
85 D, = -98+ IW!tog,o((q~~·)
75
Flo. 2..13 Relationship bet-Neen c:one penetration resistance and relattve density
(alief Jamiii<OWSIII ot al., 1985).
The peak friction angle •• of normally consolidated sand may be obtained from the
expression. (Kulhawy and Mayne 1990),
For cohesive soil, Mayne and Kemper (1988) gave the following relations for the
undrained shear strength c,., preconsolidatjon pressure Pr• o.nd the overconsolidation ratio.
OCR as
Copyrighled material
46 • Theory aud Practice of Foulldation Design
.... q, - a.,
c. - 20
1.0 1
OCR = 0.37 ( q, ~. " • )
where a" and a:. are the total and e ffective vertical stresses at the level of test respectively.
Some useful relalionship be1ween q, and !he SPT blow counl have also been oblained
by Robertson and Campanella (1983). The range of variation of q,JN, wilh mean grain size
D, is illus1ra1ed in Fig. 2. 14.
Clayey slit & Sandy silt
Clay sfJty d ay and silt Silly sancl
1000
//
900
/
800
700
// /
v,.....
,....." v
Range of results of Robertson &
___ ....
/ ,.....'
~/
C..mpanella (1963)..,
/
300
~-.:: < ..... ..... ~
200
-- -- ,..--
:--- .).. _..;>..;:
100
--- - ~--- -
..
lnela
Average of Robertson &
(1963)
0
0.001 0,01 0. 1 • 1.0
Mean grain size. D,o (mm )
Flg. 2.14 Rangt Of vatlation Of Q1/N~
Meyemof's (1965) simple correlation between q, and N for fine 10 medium dense sand is also
eX!eliSively used. This relation is expressed as
q, = 4N (2.9)
where qr is in kg/cm 2•
A four bladed vane ac the bouom of a drill rod is pushed into the soil and a torque is
applied by turning a handle at lhe top to create a cylindrical shear surface. as depicted in
Fig. 2.15.
p
go• 1<---s--+1
go•
Torque head
p
Torque
rod
Vanes
-Pvanes
~<'-0->0
At failure. the shear strength of the soil is related to the applied torque by the relationship
T
2
2
= 1<D H (I +.!_ D )~
3H
(2.1 0)
where,
D ::diameter of sheared cylinder ~ diameter of vane
H =Height of vane
T = Shear strength acting along the surface as weU as at the top and bottom of the
sheared cy Iinder.
The assumption that the shear stress is uniformly distributed across the top and bottom
is questionable but the variation due to any other assumed distribotion is not great. Normally.
SO mm diameter x 100 mm Jong four bladed vane is used and the vane is rotated at the rate
or 0.1 degree/s. Both undisturbed and remoulded strengths can be determined by first finding
the undisturbed strength and lhen rotating the vane fully to obtain lhe remoulded strength.
In-situ direct shear test, depicted through Fig. 2.! 6. is particularly suitable where tests on
small specimens are not representative or lhe performance or the in-situ soil. e.g. fissured
c lays. The test has been done extensively on London clay (Bishop 1966).
Copyrighted material
48 • Tlt~ory and Practice of FoUirdation Design
Peak
strength
-~~~
strength
Test 1J...----tr Hydraulic
1'S jadt
Shear displacement
jack
Ftg. 2.1& lr»>tu dWed. shear tHl
1M: :CN!t
I I
I ~------
I
The failure load is given by the intersection of initial and final tangent. If no well
defined failure point is reached, the data are plotted on logo versus logp scale to obtain the
point of intersection. failure may also be taken to be the point corresponding to an
arbitm.rily chosen limit of settlement., depending on the requirement of the suucrure.
Knowing the failure load and deformation char.acteristics from plate load te,st. the shear
strength and modulus of elasticity of the soil may be obtained from corTelation with be:lring
capacity and settlement equations of shallow foundations.
Copyrighted material
Sitt lnv~stigalion • 49
2 .7 .7 Preuuremeter Test
Menard (1956) developed the pressuremeter test to measure the strength and deformation
characteristics of soil in-situ. The test is done at different depths in a borehole with the help
of a pressuremeter which consists of an expandable probe with a measuring cell at the centre
and two guard cells at top and bottom. One such lfl1lRgement is shown in Fig. 2.18.
Cowlter Ll'lit
-
gas IUPil'Y
The probe is inserted in a pre-boned hole and is expanded in volume either by liquid or
air pressure until the soil fails or the expanded volume of the measuring cell reaches twice
lhe original volume of the cavity. The guard cells are used to minimise the end effect on the
measuring cell. Table 2.9 gives the typical dimensions of the probe and borehole.
Copyrighted material
SO • TI1eory and Practice of Foundation Desig11
~~~~~~~--~~~T~aM~
V0 V0 + Vt 2(V0 + V 0 ) YOkme, V
Vo + V"'
N, = I + lo~( z)
Here. E= 266(v + v. +2 •t)(Pt-
p •
0
VI -
Po )
VQ
Copyrighted material
SiJe /uvtsrigation • 5 1
Further innovations in in·situ testing have been achieved through the flnt·phue
dilatomettr test (Marchetti 1980, Schmenmann 1986). This is a further development of the
pressuremeter test. But these tests are rather expensive and are yet to be adopted as a part of
routine soil investigation.
The remaining field tests indicated in Table 2.5 arc not directly relevant to foundation
design. field pumping tests are done to obtain the in·situ permeability of the soil which is
required for working out a dewatering schc.me. Compaction c.ontrol tests are done to control
the field compaction of soil in land reclamation and embankment construction. Load test on
piles, which are required to check the safe load capacity of piles will be discussed in the
chapter on pile foundations.
A sci of routine laboratory tests are required to be done to obtain the soil parameters for
foundation design. These tests are indicated in Table 2 .4. Care needs to be taken in choosing
the appropriate tests for a panicular soil type. Classification and identification tests are
nonnally done on representative or disrurbed samples while engineering properties are to be
determined from tests on undisturbed samples. Sufficient number of tests should be done for
each identified stratum to assess the relevant design parameters. The procedure for laboratory
tests arc given in I.S. Codes and other building codes.
The ground warer table and seasonal fluctuations of the same are important parameters that
are necessary for foundation design and for working out dewatering schemes for deep
excavations. The position of ground water table is determined at the time of investigation by
observations in open wells or boreholes allowing sufficient time for stabilization. Depending
on the time of investigation, the measured ground water table may give the highest or lowest
position of the same. To obtain the seasonal fluctuation of ground water table observations
may be made in suitably placed piezometers at regular intervals of time.
Copyrighted material
52 • 1lu!ory and Practk~ of Foundation DeJigu
•. o lnitial bOrehOle
• •
\ • Supplementary boreholes
(b) Large building
·~
·.'. I '
ri
• Fllled-vp pond
.
'' ···~
.. ' Heavy plant
0 ..
Mufk101oy biOd<
(C) Fac10<Y building (d) Large de""lopment area
Fig. 2.20 l.ai'O<ft of bor-..
• •l
, j : ••
Depth ol-es
1, Obcaln cjepth Z 1 SUCh 11\at
\ - - In-situ o"odMo f>li/Po • 0.10
stress (A,) ' . 2. Obcaln depth Z2 such that
Increase of
z, v vertical pre$SUre
t.ptq,.. = 0.1
(q..,) 3. Depth of borehole should
be z, or Zt ~k:h
,. ever
Is less
Copyrighted material
SUe ltrvestigatioll • S3
Bishop, A.W. (1966), S~tength of Soils as Engineering Materials, Geor.chnique, Vol. 16,
pp. 89- 130.
Hatanaka, M. and A. Uchida (1996), Empirical Com:lation Between Penetration Resistance
and Internal Friction Angle of Sandy Soils; Soils and Foundations, Vol. 36, No. 4.
pp. 1-10.
Jamilkowski, M.• C.C. J..add, J.T. Germaine, and R. l..ancellocta (1985), New. Developm<nts
in Field and Laborarory Testing of Soils, Proceedings. lith International confen:nce on
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, San Francisco. Vol. I. pp. 57-153.
Kulhawy. F.H. and P.W. Mayne (1990), Manual on Estinwting Soil Properties for
Foundation De.sign, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto. California.
LonceJiotta, R. (198'3 ), Analisi Di Affidabilita in lngegneria Geotecnia, Ani lnslituto
Sciencza CostnJ.z.ioni, No. 625, Polhecnico di Torino.
Mllrchetti, S. (1980), ln-siru Test by Aat Dilatometer, Journal of Geot<chnical Engineering
Division. ASCE. Vol. 106, GT3, pp. 299-321.
Mayne, P.W. and J.B. Kemper (1988), Profiling OCR in Stiff Clays by CPT and SPT.
.
Geotechnical Testing Joumol, ASTM, Vol. II , No. 2, pp. 139-147.
Menard, L. (1956), An APparatus/or Measuring the Srrengrh of Soils in Piau, M.S. Thesis,
University of Jllinois, Urbana, lllinois, USA.
Meyerhof, G.G. (1965). Shallow Foundations. Joumol of Soil Mechanics & Foundation
Divisioro. ASCE, Vol. 91. No. SM 2, pp. 21- 31.
Robertson, P.K. and R.G. Campanella (1983), Interpretation of Cone Penetration Tests.
Pan I: Sand, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 718-733.
Schmcnmann, J.H. (1986). Suggested Me,thod for Performing the Aat Dilatomcter Test.
Geoteclmical Testing Joumat ASTM, Vol. 9. No. 2, pp. 93-101.
Skempton, A.W. (1986), Standard Penetration Test Procedures and <he Effect in Sands of
Overburden Pressure. Relative Density, Particle-size, Aging and Over consolidalion.
Geotechnique. Vol. 36. No. 3, pp. 425447.
Copyrighted material
Soil Data and Design
Parameters
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of soil investigation is to provide the e,ngineer with knowledge of lhe subsurface
conditions at a given site for
• Safe and ecooomic design of foundation and subsuucture.
• Overcoming construction problems that may be encountered at site.
• lnves~gation of f~ilure/distress of engineering structures.
The extent and nature of investigation depends on !be impo!Wlce and type of lhe structure.
There should be a desired degree of interaction between !be designer, lhe investigation
agency. and the construction agency so that problems of design and constructjon may be
identified in time and measures taken to tackle them before things get out of hand.
Figure 3.1 is a schematic representation of interaction of various agencies involved in
construction work.
Soareport
Design
eons ttuellon
agency
Project Construction
oompletlon
~ Existing buitding
\(&-storey)
.' •''.
,
·-·
•,.. ..
~
Routine soil exploration is carried out through boreholes. in·situ standard penetration· test
within boreholes. and field te-s ts such as static and dynamic cone penetration tests. Laborataty
Copyrighted material
Soil Data and D~slgn Parameters • 57
tests are carried out on disturbedlundistUibcd samples collected from the boreholes. For a big
project. a limited number of boreholes may be supplemented by dynamic cone penetration
tests which arc particularly useful for determining the depth of fill, if any, through
appropriate correlation with borehole data. It is, however. necessary to· do at least one
dynamic cone test adjacent to each borehole. The Jocation of a filled-up pond in the HUDCO
project area in Ultadmlga, Calcutta was de=ated in this manner with the help of dynamic
cone test, as shown in Fig. 3.3.
•
Arm
cloy
-s Very
soft 1 //'8112
. -····-
i" 8113
~ day
•
2
•• • Soft
day
I Soft
ela)'
• • 3•
1
• Oynamk:: cone test
• Boreholeo
Date or lnvestlgatlon
The date of investigation is imponant in evaluating the fluctuation of ground water table
(O.W.T.) at a glven site. If there is seasonaJ fluctuation in water table. measurement at the
time of investigation does not necessarily give the highest or lowest position of G.W.T. In
ease investigation is done in the dry season. local enquiry should be made about seasonal
fluctuation for proper evaluation of O.W.T. The date of investigation becomes imponant in
such an evaluation.
The method of boring adopted at a given site should be given due imponance in evaluating
the soil data. The report should clearly specify the technique-shell and auger, wash boring.
or bentonite mud drilling~hat has been used to make the boreholes. Also. the usc of casing
or chiselling done, should be clearly indicated in the report.
Sampling is an important aspect or soil investigation. The quality of samples detennine
the reliability or otherwise of the laboratory test data. The relevant data on sample and
sample collection are:
(i) TyJH of sampler 11sed
• open drive sampler/piston sampler
Copyrighted material
58 • Theory turd Practice of FoundDticn Design
0 G.l.
3m
6m
.J
.; 9m
~
.!l
t
~
Joj.----21 m
0 San-c>les not oolleded
lo f - - - - 2 • m
Testing
Laboratory testS on disturt>edl\lndisturbed samples are done for the purpose of classification
of strata and also for detennination of their engineering properties. The schedule or tests
s hould he drawn up with care, reflecting the soil type, and the narure of problem to he
solved. This should beuer be done in consultatjon with the de...-igner to avoid a random choice
of the l)'pe of test from the schedule of tests given in the bill of quantities. figure 3.S gives
a schedule of tests on samples from different strata of normal CaJcutta deposit. 11le types of
Copyrighled material
Soil Dai/J and IRs!gn Para,..ttrs • 59
ScnodultoiiHit
+.;- • 0
Arm...,
day
(ml T w LL
Pl.
GS
.ae uc
T
t\JU) c
• •
I 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 :1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0
•0 6.0 0 0 0 0
Soft lilY 8.~1
-
conlent
6.5 0 0 0 0 0 0
•0 cloy • 11.0 0 0 0
uc • Unc::onlhld
12 • S..ndy
13.5
18.0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0 u.. Uquld~
0 0 Pl • P1Mic limit
•0 lilt w(th
el e)l
19.5 0 0 0 GS • Grein tim
18
• Bind« 2..25 0 0 0 0 0 0
T • Tl1ulol (Wl
... 75 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
B.H· 2 c• Coneolctdon
0
7.50 0 0 0 0
• Arm dly 10.0 0 0 0
0 12.5 0 0 0 0
15.0 0 0 0 0 0
-
24
DenM 11.5 0 0 0 0
21.0 0 0 0
v
Flg.U -ollobcllobyiMit.
tests should be so chosen ., to give lhe properties of all lhe strata relevant for design. One
should avoid going for unconfined compressioo test in a predomlnandy silty soil.
Similllt'ly. oon.'IOiidation teSt$ are required for cohesive strata only. For sandy strata. one
has to rely more on rield tc5U. such as SPT. Even undisturbed samplu in sand do nor
provide much help.
Soli proftle
Soil profiles should be drawn through a number or boreholes, if not through all of them. to
give the subsoil stratification along a chosen alignment. Such soil profiles dsown for a
number of carefully chosen alignments give a comprehensive picture of the variation of soil
strata, throughout the site. Plotting separately for individual boreholes does 001 cive lhe true •
picture ar a &,lance. Therefore. the best way is to pl01 lhe soil profile on a desired alignment
with nespeet to the vanation of N value with dep<h. The relative consistency of dlffeseot
str.wo emerg<S clearly from sucb a diagram. as depic:tecl throuJb Fla- 3.6.
The position of around water table at lhe time of investiaation should be clearly
indicated in the soil profile. Design or foundations should take appropriate ])OCe of any
seasonal noouation In around water table.
t _,,.yrighted ma ,noll
60 • 1?reory and Praclice of Founda#on Design
·w (8Jows/30 em)
0 10 20 30 4() so
0
4 .
6
g
~ 12 12
(j
1 16 1
'
3
2
1 1 '
c--.
24
28 =;
30
or data, thereby becomes difficult. While the basic b:St data should always be there, the
engineer should• be in a position to make proper assessment of the engineering propenies of
different strata to be used for design.
The basic test data may be summariud under the foUowing categories for each major
Stratum of a s-ubsoil deposil:
(a) Classification data
Bulk density
Natural moisture content
Atterberg limits
Grain-size distribution
(b) Engin~ering pro~rlit!s
Shear srrength parameters
Penneability
Consolidation test data: m..., c,.. eli
Compaction characteristics
(c) Chemical and mineralogical data
(d) Chemical test on water samples
Data Interpretation
The consistency data should be established before choosing the design parameters for a given
problem. Further, the reliability of data and their consistency may be studied qualitatively
from the results of individual testS. For example.
Copyrighted material
Soil Data arui IHsign Parami!IUl t '1
Atterbera Umits
Classification Grai,..aia:e
Mlneralosr
Auerbera limits'
Natural moisnue conu:nt
Slandanl peneuation resiSW>Ce (N value)
Undrained war wenglh
Consolldadon characleristic:s
Cl4st~" t~stt: A elooe examination or lhe IJ&in·lla:e distributioo dala and lhe
Atterbera limits may reveal incon&Jsu:ney in teSt results. ln Table 3.1 which gi>es a set or
= daiA. sample no. 4 wllh clay fncdon or only 8,. indica~e~ a highly plastic clay with
liquid limit 62.. while sample no. S wllh 1 cloy fnctlon 11 biJh 11 48.. bas a liquid limit of
35.. only. These dala do not inspire confidence. It is necessary. ~~~ererore to cheek !he
Atterbera limits against lhe pain·size distribution or eoch sample to determine their
rdiability/eonsistenc:y.
Tobk 3.1 Ooulllcaloft ICfU
-
s-pt.
I
2
)
S<wJ
7
2
16
GroU.·•Iu
Sili
60
Sl
6S
t•!
Clay
.,
))
19
........!1 , _
u. 1"1 I'L 1" 1
sa
76
39
2M
2&.2
u .o
•s 20
6
72
46
8
46
62
35
30.2
2S.O
ConsilttiiCJ: The variation or Atterberg limits and natural moisture conlent with depth
gives a clear indication of the relative consistency or different suata. A natural moisture
content cl0$C to the plastic limit and a high bulk density eonfinns a finn to stiff clay whereas
a natural moisture content approaching liquid limit should generally give a lower unit weight
and thus. indicau:s a soft normally consolidated soil, Fig. 3.7.
W(~) y(thn')
00 • '"" . .
10 15 .
20
T
• •I
-.
2
i
-e
16a '·
/.
10
12 II
w u
1Q edIT'" a
62 • Theory and Pracriu of Foundation Design
Undrdilltd lhtar strength: The undrained shear strength of cohesive soil is required to
analyze bearing capacity of foundation, shon-term stability of clay slopes, brnced excavation,
runnelling. and so on where fajlure may occur at end of construction. Here. s tress changes occur
essentially under undrained condition as a result or' low permeability or lhe soil. The condition
;. = 0 then prevails and lhe undrained shear strength c. may be determined from unconfined
compression test or unconsolidated undrained u-iax.iaJ tesrs. However. unconfined compression
does not give reliable data for samples with high si1r content. Such inconsistent results are
evident from Table 3.2 where samples 3 and 4 give much lower value of c. from unconfined
compression test than from UU triaxial test due to relatively high sand/silt content.
Tabl< :l.l Undrained shear stttnglh
:! c.,
-- ----
c
"••..
~
NOfmal stress
Fig. u uu triuial teot Mohfs cirdes. Copyrighted material
Soil Data and D~sig, Parameurs t 63
Efftctiv~ str~ss JHlramd~rs: The effective stress parameters are required for analysis of long
term s tability when all the excess pore pressures developed during const·ruction ha ve
dissipated. However. in ca~ of granular soils. effective stress parameters are to be used even
for short-term stability because me high permeability of lhe soil generally ensures that all the
excess pore-pressures get dissipated during construction itself. The effective shear parameters
of a soil arc determined from consolidated drained triaxial test or the consolidated undrained
rriaxial test with pore-pressure measurement. TI1e latte-r is particularly useful in problems of
stage constnJction of embankment where stability of me embankment is to be investigated for
undrained loading afte r each stage of construct.i on (Gangopadhyay and Som. 1974). The
pore-pressure parameter A is aloo required for such an analysis.
For purtiaiJy saturated soils and for soils with high silt content where partial drainage
may occur even during load applicaajon, the total suess parameters of soil (c. and ; .,) may
have to be evaluated for stability nnnlysis.
Consolidation: Consolidation tests are often done for pre..detennined press-ure ranges without
any referenc-e to the depth of the samples. In panicular. if the Si'mple is derived from deeper
strata or it appears overconsolidated. the virgin compression curve has to be determined by
loading the sample to sufficiently high pressures for es~blishing the field compression curve.
Only men is it possible to determine if n soil is normally consolidated or preconsolidated. In the
latter case. the Ct' value in the overconsolidation range and the preconsolidation press ure are
important in selecting the design parameters. Moreover. calculating the m., value for different
srrcss ranges from the laboratory curve may not represent the field behaviour correctly because
of sampling disturbances. h would be more appropriate to obtain the virgin curves from the test
data-using Schmcrtm:mn's procedure. as shown in Fig. 3.9.
·~Po : p, • 0.9(kglcm')
1.0
-"
-~
'' ,p,
~ . ~' J!2.
"'
0.8
8 r-...."\fiet
e :•••
"~ 0.6
0.4
'"'
Lab ~
~
.•
•
••
' ""
0.1 0.5 1.0 5.0 10 20 0. 1 0.5 t .O tO 20
p~cmz) p(l<ol<m')
Fig. 3.9 VIrgin c:onsolidalion curYe (after Sc:hmertmaM 1953).
DeaiCD puametezs
On the bas is of field nnd laboratory test data, it should be possible to assign appropriate
values of design parameters for each stratum. Considerable judgement is required to evaluate
the data. Individual values may be erratic for various reasons described earlier. But an over.tll
assessment for a particular stratum is necessary. Figure 3.10 gives the resultS of a controlled
exploration programme for a foilurc investigation. The consistency of data bec.omes evident
from such presentation and the results inspire confidence. The average engineering properties
of each stratum can thus. be obtained without much difficulty.
Copyrighted material
64 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
--
0 0
•-
• -0 •
0
•
.....: ''
Jo ' ''' f,
' :--.!
'
'
: '
• i I
J
i..
l!
I ....... ;.. \"
i
j
I
I
I
i i
I
~·
,•, • e; ,._ i
.. f-..· - -·d ..
N
:r
~
·~ J
0
fl t
ij
:h h
n
!t
~! u ..t: :;:
0 N ~ ~ ~ ~ :! ~ ~
~
D
~ !<I !:1 II Iii
Oangopadhyay, C.R. and· N.N. Som (1974). An Approach to ' · = 0 Analy•is for Stage
Constr11ction, Proceedings ASCE, Vol. 100, OT6, pp. 699-703.
Copyrighted material
Foundations: Types
and Design Criteria
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Foundation is that part of a structure which provides s uppon to the structure and the loads
coming from it. Thus, foundation means the soil or rock that ultimately suppons the load
and any pan of the structure which serves to transmit the load into the soil. The design of
foundation for a structure, therefore involves the following:
1. Evaluation of lhe capacity of lhe soil to s uppon the loads and
2. Designing proper structural elements to transmit the super structure load into the soil.
Often the term foundntion describes only the structurnl elements but this definition is
incomplete. because the ability of the structural element to transmit the load is limited by the
capability of the soil to suppon the load. Therefore. the problem should be considered .., a
whole and not in isolation. A foundation failure may destroy the superstructure as well while
a failure in the superstnJcture might resuJt only in localized damage and does not essentially
mean failure of the foundation.
4 .2 TYPES OF FOUNDATION
Foundations can be classified as shallow and deep foundations depending upon the depth of
soil which is affected by the foundation loading and. consequently. affect the foundation
behaviour. These can be further divided into different types of foundations which are
nonnally 3dOpted in pmctice. This classification is shown in Fig. 4.1.
Foundation
ShallOw Deep
I
I I
Footings Ran PileS Wei/Caisson
85
Copyrighted material
66 • Theory atrd PracliG'e of Foundation Design
4 .2 . 1 Sballow Foundations
In shallow fo undations. the load is transmitted to the soil lying immediately below the
substructure. as shown in Fig. 4.2. Such foundations are used when the subsoil near the
ground surface has adequate strength to support the load.
Ground
surface
.
• •
.
:' lnftuenoe ':
~ zone /
•\ . /
• ••
.....-·
'•
Fig . ... 2 Shalow loundatlon.
J.l'oot!D.ga
lso/aJ$d footing: Isolated footings are provided to support the columns of a building frame
· individually. Figure 4.3 depicts an isolated footing. Such fOOtings behave independently of
each other without being influenced by adjacent footings in any way .
... ...
-rni'F
B
c, c, c,
0E
I· B ·I
Fig. 4.3 lsola1ed ftxltlng.
Combined footing: Combined footings arc designed to support two or more adjacent
columns in a building frame where isolated footings either overlap or come very close to one
another (refer Fig. 4.4).
x..J
E""'1_6;"
Az Ground
surface
B, B, 8
1!1-''----fil' '
c, c,
Fig. •·• Combined toocing.
Copyrighted material
Foundations: TyfHs and D~s;gn Crit~ria + 67
Strip footing: Strip footings support a load bearing wall or a number of c losely spa~
columns in a row. They form a long, narrow continuous foundation, with the width small
compared to the length, as illustrated in Fig. 4.5.
A,
I I
c,
Flg. 4.5 Strlp -ng.
Raft or mat fOUIUlaUoa
A large number or
columns or often~ the entire sttucture is founded on one single slab or
raft. When individual column footings are, together, found to occupy more than 70% of the
plan area of the building, raft fouodations are provided. This is shown in Fig. 4.6. The basic
difference between footings and rafts lies in their size-the latter being mue-h larger and
affecting a greater area of the soil in determining its behaviour.
,--------:1
I I
.I
U
L_ ____! . Jit!~;:=J[~ =.;:Jt~ dr ~ ~:-r.:
1 X Section on-XX
: ~
L---------------•
Flg. u Raft foundatiOn.
ConventioiUII rq/1: Conventional rafts are provided at shallow depth beneath the ground
surface and backfilling is done on the raft to reach the original ground surface. Thereaf~r
plinth filling is done tO lay the ground Uoor of the building, as shown in Fig. 4.7.
Gtound
Bodo 111
Raft
Fig. .C.T Conventional raft.
Copyrighted material
68 • Theory and Practiu of Foundotion Duign
BruJy<~.ru:yraft: Buoyancy rafls are placed at some depth beneath the ground surface but no
backfilling is done on the raft. A ground floor slab is provided at the desired height above
the ground and the space betW<:en the ground floor slab and the foundation raft ;. kept void,
refer Fig. 4.8, to provide relief of overburden pressure at the foundation level. Basement
rafls are typiC11l examples of buoyancy raft foundation.
Gould
"f'
V 0 I D
4 .2 .2 Deep FoundatloDa
In deep foundations. tbe load is transmitted well below the bottom of the subsuucture, as
shown in Fig. 4 .9. Deep foundations are provided when soil immediately below the structure
does not have adequate bearing capacity but the soil at deeper stralll have.
Grcund
I \
I \
I \
I I
t + lnftuence zone
I I
I I
I I
',' ___.,
I I
/
/
t
+ t
Soft Clay
Ann to t t
sUff day t t
+ t
t t
Rod<
(a) Frlcrlon pile (b) End bearing pile
Fig. 4.10 Pile foundations.
Copyrighted material
Foundations: Types and Design Criteria • 69
Usually a column load is supponed on a group or piles through a pile cap. as shown
in Fig. 4.11. Rafts and piles are sometimes combined 1.0 form a piled rafl illustrated in
Fig. 4.12.
- r
0 ot to 0
0 ol to 0
CaOJmn
r:!:1:PVe Plies
cap Pile" IH±::f::::>,..,Pies
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
U..J...H1T> Plies
Hard SOil
Fig. 4.12 Piled raft.
These arc large diameter piles, in effect. which are used to suppon heavy structural load
from bridges or very tall multistoreyed buildings. A pier or a well is a shaft drilled into the
soil which is then filled with concrete, gravel, and so on. The bottom of the shaft may be
undercut or belled out. either by hand or machine as depicted in Fig. 4.13 to afford a large
bearing area. Wells are rigid structural elements and can take large lateral forces while piles
are slender and liable to bend under flexural stress. Cais.Cions are large diameter wells which
are installed by special construction technique.
f9
• HFL
Rmr bed
I \
Caisson Well fourdatlon
Fig. 4.13 caisson and well foundation.
Copyrighted material
70 • Theory and Practice of FoundaJiorr De.sign
4 .3 . 1 Bearing Capacity
Net ultl.mate bearlJIC capacity
The net 1dlimare bearing capacity, (qutJ,. of a foundation is the applied pressure at which
complete shear failure of the subsoil occurs. This can be obtained. for a given foundation and
for a given subsoil condition. from an appropriate analysis-theoretical or empirical.
Copyrighted material
Foundalio11s: Types curd Design Criteria • 71
Copyrighted material
72 + Titeory and Practice of Foundation Design
Original level
offoundotion
-:-
...._ -:-•
4-
All these criteria can be evaluated from an adequate settlement analysis of the foundation.
However, it is obvious that mere prediction of settlement is only of limited practical value
unless some idea about how much settlement the building is going 10 tolernte without suffering
damage. is obtained. If a building frame settles uniformly over its area. no matter by whatever
amount. it has no adverse effec.t on the behaviour of its stnJc.tural components. Maximum
settlement is important in relation to access and services of the building and is generally of not
much significance when it is within reasonable limits. Damage to suuctural components may.
however. occur if there is excessive differential settlement.
Damages due to differential settlement may be classified under the following categories
(Skempton and McDonald 1955),
(i) Structural damage involving frame members. namely, beams, columns, and their
joints.
(ii) Architectural damage involving the walls, floors, and finishes.
(iii) Combined structural and architectural damage, and
(iv) Visual effects.
SlnlctMral dalftDge: Building frames are generally designed 10 achieve uniform ~ttlement.
Since differential seulement occurs in most cases, secondary stresses are induced in the
members of the framed structure. the evaluation of which is yet to become a 5tandard
practice. althougb with the advent of numerical analysis using computers, it is now possible
to undertake theoretical analysis of complicated buiJding frames for different conditions of
total and differential settlement.
In steel frames, local failure may be prevented by yielding of the joinlS, provided mild
stoel is used because the relative rotation required to cause fracture is in most cases greater
than that which can occur. However, with increasing use of we1ding in recent years.
secondary stres.ses are of greater importance since yielding of welded connections would
result in rupture and failure.
Architectural damage: This refers to cracks in the wal1s. floors. and finishes which is
apparently a more immediate effect of differential seulement than the overstressing of
structural members. Excessive c-racking may cause damage to the functional aspects of the
building. For example, major cracks are considered detrimental to hospitol buildings, cold
storage, und the like. Hence., in most cases, the cracks or the architectural damages are the
guiding fac tor in de-termining the allowable se.ulement of buildings.
Copyrighted material
Foundations: Types and Design Crireria • 73
Co...biMd tudrilutura/ and strudluvl t/4maf.: Usually. archileetural dAmage occur1> long
before there is structural damage in beams and columns and consequently a stn>Ctural damage
is almost invariably accompanied by architectural damage.
VlsiUII efful: Even before there is any architectural or structural damage. excessive
differen1ial settlement or tilt which can he recognised by naked eye cannot he accepted either
psychologically or aesthetically.
Allowableeettlemeat
The allowable settlement of a building can he determined from an integrated analysis of the
building frame for given magnitudes of settlement. This is, however, laborious and time
consuming and has to he done separately for each building. Therefore. attempu have been made
to estimate the allowable settlement from statistical correlation between damage and settlement
criteria.
The allowable settlement of buildings depends upon the type of con$11Uction, the type
of foundation, and the natwe of soil (sand or clay). The angular distortion appears to he the
more useful criterion for establishing the allowable limits. Terzaghi (1938) studied the
settlement pattern of a number of brick walls in Vienna. He found that the walls reached
their ultimate strength when the angular distortion was 1128S and concluded that an average
settlement of S-7.5 em woold be considered normal.
Skempton and McDonald (19SS) derived a statistical correlation between damage and
settlement of 98 buildings from different partS of the world and coocluded that an angular
distortion of 11300 should be considered the allowable limit for conventional buildings.
Jappeli (1965) obsaved the damages to a three-storeyed building on clay due to differential
settlement and confirmed that an angular distortion of greater than 11300 would lead to
severe damages in walls of ordinary buildings. Whitman and Lambe (1964), on the other
hand, studied the settlement pattern of buildings in MIT Campus and observed that an
angular distortion of as little as 11800 was sufficient to cause cracks in bricks and masonry
elements. Mackinley (1964) made a study of more than fifteen structures damaged by settle-
ment. He observed that there was no simple rule to define the tolerance of structures to
settlement. A cement silo had collapsed in New York after ortly 5 em of differential settle-
ment whereas some public buildings in Mexico City had been in u.c;e even after differential
settlement of more than 10 em.
Rethatl (1961) carried out an investigation of twelve buildings on fill. This time. the
rigidity or the structure as represented by the number of storeys was also considered. While
the critical angular distortion of 11300 agreed well with those proposed by Skempton and
McDonald, it was found that 91% of the buildings that suffered structural damage were two
storeys or lower. Hence, the author concluded, the critical angular distonion should he
related to the rigidity of the building. Some funher studies on allowable settlement have been
made by Feld ( 1964) and Grant et al. (1974).
While much work still remains to he done on the subject to recommend some readily
acceptable values of allowable settlement. it seems there is a common agreement that an
angular dis tortion of more than 11300 may lead to damages in conventional load hearing wall
and framed construction. There is, as yet, no agreed guideline as regards the allowable
maximum settlement of a building. Skempton and McDonald (1955) have proposed some
tentative damage limits which are shown in Table 4.1.
Copyrighted material
74 • 111eory and Practice of Foundation Design
Tab~ 4.1 Damage limilS for load bowing walls in tr.ldilional cype framed buildings
An allowable limit of angular distortion of 11300 has been proposed for frnmed
buildings of bolh traditional and modern coosltuc.tion. This may not eliminate lhe chances of
cracks in walls aod floors altogether, but structural damage would. by and large, be
eliminated. Bjcrrum ( 1963) has given the damage limits for different performance criteria.
which are shown in Table 4.3. To eliminate cracks in a building. the angular distortion
should be less than 11500.
Table 4.3 Damage limits of an&ular distortion for different ~ttlemc:nt criteria
6
Angular distortion
I
I I I I I I I I I I
100 2oii 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 iOOO
~
Umit "''here difficulties with m.achinery
sensitive lO settlements a.re 10 be feared.
f.- Limit of danger for frames with diagonals
~ Safe limit for buUdin.gs v.'here cracking is not pennissible.
,.._ Umit where first aacking in panel walls is to be: expocted.
,.._ Limit where difficulties with overhead cranes are lO be expected.
Copyrighted material
Foundations: Types and Design Cn'teria • 15
Bjcrrum. L (1963), Relation /Mtwun Obstressed and Calculated Settlement of Structures iJr
Clay, and Sand, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute Bulletin, Oct 1969.
Gnmt, R .. J.T. Christian, and E. Van Man:ke (1974), Differential Smlement of Buildings.
Proceedings ASCE, Vol. 100. GT9, pp. 973-991.
I.S. 1904 ( 1986), Code of Practice for Design of Shallow Foundations, Bureau of Indian
Standards. New Delhi.
Jappeli ( 1965), Settlement Studies of Some Struct11res in Europe, Proceedings 6th Inter-
national Confere.nce on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 2,
pp. 88-92.
Rethati (1961), Behaviour of Building Foundations on Embankments. Proceedings 5th
ICSMFE, Vol. I , p. 781.
Skempton, A.W. and D.H. McDonald (1955), A Survey of Comparison Between Calculated
and Observed Settlmrent of Structures in Clay, Proceedings Conference on Correlation
of Calculated and Observed Stresses and Displacement of Structures, Institute or Civil
Engineers, London, Vol. I, p. 38.
Terzaghi. K. (1938), Settlement of Structures in Europe and Met/rods of Observation,
Proceedings ASCE, Vol. 103, p ..J432.
Whitman, R.V. and T.W. Lambe (1964), Soil Mecha11ics. McGraw-Hill Publicatjon,
New Yorlc..
Copyrighted material
Stress Di~tribution in
Soils
5 . 1 INTRODUCTION
5 .2 IN-SITU STRESS
The stresses in the subsoil due to the over burden are called in ~ situor geostatic stresses.
Figure S.l shows the in-situ sU'esses in a soil element at a depth z. below the ground surface,.
Tota.J vertical stress, <T., = yz (5. 1)
where. r = unit weight of soil, and
z = depth below ~ound surface.
71
Copyrighted material
Stress Distributio11 in Soils • 77
z
h
"·• =~
Effec.tive horizontal stress, ...,"-uo
= Kyz - Ywh
(5.5)
where K0 = coefficient of eanh pressure at rest with respccl to effec.tive srress.
The value of K., depends on the type of s.oiJ and its stress history. For normally
consolidated soils. it varies from 0.4-0.7. For over consolidated soils. K., depends on the
overconsolidation ratio and generally becomes greater than 1 for overconsolidation rotio
exceeding 4 (Som 1974).
Some empirical formulae for computing K0 values for soils are as follows:
For sand and normally consolidaled clays, laky (1944) gave a relationship berween K. and
!he angle or shear resistance, ~. .
K11 = I - sin4f (5.6)
This was subsequently modified by Brooker and Ireland (1965) as
K. = 0.95 - sin•• (5.7)
For overconsolidared soils, Alpan (1967) gave rhe relalionship,
( K.Joc = (K.)NC (OCRl (5.8)
where A is a facror depending on rhe plasticiry index of !be soil and is given by
1, = -281 log(l.85A) (5.9)
Ladd (1977) suggested !he value or 0.41 for A.
Copyrighted material
78 + 111eory and Pra.clice of Foundation De.sign
Boussinesq (1985) (sec Terz.agbi 1943) was lhe first 10 obtain solution for the slresses and
deformations in the interior of a soil mass due to a vertical point load applied at the ground
surface, refer Fig. 5.2. He considered the soil mass as a half spoce bounded on lhe top by a
horizontal plane (ground surface) and extending to infinity along ~.pth and width.
.
••
/ y
••
z
Fig. 5.2 Stress In the soil due to poin1 IO&d a1 surlaee (rectangular c:ocrdinatos).
Copyrighted material
Stu.ss Distribution in Soils • 19
3Q [ x'z
<>x = 2~r R' -
l-2v{ I
3 - R(R + l) +
(2 R +z)x
2
z}]
(R + z)' R3 + R3
a~ =
3Q -
- z'
21< R'
3Q xz1
'fx~ = --
2Jr R'
z "•
Fig. 5.3 Stresses in the aoil due to poin.t load at surface (cylindrical coordinates).
Copyrighted material
80 + 111~ory and Practice of FoundaHon Design
3Q -
(}'.- = - •'
21r R'
u= [
Q 3tr·
21r R'
' 1-2v
R (R + z)
] (5. 11 )
Q
a, = ii<(l - 2 v) [ R(R+ t) - ? I 2]
3Q t 2r
21r R'
The above expressions for stresses are valid only at distances, away from the point of
load application. At the point of load application, the stre:s..~s are theoretically infinite.
For foundation analysis, the venical stresses on horizontal plane (uJ are mostly
required.
Puuing R = J<x' + y' + t 1 ) = J<r' + z1 )
-Q,· I,
U,=
,- (S. I 2)
3
where Ill =
21r[l+(rill'J'"
Ill is the influence coefficient for vertical stress at any point within the soil mass. for the
Boussinesq problem. The vaJues of /8 for different values of rlt are given in Fig. 5.4.
0
•'
l:' 0.5
A
• ·- -~· -
r -.......
0.4
0
(u, }" = 2 Is 0.3
\
"' """
z
'• 0.2
0.1
0
r---
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
rtz
FliJ. 5.4 Str.,. Influence fO<Wr for point load (Boussl~).
Copyrighted material
Stress Distribution in S<Jils • 81
If a number of point loads Q1, Q,. and Q3 are applied to the surface of soil, then the
ven.icaJ stress on horizontal plane at any point M, is obtained by adding the stresses caused
by the individual point loads. Fig. 5.5.
o,
Fig. 5.5 Venlcal S1noU In ... sal duo 1D 1 rumbor ol point loocll.
In this case.
The venieal stress at the point M at depth z below the comer of a rec~angular area of length
2a and width 2b, due to a uniform vertical pressure q per unit area, can be obtained by
integration of Boussinesq equation. which is given as Eq. (5.10). Figun: 5.6 depicts this
arrangement effectively.
(11, )1, Z)
z
Fig. 5.& Stresses below the comer ol rectangular lOaded area.
Copyrighted material
82 • Th.ory and Practice of Foundation Design
Integrating Eq. (5. 14) between [- a to +a) and (- b to +b) along the x and y directions
respectively we get,
(5.15)
Evaluation of this double integral gives the general expression fo.r vertical stress at any
point within the soil mass. Let us now consider the vertical stress at the origin (x = y = 0).
Then,
O'z(00
, , l) -
_ 2q( 2
abz(a +b +2z
2 2
)
+ SID -t
• ab ) ( !6)
5.
" (~+ z )(b
2 2 2 2
+ z )Ja + b + z 2 2 2
Ja' + .' Jb +
2
z
Now taking one quarter of this expression, the vertical streSs below the comer of a
fledble rectangular area (a x b) (i.e. one quarter of the original rectangle 2a x 2b) is
obtained as
a b
where m= andn=
l l
or (5.18)
where
1(1 is called lbe streSs influence coefficient and is a function of two dimensionless parameters
m and n.
The value or Ia ror different values or m and n are given by Fadum (1948), are shown
in Fig. 5.7.
Copyrighted material
Stress Distribution m Seils • 83
Fig. 5.7 Influence factor for vertical str8$.S below comer of rectangular lOad, Factum (1948).
Copyrighted material
84 • Tlteory and Proctic• of Found<Jtion Design
1 ---1.. ./
q
/ ~
/
2 q
·/
3
z
I
i •
5
u, = Jqz
2t
II[r +
J alJr
1
rdrd8
b2 + z2 - 2brcos8)512
(5. 19)
0 0
=
q
12
{A - 1f~n' +n(I+ t)' [ n'n'+- (II +- r•) E( k) + .!..=..!.llo(k
I + t ,p
>]} (5.20)
where E{k) and n 0(k, p) are complete elliptic integrals of the second and third kind of
modulus k and parameter p.
t = ria = I if r<a
For the special case of the points beneath the centre of me load, r = 0
Copyrighted material
Stress Distribution in Soils • 85
(a,),.o = q {· - --·--=--=-}
[I + (all)'J"'
(S.21)
The vertical s-tresses beneath the centre of a uniform circular load are shown in
Fig. S.8. The stress influence coefficient for a circular loaded area for different values of
ria and tla is given in Appendix A.
<1; =- 2p ~· (S.22)
It (x' + ~'>'
= ~(K(I+:2 /~ 2 )2 )
The stress distribution directly beneath the load {x = 0) is shown in Fig. S.9(a). The
variation of a,j(ph) with xl~ is shown in Appendix A.
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.5
\
.!!Lo
pl z ·•
0.3
0.2 \
0. 1
z r-.....
1.0 J( 2.0 3.0
{a)
•
{b)
q •1 t • t 2?2]
2at(x - t - - a )
a. = - tan
• tr [ (x -)
a
- - - tan 1 - - - (x+a) ..,
(xl+ z-- a1)2 + 4a2x-
, (S.23)
The corresponding stress distribution below the centre. line nnd the edge are shown in
Fig. S.IO. The variation of u,tq with xla and z/a is tabulated in Appendix A.
.
Slllp
~ ~
width 2b q q
q 0.2 M 0.6 o.a 1.0 1.2
0
1 ~ ~
• /
2 I /
3 lh
z
;; • I
5
I
6
8
Fig. $.10 Vertical stress below unlfonn slrlp toad.
5 .6 .3 TrtBDgUJ.ar Load
The venicaJ stresses in the soil due to a triangular load increasing from zero at the origin to
q per unit area at a dislllnce a [refer Fig. 5. 11 (a)) is given by,
(uJA = !!!..[ran·•(_!_)
Jra x- a
- tan· •(!.)]
x
- [-qz---"-x-~a]
tr (x _ a)2 + z2
(S.24)
X -I
a. x
or -·q· = 1l 1
a
tan·• ( ;; ) - tan·•!.!!. t _ __,a'-=--~
~
a
_
1
ax
a(: -I)'+(J
Copyrighted material
Stress Distribution in Soils • 87
were
h '(Jt
1• = - - - tan-.
1t 2
-·•)
a
The variation off with va is shown in Fig. S.ll(b). The tabulated values of G/q for
different values of x/a and va are given in Appendix A.
Zl•
00 0.2 o.• 0.6
• 0.5
Stress /' t
q/Unit area
X 1.5 a,= qr
B
• A(x, Z) 2
l
(a) (b)
Fig. 5.11 (8) Ver1lca1 stre:M due to • triangular load. (b) Variation of f with ria (stress belOw point 8).
where q. = yH
r = unir weighr of embankment soil
H = Height of embankment
tan·• 81 + B, - tan·•!!!. rad
l l
a,=tan -• -B,
- t
Copyrighted material
88 • Theory and Practie< of Foundation D.sign
8,
I• •I
(a)
0.50
0.05
0.41l
0.35
n ·n
0.
n "
The principle of superposition allows determination of vertical stres:s at any point below a
rectangular looded area. For point A, for example, Fig. 5.13. the loaded area may be: divided
into four s maller rectangles keeping the point A at the comer of each rectangle. The n,
(5.27)
I
••• II
:• A
---<)------------
•.
Ill • IV
•
where q is the applied load intensity and lal' l aw la 111 and larv are the stress influence
facrors for points below the comer of respective rectangular areas.
Similarly, for points outside the loaded rectangle. Fig. 5. 14, the vertical stress below
point B may be: obtained as.
(5.28)
II
:•' •
m 9"A:rv :••
·······----- ~ ---··
Fig. 5.14 Stresses belOw I)Otlt outside 1 toa.ded rectangular area.
5 .8 NEWMARK'S CHART
Newmark ( 1942) derived 3 simple graphical c.alculac.ion for determining the vertical stress al
any point within a soil mas.~ for any shape of loaded area.
Let us consider the stress beneath the centre of a loaded circular area. Fig. 5. 15.
Copyrighted material
90 • 71Jeory and Practice of Foundation De.Jign
• / qtunit area
Fig. 5.15 Stress beneath centre ol a k:laded circular area: c:oostructkln of Newmark's chart.
O': = q 1- I ., } (5 .29)
{ [I+ (ahtf 2
The interpretation of this equation is that alt. ratio is the relative size of a circular
loaded area in terms of the depth t such that when loaded h gives a unique pressure ratio..
a,lq on the soil at that de pth. By substituting different values of <1,/q in Eq. (5.30),
corresponding values of aft can be obtained. as in Table 5.1.
Then, taking an arbitrary value of z (say. 1 em), a series or concentric circles of radius
0.27 em, 0.4 em, and so on can be drawn. The series of rings is further subdivided into a
number of units (say 200) by drawing radial lines from the centre, as shown in Fig. 5.16.
The value of each unit then becomes ( lnOO)q = 0.005q.
To obtain the Stees~ at a point A located at depth z below a footing. the loaded area is
drawn on a tracing paper to a scale z equal to the scale for which the Newmark's chart to be
used has been drawn. The plan on the uacing paper is placed on the Newmark's chart such
that the point A is placed at \he centre o f the chart. Then. the number of units of the
Newmark 's Chan (N) enclosed within. are counted. The stress at A is given by.
(<TJA =q x N x value of each unit
Copyrighted material
Stress Distribution in Soils + 91
By moving the plan of the building and bringing different points at the centre of the
Newmark's chan. the stresses at different points may be obtained. For different depths, the
plan of the building is to be drawn fresh to the appropriate scale.
Strip
0.05
COde
wid1h b dia. b
6 3~--~2~--~,----~0~--~,~---±2----~3
rib
Ag. 5.17 Pressure bulb b circular and s...., footings.
The pressure bulb gives the z.one of soil which influenced by the foundation loading
and is useful in planning soil exploration programmes. and in the study of settlement and
interference of footing.
Mos1 footings possess a definl!e rigidi<y. 11 is impor1llnl 10 estimalo !be effect of rigidi<y on
the distribution of pressure on the footing base (contact pressure), and on the stress
distribution wi<hin !he soil mass.
According to Boussinesq analysis, the vertical defonnation of a point on the surface of
an elastic half space under the action of a concennted load P is given by
p 2
W=-(1-v)E (5.31)
trR
For an arbitrary loading area (Fig. 5.13), !be vertical displacernen< of !he point A is given by
(5.32)
Copyrighted material
Str~n Distribution in Soils • 93
With an absolutely rigid foundation, all poiniS on lhe surface of contact will have lhe
s.ame vertical displacement Thus, the condition of absolute ri,g.idity of a foundation is.
p(x. y) = P. (5.34)
2~[1-((/al'J
where,
a = radius of foundation base
' = distance from lhe centte of base to a given point (( S a)
p. = mean pressure per unit area of the base
'=
It can be seen from Eq. (5.34) !hat for ( = a (i.e. at footing edge). p(x, y) =
0 (i.e. at footing centre), p(x, y) = p.l2.
For a strip footing. the contact pressure at the point M is given by,
~ and for
where.
y = horizontal distance of lhe point M from tbe eenue of f()()(ing
b = half width of footing
The distribution of contact pressure for an absolutely rigid footing on an elastic half
space will have a saddle like shape wilh infinite pressure at lhe ends, as shown in Fig. 5.18.
However. in actual practice, there is redistribution of stresses over the base (the stresses at the
edge of footing cannot exceed lhe bearing capacity of lhe soil) and lhe contact pressure at lhe
base of a rigid footing tends to become more uniform.
Conlact
preS$ure
- -
Fig. 5.18 Rigid footing: contact pressure.
Copyrighted material
94 + nreory and Practice of Fou11datio11 Desig11
For foundation of finite rigidity, the contact pressure can be obtained by solving the
integral equation, Eq. (5.32) together with the differential equation for bending of plates.
Using such an approach, Borowicka (1936, 1938) obtained the contact pressure distribution
for a uniformly loaded circular/strip footing on a semi-infinite e lastic mass. The shearing
stress along the base of the foundation was assumed to be zero. It was found that the
distribution or contact pressure is strongly dependent on a dimensionless factor, termed
flexibility factor. of the fonn,
A s imple cwo-Jayer system. Fig. 5.19, may consist of either two elastic layers with different
engineering propenies or single elastic layer on a rigid base.
Copyrighted material
Streu Dutrfbutlon In Seils • 95
E, v ~
To • To•
t
-
(I) (b)
Fig. S.1t 'IW<Ho)'Of olostic oya-.
This situation is on.:n encounlered in the case or pavements when: stirrer layers are placed on
a soft aubpade. However. in the cue of foundations, the situation Is on.:n rcvened and one
may encounter a layer of soft soil overlying a llrOQger clepooiL
Blot ( 1935) and Picken ( 1938) were among the fust to solve the problem of..,....
dillribution in the two-layer ri&id bose syown. However. their rcaults could only be used to
ddetmine the ~tresses at the surface of the bose layer. In a series of papen in 1943 and 1945,
Bunnister (1943. J945a. b. c) presented the geocnl theory of ~tresses and displacements in
layetcd soils from which exact solutions could be obtained for axl·aymmeuie loading. Using
Bunniltet's analysis, Fox (1948) published tabulated values of sueues clue 10 a uniform
circular loading wilh or wilhout friction at the inletface for the cue of Poisson's ratio, v =
112. The case of the line or strip loading was analyzed by Lemc:oe (1961) who developed
equations of stre&..a for a general two-layer system and ubulated numerical values for the
particular case of £ 11£2 • SO and v 1 = v, = 1/4.
In the general two-layer syatem for a circular load, the SII'C&Iel depend on the valuea of
v 1 and on the two pllamtten (refer Fig. 5.19).
b
Q =- and K- .§_ -e. (5.37)
h
where.
b • radius of the loaded area
lo s lhieknal of the top layer and
£ 1• ~ are the elastic modulii or. respectively the 1op and bOI2om layers.
In Ag. 5.20 are plotted the distribution of vertical streue1 benealh the ceniJC of a circle
for the special cue of a • I and where the upper layer is stiffer lhan the lower. It can be
seen that the presence of lhe •tirr upper layer has a considerable innuence on the stresses.
particulatly In the vicinity of the interface. For eumpk. a rigid upper layer which is five
times stirrer lhan lho aubgrade (i.e. £ 11~ = 5) tcduces lhe all'Css at the interface 10 60% of
the Bou•sincsq value. This load spreading capacity of the Iliff upper Ioyer has been
successfully employed In the de•ign of pavements on sort subgrades.
l OiJyrighted ma.enal
96 • 17oeory and Practice of Foundation !Hsign
1
z v, •0.2
b o.•
"'J a
"'l a 0 .•
3
(a) 0 2 b
1i
3 • 5
(b)
Fig. 5.20 T- . loyer - aysan: Etlect of rlgidl1y ol upper l~r on the vettical
tnss btne8lh centre of a uniform drcullr toed (after Boonisler 1963).
The effect of relative size of loaded areas and thickness of the upper layer on the
vertical stresses at the interface is shown in Fig. S.19b. The upper layer is most effective in
spreading the load when its thickness lies between b and 3b while for very thin and very
thick layers, they approach the Boussinesq values.
The case of a foundation where a sofllayer i's unde..Wn by a stiffer deposit (£1/£2 < I)
has not been evaluated but from exb'apolation. it can be concluded that the stresses in the
upper layer will, if anything, be greater than those for a homogeneous medium.
gradually diminishes and for hlb > 8, the stresses are almost indistinguishable from the
Boussinesq values.
Oia2b q q
q, ! .ll I I I J o.2 o.•
0 .... ·--
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
~ 'i
1 .
,2
·,A ~
2
3
~-\•
.I
v. ..... b ~
z
•
'I j
.c '
b
5'
.8 z
8 - a,,lWo-layer rtgld base
. .. ..... CJ, (Met Poulos 1987)
v. 0.5
1
---- BouNinasq
8
. Figures on curves are values of hlb
I I
Fig. 5.21 ~ olslreaaeo In -.layer rigid basa syolem (after Poulos. 11187~
q Cia 2b
"'4.P ~ .qu
layer 1 E~o v,
w(O.O)
a~
,.,
Layer 2 E,. , h,
a,,
k1 • E1!~
Layer 3 Es. ''l k2 • EiEs
• = blh,
H • h11hoz
Tow
~ig. 5.22 Th,.....ayet elaStic system.
Copyrighted material
98 t nttory and Proctict of Fou11dorion Design
Burmistcr's equations were used by Acum and Fox. (1951) to calcuhue lhe stresses at
the interfaces (for v1 = v2 = 0.5 and for fu ll continuity between the layers). Schiffman
(1957) presented methods for numerical solutions of influence values and tabulated resulrs for
a particular case. In later years. Bunnister's work wa..~ extended to compute the stresses and
deflections for any combination of thicknesses of the individual layers and size of the loaded
area. Jones (1962), Peattie (1962), and Kirk ( 1966) have published chans and table.• giving
the stress fac tors for any combination of three-layer systems while De Barros ( 1966) and
Uyeshita and Meyerhof ( 1967) have published those for deflection factors.
The stress and strains in a three-layer medium are governed by the following
dimensionless paramelers:
b h, E
a= - ; H = - ; k1 =
h,
and k 2 =
h,
E: ;(5.38)
where.
b is radius of the loaded circle
h 1 and h1 are thicknesses resptctivcly of the firs1 and second layers (The bottom
layer is semi ~ infi nite).
£ 1• £2• and £ 3 are the elastic modulii of the JM, 2"', and the 3,. layers respectively.
Figure 5.23 shows the effect of the relative thicknesses of the two stiffer upper layers
on the stresses and deflections beneath the centre of a loaded circular area. for the particular
case of h 1 + h'2 == 2b. For 1hc purpose of comparison. the Bous.sincsq stresses and the
deflections calculated on the basis of Boussinesq stress distribution are also plotted. It can be
seen that the actual values are lower than those given by Boussinesq although the maximum
discrepancy in deflection is not more than 25%.
q Oia2b
1.2
-l- H fH
-- -- v,
h,+h, •2b·
~
1.0
0.8
' ~ '-. - -.-;r; "1 c II) ;r;
w (ll, 0)
--
0.5
h,
W(O, 0)
a.,
E, =
Ez. 2E)
4&
0.2
=- - -- \ a ~· - - - Rigorous solu1ion
.... • • • • • · Boussinesq
,.,
_!L
Fig. 5.23 Stress and displacemen1 In three-layer system (efter Jones 1962. Uyeshlla
I and Meyo<hol 1967).
)
Copyrighted material
I
l
Stress Distribution in Soils • 99
For the situation where the layers become successivley stiffer with depth (l 1 :: 0.2,
l 1 = 0.2), the assumption of homogeneity will underestimate the slresseS by up to 30% for
h 1/h 1 + h 2 ~ 1 while for smaller relative thicknesses of the top layer, the enor is
considerably less, as illustrated in Fig. 5.24.
'·2 h,+hz•2b q
-1-H
Oia2b
w
I .0
....
.., • ,, • '\ • 0.5
, CTzt., ~ E
~
0.8
•• "a~ + 5£
.;:~ .. ~ >rlru.t,
:
~
.
.. 0.6
:a ,:-.,
'' I
25E
-- -- "--'
0.4
-- :-J .. k , • 0.2
k2 • 0.2
o.2
0
-Rlgorou·-
--- - 8 -
0 0.2 0.4 "' 0.6 0.8 ' .0
"'+">
F~. 5.24 Stress In a lh,...tayer system (after Jones 1962).
-·-·
modulus for the respective layers. His chans and method of calculation are shown in Fig. 5.25.
• Oia 2b
- ...w,._ ,
<
w z
La~r n ;;
...
Settlement due to la)'tf' n
1 - ,. 4/
dW,. = W,o - Wn • 1 = 2qb"""'E,;'"""(/,.- 1n .. 1) = 2qb~
Totll-
w0 =wn=2qb~
"·
Fig. 5.25 Approximate method of calculating set1tement In miAiilayer elastic syseemt (after Yeti<: 1963\ . I
Gopyngnteo n atena
100 + Thtory and Practice of FoundaJ;o, Dl!sign
Vesic observed that in three-layered systems, the shape of the deHected surface computed by
this approximate technique agrees better with measured deflections of pavements than the more
rigorous analyses.
De Barros ( 1966) proposed an approximate method of reducing a multilayer system to
a three-layer one. keeping the subgrade unaltered, by successively attributing to the two
adjacent layers an 'equivalent mcxlulus' according to the equation
(5.39)
He found that using this technique and reducing a lhree-laycr system to an equivalent
two-layer one, the approximate method is correct to within 10% for lr21b > I and 14% fo~
h, tb > 2 .
An analogous expression was first proposed by Palmer and Barber ( 1940) to reduce a
two-layer system to an equivalent homogeneous medium which yielded deflections very close
to Burmister's two-laye-r analysis.
. 1h 2b
s._, Clrde !!L a,.
q. q
dia 2b
0.2 0.4 0.6 o.e 1.0
-
0
..-;, ~ ,
,,
1
2
.(,;.
I
/
/ < f '
'
f
3
I I
4
I -_• _ _ Sir\?
Clrde, BouS$1nesq
I
I °• Citde
Strip
'ftlb = 0.1
5
I
I
1
I
8 I
f'u. 5.27 Vertical e.trass benealh centre of foundations: non-homogeneous medium (Som 1968).
•• ••
0.8 0.6
• • 2
• !!..
q •
•••
2 0.4 0.4 •
•
•
• ••
0.2 0.2
••
••
•l b •
•
zl •
0 4 8 1 8 1 4 4 8 181 4 0
fllb .,. (ftlb) fllb . ,. (~/b)
Fff!J. 5.28 Effed of noo-homogenei ty on the vertical stresses beneath centre of foundation&.(Som 1968). I . I
vOfJytlgn.co ma ena
102 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
0.5 100
o.• l 80
I
.I
/J
,
O.J 60
qb
/..'
./ ,
w(O,O)/ G(O) ..!!..%
wo
~ /
0.2
-0 -- •o
•
0.1 /.
,,
r-' 2(1
Fig. 5..21 Effect of non~lty on the setiJement of lhe centre of a uniform dra.llar load.
In orde,r to obtain an indication of the effective depth that contribu1es towards most of
the settlement beneath a loaded circle. Fig. 5.30 has been constructed by successively
integmting the venical strains for various depths using Bous.sinesq stress distribution. It is
observed that 80% of the total settlement is contributed by a depth of only 1.5b for
{Jib = 0.1 and 5b for {Jib = ao while a depth of Sb accounts for as much as 90% for all
values of {Jib. This is consistent with the st:n:ss-dislribution in a two-layer Jjgid base system.
where, it has been s hown, the presence of a rigid layer at a depth of Sb does not significantly
o.ff~t the s1resses.
Copyrighted material
Stress Distribution in Soils + 103
Cia 2b
z
b
0 1 2 3 • 5 6 7 6 9 10
Oe(>UI (Zib)
Fig. S.30 Ef'fec:ltve depth ol soil beneath a circular foundadon: non-homogeneous medil.m.
5 . 12 NONLINEAR SOIL
The problem of s1ress analysis in a soil medium with a nonlinear stresS-stroin relationship is
immensely complex and no general solution is available yet. Huang (1968) presented a
method of analyzing stresses and displacements beneath a circular load in a nonlinear soil
medium whose modulus of elasticity is a function of the stresses. ·
where CJJ (the nonlinear coefficient) and c1 (the body force coefficient) are material
parameters. He divided the semi·infinite medium into a multilayer system assuming a rigid
base at a depth of IOOb (see Fig. 5.28) and assigned to each layer, a modulus corresponding
to the stres.ses at the midpOint. Employing Burmister's boundary and continuity conditions
(Bunnister 1943. 1945} and using the method of successive approximationS. Huang c.a lculated
tbe stresses and displacements until two consecutive iterations gave thd &arne modulus. His
results are shown in Fig. 5.31. Again a close agreement with the Boussinesq stres.s
distribution in noted. Comparison between the actual settlements calculated rigorously by
Huang and the approximate settlements calculated on the basis\ of Bous.sinesq stress
distribution but using the proper variation of E with depth show that the two methods do not
differ by more than 10%. as shown in Fig. 5.32.
However. the assumption made by Huang. that each layer has uniform modulus means
that the problem is, in effect, reduced to a multilayer Burmister problem with the elastic
modulii detennined by the stresses in the centre of the individual layers as shown in
Fig. 5.32.
Copyrighted material
104 • 111eory curd Proctice of Foundation Des1'gn
Ilia 2b
q 0.2 o.• 0.6 q 0 .8 1.0
0
./
1
2
/Y. r-- ,-s
3
1
'f
/
~ c1
1
= o (BousslneSQ}
q..wi•2b
z !
b • ...c
E,
E,
N
5 8 -
...
- :a" E,
E•E0 (1• c- E.
(al • o,. • a, + cl'rltb)J "'<>
8 E.
c, . 0.02
7 .....
c E.
i
E J RKikl
8
Ftg,. 5.31 Stresses in nonlnear soil medi001 (after Huang 1968).
1.8
0
0 1 2 3 •' 5 !
6 7 8
' •
'' •
•
r\ 1.2
2
' i
'' i
'
0 02 04 06 08. .
10 12
•
l.k'-
1-'-
~
~
:?
v/ v
1
2 I
~
/.;
l
I
Legend
I
Firite element !.&. ~
Non linear ll.•• 0
6
Measun>d
••
cr. • Hortzontal stress
I
cry a Vertical stress
q = Footing presswe
7
y • 001)111 belOw foot>1g
b • Footing radius
8
Fig. 5.33 Compalfson ol ,,...... obtained from linea< and no<Hinear analySis (Das 1975).
Copyrighted material
106 • Tl1eory and Practice of Foundation Design
Therefore, it appears that any deviation from the classical problem of homogeneous
elasticity. eilher in terms or
nonlinearity of stress-strain relationship or in terms of non-
homoge,neity of 1he medium will only have a marginal effect on the stress distribution so
long as the medium is subjecled to certain boundary stresses. The displacements will, of
course, be significancly affecced buc from !he foregoing ic can be deduced chac !he seulemenl
can be obtained with reasonable accuracy, by assuming lhe Boussinesq stress-distribution but
coking accounc of the proper scress-strain relationship and/or non-homogeneity in calculating
the scrains. Also, as long as che pressure bulb due co a footing load is reslricted wilhin !he
upper layer of a soil deposic, the Boussinesq analysis should be reasonably valid,
notwithscanding any non-homogeneity below chac layer.
The pressure on footing founded at or near the ground s urface gets dispersed to a wider area
at a depth. In !he approximate melhnd, !he scress dispersion is assumed along lines through
the edge of !he footing 01 an angle ex = 26.5°, that is, 01 a slope of 2 horizontal co I vertical,
as shown in Fig. 5.34.
r;·
l ..
..
2~
• 1'
lri~~Hiiiiiil~~;hq,
Fig. 5.34 2:1 dispersion method for dlsmbution of vertical stress due to surface toad.
Copyrighted material
Stress Distribuliotr in Soils + 107
Example 5.1
Figure 5.35 shows four vertical loads of I000 leN each placed at the comers of a square of
side 5 m. Detennine the increase or venical stress 5 m below
(a) each load
(h) midpoint between adjacent loads
(c) the centre of the rectllngle
Sm
0, "1-- - -0,
:::-1"
Ftg. 5.35
Solution
From Fig S.4. vertical stresses due to a point load
u, = ~ 11 , where /8 = / (rlz)
••
Point A
Q1 = 1000 kN; rlz = 0; 18 = 0.478
5
Q2 = Q. = 1000 leN, r/z = 5 = 1.0; /8 = 0.084
(UjA = -100
52
[0.478+2(0.084)+0.03 1J =27.1JcN/m2
Point 8
r 2.5
Q, = Q, = 1000 leN; - = -
z 5 = 0.5; '· = 0.27
Q3 = Q. = 1000 kN; -
r
=
J5· ... 2.52
= 1.12; '• = 0.062
z 5
100
(u,)s = 5' [2(0.27) ... 2(0.062)1
= 26.6 lcN/m2
Copyrighted material
108 • 11reory and Practice of Foundatiolf Du,.gn
Point C
Qt =Q, =Q) = Q, = 1000 kN
r ~r2.--=5,:-+-2-
.5.2,-
= -'-----,5: - - - =o.71: 1, = 0.11
1000
:. (<>,lc = __,- [4 x 0.17)
s
= 27.2 kNim'
Example 5.2
Figure 5.36 shows the plan or a nexible rafl fou nded on lhe ground surface. The area
suppOrts a uniform vertical load or 200 kN/m 2. Estimate the increase in vertical stress 15 m
below point A.
,. 30m
"!"
15m
.,
T
15m
l__
A
Fig. 5.31
Sol uJion
Consider <WO rectangles (I + II) and II wilh lhe point A at lhe comer of each rectangle.
45 15
nr = "i5 = 3.0; n = 15 = 1.0, /•t•n = 0.201
Rectangle II: 15m x 15m
IS
m=n=
15
= 1.0; / 0 u = 0.174
I
(u,}A = 200 [0.20 1 X 0.174]
2
= 22.8 kN/m2
Copyrighted material
Strt.JS Distribution in Soils • lt9
Example 5.3
Figure 5.37 shows a raft foundation (10m x 20m) built 5 m from a tower. Detennine the
increase of stress 5, 10, 15, and 25m below the tower and draw the stress distribution. (Take
q. = 100 kN/m 2)
I• 20m •1•5m•l
•oi [--------'--------r_:~;J~.w"
(<1J. I<Nirn'
0 5 10
_ ,..s,
.o_-\
g 10r
5
! 96
15 F ·==----l
25 7••
Fig. 5.37
Solution
Consider rectangles 0 • II) and U with point A below each rectangle.
Recungle (I • Il): 25 m x 5 m
Rectangle II: 5 m x 5 m
Depth (m) Influence f!!.ctor Ia = 2(/oi + IJ 1.,.) (<1,). = 1001.,
kN/m2
5 m s
'· + II
0.204 1.0
Ia u
0.174 0.06 6.0
I 1.0
10 m" 2.5 0.136 0.5 0.096 0.08 8.0
n 0.5 0.5
15 m 1.67 0.094 0.33 0.046 0.096 9.6
0.33 0.33
25 m " 1.0 0.054 0.2 0.017 0.074 7.4
n 0.2 0.2
Example 5.4
.
Figure 5.38 shows the section of an eanh dam. Determine the increase in venical stress 3 m
below points A and B.
Copyrighted material
110 t Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
6m 6m 6m
q r
''' ''
3m /('((~ '''
''
'' '~
- ,_
3m
- '-· B ·-
p
'
I
__ 3m ._
,.,
'
u
s
Fig. 5.38
$elution
Point A
Stress due to strip load qmt:
2a = 6m
z=3 m
q = 50 k.N/ m 2
X l 3
Here. - = 0; - = - = 1.0: Ia = 0.96
a a 3
Stress due lo triangular load, pqr
a = 6m
z=3 m
q = 50kN/m2
<1.
•
=qUa> where Ia =I(!.~).
a a
from Eq. (5.24)
X 9 l 3
Here, 5· - - - -- 0· 5·· I q- -0· 06
- - - - 1.•
a 6 a 6
(a.). = 50[0.96 + 2(0.06)]
=54 kN/m2
Point B
Stress due to strip load: qurt
X
-;; = 39 = 3.0;
l
0
= 1.0; Ia = 0.003
= 3: -l = 0.5: 1, = 0.002
a
20m
I·
10m
5m
t.piPo
---,--.-T
Ol 0 0.~· · t.O
'
! Po+ AP '
''
''
10J '
E ! '
'
- ! ''
i I .• •'
'
a 20~' '
• ''
i '•
.'.
I
1
.
30-i- - - - - ' ·L-..J
Fig. 5.39
Soluti<Jn
Water load = I S x 10 = 150 kN/m2
Self weight of foundation = O.S X 24 = 121cN/m2
q,.., = ISO + 12 = 162 kN/m2
Pressure reduced by excavation = 18 x S = 90 lcN/m2
q..,. = 162 - 90 = 72 kN/m2
Copyrighted material
112 • Theory and Practice of Foundation D~~·ign
r ~ llp
Depth (m) lq tJp = q00 I a (kN/m 2) p 0 (kN/m2)
a a
0 0 0 1.0 72.0 90 <0.8
10 0 1.0 0.65 46.8 180 0.26
20 0 2.0 0.28 20.2 360 0.06
30 0 3.0 0.13 9.4 540 0 .17
40 0 4.0 0.08 5.8 720 0.008
Example 5.6
/~\
I
I
I' \
I
I
: II \
I
I I
I
I ' I
·
II
I
I I
~ i l?@ml
c IB !A I
I• ~ e\n II
•
~ I
•
12 m
Fig. 5.40
Solution
Draw the plan of !he foundation to scale, 3m = lhc seale of the Newmark's chan to be used,
as in Fig. 5 .41. Then place poiniS A. B. and C successively at the centre of the Newmark's
cha.n and count the number of units enclosed in CD4il case. Then,
0: : 11(0.005) X q.
Copyrighted material
Stress D,.striburion in Soils + 113
Fig. 5.41
Example 5.7
Solve Example 5.2 by Newmarlc's chart.
Sofuh·on
Draw the plan of the raft on uacing paper to a scale, 15 m = scale of the Newmark's chart,
Fig. 5.41. Place point A at the centre of the Newmark's chart and count the number of unitS
enclosed by the diagram. Then,
(CTJA = 23.5 X 0.005 X 200
= 23.5 kN/ m2
Ahlvin. R.G. and H.H. Ulery (1962), TabulaJed Values for Det<nnining the Complete
Paltun of Str~.nes, $/rains. and DejUcrions Beneath a Unifom• Circular Load on a
Homogeneous Half Space, Highway Research Board Bulletin No. 342, p. I.
Biot. M.A. (1935). The Effect of Certain Discollfinui/ies 011 the Pressure Distribution in a
Loaded Soil. Physics. Vol. 6. No. 12, p. 367.
Bishop, A.W. (1952), The Stability of Earth Dams, Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.
Copyrighted material
114 + Tl1e0ry n11d Practict of Fowulation D~sigu
Copyrighted material
Stress Distribution in Soils • 115
Copyrighted material
Bearing Capacity of
Shallow Foundations
6 .1 INTRODUCTION
The bearing capacity of foundation is the maximum load per unit area which the soil can
support without failure. It depends on the shear strength of soil as well as on the type, 'siu,
depth, and shape of the foundation.
Figure 6.1 shows a typical load versus settlement relationship of a footing. As the
footing load is increased, the settlement also increases. Initially the settlement increases
almoot linearly with load indicating elastic behaviour of the soil. Thereafler, the settlement
increases more rapidly and then continues to increase even without any appreciable increase
of load. The foundation is then said to have failed. that is, the soil has reached its capacity to
bear superimpooed load.
160 200
q, (Ultimate load)
.
•
10
8: 0.6m
B • 0.75m
8 • 0.9 m
40 ~----~----~~----~-----L----_J
Fig. &.1 l oad versus settlement relationship of footing. (Test data from Das 1999)
117
Copyrighted material
118 + Theory and Practice of Foundati011 Desig11
From model nudies. it has been observed that there are possibly four stages of deformation
in the soil leading ultimately to a bearing capacity failure. These include:
Elastic defoi'11\Lltion or distortion
I.
2. Local cracking around the perimeter of the loaded area
3. Formation of a wedge below the footing which moves downward, pushing the soil
s ide ways.
4. Formation of a rupture surface which may extend upto the level of foundation. The
footing then sinks rapidly into the soil followed by bulging or heaving at the top.
These stages are illustrated in Fig. 6.2(a) and the corresponding loa<kcttlcment curve is
shown in Fig. 6.2{b) where a method of dclermining failure load is also indicated.
,
I
Rupture surface
(a} Stages of failure: 1. Elastic deformation; 2. l ocal aackiog; 3. Wedge formation; 4 . Rupture sutfaoe.
Load.'unit area
~ Elaslic Tmnsition
I
(Local
~~ Plasli<:
(Rapid
vement)
Copyrighted material
Btmring Capacity of Shallow F01mdario11s + 119
Loadl'unlt area
variable slOpe
Point of fali1ure
Cons&ant sbpe
When the soil is predominantly sofl and cohesive. the settlement increases at a very
rapid rote and reaches the critical value even before the rupture surf<lcC is fully deve-loped.
This lypc of failure is known as punching .shear failure, refer Fig. 6.4.
Copyrighted material
120 + T11eory and Practice of Foundation Desigtr
Loadf\lnlt area
Vesic (1973) gives the range of relative density of granular soil for punching shear,
local shear, and general shear failure, depicted in Fig. 6.5.
Relative density. 0,
0.8 1.0
' !.:.~~~Pund'lfng
shear failure
Local shear
6 .2 . 1 Prandtl'a Analysis
A method for analysis of bearing capacity, considering an apparently realistic mechanism of
failure was fi rst suggested by Prandtl in his plastic equilibrium theory (Terzaghi, 1943).
According to Prandtl. the failure mass consists of three zones. widt the failure sudace given
by a logarithmic spiral. Figure 6.6 shows Prandtl's bearing capacity analysis.
Copyrighted material
Bearing Capacity of Slwllow Foundotions • 121
F E
r • r0 etanf
(Logalllhmlc spiral)
Fig. 8.6 PtandU's bearlt.g eapadty anatya.is: failure surface and zones of failure.
When the applied footing pressure reaches the ultimate bearing pressure. the soil fails
along a surface ACDE or BCGF. The failure mass consists of three zones. Zone 1,
immediately below the footing is under active pressure where failure surfaces AC and BC
develop. inclined at (45° + "2) to horizontal. The soil is assumed to be weightless, and the
stresses in this zone are assumed to be hydrostatic. As the wedge ABC tends to move
downward along wit:.'l the footing, it pushes the surrounding soil side ways. Passive state
develops in zone ill where failure planes FG. AO or BD, and DE, all inclined at
(45° - '12) to the horizontal, develop. Zone II is the zone of radial failure plane.<. The
surface CO or CD is assumed to be a logarithmic spiral, with B or A as the pole. The
equation or the spiral is r = r(/! 9 lllll' where r0 = BC or AC, and r is any radius BX at a spiral
angle CBX = 9.
From the Mohr's circle for c - ' soil, the normal stress corresponding to the collesion
intercep~ is a 1 = ccotf. This is tenned as initial stress, which acts normally to BC and AC
(assumed hydrostatic pressure in zone 1). Also the applied pressure, q4 is assumed to be
transferred nonnally on to BC or AC.
Thus, the force on BC or AC,
The disturbing moment of this force about B is
M 4 = r0 (a1 + qd )ro/2
,
where. N; = tan·(45° + '12)
This is because a1• due to cohesion alone, is transmitted by the wedge BDE. The
resisting moment My is given by it~ moment about B as,
P, BD a a1N0 (8D)2
2 2
Copyrighted material
122 • Theory and Practice of Foundatio11 Desig11
(6.2)
For soil with ; = 0, the logarithmic spiral becomes a circle, and Prandtl's Eq. (6.3) or
(6.4) gives on application of L'Hospillll's rule,
It may be noted that Prandtl's expression is independent of the width of the footing.
Also the assumed shape of the fai lure surface does not resemble the actual failure surface
because of the compressibility of soil. roughness of contact surface and other factors.
o,
g
II
LogarUhtnic spiral
(R • Roe'""")
(a) Failure surface and zone
Copyrighted material
Bearing Capacity of ShalloM1 Fomulatitms • 123
P- Pp
(b) Forces on elastic wedge (e) Face 'be" as retaining wall
Fig. 1.7 TonagN's bNMg capadly anatys;s.
The soil mass above the failure surface consists of three zones:
Zont 1: Due ro rhe friction and adhesion between the soil and the base of the footing, this
zone cannot spread lateraUy. lt moves downward as an elastic wedge and the soil in this zone
behaves as if it is a part or the footing. The two sides of the wedge ac and be make angle ;
with the horizontaL
Zone II: The wnes aef and bed are zones of radial shear. The soil in this zone is pushed
into zone Ill.
Zone 111: These are two passive Rankine zones. The boundaries or these zones make angles
(4S0 - f/12) with the horizontal.
As the footing sinks into the ground, the filtes ac and be of the wedge abc push the soil
to the sides. When plastic equilibrium is reached, the fon:es acting on the wedge abc are the
ones shown in Fig. 6.6. The fon:es are
(a) The ultimate footi ng load Q, = Bq,
(b) The weight of the wedge, W = (l/4)yB2 tan f
(c) The passive resistance P, acting on the fates ac and be. Since lhe soil shears along
rhese planes, and the shearing is between soiJ and soil, P, is inclined at an angle ' to
the normal. Since ac and be are inclined at f to the horizontal, P, acts vertically.
(d) The cohesive force on the faces ac and be: C11 = c8/(2cos ') where c = unit
cohesion.
For equilibrium.
Q,+ !rB 2
tan,-2P,-Bctan9 =0
I
or, Q, • 2P, ~ Be tan \I -
rB' tanjl (6.6)
4
An expression ror P" may be obtained by considering the face be as a retaining wall.
Copyrighled material
124 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
Q N, N N
0 5.7 1.0 0.10
s 7.0 1.6 0.14
10 9.5 2.7 0.7
IS 13.0 4.5 2.0
20 17.0 7.5 4.8
25 24-0 13.0 9.8
30 37.0 23.0 20.0
35 58.0 42.0 43.0
40 98.0 n.o 98.0
For footi ngs on saturated cohesive soil, criJical condition for stability generally occurs
at end of construction. Here, undroined condition exists, for which '" = 0.
Corresponding values of bearing capacity fac tors (refer Eq. 6.8) ace N, = 5.1, N, = I and
N7= 0
Copyrighted material
Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations • 125
Thus,
q, = 5.7c + q =5.7c + yDI (6.9)
Meyerhofs bearing capaciry equation for s trip fooling is similar !n form to rhat of
Terzag,hi, bm the values of N('. N41• and N1 are different. This method generaJiy over estimates
bearing capacity for sandy soil, because footings may fail from settlement consjder.ttion much
before the failure sutface reaches the ground surface. However. for clay soil the method
gives quite good results.
6 .2 .5 Hansen's Method
Brinch Hansen (1957, 1970) proposed a general expression for bearing capacity considering
effects of shape and depth of footing and inclination of applied load:
q4 = cN,.s,.drif' + qN,s,d,i, + 0.5y BN1s., d-yi1 (6.13)
where sf"> s., and sr are empirical s hape faclors.
d,. d,. and d 7 are empirical depth factors.
i,.. ;,, and iy are empirical inclination factors.
The recommendations of Hansen for Nr and N, are identicaJ 10 those of Meyerhof. and
are the result of those of Prandll (1921) and Reissner (1924).
These are :
N, = (N• - l)cot 9
N• = (e"'"•)tan 2 (45°+ ~12) (6.14)
N7 : I.S(N• - I) tan 9
6 .2 .6 VesJc's method
l'be failure surface considered by Vcsic is similar to that of Tcrzaghi's with the exception
that the zone I below the footing is in active Rankine state. with inclined faces of the wedge
at (45° + 4JI2) to the horizonml. The bearing capacity equation is the same as Eq, (6.13).
The factors N, and N• are identical to those of Meycrhof and Hansen. N.,. given by Vesic, is
a simplified form of that given by Caq1 ll and Kerisal (1948),
N 7 = 2(N• + l )tan ~ (6.15)
For shape, depth and inclination factors, the reader may refer to Vesic ( 1973).
1.$. 6403-(1981 ) incorporates the results of Hansen, Vesic, and Meyerhofs analyses
and gives the same fonn of equation as Eq. (6.13). The corresponding shape factors, depth
fac1ors, and inclinmion facrors are dealt wilh in Chapter 8 (see Seetion 8.2).
Local shenr failure may develop for foocings on loose sand or soft cohesive soil, where lo..rge
senJemem is required for mobilization of full shearing resis.1ance of soil. Wi1bin permissible
limil of se1d cment, lhe shear strength parameters mobilized along the failure surface are c,.,
and 4J,,. Terzaghi proposed thai for local shear failure. c,,
and ¢"' s hould be used in the
Copyrighted material
Staring Capacity of Shallow Foundntions • 127
bearing capacity equation and factors N; . N,j, and NT shouJd be detennined on the basis of,..
instead of ; . Terzaghi empirically suggested lhat
; ., : (213)\1 and c., = (2/3)c
Thus, lhe bearing capacity equation for local shear fail ure becomes,
q4 = (213)cN; + qNq + O.SyBN; (6.16)
where N,.'. Nq'• and NY are bearing c.apacity factors for local shear failure depicted in
Fig. 6.9.
40 ,N..
Nq ' ' I
10
\ ..\~ I
~
0
70 60 !50 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 60 llO 100
Nr
5.7 1.0
Fig. U Toaaglll's beaotng cac>adl)' falute tor geno<ll and local shear.
(6. 19)
2.2
2.0
... 1.8
c
~ 1.8
~ Smooth, Fs
1.2
1.0
0 • 8 12 16 20
0.05 0.03 0.01 0
!,.h\'8
Fig. 8.10 Bearing capaelly of non-hOmogeneous toll {aflor Oavls and Brcol<or 1973).
where A is a parameter which depends on the roughness of the footing and ~ is the rate of
increase of c., with depth.
Davis and Christian (1971) analyzed the case of cross-anisocropic soil and found that
the value of c. may be talcen with sufficient accuracy. as
where ''"' and c..,. are the undrained strength of the soil in the vertical and horizontal
direction respectively. Good prediction of bearing capacity of model footings in Boston blue
clay was obtained by using Eq. (6.20).
Vesic (197S) made detailed theoretical analysis of two-layer soil system, shown
in Fig. 6.11. with the bearing stratum either softer or stiffer than the underlying stratum.
In the first case. failure is partly by lateral plasLic now whereas in the second situation.
failure is caused by punching shear. The net ultimate bearing capacity of the footing is given
by.
(6.21)
where Nm is a modified bearing capacity factor which depends on the ratio of shear strength
of the two strata and the thlckness of the bearing stratum and is given as
(6.22)
Nm = {k(k + l)N; + k + {J - l][(N; + {J)N; + {J - I] - (kN; + {J - I)(N; +I)
Copyrighted material
B<aring Capacity of Simi/ow Foundations + 129
I q
12 II
10
9
long rectangular footing
I 2 3 • 5 8 1 8 9 10 G
(6.24)
where y' is the effective unit weight and N, and N1 depend on ;•. Here, y ' depends on the
position of water table, as depicted in Fig. 6.1 2.
For the strip footing shown in Fig. 6.12, the depth of failure surface does not extend
beyond a depth equal to the width of the footing 8 below the footing base. If the water table
is at or beyond this depth, it will have no effect on bemng capacity. If the water table is at
the base of the footing or above, then in the second tenn of Eq. (6.24) r ' = r:.•.
which is
about half the value of y,... The second term of Eq. (6.24) can now be written as
(I/2)RwyBN7 where Rw is a water table correction which may vary from 0.5 to I and c.an be
expressed as
Copyrighted material
B~aring Capacity of Shallow Foundalion.s t 131
R. = o.s( I + ~) (6.25)
,.
0
-
-IO<Y
rLoooe
.. . ....
II
0
120
' ...... N
20
')., !
I !
I"' ''
i l' .
! ! ' '\
I N,,
'N,' \
: I \
I /.'
: .''
Jfl
20 ,,
~7,·
32 36 40 44 46
Anglo of inlomal friction. • degrees
Fig. 8.13 Bearing capedty of looCings based on 'N' valUe.
(6.29)
Copyrighted material
Btaring Capaciry of Shallow Fou11dations + 133
0~--~~--~~--~--~
0 100 200 300
B (em)
Fig. 6.14 Bearing copacfty 11om static cone Int.
Example 6.1
A square footing of width 2 m re.~ts at a depth of 1 m at a site where the subsoil consists of
soft to medium clay down a depth of 8 m below ground level, which is underlain by a dense
coarse sand deposit. The water table is at l.S m below G.L. The clay has c. = 30 kNim1.
r
9 = 0 and = 19 kN/rn 3.
Determine the net load the footing can safely carry with a factor of safety of 3 against
shear failure. \Vhat will be the safe load if the wotcr table rises to the ground surface?
Solulion
Since the thickness of clay layer beneath the level of footing base is more than the width of
the footing. the bearing capacity will be governed by upper layer of clay.
Copyrighted material
134 + Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
= 30 x 6.6 kN/m2
= 6.6
30 X 6.6
(q .,,,),.. = (Fs = 2.5)
2.5
= 80kN/m2
Net safe canying copocity of the footing = 80 x 2 x 2
= 320 kN
Since this is a total stress analysis, there will be no change in the safe load if the water table
rises to the ground surfoce, unless there is a change in strength of the clay.
Example 6.2
The subsoil at a building site consists of medium sand with y = 18 kN/ml. c' = 0, ~· = 32°
and water wble at the ground surface. A 2.5 m square footi ng is to be placed at 1.5 m below
ground surface. Compute the safe bearing capacity of the footing. What wouJd be safe
bearing pressure if the water wble goes down to 3 m below G.L?
Solunon
Since ,. lies between 28° and 35~\ the bearing capacity factors are obtained by interpolation
between local and general shear failure conditions.
Refening to Fig. 6.7, for 9' = 32°, Nq = 28. N', = 10, N1 = 30. Ni= 6
18
we get. N, = 10 + [ ;~ 2-- 2 ; 8)] = 20.3
Example 6.3
A rectangular footing, with a plan area of 1.4 m x 2 m is to be placed at a depth of 2m
below the ground surface. The footing would be subjected to a load inclined at 10" to the
venical. The subsoil is clayey, sandy silt with saturated unit weight of 18 kN/m3, and
c' = 10 kN/m2 and ~ = 30°. Assuming the rate of loading i.s such that drained condition
prevails, compute the magnitude of load the footing can carry if the water table is at the base
of the footing. Use IS: 640>-1981 recommendations and take Fs = 3.
Equation (6.13) gives,
q_, = cN.s, d, i, + q(Nq - l)s•d•i• + O.Sy8N1 s 1 d1 i 1 W'
Here c = c' = 10 kNim'. ; = ;• = 30°
N• = (e",.. 0 )tan 2(45° + ;12) = 18.38
N, = (N. - l)cot; = 17.38cot30°= 30.10
N1 = 2(Nq + I) tan;= 22.37
s, = I + 0.28/L = 1.14
sq = I + 0.28/L = 1.14
s1 = I - 0.48/L = 0 .72
If. = 1 + 0 .2Dtf8tan (45° + ;n> = 1 + 0.2 x 2/1.4 x 1.732 = 1.5
Copyrighted material
136 t 11reory a11d Practice of Fomulntio, Dtm'g11
W' = 0.5
Hem:e.
q..,: ( 10 30.J X J.l4
X X J.5 X 0.79) + (18 X 2 X (18.38 - 1) X J.l4 X J.25 X
0.79) + (0.5 X 18 X 1.4 X 22.37 X 0.72 X 1.25 X 0A4 X 0.5)
= 406.6 + 704.4 + 55.8 =1166.8 kN.
(q..J..t. = 1166.813 = 388.9 2! 380 kN/ml
Esample 6.4
Wbat will be lbe safe load in Example 6.3 if undrained condition prevails? Take c. = 30 kN/m2,
;,. = =
0, N, 5.14, N, =I, and N1 : 0.
St>iuJU>II
Brinch Hansen. 1. (1961). A General FomJUla For Bearing Capacity, Danish Geotechnical
Institute, Bulle.tin No. 11 . Copenhage.n.
Brinch Hansen. 1. (1970). A Revised and Extended Fomru/a for Bearing Copaciry. Danish
Geotechnical Institute, Bulletin No. 28, Copenhagen.
Davis and Brooker (1973), The Effect of Increasing Strength with Depth on the Bearing
Capacity of Clays, Geottchnique, Vol. 23. pp. 551-.563.
D'Appolonia. D.J. and T.W. Lambe (1970). Method of Predicting Initial Settlement, Journal
Soil Mechanics and Foundarwn Division. ASCE. Vol. 96. pp. 523-544.
IS 6403 ( 1981). Codt of Practice for Dettnninarion of Bearing Capaciry of Shallow
Foundations. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Meyerhof. G.G. ( 1951), The Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Foundations. Geottchnique,
Vol. 2. pp. 301- 332.
Copyrighted material
Btaring Capacity of Shallow Foundations • 137
Peck, R.B., W.E. Hansen, and W.H. Thombum (1962). Foundation Engineering, 2nd
Edition. John Wiley & Sons. New York.
Prandtl, L (1921). Uber die Endvingungs Festingkite von Schneiden, 'kirsclrrift fur
Angebandrt Mathtmatik and Mechanik, Vol. I, No. I , pp. 15-22.
Reissner (1924). Zuns Erdd,.,ck-problem. Proc. Fint Int. Congress on Applied Mechanics.
Dept. pp. 295-311.
Skempton. A.W. (1951), The Btaring Capacity of Clays. Building Research Congress,
England.
Terzaghi. K. (1951), 7l~eoretical Soil Mtchanics. John Wiley, New York.
Vesic, A.S. (1973). Analysis of Ultimate Loads of Shallow Foundations, Journal of Soil
Mtchanics and Foundation Division ASCE, Vol. 99, No. S M I, pp. 45-73.
Vesic, A.S. (1975), Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations. · Chapter 3 of Foundation
Englnetrlng Handbook. Van Nootrand Reinhold Co., New York.
Copyrighted material
Settlement Analysis
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Foundacions on soft clay are liable to undergo excessive settlement and prediction of this
settlement is an imponant aspect of found<ltion design. A part of this settlemen~ known as
the immediate settlement,, is a result of undrained shear deformation of the soil and takes
place during loading. A major part of the settlement. however, occurs due to volume change
of the clay Cllused by the dissipation of excess pore pressure developed from imposed loads.
This is a gradual process and is known as primary cotuolidaticn. ln addition, there may be
settlement due to secondary consolidation caused by volume change of the clay apparently
under constant efFective stress. Except in clays which exhibit high secondary effec~
settlement analysis usually involves an evaluation of the immediate and primary consoHdation
settlement only.
Soft clays, in general, are normally consolidated and their behaviour differs somewhat
f<om overconsolidated clays and clay shales. A survey of case records of seulement of
shallow found<ltions on clay (Simons and Som 1970) reveals that structures founded on N.C.
clays, in geneJal. experienc~ more senlement than those founded on overconsolidated clay.
This· is only to be expected because the main effect of overconsolidation is to reduce the
compres.sibilicy of the clay. However, it is more imporcant. that for normally consolidated
clay. only 15-20% of the total settlement occurs during construction. whereas for
overconsolidated clays. as much as 50-60% of the wr.al settlement may occur during
construction. This shows the imponance of consolidation on the settlement of foundations on
clay and evaJuation of this settlement becomes a major part of the settJement analysis.
7 . 1.1 Defl.nitions
Figure 7 . I shows the development of net pressure and the associated settlement of o
found<ltion on clay during different stages of construction. Before application of the building
load. there is usually an excavation down to the foundation level during which lhere is a
heave of 1he subsoil. The ml_gnitude of this heave is generally small. unless the excavation is
deep and is kepi ope-n fot a long time. After excavalion. lhe foundation load is gradually
applied and there comes a time when the applied pressure on the soil equals the pressure
1 58
Copyrighted material
S~ul~m~Jll Analysis + 139
re l ea~d by excavation and the net foundation pressure becomes zero. The corresponding
settlement due to !he restoration of !he excavation load may be assumed to be equal to !he
prior heave. Any further increase of load is a net increase in foundation pressure and the
associated settlement is the net settlement of the foundation.
..
•
..
li
~
i
;;
z
p, !Wve
'
c p, lmmedia1e setlement
1s Consolklation
<!:
+
<t
&elllement
~ p, ".s:
When the construction is complete and the total building load has been applied. the
immediate settlement. p, has already occurred. If the construction is rapid this settlement is a
result of shear defonnation of the clay. For a saturated c lay. this occurs essentially under the
condition of zero volume strain. Any consolidation seuJement at thi$ stage is small.
After the construction is over. the clay undergoes consolidation and the settlement
graduaHy increases with time unlil, lheorelica11y. a frer infinite time. rhe consolidation is
complete. The total consolidation settlement. p, is then added to the immediate settlement,
f>i, to give the final senlemenr. p1 of the foundation. Therefore.
Pt=P; + p, (7.1)
Copyrighted material
140 • Theory and Practice of Fou11darion Desigu
Net foundation
pressure q.
z
~$ I
Deplh
II
where.
m.., is the compressibility of the clay as determined from one-dimensional
consolidation test.
C.a: is the increase of vertical stress at the centre of the layer, and
dt is the thickness or the clay layer.
The method was proposed by Terzaghi (1929) for obtaining the consolidation settlement
of clayey strata subjected to lateral confinement. that is. where all settlement is due to one-.
dimensional compression of the clay. Although this method. is valid only in cases where the
condition of no lateral strain is at least approximately valid il has been extended to cases in
the field where the roondation rests on a deep bed or clay (Taylor 1948). In such cases. there
is lateral defonnation during load application which gives rise to 'immediate' settlement.
Therefore. the conventional method seems physically inadequate to describe completely the
behaviour of a clay that undergoes important lateral deformations.
Immediate oettlement
lc is now the common practice to obtain the 'immediate settlement'. that is, the settlement
that takes place under undrained condition due to the shear deformation or rhe clay, from the
equations or elasticity. This has the general expression (given by Terzaghi ( 1943)).
P;-
_ ( q.B(1 -
£
v') ) 1p (7.3)
Copyrighted material
Settlemenl A.twlysis • 141
where.
q, is the net (oundation pressure.
8 is a width of the foundation,
£ is the Young' s modulus of the clay.
v is the Poisson·s ratio. and
lp is the influence coefficient whose magnitude depends on the geometry of the
foundation.
The values of fp for different values of UB for rectangular foundations are given in
Table 7.1. For rigjd foundacjons, lhe influence coefficient may be taken as:
Copyrighted material
142 + Tireory and Practiu of Foundatio" Design
0.1 00 ~
o. t=:"[~=rr::!:::::!:~~~~~4~
2
25 9
0.3 - 0
r.; 0.5~
D O.•~w~~·~:~.~·t~rt~5~,~2fjf,"'-~tltj
r;;
0.6f--t-++-+--t-lll'f-l--t-+--l
0.7 +ifr
O.BI-f--+-t-t--Jfi -t---1-t--H
o.9f--+-+-+--l---,f--+-+-+--lH
1.0f--t-++-+-r71r- t---+-+-+-l
0.9 Y/11
0.8 fjft-1--1--1--1--1--l
0.7 I IN
o.6f--+-+ -tffl'--f--+-+-+--lH
Jib
{)
I II~
o.5f--+--+~fH+-+-+--lf--+--+--l
IJ'I
0.4 f--+--f'-,1/
,Ht,f-l --l---1-- 1 --l---f---1
1-., 1
1 . Numbers denote rotio olb
o.a~::;t;tY.tl:~lllltl
I 9 I/ . 251
ConsoUdatlon aettlement
While Eq. (7.3) still remains the most widely used expression for calculating the immediate
senlemen~ the method of obloining the consolidation senlement has undergone some changes.
Skempton and Bjerrum (1957) recognized that there was lateral deformation in the c lay
during load application and that the consolidation settlement should be a func tion of the
excess pore pressure set up by the applied load. Therefore. taking accounc of the shear
s tresses. a modified expression for the total settlement was given as,
Pt = P; + JJP.,o (7.5)
Copyrighted material
Stlllement Analysis • 143
where
11 is lhe pore pressure com:ction factor which depends on lhe pore pressure parameter
A and the gcometty of lhe foundation and
p..., is lhe consolidation settlement obtained by the direct application of the nedometer
test results (Eq. (7 .2)).
The values of pore pressure correction factor as given by Skempton and Bjenum (19S7) are
given in Fig. 7.4.
"tB • ..o.~
"~ -~ - --
.....
...
0.21----11----+---+----'-------l
- Circutar b.Jndation
·--·· Continuous foundation
O·L-----~----~~----~----~~--~
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Fig. 7.4 Pen presswe cxwrection factor for rooodations on day (after Skemp4on and 8jerrum 1957).
For routine design. the following values of the pore pressure correction factor may be
used:
Normally consolidation c lay 1.0-{).7
Overconsolidated clay 0.7-0.5
Heavily overconsolidated clay 0.5-0.3
7 .2 STRESS-PATH
It is well-recognized that the deformation of an element of soil is a function not only of
magnitude of the applied stresses but also of the manner of their application. In other words,
a knowledge of the magnitude of stress in<:reasc is not. in itself. sufficient to indicate
precisely how a soil element is going to deform. To obtain a more complete picture. we have
also to know how the applied stresses change. at what rate and in what relation to one
another (Som 1968).
Copyrighted material
144 • TMory and Practiu of Foundation Design
•u
A B Cl_ Efleetlve
A8 Qf stress-9ath
4a;;
Fig. 7.5 Sbeu-path of an element of soli beneath founc:taliOn In the fiekS.
Now, the increase of stresses Aa. and Aa111 • which are the increase in principal stresses
in this instance, will set up an excess pore-water pressure in the element according to the
equation,
bu = B [flo-At + A (flo-.- flo-.,) (7.6)
where A and B are S kempton's pore-pressure parameters (Skempton, 1954).
If the clay is saturated, as all clays below the water table are, B = L Then,
bu = flo-At + A (flo;, - flo-.,) (7.7)
Therefore, immediately after the load application, the effee.tive streSSes become:
Copyrighted material
SettletMnt Anolysis • 145
Since for lllOfit clays, the value of A is positive in the range of 1tres.ses normally encountered
in practice, the excess pore-pressure t.u is greatct lhan t.o-., . So while the effective vertical
stress increases on load application, the effective horizonaal sll'US decreases and the slreSS
point moves from ' A' to ' 8 '. The venlcal sltlln during, loading. that is. the immediate
settlement. is, therefore, a function of the stre"'palh AB.
The element now begins 10 consolidate. At the early saages of consolidation. the
increase in effective horizontal StresS is only a recompressioo until the original value lc.P is
reston>d. Beyond this point, any funher increase of horizontal 5treu is a net increase while
there is a net increase in vertical StresS durin& the entire process of coosolklation.
Now during load a.pplicalion, in undrained eondltion. a utunued clay behnu as an
incoiDJI"'SSlble medium wilh Poisson's mio, v • 0.5. As the excus pod-pressures dissipate.
Poisson's ratio decreases and finally atUlns iu fully drained value at the end of OCli1SOIKialioo.
This ebange in Poisson's ,.tio does 1101 have much effect on the vertieal stress but the
horizontal StresS decreases by an amount 6 to ha new value K,p + bc>u. i..,.,
6 • t.o-,. 1 - t.u., (7.9)
So during consolidation. the element follows the effective wess palh BD while it would
have moved from 8 10 C had the total StresS remained unehansed. A&r full consotidation.
lherefon:. the stresSes are:
a;,. • t.o. }
0"'¥ • K. p + (t.o-., - 6) (7. 10)
• K. p+ 6o61
An ideal seulement analysis should take into account !he complete pauem of suesses an
element of soil will be subjected to in the field. In order to determine the relevant venical
sltlins, laboratory tests should be performed under Identical suess conditions and an
integration or all s-uch venica.l strains beneath a loaded area would give the settlement of the
foundation (Lambe 1964, Davis and Poulos 1967).
The methods most widely used in pracclcc. however. are the ones based on the
oedometer test. Figure 7.6 summarizes all these melhods indicating lhe effective stress-paths
associated with each of them. In plotting the stre..·palh AF in Fig. 7 .6, it has been assumed
that an undisturbed sample when subjected 10 the In-situ vcnical stress also restores the in-
situ horizontal stress so lhat subsequent stress-path for loading sUirts from lhe point A .
....
MlhJd Streu-o~~th
I AF
2 AS, M'
3 AS. EF
• AS, 80
....
Fljj. 7.1 ..._ ....- ~ ..., ln'c>llod ..............
146 • Tlreory and Practice of Foundatiotl Design
It is evident that during load application in the field. most of the defonnation takes place
under condition of no volume change, implying a value of Poisson's ratio of the soil equal to
0.5. As the excess pore-pressures dissipate. Poisson' s ratio also decreases and finally drops to
its fully drained value. It is known that for an isotropic homogeneous e lastic medium. the
venicaJ stresses are independent of the elastic parameters and are. therefore. unlikely to be
significantly affected by this decrease in Poisson's ratio. On che other hand. Poisson's ratio
has a cons-iderable influence on the horizontal stresses even for the Boussinesq case beneath
the centte of a uniform circular load. Therefore, it is clear that the problem of consolidation
in the field is very much interlinked with the problem of stress distribution, whose rigorous
analytical treatment is extremely complex. An approximate analysis may he made on the
assumption that the horiwntal stress at the e nd of consolidation will be the same as the
Boussinesq stresses for the appropriate value of Poisson's ratio.
If we consider an element of clay at a certain depth where. during load appliealion, 60'.,
and 60'111 are rhe increase in vertical and horizontal stre.'\.Ses respectively lhen, at the end Or
consolidation. the venica1 stress will still remain unchanged but lhe horizontal stres.~ will
have decreased to the new vaJue 6a111 due to the reduction of Poisson's ratio.
Copyrighted material
S~ttl~m~nl Analysis • 147
u _
' - q
[I _ (tlb)
3
(I + t 2/b2 ) 311
]
(7.13)
3
a = !l.[(l + 2v) _ 2(1 + v)(tlb) + (t/1>) ]
' 2 (I+ z2 /l?) (I + z3/b3 ) 311
where.
(7.15)
K' _ I _ [ I - 2v ] (7 .17)
- I + IJ{l + 1J)(3A - I)
Eq. (7 .17) can then be used co determine the mt.io of the stress increase during consolidation
at any depth beneath the centre or a uniform circular load.
Copyrighted material
148 • Theory and Practice of Foundat;o, Desig~t
2.4
\ - - - - · Theoretical (""Isotropic
elastcity}
"z
1.6
0.8
~ "~~ - -.
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.8 0.8 1.0
K' = Aa'.,IIJ.a ' 1
Fig. 7.7 Strain ratio, .t versus stress increment ratio. K· for draln~~~~!iq'£Xf material
Seulemem Analysis • 149
The relationships shown in Fig. 7.7 can best be determined from stress controlled triaxiaJ
tests. However, Som (1968), Simons and Som (1969) have demonstrated that this relat.ions hip
can also be established cheoreHcally from considerarion of aniso1ropic elas1icicy as:
e, I - 2~\/,K'
(7.18)
£, = (I - 2v)) + 21)(1 - vj - Vz)K'
where.
v '1 = effect of one horizontal strain in the othe-r horizontal scrain;
v'2 = effect of horizontal strain on vertic.al strain;
v'1 = effect of vertical strain on horizontal strain;
Jf = ratio of venical drained dcformatjon modulus to the horizontal drained
defoTITUition modulus.
Equation (7.18) can also be expressed as
£1 I - 2~V,K'
(7.19)
£, = (I - 2v))[K'/K0 - 1)- 2~V,K'
The parameters v'3 and rJVi can be detennined from two tests with different values of K' and
measuring £ 1/e., in each case. The most convenient values of·K' to choose are u and 1.0. that
is, !hose from lhe standard drained compression test and lhe isotropic consolidation test.
The methods of settlement analysis in current use have been described earlier. These methods
have given satisfactory results in many field problems, particularly where lhe condition of
zero lateral strain is satisfied. However, more often !han not appreciable lateral deformation
occurs in lhe field and lhe currently used methods of settlement analysis become inadequate
to predict lhe seulemenL A method of settlement prediction by the stress-path method has,
therefore. been introduced for lhe case of axi-symmetric loading (Simons and Som, 1969.
Som et al., 1975).
Immediate oettlemeat
The common practice in estimating lhe immediate (elastic) settlement of foundat ion on clay
is to assume the soil to be a homogeneous, isotropic. clastic medium. thus, permitting the
application of Boussincsq analysis. However, in practice, the elastic modulus~ E of tt:e soil
varies with depth as a consequence not only of the inherent non·homogeneity of the soil but
also of varying applied stress levels at different depths. Stress- strain relationship of soft clay
is essentially non-linear and the deformation modulus varies considerably with the stress
level. While it is possible to make theoretical analysis of undrained deformation using the
finite clement technique and taking the non-linear stress versus strain behaviour of the soil
into consideration, they are nor yet available in readily usable form. A ~il"ple expression for
immediate settlement following the stress-path method may be given as,
Copyrighted material
150 • Theory and Pmctice of Foundation Design
where C.a\. and L\a11 are the increase in toral vertical and horizontal stresses at any depth
re.•pectively and E{z) is the corresponding deforrru~tion modulus, taking due account of the
vertical and horizontal effective stresses prior to and at the end of loading.
It has been shown by many investigators that the stresses in the subsoil due to a
foundation loadjng are not significantly dependent upon the variation of E (Huang 1968.
Som 1968). Therefore. in the absence of more rigorous analysis. the Boussinesq stresses may
be used in evaluating the settlement by Eq. (7.21), the integration being done numerically by
dividing the compressible stratum into a number of layers and taking the appropriate value of
E for the layer into account.
Conaolldatlon aetUement
In the conventional method. the consolidation settlement is given by,
•
p, =
0
J (m,), a a, dz (7.21)
p, = J.1
'J(m, ) !!.a, dz (7.22)
1
0
where J.1, the pore-pressure corTOCtion factor, is a function of the soil type and tbe geometry
of the foundation, (refer Fig. 7.4).
For the stress-path method. the settlement is given by,
•
p; = J ).(m,)3 l!.udz (7.23)
0
= ).p,
where,
tJ.u = increase of pore-water pressure under undrained loading which dissipates
during the consolidation.
(m,h = coefficient of volume compressibility for three-dimensional strain.
A = the ratio of venicaJ strain to volumetric strain which is a function of the stress
increment ratio during consolidation.
If Eq. (7.23) is to be applied in seulement analysis, K' during consolidation needs to be
known in order to determine the value of A. Ac-eurate determination of K' for actual
foundation may be difficult becau,s e it depends on many factors such as Poisson' s ratio,
Copyrighted material
Seltlement Analysis + 151
K _ I _[ I - 2v ]
- I + IJ(l + q)(JA - I)
where,
7 .S RATE OF SETTLEMENT
The rate of settlement of foundations on clay is generally determined from Tenaghi's theory
of one-dimensional consolidation although tield..:onsolidation is often three-dimensional (See
O!apter I. Section 1.9.5).
According to this, the excess pore-pressure at any point at depth t within a soil mass
after a time from load application, is governed by the equation
C lflu = 8u (7.24)
'8:' 8t
where~ u is the excess pore·pressure and
C" coefficient of consolidation.
The degree of consolidation at any time, 1 (defined as the percentage dissipation of
pore-pressure) may be obraincd by solving Eq. (7.24) for appropriate boundary conditions.
Table 7.2 gives the relationship between time· factor, T, = C,JIH 2 and degree of
consoHdation, U for different boundary conditions.
Copyrighted material
1S2 • Tlr~ory and Practice of Foundalion Design
7 .4 FOUNDATION ON SAND
Foundations on sand do not present the !>arne degree of problem with regard to settlement as
foundations on c;:lay. Firstly, except for loose sand. settleme-n t is usually small and secondly.
because of high permcabilily the settlement is usually over during the period of construction.
In this case. there is no time dependent settlement similar to the consolidation settlement in
clayey soils. although large foundations may undergo minor settlement caused by fluctuations
of load due to wind, machinery vibrations. and storage loads.
Prediction of settlement of foundations on sand is, by and lange. empiric-al although
elastic theory has sometimes been used. The common methods used for this purpose are:
7 .4 . 1 Elastic Theory
The problem is similar to calculation of immediate settlement of foundations on clay as given
in Eq . (7.3). For a homogeneous. isotropic, e lastic medium
6 = q.B (I - v) 2 / (7.25)
E P
where the different terms have the same meaning as in Eq. (7 .3). However. it is to be
considered thac because of volume change during load application, Poisson's rutio. v can no
longer be taken as 0.5. The value of E and v should be determined from tbe laboratory triaxial
tests for the appropriate relative dens icy and confining pressure-. The Poisson's ratio normally
varies between 0. 15 for coarse sand to 0.3 for fine to silty sand. The value of E can also be
determined from the standard penetration resistance or the soil (refer Otaptcr 2. Table 2.7).
Elastic theory. however, gives only a very approximate estimate of settlement, because
the assumption of homogeneity would be far from renlity.
l l ! l ! !
~
~)'Of 1 E, z,
La)'llf 2
¢ Po • dl> E, z,
layer 3
¢ E, z,
Layer 4
~ "'
z.
Fig. 7.1 Settlement calc:aJiatlon for foundations on sand (after Bulsman. 1948).
where,
p. = initial effective overburden pressure befon: loading.
ap = increase of vertical stress at the centre of layer due to foundation loading, and
E = modulus of elasticity.
The sand layer is subdivided into a number of sublayers and the E values an: taken from
empirical relationship for the average N value for the layer, as described in Section 2,7.1
(Chapter 2).
The cone penetration dat4 are plotted with depth and the soil is divided into a number of
layers and each layer is assigned an average Ct value for obtainiqg• the coefficient of
1
compressibility.
Example 7.1
Figure 7.9 shows an isolated column in a buildin,g frame with a column grid of 4 m )( 4 m
which carries a venical load of 400 kN and is supported on a footing, 2 m x 2 m, placed
I m below G . L. The subsoil consists of S m of firm desiccated silty clay (c. = SO kNim',
C,/1 + e0 = 0.06) followed by medium sand (N = 20). Calculate the settlement of the
footing.
~- I<N
.. ..•
.' .'
-1m ~
2m Deslc;cotoel b<Ownlsh
grey silty Clay
e • ''
'' y = 18 k:Nim3
N
•'
• ''
.........,:--
•
+" •
• c
c., = 50 kN.tnr
~ - 0.06
' •
''
.'
•
•
·~~ ~~"·
-5 m -----'"--~'-------
Mt<ium sand
N • 20
Fig. 7 .a tsolated JooUog on day.
Copyrighted material
Selllemtnl Analysis • ISS
Solation
(a) /nunediare selflemtnl
= 0.0056 m = 5.6 mm
L D
= 1.0 and ::L = 0.5
8 8
~ depth correction, a a 0.86
(p1)....,. = 0.86 x 5.6 = 4.8 mm
Copyrighted material
156 + Tlr~ory and Practice of Foundation DeJign
K' _ I _ [ I - 2 x 0.3 ]
- I + 0.3(1.3)(3 x 0. 7 - I)
= 0 .84
From Fig. 7.7, for undisturbed Calcutta soil
.l. = 0.6
{f, = 0.6 x 43.4 = 26 mm
PJ = 4.8 + 26 = 30.8 mm
Example 7.2
A raft foundation. 8 m x 12m in plan is to be placed 2 m below G. L. in the subsoil shown in
Fig. 7 . 10. The net foundation pressure is 50 kNfm2• Calculate the total settlement of the
foundation
Raft foundation
8 m x 12 m\
0 50 kNtm'
--\ II I II II I Fwm desiccated silty clay
-2m y • 18 kNtm3
/ ~~5Am ' C11 • 40 kN!h'Y
/
/ m \ c,11 + eo= o.06
- Sm
f ' E \ II Soft ()(ganlc silty clay
I
f
f
: I
I
I
r = 11 kNim'
~ = 25 kNii m'
I I c,J1 . .. = 0 .12
I '- +a
Copyrighted material
Set1lement Analysis • 157
Take influence zone extending to twice the width of foundation. thai is, 16 m below
foundation. Neglect the effect of settlement due to sand layer.
Solution
(a) Immediate senlement
P; =
For the given problem,
q. =50 kN/m2
8=8m
v = 0.5
l p (for UB = 12/8 = 1.5) = 1.36 (refer Table 7.1)
for. Stratum 1: £ 1 = 600 x 40 = 24.000 kN/m2
Stratum II: £ 1 = 600 x 25 = 15,000 kN/m2
Weighted average. E
24,000 X 3 + 15, 000 X 10
13
= 17,000 kN/m2
... P; = 17,000
50 X 8
X 0.75 X 1.36
= 0.024 m = 24 mm
Depth correction = 1.0
Rigidity correction = 0.8 (Considering ran with interconnected beams providing rigidily to
the foundation)
(p;)""' = 0.8 x 24 = 19 mm
(b) Consolidntiotr s~ulemelrl
!:.!
P•c.:,
+_;:
A~p
p.., = I -C,- H Iog-
l +tto p.,
At A. p. = 18 x 2 + 8 x 1.5 = 48 kN/m2
Ap = 0.82 x 50 = 41 kN/m 2
At 8, p 0 = 18 x 2 + 8 x 3 + 7 x 5 = 95 kN/m1
Ap = 0.42 x 50 = 21 kN/m2
48 + 41 95 + 2 1
PO«l = 0.06 X 3 X log + 0. 12 x 10 log
48 95
= 0.048 + 0.104
= 0.152 m = 152 mm
Copyrighted material
158. • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
1m
5m I
'I' •m I,
'\
-- Medii.ITI sane~
r• 18~
i
I
+ \ N = 20
' c..= 8000 kNim'
1
I
' Medium sand
I
,,
I
I r= 19 kNim~
5m \\ +. N • '2!5
\
\ / clll:f = 1o.ooo kNfml
Medium sand
r• 20 kNim3
N • 30
c.,= 12.ooo kNim'
Flg. 1.11 FCIUI'Iaation on sand.
Copyrighted material
Sttrlemeru Analysb t 159
S<Jiution
Net foundation pressure.
1600
q. = = 100 kN/m2
4 x 4
(a) Elastic tlreory
8= q,B (I - v 1 )1
E P
Also.
q11 = 100 k:N/m2
8=4m
v = 0.3 (assumed)
lp = 1.12
E = C1 + C1N (Take average N value of the two layers having almost equal depth
wilhin the influence zone)
: 39 + 4.5 X 22.5
= 140 kg!cm2
= 14,000 kN/m2
... 8 : IOO X
14,000
4 X 0.91 X 1.12
= 0.029 m
=29 mm
C = -..1..:.:
9 c::l•O!.•
,
0
0 -- 200 •
..
r--- .....
400 600 800
""'""' 1\
60
10
Fig. 7.12 Plate load test data.
Copyrighted material
Settlement A11alysis • 161
Solution
The problem has to be solved by trial and error.
First trial
Size of footing = 3 m x 3 m
q. = 180019 = 200 kN/m2
= 50(~
4
+~r
3000
=IS mm
Allowable pressure (From curve) = 440 kN/m2
Second trial
Size of footing = 2 m x 2 m
1800
q. = = 4SO kN/m2
2x2
Again, s, ~ SO
4
(I + 300 )'
2000
= 16.S mm
Allowable pressure = 480 kN/m2
Oas. S.C. (1975). Predicted and Mea.sured Va es of Stress and Displacem~nts Downloadi,g
and Constructiotr under Circular Fof ings Rtsting on Saturated Clay Medium,
Pll.D. Thesis, Iadavpur University, Calc ta.
Das. S.C. and N.N. Som (1976). Smlemm of Footings on Soft Clay, Proc. Symp. on
Foundations and Excavation in Weak S<fl, Calcutta, Vol. I.
Davis. E.H. and H.G. Poulos (1968). The usl of Elastic Theory for Settlement Prediction
under Three-dimensional Conditions. Ge4teclmique, Vol. 18.
rieBeer, E.E. (1965), Bearing Capacity andJsmlemtllt of Shallow Foundations on Smtd,
pp. 15-33. J
Proc. Symp:>sium on Bearing Capacity atil Settlement of Foundations, Duke University,
De Beer. E. and A. Martens (1957), Meth ' of Computation of an Upper Limit for the
Influence of Heterogeneity of Sand l.Ayet s in Senlement of Bridges, 4th I.C.S.M.F.E.,
London, Vol. I. pp. 275-281.
Fox. E.N. (1948), The Mean Elastic Senlemen of Unifonnly Loaded Area at a Depth INlow
Ground Surface. 2nd l.C.S.M.F.E.. Rottdidam. Vol. I. p. 129.
Guha, S. (1979). Effect of Initio! and Incremental Strain Ratios or Drained Defonnotion of
Calcutta Soil. MCE Thesis, Iadavpur u.Jversity, Calcutta.
Ladd, C.C. (1969), The Prediction of in-situ S ss-$tmin Behaviour of Soft Saturated Clays
during Undrained Shear, Bolkesj • Sym sium on Shear Strength and Consolidation of
Normally Consolidated Clays. Norwegia Gwtechnical Institute. Oslo, pp.l4-19.
Lambe. T.W. (1964). Methods of Estimatin Settlement, Joumol of Soil M<ehanics and
Foundation DiviJion, A.S.C.E.. 90, No. SMS. pp. 43-67.
Raymond, G.P., D.L. Townsend, and MJ. Lo!asek (1971). Tbe Effe<:t of Sampling on the
Undrained Soil Properties of a Leda sy·l,
Canadian Geotechnical Journal. Vol. 8,
pp. 546-557.
Simons, N.E. (1957), Stttltmtnt Studits on o Structures in Norway. 4th I.C.S.M.F.E.,
London. Vol. I, pp. 431-436.
Simons. N.E. and N.N. Som ( 1970), Stttlt ent of Structures on Clay with Particular
Emphasis on London Clay, Construction dustry Research and Information Association
Report 22, p. 51.
Skempton. A.W. (1954), The Pore-pressure fficients A and B. Gtotechnique. Vol. 4,
pp. 143-147.
Skempton. A.W .. R.B. Peck, and D.H. Me onald ( 1955), Stttlemtnt Analyses of Six
Structures in Clticogo and l.Andon. Proc I.C.E.. Part I, Vol. 4, No. 4, p. 525.
Skempton. A.W. and L. Bjerrum (1957), A ontribution to the Settlement Analysis of
Foundations on Clay. Gtotechniqut, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 168-178.
Som, N.N. (1968). Tl1e Effect of Streu Pat 011 tire DeformaJ•'on and Consolidation of
London Clay, Ph.D. Thesis, University o London.
Copyrighted material
Senlement Analys;s • 163
Som, N.N. ( 1975), Regional Deposits: Co,tribution for Panel Discusslon, Proc. 5th Asian
Regional Conf. in SMFE, Vol. 2, p. 20.
Taylor. D.W. (1948), Fundam•ntals of Soil M.chuuics, John Wiley and Sons, Inc,
New York.
Terz.aghi, K. (1943). n~<omical Soil Multanics , Jnhn Wiley and Sons Ltd.. p. 510.
Terzaghi. K. and R.B. Peck (1948), Soil Muhanics in Etrginuritrg Practia, 1st ed ..
Wiley. New York.
Copyrighted material
Footings and Raft
Design
8 . 1 INTRODUCTION
Footings and rafts are the common shallow foundations wherein the subsoil immediately
beneath the ground s urface is required to suppon the foundation. load. The superstructure
load from a building is transmitted to the ground through columns and load·bearing walls
and sujtable structural members are to be provided to transfer the load into the s ubsoil. These
struc.tural members which are placed at some depth beneath the ground surface serve to
;spread' tbe load from high stress intensity of the superstiUcture malerial (concrete. steel, or
brick) to the low allowable stres'""' in the soil mass.
The different types footings and rafts have been illustrated in Chapter 4. They are
generally made of reinforoed concrete. The reinforoements are provided to resist the bending
moment on lhe footing caused by the upward soiJ reaction either in one direction as in the
case of strip footings or in two directions as in case of isolated or combined footings. refer
Fig. 8.1. The section of the footings may be sloped to economize on the volume of concrete.
Heavily loaded structural steel columns are sometimes provided with grillage foundations.
. . ... I I
~
-+-+C.J
r_,+-+- ~ -tt:8:+- ---+L.J-H-
4
~
(a) ISOlate<! tooting (bJ Sll1p looting (e) Com- looting
FIQ. 1.1 lsotatecl. slrlp. anc:s combined tooc:lngs.
16.
Copyrighted material
F(J()tiugs and Raft Ol!sigu • 165
8 .2 DESIGN OF FOOTINGS
8 .2 .1 Depth of Footing
The minimum depth at which a foundation should be placed depends on the soil profile,
structural requirement. ground water condition. and so on. The following factors should
generally be taken into consideration in determining the depth of foundations.
(a) Depth of top soil, rubbish fill, if any.
(b) Depth of poor surface deposit such as peat, muck, or sanitary land fill.
(c) Location of ground water table and its seasonal fluctuation.
(d) Depth to poor or better underlying stntta.
(e) Depth of adjacent footings if any.
lf the subsoil near the ground surface consists of a heterogeneous fill of uncenain
propenies or compressible soi.l like peat, muck etc. the foundation should. preferably. be
taken below the fill. Figure 8.2 is a clear repn:sentation of the same. It is also desirable that
the foundation be taken beJow the zone of seasonaJ fluctuation of water tabJe where the soil
is not subjected to seasonaJ volume changes due to alternate wetting and drying. For this, the
foundation is generally placed l - 2 m below ground surface. However, if the water table
fluctuates over a great depth, it may not be economical to take the foundation to the desired
level. The foundation may then be placed at some convenient depth and the design done for
the highest position of the water table. The depth of foundation is also influenced by the
location of underground facilities below the building. ln case where a stiff clay is underlain
by n softer material, the foundation should be placed as high above as possible so that the
pn:ssure bulb may be restricted within the stiff c lay.
Pea~
Muck etc.
~Finn soil
'
I
,I
In sandy strata, if there is marked increase in density of sand with increasing depth, it may
be tempting to take the foundation deeper than normal in order to take advantage of the
higher bearing capacity. This proc--edure may not be economical if it involves deep excavation
below the water table involving large scale dewatering. Further. there may be problems with
the stability of side s lopes and adjacent structures.
rl
0
E
n
~ I'
/ ~ .sm.. \
- -- I
I
I I< 3.Sm -+1',
\
\
Ooplh
0
• I
I I
I
I
I Stratum I \
\
\ , .... ,
I
......_ftu
~U~
In eoce
I
I,
A rm desiccated
·
silty day '1 ,._
IE
Keeping under consideration shear failure of the soiJ, lbe ullimate bearing capacity of
footings on different typeS of soil may be obtained as follows:
(a) Coh.siv• soil (' ; 0)
q, (n) = c. N, (8. 1)
where, c,. = undrained shear strength of the soil and
N~ = bearing capacity facror
The shear strength of the soil within the failure tone below the footing. that is. within
a depth approximately equal to the width of footing. should be used in design. In view of
the natural variation of soil properties at a building site. there is usually a wide spectrum
of test results and the designer is required to exercise his judgment in selecting the
design shear strength. For a stratified deposit. a weighted average shear strength may be
used in desi.g.n. However. it is to be realized that if the major portion of the failure surface
is coatained in stratum I , the bearing capacity of the foundation would be detennined
primariiJ by the undrained shear s..-ngth of stratum I. Figu"" 8.4 depicts a failure surface·in
stpotifi<:d soil.
(8.3)
The shape, depth. and inclination factors to be used in Eq. (8.3) are given in Table 8.1. The
effect of water level should be taken into account in determining the values of q and y '.
N(', N., and Nr are functions of the angle of shearing resistance of the soil obtained from
laboratory tests or from empirical c.orrelation with the field standard penetration resistance, N
(for details. sec Chapter 6).
Copyrighted material
168 • 17Jeory and Pmctice of Foundah'on Design
Far:sors Valla!
Slwp~ facto rs
d, 1 +0.2~ •an(4S'+ i)
I + 0.1 ~tan( 45° + t} for ~ > JO•
1 for ~ < 10•
Jndlnalion foctor:r
(I - ~)
,, ·(1-:) ain degrttS
from the ultimate bearing capacity. the net allowable bearing capacity of a foo ting,
QaJJ(n), is obtained as
qau(n) -- q,. (n)
F (8.4)
Copyrighted material
Footi11gs and Raft Design • 169
table at a depth greater than 8 below the footing. bulk density is to be used. For ;\l!Y
intermediate position of the water lJible, the effective unit weight may be obtained, ttMn
interpolation between rand y', as shown in Fig. 8.5.
1
<D o, q
Ui iLU r'
® • lo- B --oj
•
B
\
Fig. 8.5 Elloct ol ,..,., table on bearing capacity.
8.2.4 Settlement
Trial dimensions are chosen to accommodate the required footi ng as given by the allowable
bearing capacity of the footing. The settlement of the footing is then estimated for the actual
net foundation pressure, q,. given by,
Q
q, = -:---~':--,- (8.5)
Area of footing
where Q = net load on the footing.
For footings on clay,
(a) Immediate senlement
q,B (I - v 2 ) I (8.6)
E •
where, q,. = net foundation pressure.
B = width or foundation,
E = modulus of elasticity of the soil within the zone of influence,
lp = influence coefficient. and
v :: Poisson's ratio.
(b) Consolidation senle~nt
P~ = J1"" C,
L... J + <o
H log P. + l!.p
Pu
(8.7)
(8.8)
As a general rule, square footings give the most economic stroctural desi,g.n for a given
column load. In case of space restriction, it may be necessary to go for rectangular footings.
as shown in Fig. 8.6.
rr:=~;===-::-==~-;:==:-j
rn :. :, r:.Gd !• ,; P'7l
r.Gf :,• l
l ........
:r:r.~ :: f'7A
.~ • •
• . _________
~
,} . . .......... ,) . . .....
I :·---- ; Square ,-----· I
I • ' r•·••· j )..______ : !I
ll~ ! : ~ : : ~! : ~ : 1
1:'
J
::
~-----*
:.... .....: .~--·--':: 1
:............: :
Rectangular 1
I -----, ________./, __\ _______, ------. I
: f1'7.:1 : : r7l. : : m : : m: l
l ........
: ~ : .. : .......
~ .....
: : __________
r.Gd ::.......
w .J..J
.
l
-------, ---- Property line
Fig. 8.6 Square and rectangutar footings.
Copyrighted material
Footings and Roft Design • 171
Two or more columns in a building frame may be supported on a single footing. eithe.r
recmngular or trapezoidal when isolated footings tend to overlap or extend beyond the prope~~
1
line. If the allowable bearing pres..'\ure is known, the sjz.e of lhe footing may be determined for
a permissible settlement. In onder to get uniform bearing pressure. the footing should be so
proponioned that the resultant column loads pass through the centroid of the footing area.
Figure 8.7 shows typical combined footings of rccmngular and trapezoidal shape.
Cont>lned
Strip footings arc provided below load bearing walls or a row or columns in building rrarne.
Even if the column loads vary a little. the longitudinal extent of the footing normally ensures
a uniformly distributed load below the footing. A pedestal may be provided if a singly
reinforced scrip fooling along lht width is desired below closely spaced columns. This is
depicted in Fig. 8.8.
r----------- , Load bearing wall
::
I
:v Strip footing
::
I
AtJ ->WA
I--- -----,-
, .-. I Brick wall
L_..! L - .-. - --.
I
I
I
I
I
I I ••••
I I Section AA
__ I
•
Copyrighted material
172 + 17~tory and Practic. of FoundtJJU'" Design
8 .2 .6 tDterf~ce effect
When a number of closely spaced colulllll$ ate required to be supported on ioolated footings,
the pressure bulbs under individual footings tend to overlap, as shown in Fig. 8.9. According
to Boussinesq stress analysis, the pressure bulb below a footing extends to a distance of 812
on either side of the footing (where B is the width of footing). If two adjacent footings come
to within a distance B from each other, the pressure bulbs overlap and the soil below the
depth. D behaves as if it is loaded by a combined footing. The settlement or the footing as
determined for an isolated foundation is no longer valid. The effect or superposition or
stresses should be taken into account in estimating the settlement. Appropriate stress analysis
for adjacent footings, taking into consideration the interfen:oce effec~ may be done to obtain
the soil stresses for calculation of settlement.
In order to ensure the behaviour of footings as isolated footings, the spacing between
adjacent footings should not be less than the width of footing. If the footing size varies, the
spacing between footings should be equal to the width or the larger footing.
The basic factors which affect the settlement of footings on a given soil are the
intensity of loading and the size of the loaded area. The settlement increases in almost direct
proportion to these parameters. It is a common experience that even though the foundation
pressure is the same under all footings. a bowl shaped defonnation trough is obtained with
greater settlement at the centre than along the edges of the building mainly due to greater
load in the central columns and the overlapping of stresses from adjacent footi ngs. Hence. to
produce uniform settlement, it may be necessary to adjust the pressure with size of footing,
that is, to impose greater pressure under smaller footings than under larger ones and also to
use larger pressure under the footings along the edge of the building. The principle was
utilized in the CB 1 Esplanada Building, Sao Paulo which was founded on moderately
c.ompact fine to medium sand. A pressure of 550 kN/m2 was used under the outer footings
and 400 kN/m2 under the inner footings. with the result that the maximum differential
settlement did not exceed 8 mm (Skemp<on, 1955). So. the bearing pressure of footings in a
building frame may be varied though it is always kept within the safe bearing capacity so as
to have the maximum and differential settlement within permissible limits. This may require
a number of trials before the final design is arrived at. A simple calculation for achieving
unifonn settlement of adjacent footings is shown in Example 8.4.
A satisfactory method of reducing the differential settlement of footings in a building
frame is to provide interconnected beams between columns at the foundation level. A framed
structure is tied laterally. from fin;t noor onwards, by beams and s labs but no such
connection is generally provided at the foundation level. Consequently, the individual
footings can settle differentially. Providing interconnected beams increases the rigidity of the
foundarion and differential senlement is substantia1ly reduced. An approximate way of
analysis would be to estimate the settlement of individual footings as isolated/strip footings
and then to design interconnected beams to resist the bending moment at the joints due to the
differential settlemenL For more accurate design. theoretical analysis of the building frame
may be done with predetermined sections of the interconnected beams and footings.
Figure 8. 10 shows a typical strip foundation with interconnected beams.
D D ~~;AS:,-~I
I I I I Sedion AA
Strip
D Ej
• • • •
.JA
tJ D d b
I I I I
j_p
ww
I _;r I I I I I I
Slrip
lnterc:onnecled
beam
•-""
v
~
Fig. 1.10 Strfs) tooU.ngs with Interconnected beams.
Copyrighted material
174 t T!Jtory and Pracrict of Foundatio D~.sign
StruciUral designing of footings is mostly do by the conventional 'rigid' method. Hert:, the
footing is assumed to be infinitely rigid so that the displacement of the footing does not
affect the pressure distribution. However. in tual practice, the pressure distribution below a
footing depends on the footing rigidity and the soil type. In loose sand, the soil near the
edges of the footing tends to displace lat y whereas the soil towards the inside remains
confined. Cohesive soil has high shear stress c;pncentration near the edges which leads to local
yielding even at high factor of safety ag&inst bearing capacity failure. Bowles ( 1988)
indicates the probable pressure djstribution r neath rigid footings for different soil types.
refer Fig. 8. II. ~
0•0
I
(a) Coh<+ lltess soil
q
Edge s may
be velY large
(b) l ive soli
p
l
the footing area while for combined footings, 1 e shape and dimensions of the footing are to
Copyrighted material
Footings and Raft Design • 175
be determined 10 achieve this condition. Once 1he pressure distribution has been obtained for
the chosen geomerry of the footing, the stnJctural design of the footing is made to resist the
shear forces and bending movement for the appropriate suppOn conditions. For isolated
foolings. the cantilever bending moment at the column face will normally determine the
amount of reinforcement to be provided. In case of combined footings, the design is a simply
supported beam with overhang on both sides whiJe a strip footing is designed as a continuous
beam with support at the column locations.
A raft foundation usually covers the entire area of the building, thereby distributing the total
load to a larger area than a footing foundation and reduces the bearing pressure to a
minimum. The choice between a raft and a footing foundation depends on the soil properties
and the weight of the building. If a preliminary design wilh footing foundations reveals that
the sum of the footing areas required to s uppon the. structure exceeds 60% of the total
building area, a raft foundation covering the entire area of the building should be preferred.
Moreover, where the soil properties vary largely throughout the site, the amount of
differential settlement may be excessive for a footing foundation, but with a raft foundation
the effect of weak zones scattered at random tend to even out. Therefore, the settlement
pattern is Jess erratic and the differential settlement is also reduced considerably. Also. a raft
fou ndation provides increased rigidity which reduces the differential movement of the
superstructure.
Two types of raft foundation arc in common use which fonn a subject mauer of discussion
in this subsection.
(a ) Conventioaal raft
In conventional raft (refer Chapter 4. Fig. 4.7) foundation, a flat concrete slab of uniform
thickness covering the entire area of a building is placed at some deplh beneath the ground
surface and the columns are built directly on the raft. Then backfilling is done upto the
ground level. This is followed by further fi lling, called the plinth filling, on which the
ground floor slab is placed. The ground floor load, therefore, goes to the raft by direct
bearing through the plinth and backfill.
Figure 8.12 shows some typical rafl foundalions. The columns may be placed directly
on the s lab or 1he slab may be thickened under large column loads 10 give sufficient s1rength
agains l shear and support moment. Rigidity of the raft foundation may be increased by
cellular construccion or rigid beam and s lab construction. Figure 8.13 shows a simple raft
foundation for the fourteen-storeyed block of tlars at Golden Lane, London (Skemplon,
1955).
Copyrighted material
176 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
LlJJJ, J:WJJ ~
A- A B- B
• • .---,.-
• • •A B E '' •'•' ' ' •'
E-E
--,. -· .,. ---,
''
A E
• •
''
--
''
:.. .... -·~ .... -·:..- ....·:....
---..J
.... .........
t. •
•
•
• • • •
® ® ® ®
® ® ® ®
j t ·---.·---.·---.·
...'' ..•'•' ..
-:-~ -- --, -:-~~~.
.
';:.-.-. :-------,
'' ' ' ' ' '' ''
• • • • • ® ® ® ® .... -
' ' ....'•:..' __ _. :_ __ -·
' ..•:..-
~
£
~
c
~
l
Average gross
pressure under
raft: 190 kNim2
Clay
•.2m II -~ . 1:!i/E
- L
1:;;
. 13.4m London clay
Fi.g. 8.13 Raft foundation for Golden Lane ftats. LondOn ($kempton, 1955).
Copyrighted material
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _:..;
F.ootings nnd Raft Design • 177
\Vith 1he incru.5Cd number of tall buildings now being buill for vanous commerei:d and
residential putpOSeS, rafl foundauons bavc been CO\'Coiendy combu!Cd Wllh !he: principle of
fkxlllluon. Buoyancy rafts (refer Chopccr 4, Fig. 4 .8), wnh or without ba!cmcnt. an: placed at
some depth beneath the around surface. but no backfilling is done on the raft. A struc1ural slab
is made. usually a linlc above the ground level to serve as the ground Roor of !he: building. The
space between the ground floor slab and the raft is kept void such that the net foundU~ion
pressure gets rtduced and remains within the permissible bearing pressure on the foundation.
That is. q.., = q,....- yD1 (8.10)
< q,.t{rr)
where, qlrot• • gross roundmion pressure.
yD1 • lOCal overburden pressure at the foundation level, and
q,11{n) " net pennissible bearing prcssun:.
When a buoyancy ron has sufficient bead room below !he: around Roor •lab. the SPace
may be utilized u • basement Roor below the ground. Although a ba!cment is. in effect. a
buoyancy raft. it is not necessarily designed for the purpose. The main function of a
basement is to provide addlt.lonaJ floor space in the buildlna and the fact that it n:duees !he:
net bearina pressure may be quite incidenllll. A buoyancy raft may, ho"'-ever, be designed
solely for the purpose of providing suppon to !he: slnl<:ture and to reduce the ta<al and
differential settlements within permissible limits.
8 .3 .3 Settlement
The immedtate and eonsoltdauon settlements of raft foundations on clay are obtamed an the
same manner IS for fOO<on&S. see Eqs. {8S) and {8.6). The <Ompt'eSSIOD Of all !he: stralll within
!he: signifocont depth below !he: foundation are to be calculated separately and !he: summation of
all these seulements woll give the ta<al settlement of the foundation. Use or Eq. (8.6) to
calculate the immeduue sculement presumes that the subsoil behaves as homogeneous. isotropic.
e.lastic medium. In case of non ·homogeneouslstr.ttified deposit. this is somewhat approximate.
but is often accepted for practical purposes. More rigorous analysis. taking into account the
variation of subsoil properties. can also be done. Depth correction Is no1 slanificant for raft
t u, righted materio1l
178 • Theory and Pmclice of Foundation Design
foundat ions because of small DJ'B ratio but rigidity correc1ion is generally applicable.
Pore-pressure correction is to be applied giving due weightage to the contribution of the most
significant layers in the settlement calculation.
~-~'-i~~~~'~;;;t;;:;j;;;,;J;;:~t~lt":.;,~o..;:;!;..cca!~
, btcw.nlsh gtoy silty day:
3 _'..::''-::----r-'--'"'-----;,£----',----c::
' , I \
•,.•_,,:..!IO~kNirn', Cc/(1 +eo) = 0.05
_, "
' I \ .;
' I \ /
'I \ "
:~....
I ' ....... ___... ,. " ', ... ... ___ ....... ,.. ' ~
\\
I I
1 \ II Greyldartt grey Of'gank:: sil ty clay
l J with decomposed wood:
t r c., • 25 kNim2, C(l/(1 +eo) • 0.15
1 4-----~~----------------------+
\ 1
· ~~~~
Ill Firm bluish grey silty clay with
, I caJcareous nodUles:
18 _____ _,'t-- - - - - - -- --_,,:./_7 .:<:-·.::•..:60=-:kNim2, c , t(1 +eo)= 0.10
, 1 rv Brownish/greyish brown sa.ncty
', / slit: N =12
~ ----------~------------~---------
' ....... , ,..,/ v Mottfied brown $llty clay:
.......-- -- ...... c.,= 100 kHim2• <;1(1 + Ito) = 0.06
25----------------~~~---------------
Vl Dense sand: N > 40
Fig. 8.14 Bearing capacity of raft founda11on.
Structural designing of footings is mostly done by the conventional 'rigid' method. Hen:. the
footing is assumed to be infinitely rigid so that the displacement of the footing does not
affec.t che pressure distribution. However, in actual practice. the pressure distribution below a
footing depends on the footing rigidity and the soil type. In loose sand, the soil near the
edges of the fOOting tends to displace laterally whereas the soil towards the inside nemains
confined. Cohesive soU has high shear stress conc-entration near the edges which leads to local
yielding even at high factor of safety against bearing capacity failure. Bowles (1988)
indicates the probable pressure distribution beneath rigid footings for different soil types.
nefer Fig. 8.11.
p
D•O ~ W
QU t f f t~ l ~~
Edge streas depends
dep1h, D of
The basic factors which affect the settlement of footings on a give.n soil arc the
intensi<y of loading and 1he size of the loaded area. The senlement increases in almost direct
proportion to these parameters. It is a common experie.nce lhat even though the foundation
pressure is the same under all footings, a bowl shaped defonnation 1rough is obtained with
greater settleme-nt at the centre than along the edges of the building mainly due to greater
load in the central columns and the overlapping of stresses from adjacent footings. Hence, to
produce uniform settlement. it may be necessary to adjust the pressure with size of footing,
that is. to impose greater pressure under smaller footings than under larger ones and also to
use larger pressure under the footings along the edge of the building. The principle was
u1ilized in the CB I Esplanada Building, Sao Paulo which was founded on moderately
compact fine to medium sand. A pressure of 550 kN/m2 was used under the OUler f()()(ings
and 400 k.N/m2 under the inner footings, with the result that the maximum differential
settlement did no< exceed 8 mm ($kempton, 1955). So, lhe bearing pressure of footings in a
bu.ilding frame may be varied though it is always kept within the safe bearing capacity so as
to have the maxjmum and differential settlement within permissible limits. This may require
a number of Dials before the finaJ design is arrived at. A simple caJculation for achieving
unifonn settlement of adjacent footings is shown in Example 8.4.
A satisfactory method of reducing the differential settlement of footings in a building
frame is to provide interconnected beams between columns at the foundation level. A framed
slructure is tied laterally, from firs! floor onwards, by beams and slabs but no such
connection is generally provided at the foundaHon level. Consequently. the individual
footings can settle differentially. Providing inten:onnec<ed beams increases the rigidity of the
foundation and differential settlement is subscantially reduc-ed. An approximate way of
analysis would be 10 estimate the settlement of individual footings as isolated/strip footings
and then to design interconnected beams to resist tbe bending moment at the joints due to lhe
differential settlement. For more accurate design. theoretical analysis of the building frame
may be done with predetermined sections of the interconnected beams and footings.
Figure 8.10 shows a 1ypical s:aip foundation with interconnected beams.
D D -~;dk,]~~
I I I I Section AA
Strip
D EJ
•
I
•
I
•
I
•
I I
_JA
I I I
0 L! D D
1/ I I I I I
f- Strip
,..... ~ ~ ~
1---
lnterooonec::te'
beam
settlemenlS due 10 consolidotion of the clay were reduced as can be seen from the very flat
slope of !he settlement curve in Fig. 8.1S.
Tlmt 1n.t OOf'llttuclion (ye~rs)
0
0 I
•' 7 a 9 10
,\
t'-...
1\.
,.-
Muimum dl'**'lill
f' lr Mo>*num
75
Flg. 8.15 S e - ol ~ - Life - lkAklilg. Booton (Co_.,.,. - FacO.wn. 1942~
In the high Paddington projec~ a thirty four-storey building wu built on
overconsolidated London clay by providins 1 18 m basement which reduced the foundation
pressure to 100 kN/m 2 while the gross pressure remained 425 kN/m2• This is depicted
through Fig. 8.16. The conslNerion of • box type foundation provides extra stiffness to !he
sbUeture which reduces the chance of exce51ive diffe,.,ntial settlement (Skempton. 1955).
N
l
e
~..... * 8
~
Pan Plan
0~
i
~
Fll
1• ~m ·• • I~
·20 """"'
(grooal - ....,_, day
Glossop ( 1972) indicated two types of floating foundations de-p ending on whether
floatation is required to reduce the settlement or to prevent shear fai lure of the s ubsoil. In
eithe-r case. the net fou ndation pres.\ure should be reduced to such an extent that the design
criteria with respect 10 both. shear failure of the soil and seu.lemen1. are satisfied.
Increased rigidity of fou ndation may be achieved with a buoyancy rofl by providing a
cellular construction below the ground. The s uperstructul'e and the cellular rofl provided for
the Cossipore Power Station, Calcuua is an exceJient example of a near floating foundation
on soft normal Calcutlll deposit. It is shown in Fig. 8.17.
When the height of a building varies, it is possible to combine rafts under the heavier
part with footings under the lighter pan of the building. A good example of this is fou nd in
the Thomas Edison Building, Sao Paulo, refer Fig. 8.18, where a reinforced concrete mat
with foundation girders connecting all columns was provided under the twenty onc-st·o rey
section of the building while s pread footi ngs were provided for the ten-storey block. The
maximum settlement at the end of construction was only 15 mm (Rios and P. Silva, 1948).
21
10
Depth (m)
4.9m ~~:j~
--.,::=-=::&---! 5
-~"':-!"'::"----! 10
Fig. 8.18 Combined raft and fooling foundalion for Thomas Edison Building, Sao Paulo
(Rios and P. Silva, 1948).
Copyrighted material
Footi11gs a11d Raft Oesig11 + 181
Building line
mm Chase few ...
Property
Part< street
cable
Approx. 7 m vault
.
Fig. 1!1.19 t.1urtiple basement for AJ)any telephone building (Giossop, 1972}.
Analysis of buoyancy ran foundation in normal Calcutta soil g.ives some interesting
observations. For a typkal 10 m x 20 m raft. the net foundation pressure is to be rcstricled
to 40 kN/m 2 to keep the senlement within the permissible limit of 125 mm (IS 1904: 1966).
According.ly, the depth of foundation for different gross foundation pressures can be
calculated. Table 8.2 gives the relevant data. II is clear that one, two, or three levels or
basement may be provided within the depth of foundalion to restrict the net foundation
press ure to 40 kN/m2 for eight. twelve, and sixteen-storey buildings respectively. That means,
four upper s toreys can be buill for e::ach basement floor for buildings beyond four s10rcys
high.
Tabl ~ 8.2 Depth or b3~ment in normal Calcu n:~ soil
q~ No. of No. of
(tlm'l s1orqs basem~nl jiDOrs
4.0 4-0 ..
10.0 3.3 4.1 8
qiWf • q,_ - ro, 16.0 6.6 4-1 12 2
;;; q.,_ - i .SD1 22.0 10.0 4.0 16 3
Copyrighted material
182 • Titeory and Practice of Foundation Df'.sign
(8.12)
where.
Ks = coefficient of subgrade reaction {pressure required
to cause unit displacement),
b = width of a strip of raft between centres of adjacent bays,
£(' = modulus of ela.sticity of concrete, and
I = moment of incnia of the strip of width b.
In the simplified elastic method, lhe soil is assumed to consist of infinite number of clastic
springs each ac.ting independently. The Winkler model is (."Onsidcrcd valid. The springs are
assumed to be able to resist both tension and compression while the soil defonnation is
considered proportional to the pressure . The elastic constant of the springs is determined by
the coefficient of subgrade re,aclion or the soil (defined as the unit pressure required to
produce unit settlement). The analysis is carried out following the concept of beam on elastic
foundation , the rigorous analysis for which was done by Hetenyi (1946). The raft is
considered a.s a plate and the column loads arc distributed in the surrounding areas in the
zone of influence. The bending moment and shear force are calculated for each column point
and the data are superimposed to obtain the moment and shear for the raft foundation.
American Concrete Institute has recommended a procedure for design (ACI 1966, 1988).
Computer programs are now available to C-il.rty out the comple~ ma h~Yi~~~-~8uli\tffit 1 · rnr
Footings and Raft Design • 183
practical use. Finite element fonnulation can also be used to work out a computer program.
Given the scope of this book. the details are not discussed here.
Example 8.1
An isolated column in a building frame. with a column grid of 3.5 m X 3.5 m carries a
superimposed load of 450 kN. The subsoil condition is shown in Fig. 8.20. Design a suitable
square footing for the column.
450kN
Depth (m)
0
Fl
1
1 Oesk:leated bt'Owr'!isl'l grey silty day
2
r= 18 kNim3
c., = 40 k~; Ccl(1 + So) =0.05
4
~. -
r.
288
112.5 = 2 '56 > 2 ' 5
...
40 2 + 25 2
c• =
X
4
X
= 32 kNim'
and
p, = q£B o - v')l,
112.5 X 2
= 19,200
X 0.75 X 1.12
= 0.0098 m
Depth correc.tion (Fig. 7.3)
D 2
= =1
.fi.i N
and -LB =1
Pr = "" C, H lo P. + llp
L... I + "o g Po
Influence zone extends to depth of 4 m below footing, that is, 2 m in stratum I and 2 m in
stratum II. Hence, consider settJement due to both.
Copyrighted material
Foorings a11d Raft D.sig11 • 185
=
AI A : Po 18 x 2.0 + 8 x 1.0 44 kNfm1 =
6p (for ZJB = In) = 0.6 x 112.5 = 67.5 kNt m'
At 8 : p 0 = 18 x 2.0 + 8 x 2.0 + 8 x l.O = 60 kNtm'
,
6p (for ZIB = 312) = 0.15 x 112.5 = 16.9 kNfm·
p,. - 005 2 I
. xxog ( 44 + 67.5 ) +0. 16 x2 1og 60 + 16.9)
44 ( 60
= (0.041 + 0.034) m
= 0.075 m
Depth correction = 0.73
Pore~pressure correction, J1 = 0.7
(Contribution of layers I and 11 are nearly equal. Hence, take p. = 0.7)
.. (p,),,.. = 0.73 x 0.7 x 0.075 =0.038 m = 38 mm
ToU\1 seulemenl, p1 = 7 + 38 = 45 mm
The foundation is therefore adequa1e
Example 8.2
Design a slrip foundation for !he column row C in the building frame shown in F1g. 8.21.
The soil data are also given in the figure.
Oeplh (m)
0
1 -l~~
";i~~~~ I Brownish grey silty clay
,' lc 2.5 m .-l'~---r-;_19k Ni,;,----
2
E ' \ tv = 35 kNfm
N j +A \ Cc/(1 + Oo) • 0.06
I I
3
\ I II Grey organic day
\ + B ,' r = 18kNim!
___
E
~ , I Cv = 20 kNfm2
C,/(1 + ~Jo) = 0.15
_ ..._ ' ,,
...... __ ...,.,/
.;:
0 0 0
-~ '~·--~~~~--~
4@ 3.5 m
·1
12--------------~---------------
(OJ (b)
Fig. 8.21 Building frame (Example 8.2).
Copyrighted material
186 t Theory and Practice of Fotmdation De.sig11
: 35 X 5.6
= 196 kN/m2
Failure zone is resuicted in stratum I. Hence, take c.. of stratum I.
Fs = 196
65 = 3.0 > 2.5
(b) Immediate sttlltnrtnt
q 11 = 65 kN/m2
8 = 2.5 m
v = 0.5
lp =(for UB = 17125 = 6.8) 2 .32
E = 600 c. = 600 x 26 = 15,600 kN/ m2
Influence zone extends to 2 m in suatum I nnd 3 m in stratum II. Therefore. wejghted
;:~vcroge.
2 X 35 + 3 X 20
= 26 kN/m2
5
And
q.B (l - v}'t
E P
65 X 2.5
= , X 0.75 X 2.32
15 600
= 0.0 18 m
Copyrighted material
Footi11gs and Ruft Desigu • 187
Depth correction:
- =-
L
8
17
2.5
= 6.8
D 1.5
= = 0.23
JL8 ,)2,5 X J.7
... ~
= 004
. x
21
og
28 + SS.2
D + .
0 IS
x
21
•
49 + 27.3
49
= O.Q38 + 0.058 m
= 0.096 m
Depth correction = 0. 95
Rigidity correction = 0.8 (lnrerconnected strip provides rigidity to the foundation)
Pore-pressure correction. J1 = 0.75
(Major contribution to settlement comes from strata I and II. Hence. J1 correction for N.C.
clay is considered.)
.. (p,)""' = 0.95 x 0.8 x 0.75 x 0.096 = 0.055 m = 55 mm
.. Total setdement. p1 = 17 + SS = 72 mm < 75 mm
Example 8.3
A column carrying a superimposed load of 1500 kN is to be founded in a medium sand as
shown in Fig. 8.22. Design a suitable isolated footing.
Copyrighted material
188 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
1SOO kN
Depth (m)
N {Biow>/30 em)
o--------~ ~~~----~~~~r;
18kNim3
2 --¥,.-,,..-----,
,. . ."'.
I -
-5m i
2
S = ·~· fl log Pn + l!.p
Po
Copyrighted material
Footings ami Rafi Design • 189
Depth (m)
o --------~RI
~-------,-.~t7
s 7k~Nhn~,------
-• - ~-----------------------
- I Medium day
r• 18 kNim,
c;. = 40 kNhn'
m~ = 0.0005 m'lkN
-s----------~------------
11 SUff Clay
r= 19 kNim1
c;.. 90 """"'
-10----------=....::;=:.:.::..=------
m.. • 0.0003 m21kN
Solution
Approximate q.,,(n) of slr.ltum I
= cll/Nt:
= 40 X 6.0 = 240 kN/m2
qo~,(n) = 240
.
25
,
= 96 kN/m- (for Fs = 2.5)
Choosing approximate fOOting size accordingly and carrying out detailed analysis.
Column A
Take footing size = 2.2 m x 2.2 m
Area = 4.84 m2
500 2
q..,. = - = 103.3 kN/m
4. 84
Copyrighted material
190 • Titeory and Practice of Foundation Design
1
: 5( 1 + 0.2 X ) (1 + 0.2 X 1)
22
= 6.55
Qun(n) = cMN('
: 40 X 6.55
= 262 I<N/m2
262
Fs = . = 2.54 > 2.5
103 3
(b) Immediate senlemelll
q. = 103.3 I<N/m2
8 = 2.2 m
v = 0.5
lp = 1.12
E = 700 x 40 = 28,000 kN/m2
P; = q.EB (I - v 2) / P
.. Pt- = m.,tjpH
: 0.05 X 36.5 X 4.4 = 0.080 ffi
Column B
Take footi ng size of 3 m x 3 m
Area =9m 2
720
q,.. = = 80 kN/m2
9
(a) Bearing capaciry
N, I
= 5( + 0 .2 ~ ) (I + 0.2 n
1
= 5(1 +0 .2 X
29)<I+ 0.2)
= 6.4
qulc(n) = C11N~
: 40 X 6.4
= 256 kNtm'
Fs = ~
80 =32
.
(b) lmmed,.ate settlement
q. = 89 kNtm'
8 =28m
v = 0.5
Ip(..,ey = 1.12
40 x 4 + 2 x 80
6
= 53 kN/m2
Influence. zone ext·ends approximately to 4 m in stralum I and 2 m in stratum II. Therefore.
weighted average taken is
Copyrighted material
192 • Theory and Practic~ of Foundation D~sign
80 X J
= X 0 .75 X 1.12
37,000
= 0.0054
-
. Depth coJTection:
L = I
B
D
= 0.33
JLB
.. Correction factor = 0.9
.. (p1)..,. = 0.9 x 0 .0054 = 0.005 m = S mm
Consolidation settJ~ment
Pc = Lm~~6.pH
= (0.0005 X 4 X 36.8) + (0.0003 X 2 X 9.6)
for point A(ZlB = 0.66), 6p = 0.46 x 80 = 36.8 kN/m2
= 0.074 + 0.006
for point B(Z/B = 1.67), 6p = 0.12 x 80 = 96 kN/m2
= 0.080 m
Depth correction = 0.9
Pore-pressure correc1ion = 0.7
(p;)""' = 0.9 x 0.7 x 0 .086 = 0.050 m = SO mm
p1 = S + SO = SS mm
Column C
Take footing size or 2.5 m X 2.5 m, and
area = 6.25 m2
q., = 6600
_ = 96 kN/m
25
2
Sellltm~nt
By similar calculation as in the previous pans,
p, = 5 mm
p, =SOmm
Pt =5 +50 =55 mm
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
File Foundations
9.1 IN'fRODUCTION
Piles arc relatively long and slender structural members used to transmit foundation loads
throu~ soil of low bearing capacity to deeper strata (soil or rock) having high bearing
capacity. They are also used in normal ground conditions to resist uplift and lateral forces.
The principal uses of piles are:
I. To carry vertical compression load from builclings, bridges, and so on.
2 . To resist horizontal or inclined loads by retaining wall, bridge pier, water front
structures and structures subjected to wind or seismic loads.
( 3. To resist uplift forces in transmission towers and underground structures below water
·'
table.
Piles are described as end bearing piles and friction piles depending on the manner in which
· the load is transmitted into the surrounding soil. These can be defined as follows:
~ If the pile rests in a hard and relatively incompressible suatum, for example, rock or
dense sand/gravel, the pile derives most of its carrying capacity from end bearing at the pile
tip. Such piles are called end bearing or pcint-bearing piles. Figure 9. 1(a) depicts end-
bearing piles. The soft compressible layer through whic·h the pile passes may not carry any
significant load by side friction.
0 0
Soil propeftieS
Frm ground
{a) End bearing pie {b) FrictiOn pile
Ffo. 1.1 Pile:s: methods of lOad transfet'.
199
Copyrighted material
lOO • Theory and Practice of Foundation De$ign
If the pile does not reach an incompressible sttatum but is driven for some depth into a
penetrable soH, the carrying capacity of the pUc is derived primarily from skin friclion or
adhesion between the embedded surface of the pile and the surrounding soil. Such piles arc
called friction piles. as shown in Fig. 9.1(b).
Although. in common terminology, piles are often referred to as friction piles or end·
bearing piles-in reality. there is no pile that ttansmits the load to the surrounding soil solely
by fricr ion or solely by end bearing. The distinction only serves to indicate the relative
magnitude of the load that is transmitted by friction and by end bearing. For example, a
S!raight pile embedded in homogeneous c lay will mostly ttansfer the load by friction and a
pile wid& its tip resting in dense sand underlying soft clay can be considered an end bearing
pile.
The relative magnitude of the, skin friction and the base resistance of a pil~, however.
depends on various fac tors such as~ :.
1. Geometry of the pile shaft-its shape, length, and diameter and whether it is with or
without enlarged base.
2. Subsoil slratification along the pile shaft and the properties of soil in which()be pile
is embedded and where the tip of-the pile rests.
3. Method of consl!Uction of the pile. that is. driven pile. bored pile, and so on.
9 .2 CLASSIFICATION
Piles are classified according to their composition or method of installation. I
Copyrighted material
PUe Foundations • 201
(a) Drit~tn pil~s: These may comprise of timber, steel. or preca.~t concrete. The piles
are driven by the impact of a hammer or by vibrations induced by a vibratory
hammer.
When n pile is driven inro the soil, i1 displaces a volume of the soil equal to the
volume of the pile. So. these piles are also called disp/acemem piles. In granular
soils. the driving operation densities the soil and increases strength of the soil in the
vicinity. When piles are driven in saturated clay, the soil instead of being compacted
gets remoulded often with reduction of strength. The soil, however, regains strength
with time due 10 consolidation and thixotropic hardening. Because of the
displacement of soil by !he piles, !here may be ground heaving around the piles.
/"~Jso, driving of piles impartS vibratjon to surrounding soil. which in some cases.
' may be detrimental to struciUres located very close to the site.
(b) Driven c4st-in-silu-pilts: These piles are also a kind of driven pile. Steel casing is
J driven into !he ground wi!h a shoe a! the bonom. The hole is then filled up with
concrete, and the casing is gradually lifted as the concrete is poured.
(c) Bo,..d piltf: These piles are formed in prebored holes in !he ground either using a
casing or by circulation of a drilling Ouid, such as bentonite slurry. Concrete is
poured into the hole by displacing benloni!C and then gradually lifting !he casing.
Bored piles may be of the following types:
f'
• (i) Small diametes bored piles-generally up!o 600 mm diameter.
(ii) Large diameter bored piles- diameter generally greater than 600 mm. They are
'i advantageous where heavy structurnl loads are to be supported.
~ (iii) Under.reamed piles-one or more bulbs of larger diamerer than that of the shaft
are fonned by s-uitably enlarging the borehole with special tools ro increase the end
resistance. These piles are suitable when a good be.aring s1.ratum is available at a
relatively shallow dep!h. The uplif! capaci!y of these piles is high. In India, these
piles are widely used to provide suitable foundations in expansive soils.
Bored piles are noll·displacement piles and may be used when pile driving is
detrimental to adjoining structures.
figure 9.2 shows a typical load seulemen! diagram for a pile under gradually increasing load.
At small dcform~tjons. say upt'O the point A in the figure. the piJe,..soil system behaves
elastically. as indicated by !he linear load ' 'ersus scttlemcm relationship. Up1o !his poin!. !he
entire load is carried by skin frictio n and there is virtually no transfer of load to the pile tip.
\Vith more deformation. the pile shaft carries more frictional fon,-es while a part of the load
is transferred to the pile tip also. At 8 , the pile tip carries the ma.ximum skin friction that
can be mobilized in the soil. Therefore. funhcr increase of load on the pile is carried out at
the pile tip and the pile is said to have failed, at C. when the tip lood has also re:~ched its
Copyrighted material
II
!!
"
202 • TJreory and Pracn'ce of Fomula1itm Design
maximum value. Thus. the load c.arrying cap ily of a pile may be determined from separate o1
evaluation of the ultimale skin friction and t ultimate base resistance. I
I
c
Tolal
Oispl~nt --+ •
Fig. 9.2 Load settl t relalionshlp ol plies. '
Thus.
wp- w,
where Q• is the load carrying capacity of pile.
a, is the maximum skin friction on e pile shaft,
Q. is the ultimate tip resistance,
WP is the weight of the pile. and
W, is the weight of soil displaced b 'the pile.
•
In general. w. and W, are small in relation to QP and their differences even smaller. Thus.l
for practical purposes
Q, = Q, Q. (9.2) ~-
Therefore. it is apparent, that full mobili 'on of Q1 and QP are primruily dependent on •
the movement of the pile in the soil (refer Fi . 9.2). Cooke (1974), and Cooke and Price
(1973) have shown that. for an clastic soil, ful mobilization of skin friction in a cylindrical
pile occurs at vertical displacement of O.S-1% of the pile diameter. On the other hand, full
mobilization of base resistance requires a muc greater ddormation-even upto 20% of the
base diameter (Whitaker. 1976). This suggcs that skin friction is mobilized almost fully
before any appreciable base resistan<-e develo in the soil. Therefore, the entire problem of
load distribution through piles has to be \'iew as a pi~e-soil interaction where the response
of the soil to a given deformation in terms of 'n friction and end bearing has to be taken
into account.
An evaluation of the zone of soil that is i nuenccd by piling is important to detcnnine
the soil propenics that come into play in resi ting the movement of the pile in the soil.
Meyerhof (1959) and Kerise1 (1961) consider+ the influence zone as shown in Fig. 9.3.
According to Meyerhof (1959), the shear zone~ the base causing beruing capacity failure of
the soil e"tends to !\Qme distance above the pili tip. The zone of skjn friction may extend
laterally to a distance of three to fou r times the iameter of the pile while compaction of lhe
pile m11y occur upto a distance of five to six mes the diameter. Cooke and Price (1973)
have. however, observed that displacement of thl soil may extend to a radial distance of ten
Copyrighted material
Pile Fount/Qtions + 203
diameters around the pile. Pile driving cause.~ significant changes in dte soil within the zone
of influence. Therefore, it is important to study the various fac.tors that affect the soil during
piling.
p
•
Ag. 1.3 Stress Influence zone around piles.
The load carrying capacity of a pile is controlled by its suuctural strength and the supporting
strength of the soil. The smaller of the two is considered for design purposes. These are three
apporaches to the computation of pile capacity based on soil support. These are:
(a) Static analysis
..• (b) Dynamic analysis
(c) Load test
where
/, = unit skin friction in each layer.
AJ = pile area providing skin friction in each layer.
A, =pile area providing end bearing, and
q, = ultimate bearing capacity of soil at pile lip.
A total stress approach is generally used to determine the shaft and tip resistances of piles in
tohesive soil considering that the load transfer from the pile to the soil occurs under
undrained condition.
Driven pil~s: When n pile is driven into a cohesive soil, two effects of pile driving become
significant. J
The clay is displaced laterally and in an upward direction, resulting in a ground heave.
The soil close to the pile shafl gets disiUrbed to cause remoulding of the clay. This may lead
to considerable loss in strength of the soil. This has been discussed by Flame (1972! who
observed appreciable increase in wat·e r content and corresponding reduction of shear strength
of the soil between two adjacent driven piles in clay. With time. soft clay regains this
strength either completely or partially by thixotropic haroening (Skempton and Northey,
1952). A corresponding increase in load carrying capacity of the pile with time is shown in
Fig. 9.4 (Tomlinson. 1994). On the other hand. in stiff c lays, extensive crocking or the soil
occurs during pile driving. Clay in the upper part of the pile breaks away from the shaft and
nury 11ever regaitr contact with it (fomlinson, l977). Thus, the effect of pile driving on thilt
shear strength of the clay differs with the soil consistency. Considerable gain in strength may •
be observed with time in sofl clays while no appreciable effect may be noted in stiff clays.
r-
2
'5ll-:;200;;;;-:-,-'.;2~15;-:m:m:-'cooae:::::::t::.-ttt-----t--tp-t-.:;le.f:f·Tt.r.~~"·~=-.·-~--~--..-. .-. t-..-..t.-..t.-t.r.t:-.11.H 25 o;
-~
-200 (Gothooburg) 'ln......
.....
. .- · - - - ·- ... ·· ·
-r·-::::"'::;;-~~~"'+""f+l+t-tt---t-HH+t+tl20-
=
E
Fig.. i.4 Gain in load carrying capacity with time of driven piles in soft clay (Tomlinson. 1994).
High porc·prcssure is developed in the c lay due to pile driving fo rces. This pore-
pressure often takes time to dissipate. When reconsolidation of the clay occurs, the soft clay
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
206 • Theory and Pracll'ce <if Fomulntiou Design
where J1 is the coefficient of friction between the pile and the soil,
r is the density of the soil.
•·
l. is the length or the pile. '
(J is angle of internal friction of the soil, and
A, is surface area of the pile.
Tl1e major uncertainry in using Eq. (9.4) to evaluate the skin fTiction lies in the
estimation or p and (!of the soil. In particular. no di<tinction is made between clay and sand,
and the choice of these parameters for actual conditions that exist around a pile during and
afte-r driving leads to difficulties. ~
Burland (1973) developed a method of calculation of shaft friction from the e ffective
stress principle. It is assumed that the zone of distortion around the pile being small, the
porc·pressure dissipates quickly and Joading takes place under drained condition. It is further •
assumed that there is no effec.::tive cohesion in the soil due to remoulding of the soli around
the pile. The unit s kin friction at any depth is then given by.
[, = kp tan 8 (9.5)
where k is the lateral earth pressure coefficient.
p is the effective overburden pressure at the depth considered. and
8 is the angle of friction between the pile and the soil.
It poses extreme difficulties to seJec,t appropriate values of k and p. p is initially s mall due to
high pore·pressure developed during driving but its value soon increases with dissipation of
pore water pressure. In driven piles. k is also likely to be high initially because or the driving
forces whereas in bored piles, k will be small due to swelling of the soil. These values may
ulti mately attain some s tability after installation but uncertainties stiiJ remain regarding the
time required for drainage of the soil around the pile and about values of k and p that should
be applicable in a field situation. Burland made a further simplifying assumption that k = ko
(k0 is the coefficient or earth pressure at rest) and obtained the following expression for the
total shaft friction:
L
F, = JTB L pko tan 8(A£.) (9.6)
0
Copyrighted material
Pile Foundations • 207
(9.8)
where At is the surface area of the pile shaft in contact with the soil in different layers .
~
.;; While the undrained s hear strength of the clay. c,. can be determined from field vane
· shear test or from laboratory triaxial test. a proper assessment of the adhesion factor is
required for the evaluation of tbe unit skin friction. This adhesion factor gives a measure of
, the part of the undrained shear strength of the soil that is mobilized as skin fric tion.
The unit skin friction, according to Eq. (9.1 0) varies linearly with depth along the pile
shaft. This is shown in Fig. 9.8. The total frictional reaistance for a pile of depth D1 can be
obtained as
(9.11)
Dt
K..-,
«t~t~l
~
_},
_.,
1<7' O,tan I
flo. • •• ~ - In ploo - Nnd.
where,
A1 is the amo of the pile shall In contaet with the soil and
y' D1 is the effective overburden JniSUre at the pile tip.
The values of K, and 6 as given by Broms (1966) are shown in Table 9. 1. While K, is
a furu:tion of the relative density of the soil. 6 is related to the angle of shearing resistance of
the soil and the nature of pile soil contact. In plies with liner. the sldn friction is even less
than direct soil-concrete friction and a reduced value of 6 should be used.
Tobie u Values or K, ond 6 (Broms 1966)
ltuiiJIIatiort IN!f/tod P//t'-«)U lrttttfact
Driven piJes, luse displ~eement I.S-2.0 S1t<Vsand O.S~'-<1.7f
Driven piles, small displace.ment 1.0-1.5 .......... <oncmclsand 0.8f-I.Of
Bored and ca:st-in-s.itu piles 0.7- 1.0 Cut-in-siN cona'ttdsand I.Of
In driven piles, Poulos and Davis (1980) have recommended the UK of the relationship
to dewmine the angle of pile soH friction ICCOUnting for the effect of pile driving, f being
the angle of shearing real StanCe prior to installation of the pile. However, a value of 6 greater
than ~· •hould no< be used in view of the wide variation of driving methods in the field.
Tomlinoon (1977) hu indlea!ed a relationship between aventge unit skin friction and
relative density, bued on the reauh• of actual pile !Old tesa. as depicted by Fig. 9.9.
According 10 litis relationohip, the skin friction auains 1 petk value of 107 kN!m' (10 !lmlj
foe high relotive density.
Hidden page
Hidden page
214 t Theory and Pracr;ce of Foundar;on D~sign
10,000 .----.---.-----,-----r--,--,
02~5------~
30~----~35~------.~0~----~.~5------!
It can be seen that Terzaghi (1943) gives the lower bound and De Beer (1970) gives
the upper bo<Jnd values of N,. Comparison of observed point resistances of piles in sand by
Nordlund (1969) and Vesic (1967) reveal that N 9 values established by Berezantzev et al.
( 1961) give better estimates of point resistance. Although N, values of Berezantzev are
dependent on the relative embedment depth DtfB, the variation is small. An average
Berezantzev curve has been given in IS 2911 (pan I, 1979), Fig. 9.12.
Copyrighted material
Pilt Foundations • liS
~-H~tHH+tH+tHK+t~trH+tH~Hi+rttH
~-rHH~++~~++.~Hit+~~t+~Hi+t~HH
•o-+rrt+t+~HHbHRH~14+t++++++t+HHHHHH~HH
~-rHH~++~~++~Hit+HH~t++HHi+t~HH
10 -L~~~LLLUUUUUUU~~~~~~LUUUWU~WW
:zs.o 27.5 ~.o 32.s 35.o 37.5 -o.o •2.5 '5,o
lw;Je or.~ - ..... (~1. .)
f lo. 1.12 Var1alion d N• - .- t-nttov, 10&1 ~
z,
j_
9. 7 CRITICAL DEPTH
The effective overburde,n pressure required for c.alculadon or friccionol resistance and end
9 .9 UNDER-REAMED PILES
Under· reamed piles are often used as load bearing and anchor piles in expansive clays. A
single under·reamcd pile is sujtable for anchor pile while double under·~ piles are used
to incrcose the load bearing c~pacity of the pile, this is shown in Fig. 9. 16. The ultimate
capacity of an under·rcamed pile is given by
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Pile Fomulatio11s • 219
However. it may be noted that a con~pt of overall factor of safety does n01 necessarily
imply identical foc:cors of safety with res-pect 10 both frictionaJ resistance and base resistance
of a pile. Tomlinson (1977) has observed !hat for a large diameter bored pile in stiff clay, an
overall factor of safety equal to 2.0 wdl result in lhe mobilization of full frictional resistance
(i.e., FS = 1) while only 22% of the ultimate base resistance will come into play
(i.e FS = 5). Settlement of a pile foundation will, therefore, be primarily governed by the
compression of the soil around the pile shaft where the load is transmitted to the soil by skin
friction.
There is conside rable doubt and controversy over the mobilization of end bearing in
cohesionless soil in the field. Depending on the extent of quality control that can be achieved
during boring there is a real danger of muck remaining uncleared at che bottom of the
borehole prior co concreting. Consequently. the mobil.ization of end bearing would be in
doubt. ln panicular. with a wide variety of piling rigs in use-some of them adopting even
augur boring to make the borehole-it remains doubtful if the integrity of the pile at the pile
tip can always be mainulined. With mechanically operated rigs and proper circulation of
bentonite mud, this problem would be considerably minimized. The problem is. as is
sometimes made to be. not whether the concept of end bearing at pile tip is correct or not. It
is more a question of whether adequate construct control is achieved at site. Till the
profession is in a position to overcome these deficiencies, a cautious approach is called for in
estimating lhe end bearing capacity of bored piles in cohesiordess soil. One way would be to
apply • high factor of safety on the end·bearing component of lhe pile capacity. In any case
this would be the case under working load as lhe tip movement necessary for mobilization of
end bearing would not materialize in actual foundations. l n such :1n approach a factor of
safety of 1.5 is adopted on skin friction and 4 on end bearing.
A factor of safety of 2.5-3.0 is normally adopted to obtain the safe load on a pile from
static analysis. IS 2911 (1985) recommends a minimum factor of safety of 2.5. Hence,
Q - Q,+Q. Q Qf Q. (9.22)
all - 2.5 or '" = 1.5 +4
The typical case of piles in normal Calcutta soil (see Example 9.3) shows that for s.m.all
diameter piles (Dia < 600 mm) !he allowable load obtained by using an overall factor of safety
of 2.5 may be just about the same as the skin fricton component. That means, at working load,
only the skin friction is mobilized and the entire end bearing is kept in the reserve.
Design of a pile foundation involves not only the determination of the allowable load on
a pile from consideration of ultimate resistance of s ingle pile but also ensuring the stability of
the pile group where a large number of closely spa~ piles are provided to support lhe column
load. The entire soil inc luding the pile group wiU be stressed as a block and lhe settlement of
the pile group wiJI have 10 be evaluated under the working load and the design should ensure
that the settlement is acceptable. Group action of piles is discussed in Section 9.12.
,ft..!:,""' fall
L__j-Wtight. W
Hoigl\1 Of lal, HI i
•
t._ , Reaetion,R
WH • RS + losse!;
s--*-
T
---J
Fig. 8.17 Dynamics of pie driving.
EHL
The ultimate pile capacity as detennined from tbe pile driving formulae may be used to
determine the safe load capacity of a pile by using a fac tor of safety. ln view of the
uncertainties involved in tbe calculation, a high factor of safety, not less !ban 3, should be
used. The early ENR formula even recommended a factor of safety equal to 6.
Sorensen and Hansen (1957), Housel (1966), and Olsen and Flaate (1967} made
comprehensive studies on the use of different pile driving formulae in predicting the pile
capacity. It appears from tbeir studies, "if driving formu lae are to be used, those which
involve the least uncertainty arc the Hiley and Janbu formulae while the most uncertain is the
ENR formula",'' (Poulos and Davis. 1980).
The building codes provide minimum allowable spacing of piles in a group. I.S. 2911
(pan 1), 1979, suggests the following guidelines for spacing:
(a) For piles bearing on a hard stratum and deriving their strength mainly from
end bearing. the minimum spacing shall be 2.Sd, d being the diameter of the
pile.
(b) For friction piles in clay. the minimum spacing shall be 3d.
(c) For piles driven through loose sand or fill, the minimum spacing may be 2d.
However. the most commonly used spacing is 3d. Figure 9.21 shows some typical pile
groups with different number of piles.
, ..._,A
rr·-~ ~o"'()'':e:.
~
f.
0.87• ·
~~ ...
;,
4
$
t ....... o:
.•
•
.•
:
'
~· t·t·f 1
3 piles
;
·~·.J! :
•
•
•
•
' ' 6 piles
•0
' ........0·''
5 pUes
r····-··---·
:o 0 0 ~ :O 0 -&!-+'
• ••
:o ~
1
tt·.t.-f 0
it-1~-f
0 0
7!llles 8 piles
9piles
:rr-·-~r-1:
..~- -;10
· -~J~:.
10 piles 11 piles
(a)
p = M rCI s !':!.Jz.
11 Lx; Z.u
On the other side or CG. the reaction is upward, that is, P1 is negative.
P _ ±Ma x, _ ±Mu
Thus. " - L,x; - Z.u
Thus,
load V " 1 M,.y1
pile =P= N±Myy.<, £... x.± I I. (9.30)
It should be noted here that for large moment on a pile group, the reactions due to
moment may be even greater than the reactions due to the vertical load. In such cases, the
outermost piles on the leeward side of the moment may be subjected to uplift forces.
To know the effective depth of soil below the pile group, the best method is to
determine the. stress increment ratio Aplpfl at different depths and consider the depth of soil
for which llplp > 0. I.
S= Sq. (9.33)
~ 81 (1 + 0.4~ )
where S = settlement coefficient.
q, = average pressure on the equivale.nt raft.
N = average SPT value over a depth 28 below the foundation level or Ds i f the
depth of cohesionless soil is less than 28,
D1 = depth of equivalent raft, and
8 = width of equivalent raft.
The settlement coefficient. S varies with DJ'B as shown in Fig. 9.24.
10.0· ~-----------~
- sp
I p - N'·"(1 • 0 .40,18)
D,JB ~ 2
D,
V~/////PP//////////H/////////1'
Reduction factors for o;s < 2
1~8
Dsl
1 2 5 100
1.5 0.91 0.6\1 0.87 0.85
0.1L-'---'--'-.L...I.-...L..-L-l-'-l
0.5 1 2 3 4 5 10 20 30 4050 1.0 0 .76 0.72 0.69 0.65
Breadth, 8 (m) 0.5 0.52 0.48 0.43 0.39
FJg. 9.24 Setltement coefficient. s versus DriB (Schultze and Sherif. 1973).
Copyrighted material
Pile Foundations • 231
ttttt
for cohesive soils, the uplift resistance of the block may be obtained by summing up
tbe undrained shearing resistance around the periphery of the block and the weight of soil
enclosed by tbe group as
Q. = 2(L + 8)D1c, + IV (9.34)
where L = length of the pile group.
8 = width of the pile group.
D1 = depth of tbc pile group.
c11 :: average undrained shear strengch of the cloy. and
IV = weight of the soil enclosed within tbe block.
A safety factor of 3 should be used to determine the safe uplift capacity of tbe group.
Copyrighted material
232 • T7reory and Practice of Foundation Dtsign
·.
9 . 15 PILES UNDER HORIZONTAL FORCES
Vertical piles can resisc lateral forces to a certain extent depending on the strength
and stiffness of the pile and the soil. According 10 I.S. 2911- 1985, permissible
lateral load of a vertical pile is 2-5% of the permissible vertical load. For greater
horizontal load. addjtional reinforcement is to be provided in the pile or raker piles may
be used.
Ullimate lateral resistance and load-deflection behaviour of a pile under lateral load is a
complex problem of soil-si!Ucture interaction. The lateral load on the pile head is initially
carried by the soil close to the ground surface resulting in elastic defonnation of the soil. As
the load in<:reases. the soil yields and transfers the load to greater depths.
Short and long piles fail under different mechanisms. This subsection brieny discusses these
failure mechanisms.
A s hort rigid pile. unrestnined at the head, tends to rotate or tilt as shown in
Fig. 9.26. and passive resistance develops above and below the point of rotation on opposite
sides of the pile. If the pile head is restrained by a cap. the re will be lateral translation.
In both the cases. the pile will fail when the applied load exceeds the passive resistance of
the soil.
Load H ,._
I I H
I I
I
I
I
I
L I
I
I
L~--c.n ..e o1 I
rotation I I
I I
I I
L-
(a) ( b)
Fig. 9.21 Failure mechanism of rigid pile under hori:zonlal load: (a) free head, (b) ftxed head.
For a long pile, the passive resistan<:e is very large and pile cannot rotate or till. The
lower ponion remains almost vertical due to fixity while the upper part deflectS in flexure.
The pile fails when a plastic .hinge is formed at the point of maximum bending moment,
Fig. 9.27.
As a consequence, a shon pile fails when passive resistanc-e of soil is exceeded
(soil failure) and a long pile fails when the moment ~ap<lcity is e.ceeded (si!Uctural failure).
Copyrighted material
Pil~ Foundations t 233
H o 1~'/l'illlli'
'!
, If.._
r-- Fracture
L L
•
(a) (~)
Fla, 1.21 Fan... , . . , _ , o1 1oog p1o under horiza>tal lood: (a) - head, (b) - head.
For development of ultimate · resistance, the lateral movement is generally too large.
Therefore, after c,aJeuJating lhe ultimate resisrancc and dividing by a facror of safety, it is
nec.essary to check that the perrni ..ible deflection or pile head is not excuded.
Tablt 9.3 Values of K1 for different consistencies of clay (after Teru~Jhi. 19SS)
Copyrighted material
234 • nuwry and Practice of Foundation Design
For soft normally consolidated clays and for granular soils, the soil modulus is assumed
to increase line:trly with depth. For this case. the stiffness factor is given by
.. Copyrighted material
Pile Foundatioru • 235
Q,.(g) 11"
-·-pile
Embedment qth. uo
Fig. 1.21 Oulgn chafls for short pleo in coho5Ne ooll (llroms 19M).
Lenglll, LID
Fig. 8.21 Design charts fot Short plies In coheslonleas 8041 (Stems, 19&4).
Copyrighted material
~ • Theory tmd Pro<:tice of Fouru/4tion Design
100
60
40
20
+;
10
i
--
6
•
I 2
1
3
• 6 10 20 40 100 200
:1J - 600
Ulllmollo - men-. U..tc,D'
Fig. UO Oooign chor1 lor long piloo in ooheoiYe soil (Broms, 19&4~
i; 1000Hf f·
."'.
i!' ...1
100~-~
~~
'
~o~r--------+--------+-~~
i
I
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
238 + Theory and Practice of FoUJI(/Q.tion Design
A, s,.
-1 0 1 2 3 • 5 ~ 0 1 2 3 •
0
1
~---~~
~~ • 4::',. · ~
0
!;; 2
::::: 2 ...
• •
.... 3 3 ~
••
,tl
10
•
5
1\, ~
0
. .. 12
02 04 06 0.6 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0
1 r-:-'. 'l. -L!· ........ ~:4
!;; 2 ~
y ,. -'l » 'f
/' 2 ...
•
...• 3
3 ~
•IKo 10 •
5 5
Fig. 1.32 Pile c:lefJecllon ltld moment In CXJheslcnleu SOit: Elulc anatysis
111- and Mallock (19S6~ Oas (1998)~
, Q1 R3 M1 R2 ,
x,(z) = A, "'E[" + B, E 1 (9.43}
I'P PP
and (9.44)
wbere A:r, 8'¥, A~. and B'.. are coefficients and R = ~ EPI,IK .
The variation of A~. B'p A;,., and B'. with z is given in Fig. 9.33.
8~. &"'
-2 -1 0 1 2
0
~"' -;:::;-. 2
1
v j. 1
z
2
3
/
3..._,
l~ 3 '
' .
Z..•2
• - 8'.
-- a;.
5
Fig, 1.33 Pile denection and moment in CXIhesive soil: Elastic analysis (0avi$SOO and Gill, 1963),
Copyrighted material
Footings and Raft Design • 195
6p 1
-=
p., 1
;; = 0.09 < 0. 1 Hen<:e. soil below stratum III is not significant.
33 + 49.8 81 + 37 .5
p, : 0 ,03 X + 0.08 x 12 log
1•5 X 1Og
33 81
139 + 17.8
· x 4 1og
+ 006 139
= O.Ql8 + 0.158 + 0.012
= 0 .188 m
Deptlvcorrection = 1.0
Rigidity correction = 0.8 _
Pore· pressure correction = 0. 7
I
• (p,),.. = 0.8 X 0.7 X 0. 188 = 0.105 m
Pi = 0.017 + 0.105
=0.122 m = 122 mm < 125 mm
E><amp1e 8.6
, Design of a buoyancy raft foundation for a 4-storey donnitory building with two columns in
each bay, depicted in Fig. 8.25.
I
Depth (m)
0.6ml Basement
0
1
- 3m
..,E ~
Copyrighted material
1% • Theory and Pracriu of Foundmion Desig11
Solution
Size of rnft = 9 m x 90 m
Area of each column bay = 3 m x 9 m = 27 m1
Load in each bay = 2 x 900 = 1800 kN
Gruss foundation pressure
1800
for superstructure q = 2"7 = 67 kN/m1
Assume weight of basement to be 25% of superstructure weight. Thus. q -0 = 17 kNim1
:. q1,.., = 84 kN/m1
Provide depth of foundation, D1 = 3 m.
q,.. = ql""' - rDI
= 84 - 18 X 3
= 30 kN/m1 •.
(a) Bearing capacity
Consider 9 m depth below raft
25 X 4.5 + 20 X 4.5
:. c., = = 22.5 kNim2
9
and
N, = 5( I + 0.2 ~)
= 5(1 + 0.2 io)
= 5.2
qult(n) = cllN~
= 22.5 X 5.2 = 117 kN/m2
I
i
~length.~
Fig. U 5 Oelloctlon ol plio - u.- wmclng lood: Ccllloolw ooll (Bromo, 19ee).
2.3 - - FrMheadpllo 0 0
- - - - Fbood heed pile l1 L1
2.1 = .1.
..3- ' t·.m:jm.
1.9 ' , "-- ~..
L Forplleoln-and
r=
a \ ------} normally-~
\
~ 1.7
'' '
1.5
1.3
--- -----}For-in po-
days
0 2 • 8
L,IR or L,IT
8 10 ..
Copyrighted material
Pilt! FoundationJ • 241
Considering lhe pile as on equivalent cantilever. the pile load deOection, y is obtained as
Q(!., + L1 l'
y • for free head pile
3£,1,
(9.45)
=
Q(l., + Ld for fixed head pile
12£, 1,
where Q = latenl IMCI and Lt and It on: as shown in lhe figutt.
The fixed end moment (M,) of lhe equivalent cantile~ is given by
0.8
1?- -- -- In- 1--- .
kL::
- For piles
E di)'S
~
J! 0.6
- - - F« Clho In """" end
normally toodod days _
1
,7
0
11~
L,
~ T
£ 0.4
1/
...
L
0.2
0 2 • 8 10 12
1.2
- F0< plloo In pertoodld ctayo
-
---
--V' 1---
L~G~
0.8
L.--
v T'~
1
;I {
0 0.5 tO tS 20 2.5
LvR or Lv T
(b)
A semi-empirical method of estimating the negative drag based on the one described by
Terzaghi and Peck (1967) has been suggested by Nayak (1967). It can be done through the
fo llowing steps:
1. Estimate the length of pile over which negative skin friction develops.
2 . E.~timate the positive skin friction over that length.
3. Multiply the value obtained in (2) by a fac tor to obtain dragdown. This factor
depends on the cause of soil movement and may be taken as a value varying over
0.6-0.8.
4. Estimate the ultimate pile capacity, Q..p as consisting of point bearing and shaft
re.~istance over the length where there is no negative skin jricrio11.
5. Calculate factor of safety, F from ·
F = Q.P (9.51)
(Q + Q.,)
where Q = structural load on pile and
Q,, = downdrog force on the pile.
In a pile group. the total downdrag force on the group. Q., is the minimum of the following
values. ·
Q., = NQ., (9.52)
and
Q"·' = yL"P (9.53)
the weight or soil enclosed with the pile groups,
where N = no. of piles in the group,
r = unit weight of soil.
L,. = length over which negative friction develops, and
P = perimeter of the group.
Poulos and Davis (1980) have described a method based on elas1ic lheory. wilh
allowance for pile-soil slip, to estim:ue downdrag force. ln this method, the dependence or
downdrag on the settlement of the soil can be included, rother than assuming that sufficient
soiJ movement occurs to mobilize the full adhesion along the pile shaft. Based on a study of
the various parameters responsible for negative skin friction, the authors have presented
charts which can be used very con..,eniently to calcul::ue downdrag force.
9 . 17 TESTING OF PILES
Recent trends in foundation design follow the use of large diameter, high capacity piles fo r
supporting heavy s tructural loads. Till the early sixties, driven piles of diameter upto
SOO mm were nonnally in use in India. These ptles would have safe load capacity upto
100 lonnes depending on the deplh of pile and s ubsoil condition. Wilh 1he coming of bored
cast·in..:situ systems, large diameter piles are now common and typical 1500 mm diameter
piles with safe capacity of 500 tonnes or more have frequently been used in recent years.
This obviously necessiunes o strict quality control in the installation of the pile so chat each
pile carries the des ign load with certainty.
Copyrighted material
246 + 17u~ory and Practice of Founda.tiou Design
(c) The load at which the settlement of the pile head is equal to 10% of the pile
diameter.
Pile load (kN)
0 1000 2000 3000
0 .......
.........
" ~• 1-
'\
\
60
r- - b
According to IS 29-11- 1985. the safe load from initial load test is taken as the least of
the following:
(a) Two third of the load at whieh gross settlement is 12 mm or
(b) 50% of the fi nal load at which gross setllement becomes 1/IOth of the pile
diameter.
The ultimate load obtained by these methods for the pile test data, as depicted through
Fig. 9.43, is shown in Table 9.5.
In routine load test. the pile is considered to be safe if the gross settlement under 1.5
times the working load is not greater than 12 mm. However. this criterion of 12 mm gross
settJement should be related to the pile diameter particularly a large diameter piles.
Maintained load test is very time consuming. Also. some amount of consolidation and
creep may take place during the test. So, it may be difficult to correlate the test results with
undrained shear strength data obtained from laboratory tests.
A field test with POA is shown in Fig. 9.45. Major defects such as crocks. soil
incursions, necking, and changes in cross section are easily detected using this cesl. For
complete pile driving analysis, two specially designed combined acceleration and strain
transducers are mounted on the side of the pile near the pile top. During driving of piles,
signals obta.i ncd through the mounted ·transducers are passed on to the signal conditioning
subsystem for processing and finally to the computer. The processed signal for each blow is
stored in o hard disc memory and displayed on the computer screen. After pile driving. a full
record of all relevant parameters are ovailable with respect to the number of blows as well as
depth. Typical test data obtained for structuraJiy sound piles and piles with discontinuity are
shown in fig. 9.45.
Copyrighted material
252 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
=~ +-·!- r1
5.4 cm/s 0 2 4 6
i l l-l-H I :~:
8 10 - 12 14 16 18 20
Structurally sound pilo
Crackldecrease In aoss secllon
77
Increase In cros.s.secOOn
5.6m
0 1 2 3 • 5 6 7 8 9 10 m
Example 9. 1
A closed ended steel pipe pile, 30 em in diamerer and 20 m long is driven to a sand deposit
with cut off at ground level. The depth~wise variation of N and 9 values is given in
Fig. 9.46. The waler table is 3 m below ground level. Compute the ultimare load capacity of
!he pile based on soil support, using
(m) H (Biows/30cm)-+10 20 30
0~----~----~~~~~~~~
• I IH• S
2 --------- ----------7· -...;::-
3 : ----- -· 27.6 kl<lrn' _.,._ ~
'' f---
Skin friction :
I
~ N • 16
-------- --------~----
39 kNrm2
--- .......
Copyrighted material
Pile Foundar;ons • 253
(i) N value.
(ii) Overturden pressure considering c ritical depth.
Take effective unit, t' =- 1.73 tlm3 above water table. and 0.73 rJmJ below water table.
So/uJion
(i) Using N value
Average N along pile shaft. N., = [(5 • 2) + (16 • 15) + (22 • 3.6)Y20.6 = 15.98
= 16 (upco 20 below tip)
N value below tip = 22
Using Eq. (9.19)
Q• = 4NAp + N.,
6 A1
= 4 X 22 X 0 .785 X (0.3)2 + (16/6) 3.14 X 0.3 X 20
=62.22 + 50.24 = 112.41 = 112 I = 1120 kN
(ii) Considering critical depth for overburden
For medium sand, ~ID :: 20, z~ = 6 m, N, = 45, using Berez.antzev's curve.
Fig. 9. 12.
For driven steel pile, lAke K, = 1.5, ;.. = 0. 7~'
E•amplt 9.2
Determine the safe load of a group of 9 driven c.ast-in-situ piles, 40 em in diameter, 15 m
long. installed in a cohesive deposit. as shown in Fig. 9.47. The cut off level is 1.5 m below
ground level and the spacing of piles 1.2 m.
\} - c,(l<Nht!') 50 100
0
oe.icxa ted 111m day
%50kNhn'
2.5
g
i 13
I) ......._
15 m
8
Stiff day
)
100 k
Solution
Individual pile actictJ
Capacity of • single pile: Q. = Qf + Q,
Taking adhesion factors as follows:
c, (kN/m2) a
50 0.9
25 1.0
100 0.45
Qf = 3.1 4 X 0.4(0.9 X 50 X I + 1.0 X 25 X 10.5 + 0.45 X 100 X 3.5)
= 584.2 kN
Qp = 0.785 X (0.4i X 9 X 100 = 113 kN (where N, = 9.0)
Q. =584+ 113=697
Q.u = 69712.5 = 280 kN
Safe capacity of 9 piles = 9 x 280 = 2520 kN
Copyrighted material
Pitt FormdntiOJIS • 255
Depth tm)
0 ,_, ,_,
1.5
roi<N.m'
2.5 I I
I I
I I 1-r.0.3m
I I
I I
251<N.m'l I 1.2m
I I
I I 1.2m
I I
I I 0.3m
1-"
I I
13.0
I I
1001<N.m'l I
16.5
I
-.- --- - I
18
Firm bluish grey silty day Cv. 80 kNim2
22
Silty fine dense sand N = 40
Fig. 9.49 Subsoil profile for Example 9.3.
Copyrighted material
256 t 111e0ry and Practice of Foundation Desig11
=7060£>'
Pile dia. QJ(kN) Q,(kN) Q,n(kN) Q,u(kN)
(mm) (FS = 2.5)
600 1086 1524 2610 1050
750 1357 2978 4330 1730
1000 1810 7060 8870 3550
(Not~: There is some uncenainty O\'cr the choice of aitical depth in piles that penetrate through cohesive soil
into sand. If the critical depch is not considered and fuJI overburden is taken. end bearing in sand will increase
appt<eiobly.l
Therefore. 750 mm diameter piles with Q.,, = 1700 kN arc used.
Example 9.4
A typical column of the multistoreyed building in Example 9.3 is subjected to the following
loads at ground level.
Using 750 mm diameter bored cast~in-situ piles (safe capacity ns found in Example 9.3).
design a suitable pile group for the column. Also detennine the moment due to horizontal
load for which the section shoold be designed.
Solution
Safe bearing of 750 mm diamecer pile, 22 m long, with cuH>ff at 2 m below G.L. is 1700 kN.
Considering the nature of loading. a 4-pile group (as shown in Fig. 9.50) is chosen.
Pile cap = 3.3 x 3.3 = 10.9 m'
Weight of cap. pedestal. and soil upto G.L. " 10.9 x 20 = 218 kN
1
l, = ' · = (4 x 1.125) = 4 __5 m'
' 1.125
Copyrighted material
Pile Fou"dotions • 257
(a) DL + U Condition
i:V = 5500 + 700 + 218 = 6478 kN
M,. = 123.5 kNm
Myy = 115.2 kNrn
Maximum load in pile. P =647.8/4 + (123.5 + 115.2)145 = 1672.5 kN > 1670 kN.
(Marginal overloading on one pile may be accepted.)
(b) DL + U + SL Co11dition
:!:V = 6478 + 657 = 7135 kN
M., = 123.5 kNm, MTI = 115.2 + 985 = 1100.2. H, = 380 kN
Example 9.5
Compute the long tenn ~ulement of the pile group considered in Example 9.2.
The load on the pile c-ap is assumed to spread at a slope of 4 horizontal to I vertical
upto the level of 213 pile length from the top. and then at slope of 2 vertical to 1 horizontal
to a depth of 12 m below that level, which is about 1.5 times the width of equivalent
imaginary footing.
Solution
Two points A and 8 arc considered at the mid point of the relevant strata beneath the
imaginary footing. Water table is assumed to be at G.L.
At A. Po = 12.25 x 9 = 110 kNim1
fl.p = 25201(8.2)2 = 37.4 kN/m2
6, = 0.10 x 150 x logto [(110 + 37.4)1110)] = 1.9 em
At B, Po = 19 x 9 = 171 kNim2
tJ.p =' 25201(12.2 X 12.2)2 = 10.2 kN/m2
62 = x 1200 x lo&to [(171 + 10.4)1171)] = 2.46 em
0.08
:. Total settlement = 1.9 + 2.46 = 4.36 em
Example 9.6
RCC bored piles, 1000 mm diameter x 20 m long are proposed to be used for a flyover
passing over a canal bed with predominantly river channel deposits, as depicted in Fig. 9.50.
OMC method of boring is adopted and steel liners would be u~d to a depth of at least 15 m
below G.L. Design the safe pile capacity.
N (BiowS/30 em)
0
•- 10 20 30 40 ~
0
3 -- -,:'off-- --
Cut
~N = 20
10
Brownl$h
medium 10
sand
£
2'
0
20
\
30
Greyish brown
stiff clay \
c., • 100 k.Nim2
40 I\
Fig. 9.50 RCC bored plies for Example 9.6.
Copyrighted material
Pile Fou,dations • l59
Solution
Here, skin friction will develop between the liner and the soil.
Hence, take K, = 1.0, 6 =0.7f = 0.7 x 34 = 23•
End bearing: Consider reduction of f value for bored piles = f = 36 - 3 = 33°
Example 9.7
If !he pile in Example 9.6 is laken down to 28 m below cut·off, what will be safe capacity?
Solution
Q. = Q,+Q,
Q/ = 1r X 1.0 X (5 1 X 15 + 51 X 10 + 0.5 X 100 X 3)
= 3270 kN
Qp = Jr/4(1 )2 X 9 X 100
= 700 kN
Q. = 3270 + 700
= 3970 kN
3970
Q. 11 = - = 1590 kN ., 1600 kN
2.5
[Note that increasing the pile length increases frictional resistance but there i.s major
reduction end bearing also.)
Example 9.8
A foot bridge having !he main trestle consisting of steel columns (refer Fig. 9.51(a)) is to be
founded in the subsoil shown in Fig. 9.5l(b). Design a suitable pile group for the trestle
foundation.
Copyrighted material
260 • Theory and Practlce of FouudaHon Design
Depth (m)
\ 0
Top sol: Rubbish/day/Brickbats and so on.
140kN
Bt~ish f¥8Y Clayey silt with tine sand
N•6 y= 18 kN/ms, Cu = 35 kNfm2
4
6.5 ' N•6 Btownish grey sandy silt v.ilh ctay binder.
5
Gtey/dal1t grey silty day with
I decompomsed wood.
N• • r= 17 kNim3
I I C11 = 25 kN.ffn2
4m ,3
I I N •
12 Bluish grey 3silty day Ytflh kankar.
r • 19 kNim • c;, • 65 kN!m2
I Pile$ I ,6
I I N •
16
Monied brown silty day.
r = 19 kNim3, tv = 10 kN!m2
0.5
22
N = 25
....
Yellowish/greyish brown silty day with
kanlcar and occasional sand ten
4.0 -End of
5.0 borehole
(a) (b)
Fig. 1.51 (a) Main mile COI..,.,s and (b) subsoil IYPt tor ~· 9.8.
SoiMtion
Pile copaciry
Pile djameter = SOO mm
Depth ~ 18 m/24 m
Cut·Off level ~ I m below ground level
Pile tip at 18 m below ground level
Q... per pile ~ L.A1J, + A,q,
~ 0.5lr(4 X 35 X 1.0 + 8 X 25 X 1.0 + 3 X 65 X 0.7 + 2 X 70 X 0.6)
+ lr/4(0.5)2 (9 X 70)
~ 0.5/t (J4Q + 200 + 136 + 84) + (0.2 X 630)
~ 879 + 126 ~ 1005 kN
1005
Q,11 per pile = 3 (FS) =333 kN ,. 300 kN
879
Uplift per pile ~ T ~ 293 kN ~ 250 kN
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
262 + 111eory and Practice of Foundation De.sign
·~ factor,
St1uness T -- .{El
~ K!
K
4
- l 2 X 106 X;r/64(0.5)
- 60
= ~ 102.2 = 2.52 m
Slorm • Impact
Rigid cap
140 150
4 +
4 =n.skN
---- ~-"""'!'~------- -
c;, = 35 ltN!m2
As pile deplh = 18 m > 4T. Hence, it is a long elastic pile and we use Brom's method.
!:!,__ = 35 = 4.0
c,B' 35 x (0.5)2
Considering restrained pile
M,
..- C11 8 3
= 5, which gives
M. = 5 X 35 X (O.S)'
= 21.8 kNm
Berczantzev. V.G.. V. Khristoforov. and V. Golubkov (1961 ). Load Bearing Capacily and
Deformation of Piled Fou11dations, Proc. Slh Int. Conf. on SMFE, Vol. 2, pp. 11- 15.
Birmingham, P. and M. James (1989), An Innovative Approach to Load Testing of Higlr
Capacily Piles, Proceedings of the International Conference on Piling and Deep
Foundations, London, Balkema, Roterdam, 1989.
Bishop. A.W. (I 966). Sixth Rankine Lecture: The Suength of Soils as Engineering
Materials, Georec/mique, Vol. 16, pp. 89-1 30.
Bowles, J.E. (1968), Formdcaio" Jbialysis and Design, McGrnw-Hill [nc., New York.
Copyrighted material
Pile Foundations • U3
Nordlund, R.L. ( 1969). Bearing Capacity of Piles in Cohesionless Soil, Journal of Soil
Mechanics and Foundation, ASCE. Vol. S9, No. SM3, pp. 1-35.
Poulos, H.G. and E.H. Davis (1980), Pile Foundatior1.1 Analysis and Design, John Wiley and
Sons. New Yorlc.
Radhakrishnan, H.S . and 1.1. Adams (1973), Long-term Uplift Capacity of Augured Footings
in Fissured Clays, Canadian Geottchnical Journal, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 647-652.
Rees, L.C. and H. Matlock ( 1956), Non-dimensional Solutions for Laterally Loaded Pil.s
with Soil Modulus AJsumed Proportional to Depth, Sib Texa.< Conf. on SMFE, Special
Publication No. 29, University of Texas. '
Schultze, E. and G. Sherif (I 973), Prediction of Selll•ment from Evaluated Selllement
Observatwns for Sand, Proc. Sib Int. Conf. on SMFE, Moscow, Vol. I, p. 225.
Sltempton, A.W. (194S), The f 2 ·o Analysis of Stability and its Theoretical Basi.r, Proc. 2nd ·
Int. Conf. on SMFE. Rotterdam, Vol. 2.
Skempton, A.W. (195 1), The Bearing Capacity of Clays, Building Research Congress,
England.
Sltempton, A.W. (1959), Cast in-situ Bored Piles in London Clay, Geotechniqu•, Vol. 9,
No. 4, pp. I 53-173.
Skempton, A.W. and P. La Rochelle (1955), The Bradwell Ship: A shon term failure: in
London Clay, Geotechnique, Vol. 15, No. 3.
Skempton, A.W. and R.D. Nonliey (1952), The Sensitivity of Clays, Geotechnique, Vol. 3.
No. I , pp. 40-5 I.
Smith, E.A.L. (1960), Pile Driving Analysis by the Wave Equation, Journal on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, Vol. 86, SM4: pp. 35-61.
Sliwinski, Z. and W.G.K. A eming ( 1974), Practical Consideratio11s Affecting the
Performance of Diaphragm Walls, Proc. Conference on diaphragm walls and anchors,
ICE. London, pp. 1-10.
Tenaghi, K. ( 1942), Discussion on the Progress Repon of rite Committee on the Beanirg
Value of Pile Foundations, Proc. ASCE, Vol. 68: pp. 311-323.
Terz.agbi, K. (1943). Theoretical Soil Mechanics, John Wiley and Sons Lid., p. 510.
Terz.agbi, K. (1955), Evaluation of Coefficient of Subgrade Reaction, Geotechnique, Vol. 5:
p. 297.
Terz.aghi, K. and R.B. Peck (1967), Soil Mechanics in Enginuring Practice, 2nd ed., John
Wiley and Sons, New York.
Thorburn, S. and R.S.L. Mac Vicar ( 1970), Dis.:ussion, Conf. on Behaviour of Piles, ICE,
London, p. 54.
Tomlinson, M.J. (1965), Foundation Design and Construction, 2nd ed., Pitman, London.
Tomlinson, MJ. (1977), Pile Design and Construction Practices, lst ed., Viewpoint
Publications, London.
Copyrighted material
Pile Fmmdallons • 265
Tomlinson, M.J. (1981). Pile Design and Constmction Pmctices, 4th ed.. E ond F N Spon,
London.
Touma. F.T. and L.C. Reese (.1974), Behaviour of Bored Piles in Sond. Joumal on
Geoteclmicnl Enginuring Division, ASCE. Vol. 100. No. GT7: pp. 749-761.
Vargas, M. ( 1948), Building S<ttlement Obsm.·atlons in Sao Pnuw, Proc. 2nd lnt Conf. on
SMFE. Rouerdam, Vol. 4, p. 13.
Vesic. A.S. ( 1967), A Snrdy of Bearing Capacity of Deep Formdatio11s, Final Rcpon, Project
B-189, School of Civil Engineering. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
Vcsic. A.S. (1975), Principles of Pile Foundation Design, Duke U niversity. School of
Engineering, Soil Mechanics. Series No. 38.
Vesic, A.S. ( 1970), Tests in Instrumented Piles-Ogeechee River Sit.e, Joumal of tire Soil
M ulwnics and Foundati'ons Division, American Sociecy of Civil Engineers, Vol. 96.
No. SM2. pp. S61- S84.
Vijayvergiya, V.N. and I.A. Focht, Jr. (1972). A New Way to Predict Capacity of Pilu in
Clay. Offshore Technology Conference Paper 1718, Pounh Offshore Technology
Conference, Houston.
Whitaker, T. (1976). The Design of Pile FoundatiollS. 2nd ed., Pergamon Press, London.
Copyrighted material
Well Foundations
10.1 INTRODYCTION
The conventional foundations discussed in the previous chapters are applicable to low and
medium rise buildings. Depending on lhe subsoil condition at a given site.• an optimum
foundation design is to be achieved for the g.ivcn structure. For multistorey buildings, say
upto 20 storeys high, pile fou ndations with or without basement are gcncralJy adopted. For
even heavier structural load- for bridge pier and abutments for example. -the vertical load
may go upto a few thousand tonnes and major horizontal fon:es due to wind, current. and so
on may apply. Conventional pile foundations are not suitable in such cases because of the
limited capacity of piles to resist lateral forces. Large size fou ndations. often quite deep. are
required for this type of loading. The behaviour of these foundations under large lateral
forces are determined by conditions which arc somewhat different from conventional
round.ations. Such foundations may undergo rigid body movemenl under lhe external forces
and the lateral earth pressure on the embedded ponion or the foundation. These foundations
are com.monJy known as caissons and well roundmions.
10.2 CLASSIFICATION
w~lls or caissons are large size prismatic or cylindrical shells which are built deep into the
ground to suppon heavy loads. Depending on the melhod of installation the caissons may be
of three types, namely (i) ope-n caisson or weiJ, (ii) box caisson or noating caisson. and
(iii) pneumatic caisson. The types of caissons or well fou ndations are depicted in Fig. 10.1.
The top and bottom of open caissons are ke pt open and instaUed into the ground by
excavation of soil within the shaft so that it may sink into the ground either under its own
weight or by addition of surcharge lood. The bo:c caisson is a shell open at the top and
closed at tbe bottom, built first on the solid ground and then towed to the site where it is
sunk tO a prepared foundation base. The pneumatic caisso11 has a working chamber at the
bouom which is kept dry by maintaining a high air pressure to prevent water from entering
into the chamber. thus. facilitating sinking of the caisson.
Although cajssons are often used to s upport heavy structures including high rise
buildings. they constitute by far !he most common type of found~tipns for major bridges on
2611
Copyrighted material
WeU Foundations • 267
rivers with erodable bed. Mostly open caissons or well foundations are used in India. This is
because the well can be installed to sufficient depth below the maximum depth of scour, and
a single well is capable of supporting large axial and lateral loads.
(a) Circular well (e) I>Jmb-bell - (d) B«lad ned<ed twm welt
-;th circular dredge holes
00 ~
(t) Double octagonal with
c:ircula.r dredge hotes (f) Mu111ple dredge hole well
Copyrighted material
268 + Th~ory and Pracn'u of Foundalion Des1'gn
Al>u!Jnent pier
Well cap
r--'-__.+-o '£ V" !,WI,
8 300
e"' lntermeclateffop plug
~ Staining
............ ......
'
, , . . . !.~ .. .
.......... .. .
. .. .. :r .. .
"
e .... :·.:·.:·
·~·
0
~
800
B<lllOmi*Jg
Fig. 10.3 Components ot wei foundation.
800
37
200. 12 Pl.
Details at®
Copyrighted material
Well Fmmdarions • 269
10.4.1 Steining
The well steim'ng is lhe main body of the well which transfers load 10 the subsoil. It also acts
as a coffer dam during sinking, and provides !he weight for sinking. In addition to the usual
design forces at service condition. the steining is likely to be subjected to certain additional
loading during instaJiation. The thickness and reinforcement of well steining are generally
detennined as per recommendations of IRC 7&-1983. The thickness of well steining should
not be less lhan SOO mm and should satisfy lhe following relatjons.hip
Copyrighted material
Well Foundations • 271
the normal depth of scour, d (in metres), below the highest flood level is given by
2)"3
d = 1.34 (7 (10.2)
where q = discharge (in m3/s) through width of the channel obtained by dividing the
design discharge by linear waterway between abutments/guidebanks and
f = Lacey•s sih fac.tor which is related to the mean diameter of soil grains forming
the bed. by the empirical formula, f = 1.76 J;. Here, m is the weighted mean
diameter in mm. The value off generally varies from 0.6 to I .50. The method
of determination of m is described in IRC S-1998.
For preliminary design, the normal depth of scour below HFL may be obtained from
l )tt3
d = 0.473 (~ ( 10.3)
If the river bed is not readily sus<:eptable to scouring effect of floods, the fomula for
scour depth (E<j. (10.2)) shall not apply. In such cases. the maximum depth of scour shall be
assessed from actual observation and experience.
The base of a well is normally located at some depth below the maximum depth of scour.
During exceptionally heavy flood, the depth of scour in sandy soil may increase, thereby.
reducing the grip length. Also for some depth below the maximu.m scour level, there may
be some gap between the well surface and the soil because of tilt under fl uctuating lateral
load. Hence. skin friction is normally ignored in calculating bearing capacity of wells
installed in sand.
For wells embedded in sa.nd, the depth of fou ndation is generally sufficient (D/8 <!: 2)
to prevent base failure. Hence. scttJemcnt is normally the guiding factor. The allowable
bearing pressure for a permissible settlement may be caJcuJated from the folJowing
(E<!. (10.4)), for footings on sand as modified from Teng (1962).
2
q. = 0.14C.(N - 3) (
8 + 0.3 '
R.c,s. (10.4)
28 )
Copyrighted material
272 • 111eory am/ Prcu:tice of Foundation Design
The permissible strcsscs may be increased by 15% for (N + T) case. and by 50% for
(N + T + S) case. Also when wind or eanhquake foroes are considered. lhe allowable
bearing pressure may be increased by 25%.
With the knowledge or the magnirude, directjon, and points or application or all the
forces and for the worst combination of forces. the resultant venical force \V and resultant
horizontal rorces P across the pier and Q along the pier, are determined. The horizontal force
acting in the direction of the transverse axis of the pier, that is, perpendicular to the flow, is
more critical for stability. The forces must satisfy the following conditions of equilibrium:
( I 0.5)
i.e., total downward force = base reaction + friction on the sides of the well
(I 0.6)
i.e., net lateral earth pressure including friction at the base should be zero.
( 10.7)
i.e .. the algebraic sum of moments at base due to net lateral eanh pressure, friction on sides
ond base reaction should be zero.
t
'H H
i AX A M
d
D D
f
.:L F
0
C . G
r:-.:. D(l<p- K•l-+ yD(/(p - K..l-1
(a) Forces on a free (b) Earth pressure on a free
rigid b<Jikhead rlgldb<Jikllead
Fig. 10.5 Stabllty ol ~II : rigid bulkhead melhod.
Copyrighted material
274 • Theory fmd Practice pf Fow1dation Design
q,.)l
6
;..;...; ....
T H
0
D
1~.,-~· KpY'D •I
Fig. 10.6 Force and deflection diagrams of a well for rotation about base.
I D3
q.,., = 6y(Kp -
I
KA) H + D (10.9)
If there is unscoured soil of thickness Z above the maximum scour level. then its effect on
active earth pressure is considered. As a result.
I D 2 (D + Z)
q.., : 6y'(K,-KA) H +D (10. 10)
W M
!=A± z: ( 10.14)
where W = net direct vertical load on the base taking into i.lCC-o unt buoyancy and skin
friction,
A = area of the b3se of the well. and
Z 8 :: section modulus of the well base.
Correct evaJuation of passive relief is a very important fac tor in the design of a well
foundation. because it governs the depth to which the well is to be sunk. Views differ
regarding the assumptions and methods. to be adopted for working out its values. The main
points to be addressed while deciding for the method are:
(a) whether the rolation of the foundation takes place only at the base or at points
above or below the base,
(b) whether the skin friction on the sides can be considered in rhe calculation of well
resistance, and
(c) what fraction of applied moment is resisted by soil resistance on the sides and base
resistance.
To have a uniform practice in design. IRC Bridge Sub-committee in its Bombay
meeting held in 1963. s uggested the procedure for calculation of ultimate soil resistance
below scour level. This is known as Bombay method.
Bombay method
Copyrighted material
·276 • 11reory and Practice of Foundatiou Design
cos' II
~= --r-~==~~~ (10.16)
sin(jl + o)sinjl)'
coso ( I - coso
o = angle or wall friction (IC) be taken as 213 9. limited to 22.5''), '' '
.. , •'
•I
C = cohesjou, ·' · . · ·
N, =tan2 ( 45 + jlf2),
y = su~merged unit weight of soil, 3J)d
Z = depth below design scour level.
The total soil re~istance is obtained as algebric ·sum of the areas of the rorcl: diagram due to
active and passive pressure. · · ,..
The factors, of safety fpr. detel1Jl\oing,f1>e net, permissib.Je soil (\'SiStanpe mobi)izeq below
maximum scour,Jevel ,are . • . .. . :'
Load combina~on ' For load combiJ!ation • . ., ,
(excluding seismic/wind) (including seismic/wind)
Noncohesive soil 2 1.6 •·11··m ~~~c.frr;•lfi
IRC: 45-1972
·'
The method is based
;. .
on;' model .and prototype
. ,;
studies. ...
., It has been observed that,
• sharing !'f the moment betwee~.sides liJld .~ase continuously changes "!i\h increasing
deformation of soil and . ,
• elastic 'theory gives $oii' prb.ssure at tlie sides a~d 1lhe base under' design load. To
1
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Well Fou11darions • 279
Stop 7
If any or all of the conditions in Steps 3, 4 and 6 do not satisfy. redesign the well
accordingly.
Step 8
Repeat the same steps for combination with wind/seismic separately.
Derivation of the theoretical relationships can be obtained from lRC: 45- 1972. The
pressure distribution and denection diagrams of a well used in the derivation rue presented in
·f ig. 10.7.
Scour level
I•
c• I··flii
t.---8 -->I
Plan
c ...... 3. ~
(x~~~
Deftecdonat-
~ .
"'l___LJT
T "'
.i..
Pressure distribution
at base
Fig. 10.7 Pressure and deflection diagrams of a well for elastic case.
The applied loads are increased by multiplying with suitable load facton and the ultimate
resistance is reduced by appropriate strength facton. The two are then compared.
Step 1
Compute the applied load for different combinations of loading using appropriate load facton
as
(a) 1.1 W0 + 1.6WL
( b ) 1.1 W0 + W• + l.4( WL + P, + P, )
Copyrighted material
280 • Tlreory and Practice of Foundation De..sigtr
w
A
"' !ts!L
2
(10.26)
where.
II' = lOlal downward load acting al !he base,
A = area of the base or well, and
q.11 = ultimale bearing capacily of !he soil below !be well base.
lnere.ase base area if the condition is not satisfied.
Stop 3
Calculate the res1sung moment at base. M,, along the plane of rotation (as already
menlioned, !he poinl of ro<ation is taken at 0.2D above !he base)
Mb = a\¥8 tan\1 (10.27)
where,
8 = diamete.r of circular wells and width parallel to the direction of forces in case
of square or rectangular wells and
a = a constant depending on !be shape of well and depth to width ratio D/8.
DIB 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
a 0.41 0.45 o.so 0.56 0.64
The values are for square/rectangular well. For circular wells. the values of a are to be
multiplied by 0.6.
Step 4
Compute the ultimate moment of resistance on the side of well due to passive soil resistance.
M, and due to frictiona1 resistance on side. M1.
For rectangular wells,
M, = O.IOy'D'(Kp - K•)L (10.28)
M1 = 0.18y'(Ke- K•)LBD2 sin /j (10.29)
Copyrighted material
W•ll Foundation.s + 28 1
The patterns of failure of the soil mass under the application of lateral forces to wells. with
small and large depths of embedment, are shown in Fig. I 0.8.
777
'""
· 11,,,/,
,77 R'"'"-,-,
,,,, "' "'"
11 ,,,,,, \','''\\
l t 11
,,,
\ \
1
____
......... ____ /
"'//. --_~_
_..
ln either case, the soil fails over a circular/cylindrical path with centre of rotation
somewhere above the base. For wells with large depth of embedment, the plastic flow at the
side follows the same concept as that of a rigid bulkhead.
Guidelines for caJcuJation of passive pressure on 3butment wells in any type of soil. and on
wells in cohesive soils are given in IRC: 78- 1983. The basic assumptions and procedure of
design n.rc in agreement with ..Bombay method" except that the effect of skin friction is
allowed to be considered in calculating resistance against moment and direct load.
The expressions of permissible resisting moments for pier and abutment wells in
cohesive soil are presented under this subsection.
Copyrighted material
282 • 111eory and PTClctice of Foundation Design
ulic__rD_N,~.,
l
Fig. 10.9 Active and passive pressure diagram for pier weJI in cohesive soil.
~ ( 2c.JN, ~
2
Permissible moment. M, = + yDN, ~ ~) 8
= ~(~ rN,D'+ c.jN,D') s ( 10.32)
For d,<D
1
(a) (b) (e)
Fig. 10.10 Active and pa$$1"' pre..ures on abutment well In 'e'L~Y."~~~Iiled material
Well Foundations • 283
or,
or, ( 10.34 )
For d, <:. D
then P. = 0, that is, same as in case I of pier well.
For d, < D. that is, (a) > (b) but < (b) + (c)
P• exists below dl"
At base,
(10.36)
The sinking or a well foundation is done by excavating the soil within the dredged hole. This
can be done manually or by mechanical dredger. A mechanical dredger consistS or prongs
with hard steel teeth which are pushed into the soil. When the dredger is pulled up, the
prongs c lose to form a bucket full of excavated soil. The mechanical dredger should be
adapced to suit the soil condition.
With increasing depth of well during well sinking, the friction on the sides of the well
increases. If the weight of the steining is not adequate to overcome the friction, suitable
kentledge may be placed on a platform 10 i!ICffiiSO the load on the steining. Air and water
jets are also used to minimize friction. Compressed air is used when well sinking is done
below water level to counter the water pressure inside the well.
Example 10.1
A bridge 120 m long. is to be constructed over a river having Q..... = 2418 mlts,
HFL = 81.17 m; LWL = 73.00 m and existing bed level = 72.00 m. The subsoil consists of
Copyrighted material
284 • TIJ~ory and Practict' of Foundation Design
loose silty sand layer (N.,... = 10). 3.5 m thick. underlain by a thick stmtum of medium to
coarse sand (NciJn = 24). .De1ermine the founding level and allowable bearing cap:LCity of a
4.5 m diameter nbutment well. The weighted mean diameter of the bed material upto
relevant depth is 0.275 mm. and pennissiblc settlement is 45 mm.
Solution
m = 0.275 mm
Silt factor. f = 1.76..{,;; = 0.923
24 18
D.1sc harge ·mtenslty.
· q = - 20.15 m3/s/m
=
12 0
= 56.5 11m2
• 565 kNim2
Example 10.2
The subsoil at the typical pier location of a major bridge consists of q1edium to coarse sand
(N,., = I I) upto a depth of 6 m from bed level (RL + 9.20 m). This is underlain by 9 m
thick layer of very stiff to hard sandy silty clay (N""' > 30), overlying highly weathered rock
(RQD ~ 0).
Using Lacey·s formula calculate the mnximum scour depth and determine the founding
level of the well Also. estimate the allowable net beolring pressure if the diameter of the well
is 6 m.
Copyrighted material
•
Well Foundations • 285
SoiMtion
r
382 5
Bul as stiff clay overlying wealhered rock exists al 6 m below bed level (+9.20 m), lhe
above calculation of scour depth is not applicable.
Now take maximum scour level = 9.2 - 6.0 = 3.20 m
Below this level lhere is 9 m thick clay followed by wealhered rock. For reslricling
settlemen~ il is preferable 10 lake bollom of well 3 m inlo lhe rock.
Example 10.3
Using IRC methods, cheek the adequacy of design of the pier well of a bridge
(Fig. JO. II(a)). Use the following data on loads and soil propenies:
FH i7 1 HFL 69.83 m
~ r;::::::::;:li_JJ<..:L"'Wl"" 68.16 m
H, I !:1-
800"""~'- 3900 --.il'--"800
10,822
-
Maximum acxu teve1
:ol; 57.638 m (2DJ
.............. .
..%,_.-l_h_or-1 ...... ..·.•
~:
~<.·
...... ....
.•..•..•.
Sand na:
Loading:
Vet1ical Load:
DL = 12,400 kN
U = 1390 kN
.. Total load = DL + U = 13,790 kN
Above well cap-8100 kN
Below well cap-5690 kN
Total 13,790 kN
Total horizontal fon:e, F H = 1755 kN
Moment at base = 43,180 kNm
Consider Tilt: I in 60
Shift : 0.15 m
Soil Propern'es:
N,•• = 20; f = 33"; y = 19.2 kN/m3 ; li = 20"
Soil type: Coarse to medium sand
Consider permissible settlement of 1.5% of well diameter.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
288 • TIJUJ1)' and Prach'ce of Fou"dation Design
Kr = -----;;--~c;:o;:s-'=;=~==;-r
cos.5(l _ si n(¢+ 8)sin; ) '
cos6
= 0.703 = 7.30
2
0.94 (1 - 0.68)
= 839.3 kN/m2
Allowable horizontal fon:e,
13 790
f. . = w s • = 564.6 kN/m2
"'" A 24.42
Allowable bearing capacity. q.:
For N = 20,
c. = 1.5
Rw = 0.5
8 = 5.5
c., =2
s. = 1.5% of 5500 = 82.5 mm
using &j. (10.4). q. = 0. 14 x 1.5 x (20 _ 3>e:i
5
x\~53 r o.5 ~ 2 x 82.5
= 81.9 • 800 kN/m2 > 564.6 kN/m2
Hence. this is accepltlble.
Method Based on IRC: 45 (elastic)
Copyrighted material
Well Foundations • 289
m = K, = 1
K,
I = 18 + ml, ( I + 2 f./a)
= 47.43 + I X 840.574 ( I + 2 X 0.364 X 0.138) = 972.45 m'
Step 3
r = D(_l_) =
2 ml,
(12.678 )( 972.45 ) = 7 _33
2 I x 840.574
M 48,680
-;:-(I + jJjJ' )- fiW = _ ( I + 0.649 X 0.364) - 0.649 X 13,790
7 33
=
8210 - 8950 -740 kN < H =
48,680
-M( l-JJJJ)
, + pW = _ (I - 0.649 X 0.364) + 0.649 X 13,790
r 7 33
= 5072.3 + 8950.7 =
14,023 kN > H
Step 4
I x 48,680
mM
1 = _
972 45
= so; r, (Kp- K.l = 9.2 x 7.035 = 64.7
p,
f<- 4.500 m ..., ~Max.lfllUm SOOU'
d 62.088 (1.27d,)
E
&1
I .s~
Foonding
F~
~60m
45
lew! I
I • • Ill •I I• >I
FlO. 10.12 Elevation and eanh pressure few bridge in Example 10.3.
Given:
Total Vertical Load V = 11,4n.8 kN
Horizontal Force F11 = 3446.5 kN
Moment M = 17.020 kNm
Moment due to tilt and shift = 3840 kNm
Nonnal scour depth d, = 6.096 m
P. = 47.66 kNtm'
(refer Fig. 10.10)
Solution
•
Bombay method
M 11,020
t=H 1 +D=-= = 22.35 m
·'F" 3446.5
D = 16.628 m
q,... =
v' .
(H, + D)[y(Kp- K• )Dcoso- 3p.J
6
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
W~ll Foundations + 293
IRC: 5-1998, Standard Specifications and Code at Practiu for Road Bridge, Section I,
General Features of Design, The Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi. 1998.
IRC: 45-1972. Reco,urre~rdations for Estimating tire ResistcUICe of Soil below tire Maximum
Scour L<v<l in the D«ign of Well Foundation ofBridg«, The Indian Roads Congress,
New Delhi, 1972.
IRC: 78-1983. Standard Specifications and Code of Practiu for Road Bridges, Section: VII,
Foundation and Substructure, 1st Revision, The Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi, 1994.
IS: 6403- 1971, Indian Standard Code of Practice for Determination of Allowable Bearing
PreSJure otr Shallow Found41ious, Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi, 1972.
Peck, R.B. and A.R.S.S. Bazuraf ( 1969), Discussion on Paper by D' Appolonia, el al.,
Journal Soil Mech. and Found. Div. ASCE, Vol. 95, SM. No. 3.
Teng, W.C. (1962), Foundation Design, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Terza8hi, K. (1943), 11~eoretical Soil Mechanics, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Copyrighted material
Foundations on
Expansive Soils
11.1 INTRODUCTION
Some cohesive soils undergo swelling when they come into contac.t with water and shrink
when water is squeezed out. Foundations built on these soils undergo movement with
swelling and shrinkage of the soil. As a resul~ there is considerable cracking and other fonns
of distreos in the buildings. •
Expansive soils are mostly found in the arid and semi-arid regions of the world. They
cover large areas of Africa, Australia, India, United States, South America, Myanmar and
some countries of Europe. In India, expansive soils cover nearly 2 percent of the land area
and are called black cotton soil because of their colour and conon growing potential. Large
areas of Dc<x:an plateau, Andhra Pradesh, Kamataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharastra have
deposits of expansive soil.
Expansive soiJs derive their swelling potential mainly from montmorillonite mineral
which is present in these soils. They are residual soils formed by the weathering of
basaltic rocks under alkaline environment. Extended periods of dry climate cause desiccation
of the soil but rains cause swelling near the ground surface. The depth of the swelling zone is
not much-being less than 5 m in most cases. However, lhe active zone over which lhere are
seasonal changes in moisture content. varies from l.S m to 4 m (O'NeiJI and Poormoayed,
1980).
gradually increases in volume. After 24 hours. the volume of the soil is read from the
graduations ip the cylioder. The pen:ent fru swell of the soil is given by
DFS ('J>}
Low Lc:ss than 20
Moderate 20-35
High 35-50
Very high Ot<Okt than so
11.2.3 Unrestrained Swell Test
This test is done in the standard odometer. The soil specimen is given a small surcharge load
(say. 5 kN/m2) and submerged in water. The volume expansion of the specimen is measured
in terms of the increase in thickness of the specimen-the cross·sec tiona~ area remaining
consranr. The percent swell is expressed as
Copyrighted material
296 • Tlteory and Practice of FoundaJiorr Desig11
!J.H
s.(%) = H x 100
20
to
\ 1\\'
\ \
\ \ \
\ \\
l.:"{ • 70
1 1
0~ 1\~-
J '
0.1
0 10 20 30 40 50
Natu"" - · content (%)
f'G. 11.1 ReladooJhlp between hee swen., water content. and l~ukl limit
(aftO< Vijaywrglya and Gha:Wii, 1973).
p, = 2.7- 24(;/)
Copyrighted material
Foundations on Expansive Soils • 297
USBR (1960) gives similar criteria for clays based on colloid percent Oess than 0.001 mm)
and shrinkage limit of the soil, which arc shown in Table 11.4.
cracks in the walls and at the corner of doors and windows. as shown in Fig. ll.2 Utilities
buried in the soil get damaged and the leakage of water into the soil results in funher
swelling. The effect is more pronounced in the one or two storey buildings where the
foundation pressure is often Jess than the swelling pressure. For Ulll structu res, foundation
pressure generally exceeds rhe sw~ll::tg press ure and the swelling potential reduces.
Roof sl&b
FlOOr stab
heaved
t t t
Expansion
Copyrighted material
Fouudotlmu on Expo11J·ive Soils • 299
diameter of 300 mm and bulb diameter of 750 mm. as depicted in Fig. 11.4. The piles are
fixed at the top to RCC plinth beams. A gap of 75- 100 mm is kep~ between the-plinth beam
and the soil which is filled with granular material 10 pe-n nit swelling of the undetlying soil
without straining the plinth beam-s. The piles are adequately reinforced 10 take care of the
uplift forces caused by the swelling ac1ion of the soil.
Kelly
caslng
Flg. 11.3 TOOls tor bulb fotmatlon in under-teamed ~=Mles. (anor Tomlinson. 1994)
d d
!-
L A 'AT
: 1..,
/<t."-. 'A.l_
"
Sin~
/
Copyrighted material
300 • 11reory a11d Practice of Foundation Desigu
The ultimate being capacity of an under· reamcd pile is determined from static analysis
as already discussed in Chapter 9.
Q. = aC,1A11 + c.,Ar. + A,N,C,, + A.,N, Cpz (1 1.1)'
where. A11 = surface area of pile stem,
At'1 = surface area of cylinder circumscribing the under-reamed bulbs.
Cu 1 = undrained shear strength of soil around pile s haft.
c.2 = undrained shear strength of soil around under-reamed bulbs.
Cp 1 = undrained shear strength below pile tip,
Cp: = undrained shear strength below under-reamed bulbs.
a = adhesion factor along pile stem,
A P = cross-sectional area of pile toe.
N•.= bearing capacity faclor. usually taken as 9.0. and
A. = (tr/4)(D;- D"J where D. and Dare the bulb and stem diameters respectively.
The safe capacity of the pile may be obtained by applying a factor of safety of 2S-3. The
uplift capacity of under-reamed piles are obtained from Eq. (11.1) but without considering
the end bearing component A,N,Cpl·
The main fun clion of under-renmed piles is to transmit the vertical Joad into the soil
below the swelling zone. ln case the soil above the under-reamed section tends to s well, uplift
forces are creared on the foundation which the under-reamed bulbs would be able 10 counrer.
There is some doubl over 1he practicability of forming the under-reamed bulbs in granular soil.
Obviously. the under-reamed section of the pile should be able to stJ>nd on its inclined faces
during boring and till the concreting is done. For this. sufficient cohesion should be available.
Clayey soil provides this cohesion without much difficuhy. But the fonnation of bulb i n
granular soil is not free from uncertainties. Field experiments have shown that the sand tends to
disintegmte during the stand up time and no bulb is really formed.
It should also be noted that the under-reamed piles should penetrate well into the firm
gromld to give sufficient end bearing at lhe level of the under-retlms. Presence of soft clay
benenth the expansive soil would preclude the use of under-reamed piles. Indiscriminate use
of under-reamed piles simply because the soil at ground surface is expansive in narure., ofren
serves no useful purpose.
Brick waJI
AI sa<* fiU
Swelling can also be controlled by applying a pressure on the ground at least equal to the
swelling pressure of the soil. Attempts have been made to apply a surcharge on the footing
area but this does not prevent the swelling between foundations. l.f surcharge loading is to be
applied, this should be done to cover the entire building area by a suitable non-swelling soil.
The depth of surcharge should, or course, be such that the surcharge pressure is at least equal
to the swelling pressure of the soil. Surcharge loading is depicted in Fig. 11.6.
Surcharge pressure
D rD • p,
t t
l Swelling pressure p,
CNS layer
Katti (1979) proposed the use of a cOheaivenon·swelling (CNS) layer to reduce the effect of
swelling. A clay soil of adequate thickness having non-swelling clay minerals, is placed on
the subgradc and the foundations arc placed on this layer. The optimum thickness of the CNS
layer is to be detennined from large scale tests. The method has been used in canal lining
works, as shown in Fig.. 11.7 but its use in foundations is still limiled.
Ac:tlWt zone
Copyrighted material
302 • The0')1 and Practice of Foundation Design
Chemical Stabilization
Attempts have been made to control the swelling potential of expansive soil by lime-slurry or
limc·flynsh injection. Such injection is done through pressure grouting technique on a close
grid around the foundation to cover the entire foundation on:n. Bu1 the method is expensive
and has not been widely used. However, lime slurry injection has been used to stabilize
foundations on expansive soil after occurrence of distress.
Copyrighted material
Foundations 011 Expansiv~ Soils + 303
Pidgeon. J.T. (1987), A Compariso11 of E.tisti11g Methods for the Desig11 of Stif!e11ed R'a/r
Foundation on Expansion Soil. Proceeding 7th Regional Conference of Africa on
SMFE. pp. 277-289.
Premla1ha. K.. (2002). Predicliou of HuJve U.siug SoU- Water C!JaracteriJtics and Ana/y.sb of
Stiffened Raft 011 Expansive Clay.s of Chennm·. Ph. D. Thesis, Anna University. Chcnnai.
Seed, H.B., R.J. Woodward. Jr.. and R. Lundgren ( 1962). Prediction of Swelling Potential
for Compacted Clays, Joumal of the Soil Mechanics 011d Foundations Divlslon.
American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 88, No. SM3, pp. 53-87.
Sowets. G.B. and G.F. Sowers (1970). Introductory Soil Meclwnics and FoutJdations, 3rd
ed., New York. Macmillan.
USBR (1960), &mit MaJ111al. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colorado. July. 1960.
Vijayvergiya V.N. and 0.1. Gha.uali ( 1973). Prediction of Swelling Potemial of Nawral
Clays. Proceedings 3rd lnrernarional Research and Engineering Conference on
Expansive Clays. pp. 227- 234.
Copyrighted material
Ground Improvement
Techniques
12.1 INTRODUCTION
Soils are deposited or fanned by nature under different environmental conditions. Man does
not have any control on the process of soil formation. As such the soil str:lla at a site arc co
be accepted as they are and any construction has to be adap!ed to suit the subsoil condition.
The existing soil at a given site may not be suitable for supporting lhe des~ facilities such
as buildings, bridges. dams. and so on because safe bearing capacity of a soil may not be
adequate to suppon the given load. Although pile foundations =y be adopted in some
situations, they often become too expensive for low to medium·rise buildings. In such cases~
the properties of the soil within lhe zone of influence have to be improved in order to make
them suitable to suppon the given load.
Ground improvement for the purpose of foundation construction essentially means
increasing the shear strength of the soil and reducing the compressibility to a desired extent.
A number of ground improvement techniques have been developed in the last fifty years.
Some of these techniques need specialized equipment to achieve the desired resuJt. In this
chapter. only the common ground improvement techniques t\thich use simple mechanical
means to improve soil properties for low to mec:Uum·rise strucrures are considered. For tall
structures. pile foundatio ns with or without basement would generally give the most
economic foundations.
Copyrighted material
Grou11d lmprol!em~nt Tecll11iques + 305
filled with water. Figure 12.1(a) depicts the flocculated structure of cohesive soil. Such
structural arTangement with high water content is unstable and gives high compressibility.
Under the influence of increasing overburden pressure or extemaJ load. the soil consolidates
and the particles tend to re-orient themselves along horizontal planes (that is, perpendicular to
the line of action of the applied load). Such a dispersed structure is more stable and the
reduction of water content brings the particles closer tOgether to reduce compressibiJity. as
shown in Fig. 12.1(b). Thus, reduction of water content through application of external load
would cause improvement of engineering properties of cohesive soil.
Panicles of granular soil such as sand and gravel, have three-dimensional structure. For the
purpose of understanding, they can be represented by spheres which in loose condition are
arranged one on top of the other as shown in Fig. 12.2(a). Granular soils in this condition
have low relative density. The shear strength is also low because of the tendency of the
panicles to roll over one anothu under the influence of shearing stresses. lf the same
panicles are rearranged as shown in Fig. 12.2(b), the void space decreases and the relative
Copyrighted material
306 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
density increases with corresponding increase of shear strcQ&dl. Thus, properties of granular
soil can be improved by increasing its relative density by external means. Following ground
improvement techniques are used for granular soil:
(a) Compaction wilh drop hammer and
(b)" Deep compaction by compaction piles or vibrofloatation.
Apan from these, soil reinforcement by inserting stiffer materials within the soil fabric
such as metallic strips, compacted granular piles, geotextiles, and so on would also improve
the propenies of the soil which then behave as reinforced mass. Figure 12.3 depicts soil
reinforcement technique.
Chemical injection and grouting are also adopted as methods of ground improvemcnL
In these cases, the chemicals penetrate into the voids and get set to strengthen the soil fabric.
Normally, these techniques require specialized equipment to achieve success in the field.
These methods are not discussed in this chapter.
Copyrighted material
308 + 111~ory and Practice of Foundation Design
In the earlier days, sand drains, 300-500 mm diamerer, were insralled by filling with
sand the vertical holes made into the soil at predetermined spacing. Nowadays sand wicks and
prefabricned venical drains (PVD), e.g., band drains are mostly used ro have more efficienr
consolidarion under the preload. When a soil is preloaded by dead weighr, the horizonral
drainage path is reduced and the soil undergoes radial drainage. Each drain well has an
axisymmetric Zone of influence with a radius approximately l/2 times the well spacing. 1be
flow "!ithin the zone is a combination of radjaJ flow towards lhe sand drain and vertical flow
towards the free-draining boundary. The average degree of consolidation is rhen given by,
U= I - (I - U•)(l - UiJ (12. 1)
where u. = average degree of consolidation due to radial drainage and
Uz = average degree of consolidation due to vertical drainage.
Assuming unifonn vertical strain ar the surface, Barron (1948) gave the expression for degree
of consolidation due to radial drainage as,
(3n'~
2
1
where F.= ( 2" )log.n - ).
n -I 4n
= !!.J_ _ equivalent drain spacing d
n d ,.. - dra1. n d tameter
' • an
The drains may be insralled in either square or triangular grid. Considering the influence area
of each drain to be circular. we have
d~ = 1.13s for square pattern }
(12.3)
• LOSs for triangular pattern
where s = actual drain spacing (refer Fig. 12.7).
SQuare grid Triangular grid
s s
ct. •1.13s ct. • t.05s
n • d.Jd., T, =c,tld]
covered with a drainage blanket. The sand wicks may be of 55- 75 mm diameter and can be
installed at spacing of 1- 2 m.
(c) Band drains: Band drains or fabric drains are usually 7S-100 mm wide and 3-5 mm
thick made of synthetic fabric with high permeability. They are installed in the ground by
special mandrel and cranes.
In addition to the above cardboard drains (KjeUman, 1948) and rope drains have also
been used. Different types o.f vertical drains are shown in Fig. 12.9.
fabric
Band dralno
Field control is essential for any preloading work. It is necessary to ensure that the
consolidation under preload is essenliaUy complete before the building is builL Settlement
and pore-pressure measurement give useful information in this regard. A simple
insuumenration scheme is shown in Fig. 12.10. In most routine jobs, settlement measurement
on vertical rods and pore-pressure measurement with a few standpipe piezometers, around the
periphery of the preload should be sufficient.
Copyrighted material
Gr01md Improvement Teclmiqu~s + 311
Dastidar et al. (1969) described preloading with sand wicks for four storey residential
buildings at Salt Lake, Kolkata. Salt Lake is a vast stretch of low lying marshy land in
the eastern side of Kolkata which originally served as a natural drainage outfall of the city.
The area was reclaimed by filling with dredged fine sand and silt from the river Hooghly in
the early sixties.
The reclaimed fill varies in thickness from 1.5-3.0 m. The subsoil. at a depth of about
12 m from the present GL is soft and organic in nature with shear strength seldom exceeding
1.5 tlm2, as depicted in Fig. 12.11. Below this layer, there is stiff clay with shear strength of
5-10 tlm2. This is underlain by medium/dense brown silty sand below a depth of 16 m.
E
0
2
- ""' /Grey
flne
Silty
sand
12
2nd stage
5
i.~:20
.,: tst stage
..
•
O••
"''
0 '
30 40 :so 60 70
I~ Time tdays)
II is obvious that the soft clay wou.ld be liable to undergo excessive settlement even
under low to medium-rise buildings on shallow foundations. Prelooding is primarily aimed 111
consolidating the sof1 c lay and making it strong e nough to suppon the building. As an
experiment, 75 m.m diameter sand wicks were provided at l.S m square grid to accelerate the
consolidation. Loading was done upto SO kN/m2 in two stages. It was found that
consolidation under each stage of loading was completed in 5-6 weeks. The buildings were
founded on spread footings on the preloaded soil.
Pilot (1977) reponed the case history of preloading the Palavas embankment. Vane
shear test was done before and after preloading to determine the gain in shear strength or the
soil. The measurement showed increased undrained shear strength of the soil throughoot the
depth of sand dro.ins while in the area without sand dro.ins. the strength gain was limited to
the top 4 m of ahe soil where consolidation was only effective in the first 26 months. This is
presented in Fig. 12. 12.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
3 14 • Theory and Practice of Found4tioo ~sigo
Preloading for a single building with little wori<ing space in the surrounding may 1101
be always feasible from considetltions of time and cost. Although theoretically sound, the
C0$1 of preloading per unit area goes up on accounl of the high cost of uansportalioo ·
""JUited 10 mobilize the preload and then 10 dispMe of the preload. Typically, a single sllge
preloading job needs a time of al least 10-12 weeks before a site may be made ready for
con&trUCiioo. The following srages of work are involved in the process:
(a) insullalion of saod wicks,
(b) laying drainage blanke~
(c) mobilizing the preload,
(d) lime for consolidation, and
(e) removal of preload.
Preloadiog is bes< suiled when a l~~~&e numbet of medium-rise buildings are ""Julted to
be buill in a consuuction project. M ultiple use of the sand wiclting equipment and the
preload material reduce the unit coot.
-(kPI)
0 1!!0 200 2SO
-20
i
J: llll
Wllhoul-
cdumn
-. Copyrighted material
Ground lmpro-.-nt Tecluoiqws • 315
eo...tnactJoG technique
'".l;r;:=
t-
Ultillg poJiey
Mooofold -
Wallt hoMs
H)'draiAic llooea
f---F--.a
Copyrighted material
3 16 • Theory and Practice of Foundmion Desig11
SO Hz to suit electric power cycles. The free fall amplitude varies between S- 10 mm. The
machine is suspended from a vibration damping connector by follower tubes through which
power lines and water pipes pass. These allow simultaneous release of water jets to remove the
soil around the vibroflot as the latter makes its way into the hole under venical pressure from
the top. When the vibroflot reaches the desired depth, tbe water jet at the lower end is cut off
and granular backfill is poured through the annular space between the ~ole and the vertical pipe
by head load or conveyor as the vibnuory poker is withdrawn. Well graded stone backfill of
size 1S mm to 2 mm is used and compaction is achieved by vibration of the poker as it is Hfted
up: Due to compaction, the stones are pushed sideways into the soft soil to produce a stone
column of diameter larger than the diameter of the borehole. Normally, 600-900 mm diameter.
stone column can be obtai~d for 300-SOO mm diameter vibroflot.
Ht..:>ll-- Bailer
0 ..
Fig. 12.16 Stone ¢01vmn lnstallalion by ramming methOd.
Copyrighted material
Ground Improvement Techniques • 317
under given energy of compaction. Sometimes the mixtures of stone aggregate and sand,.
generally in proponion of 2:1, are used as ba.:kfill material. It is observed that sand is utilized
mainly in filling the voids in gravel skeleton. Gravel backfill of aggregate size 7S mm to 2 mm
is generally rccommonded. The gravel should be well graded and preferably angular shaped for
good interlock. The main purpose of compaction is to rearrange the stone particles so that very
good interlocking between panicles is obtail:'led to give high angle of intemal friction. Too
muc.h ram.ming, however, crushes the aggregate. For a given compaction energy, greater weight
and smaller drop of the rammer give better results.
4 10 20 40 60 140 20Q
Fig. 12.17 Range o( d suitable f<>r -~ by..,. columns.
Rammed stone columns have been used extensively in lndia. They are found to be quite
suitable for all k.i nds of soil (Datye 1982). Nayak (1982) has suggested that the angle of
internal friction, ;· may be as high as 45° for compacted granular fi ll in rammed stone
column. whereas for vibrofl.oted stone column 4/ ranges between 38°-42°. It is also to be
noted that in vibrofloted s tone column, the top about I m deep does not get properly
compacted for lack of ~nflnement near the surface, whereas in practice this portion of the
s tone column is required to take greater Joad intensity. ln case of rammed stone column,
proper compaction can be achieved even for this length because of lateral confinement of the
Copyrighted material
318 • 17teory and Practice of FoundDtion Design
casing pipe. Willi vibrollot, lbere is no harm in using high energy of compaction. Ralhc:r, it
reoulu in larger diameter of the stone column and better compaction of aggregate to give
higher value of angle of internal friction. Net effect of this is to increase the loed carrying
capacity of the stone column. But for rammed stone column, such high compaction energy
may crush the aggregates, resulting in lower value of ;• and lower capacity of the stone
columns. In general, however, vibroflotation needs skilled labour and better quality control
while the installation of rammed stone columns needs greater manpower. (hoerall, rammed
stone column appears to be more economical although it is a very slow process compared to
vibroflotation.
Dnlp pdaclplea
•
10 - --<gil> 20 oo-'l
30
- 40 150
1. I
v v
/
f 1.2
f···/
v/
..
1.3
... ~
! 1.4
Dq>th of stone c:oiiUflll: The stone column is l..Wled below a foundation upto the deplh of
10ft ConJP1'0'5ible stnlta within the zone of lnnuence In the subsoil. In addition to carrying
verucal load, stone c:olumns function as dtalnqe peth to di"'ipale excess ~ WOJU p<eAWe
and hence, accelerate the tate of consolidotion. Thla n::quira the stone columns to be taken
down to the depdl of major COIJ'I'ra&ible WIIA which make aignificam contribution to the
settlement of the foundation.
This point can best be undetatoed by detenninina the contribution of ...:h layer of soil
towards the settlement of the foundation. Fo< example, in the subcoil condition at Haldia
(tefet Fig. 12.19). the deplh of &Oil contributina to~ of the total settlement worts out to
17 m for SO m diameter stOtage tanka. Acc:Ofdinaly. Stone column deptha of 17 m wue
odcpted for the&e fouodaUons. Howevu. in some lttllified depoaits. the nature of
anrilication men or leas delltnNnes the deplh of stone colwm. Fo< eumple. a 10 m thick
day depo&it followed by bard clay or dense unci would ~ stone column deplh of 10 m
irrespcc1ive of the size of foundalioa.
Dll"lllml SOl
0
H•5~an
IL•-
··-
Pl• 22%
...
c:if • !!10 IIHirn'
M~ • 0.(10()) tr/NH
Groyalty~--- N • 3 btc:lwii30 em
~ IL•-
PI. • 24%
w • 40%
Cu • 30 kNirn'
M, • 0.0001 tf'llt.H
N•5~cm
IL•-
PI.. 22%
N • 8 btow8I30 an
"'"' • 0J)002 m24cN
N • 20 I:IIOwii30 em
v -~--llllyday IL•-
Pl• 18%
- - NMy- " " -
w• 24~
c• • $5kN.'rn'
" " • 0.0001 rrrl-lfiM
N • 40 blowii30 em
N• 50 bkMs/30 em
~~~-~--
Fig. 12.1e(b) Table for Mtlemenl caladation fa' 50 m diameter x 11.4 m ~ tar1t at Halcla.
Spacing of stone columns: The design of stone column foundation primarily involves
determination of a suitable spacing of stone column fo.r a chosen diameter and length of the
latter. It depends on the required load bearing capacity of the foundation and the allowable
time for consolidation by radial drainage through stone columns. It can be worked out in
terms of the del!~"" of improvement required for providing a satisfactory foundation for the
design load. The settlement improvement ratio of the reinforced ground to untreated grouod
is a function of pile spacing as shown in Fig. 12.20 (Greenwood, 1970). Mitchell and Kattl
(1981) hnvc suggested typical pile spacing for rectangular and square grid depicted in
Fig. 12 .21.
0
CoUma ..........t ,...;ng on linn
gtOUnd
lnwnecla.. ......,.,:. and ..,....
~-
25 ~ Clay olroogll displaoema•ts neglected
.
d
~
<>:! 40~
_.. ..
h
;~ >....
~
50
~ ~ /20'<Wrri'
""<.<::;
:!'j!
~&
E~
;jl§
.llo 75 :s
.
100
2.00 2.50 2.75 3.00 3.25 3.50
Slone coiurm Oj)OCing (m)
Fig. 12.20 Effect of stone CCJtumn on antiCipated MtiiiiTIIIflt (Greenwood, 1970).
Copyrighted material
Ground lmprovemenr Tech11;ques • 321
•
•
s
0 0'\
.•
'- Stone COlumn
(diamolord) •
• .• •
• 0 0 0-------0 seone CXlfUmn
(dlamolet d)
•. [~r(1 + ei)J"'
(fl - f) fl
1
, - 1 .oe[Jl'(il
< +- f) •'>]"" d
(a) Square · - •
O>l R. . rtqular ..._,.,..,,
Fig. 12.21 Spac:ing ol atone cok.wnno.
Analysis of granular pile foundations for triangular grid of piles show that s ignificant
reduction in settlement occutS only if the spacing of stone column is close (sld S 4) and the
piles are insulled to fuU depth of consolidating layer. However, too close a spacing (sld s 2)
is not feasible from construction point of view. Thus. a stone column spaci'ng {s/d) of 2.~
is adopted for mQSt practical problems. Also it has been recognized that closer sp:~Cing is
preferred under isolated footing than beneath large rafts (Greenwood. 1970).
-- •• .--
••
...
--{
- - :• •
~-
••
•• • -
,-
--·
-~
• •
~-
"'
••
--·•• ,:..,Y.!!!JI
•• ~
Copyrighted material
322 • 'n1eory and Practice of Foundation Design
The value of o1 can be expressed in tenns of the initial radial StreSS, o,. as
a, = aro - u + Kc. (12.7)
From Eqs. (12.6) and (12.7},
1 + sinf'
o1 = _ .._, (o,.- • + Kc,) (12.8)
1 - SlR.,.
where c, is the undrained shear strength of the clay,
o,. is the initial total radial stress.
u is the pore~pressure.
f is the angle of internal friction of the material of the column, and
K is an earth pressure coefficient.
Measurements carried out by Hughes and Withers (1974) in soft clay using a selfboring
pressuremeter (Camkometer) yielded K values of about 4.0, whereas Menard had earlier used
a conventional pressuremeter to obtain values of about S.S. 1be fuU·scale loading tests on
stone columns performed by Hughes et al. (1975) at Canvey Island confirmed the n:liability
of Eq. (12.8) as a design tool and pmposed a K value of 4.0.
Both limit analysis (Hughes and Withers, 1974) and field experience (Thorburn 191S)
suggest that the allowable vertical stress on a single stone column may be obtained from the
empirical expression
2Sc,
r1., = F (12.9)
where c, is the undrained shear stn:ngth of the clay in the region where the bulging of the
stone column occurs and F is the fac1or of safety (sometimes FS or Fs).
Typical design load of 200-400 leN per column is obtained for 900 mm diameter stone
columns in cohesive soil of undrained shear strength of 2S-SO lcN/m2 and a factor of safety
of 2.0.
It is interesting to study the deformed shape of stone column as observed after failure
by Hughes and Wi~rs (1974). Both field and laboratory investigations show geometric4lly
s imilar deformed shapes with bulging in the upper region, as visible in Fig. 12.23. 1be data
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
324 • 17It!Ory and Procriu of Foundalitm Dfiign
Stone c:::dumn5
=
Hard sntum
6 • PPC1 • PC2
Pet = Settlement 0( slrirtum I
Pcz = Settlement of stratum II
{J = Settlement Reduction tador
Fig. 12.25 Settlement of slone COlumn foundation.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
326 • Theory and Practice of Foundatiolt Duiglf
Maximum - - hydrclosl
6 centre = 255 mm
6R. •250mm
6 edge = 150 mm
300
Fig. 12.21 Sflone column foundalion for large ClarneW llorage tarU .t Kandla: ae4llement
during hydnlleol
Ground improvement by the methnd of drop hammer is usually achieved in the top
2.5--3 m of the soil. Deep compaction is not possible by this methnd. This is clear from the
pre and post compaction density tests reported by Tsytovich et al. ( 1974) at a site in Russia.
wruch are presented in Fig. 12.28. The method is, therefore. suitable for small foundations
only.
13 14 15 16 17 18
0
0.5
\
Before
\ ~
I
I
I
1.0
'
1\ I
I
I
\)
2
.
\ r
I
.....
After
1\ I
I
c:ompacOicn
2.5
•o
I
3
Fig. 12.21 Oonsloy """"" e10p411 In c:on"4)adlon by drop hammer (Tsytcwleh. 1 974~
Based on experiences in Russia. Tsytovich (1974) suggested the depth to which s igoificant
improvement can be achieved by drop hammer technique. Table 12.2 presents compaction by
drop hammer in a tabulated manner.
Copyrighted material
328 • 111rory and Practice of Foundation D~sign
O.p1h •I
ID~r conrpoctil)ll (m)
Drop-weigh! rollen of 8 kN, 12 kN, 17 kN 1.0-I.S
Oouble-actin,g hammer. weighing 22 kN with a 2. 1 1.2.-1.4
lllOial bollom pial<
Hamroe~> 24 kN, dropped from a heishl of 4-S m 1.6 1.6-2.2
Heavy hammers weiJhin& 50-70 kN. dropped from a 2.2- 3.1 2.7- 3.5
helsh• or~ m
Hammer weight used to perform dynamic consolidation in the field is many times more
than that used for heavy tamping. It may vary from 150-2000 kN. The shape of the contact
surface and the cross-sectional area of the hammer are chosen to suit the soil type and
reaction of the ground to the impact energy. Dynamic consolidation can also be done in
saturated cohesive soil provided the fonnation is varved and contains continuous sand
partings to faciliute pore-pressure dissipalioo. In homogeneous cohesive soil. dynamil:
consolidation may be done with pre-lnstaHed vertical sand drains to effect di-ainagc. as
depicted in Fig. 12.30.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
330 • Thtory and Practict of Foundntion Design
1000
Possibly
/
...- foo
J buildings
/ ~
J Unpleasant
J
I
10
/
100
-
1000
Sc:oloddlo..,.., ~EIO
Fig. lUI - ~ YOioe:i'Y _..,. -lmpect energy end dlatance from lmpect point
[E (ln J), o (In m)J.
12.4 .3 Vlbrocompactton
This is method of deep eompoction of granular soils where a probe is inserted into the soil
and then vibrated. Compaction is brought about by vibration, as displayed in Fig. I 2.32. The
process is essentially similar to vibnoftotation as adopled for installation of stone columns in
cohesive soil described earlier.
Water auppty
CoNslonless sol
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Ground Improvement Techniques + 333
has to be approached on a trial and error basis with past experiences serving as useful guide.
A suitable approach may be to
(a) carry out detailed soil exploration by conducting standard penetration tests or cone
penetration tests within the influence zone below the proposed foundations.
(b) determine the extent of improvement required in terms of increased Nor Nr value
from appropriate foundation analysis.
(c) choose the method of ground improvement, say, dynamic consolidation,
vibrocompaction. or compaction piles depe,nding on availability of facilities.
(d) select a representative area close to the consttuction site and carry out trial ground
improvement wortc varying the construction control parameters, such as weight of
hammer, height of fall, number of blows, spacing of compaction piles. and so on.
In genernl, the weight of hammer and height of fall are predetermined as per
equipment capacity. Before s"'Jting the trial ground improvement scheme, make
sure that predensification propenies of the soil, namely SPT, CPT da"', and so
forth are determined.
(e) carry out field tests to determine the post densification parnmeters after completion
of trial ground improvement work and determine the extent of improvement as a
function of spacing of compaction piles.
(0 choose the spacing of compaction piles on the basis of pre and post densification
data.
(g) carry out field tests to check the efficacy of compaction at different locations.
A trial ground improvement work has recently been done for the proposed construction of
a 120 m high temple obout 75 km from Kolka"'. The subsoil consists of a thin layer of firm
silty clay/clayey silt followed by a deep deposit of loose to medium silty fine sand to 25 m
below GL. Thereafter, a thin l•yer of stiff clay is found and the same is followed by dense to
very dense sand. 1be soil condition at the temple site is shown in Fig. 12.36. In view of the
high foundation loading anticipated from the temple structure. the ' sandy soil immediately
beneath the top silty clay 12- 14 m below GL required improvement.
Depth (m)
o ----~
, -=
Anm
~7 ~-~
--.-.-.~;~
~da~~~d~.-
~ --~7.~~~-------------
N • 10
s-------------------------------------------------
II Loose to me<ium dense light grey
silty fine s;~nd with mlc:a
N = 1~1S
12----------------------------·- ------
111 Dense tlglt grey sllly fine sand
N= 30
~---------------------------------------
IV Stiff to vetY stiff yellowish grey silty day
N= 20
30--------------------------- -------
V Very dense grey silly sand
N> 60
Fig,. 12.36 Soil condition at temple site.
Copy~ighted material
Hidden page
Ground lmprov~mem Tuhnlqw~s • 335
N (biOws/30 em)
0 10 20 3()
0
2 ~
~ 1'----..
/
10
\ Pro
--- \
12
'' ; Pile <
~
Spacing
\ mx2n
15
\
(I)
2\-
'~
o-1.4 X 1.4
''
X:'~ Pro
g 8
1
1
1
1
a ' ©+ -2x2
10
fl '2.8 X 2.8
~
12 ~
1
1
1
(b)
Flg. 12.38 Results ol lrlol ground in'c><oYemonl
Example ll.J
A 22 m diameter x 15 m high steel storage tank is proposed to be built in a pon aru. The
subsoil condition is shown in Fig. 12.39. Preloading with sand wicks is proposed to be done.
Design a suitable preloading scheme and estimate the settlement of the tank during hydrotest.
Copyrighted material
336 • Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
17m - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
N Stllf y a i - brown sandy cloy:
N= 20
c., • 100 kNim2
LL =50, Pl =25. w=28
CJ1 • ., = 0.08
~m------------------
v Bluish gray slty aand: N • 30
C,/1 + ., = 0.05 (.......,..,)
Stratum II
~
38 51
lip= " x 0.9 = 24.6 kNtm'
29.5
,
l!.c. = 0.3 x 24.6 = 7.4 kN/m·
•
Hence, str<:ngth after hydrotest for
Stratum I : 30 + 30 + 9.5 = 69.5 kNtm'
P, =SO kN/m 1
6 =""L.... C, Hlo p, + llp
I + e., g Po
Layer H(m) 1
p, (kN/m'l llp (kN/m )
c, 6 (m)
I + "<>
I 2 8 48 0.06 0.102
11 5 36 46 0.16 0.288 0.390
Ill 10 96 31 0.08 0.096
IV 5 !56 15 0.08 0.016
v 15 236 14 0.05 0.018 0.130
I 0.520 m
(• 520 mm)
Consider 90% consolidation of strata I and II, 30% in stratum III, and 10% in stratum IV
aod v.
SeHiement at tank centre = (0.390 X 0.9) + (0.3 X 0.096) + (0.1 X 0.034)
= 0.383 m = 383 mm
(d) Settlement during pr<:load: Stage II
P, =50 kN/m2
Copyrighted material
Grou11d Improvement Tech11iques • 339
[Nou: Effective overburden pressure p. alter stag~ 1 pre~ has been detumined for full coosolldation under
the preload. ln reality. for s.lnlta Ill, IV and V. p. values would be less due to lower degree of consolidation.]
Consider residual settelement of stage l preload occuning in stage II and settlement for
s~age ll preload as
6 = L C,
I + ~o
H log Pe + Ap
Po
Copyrighted material
340 • Theory atld Practice of Formdah'on Design
Sand pad E
Sand fill
E
"'
2
.
For 18 m h1gh tank, q, = 180 X224 + 2.0 = 135 kN/m2 ("'nd pad)
30
(f) Diameter of stone column = 500 rom
Spacing: 1.0 m c/c triangular grid
Area= 0.2 m2
Influence area = 0.866 ( 1)2 = 0.866 m2
. = 0_·2 x 100 = 23%
Area rallo
. 0 866
Olpacity of stone column
q,. =25c, =25 x 40 = 1000 kN/m 2
Using Eq. ( 12.8)
1 +sin;'
. .,, (a,.- u + K c,)
I - SID 'f"
= 4.26[(18 X 2 - 10) X 1.5 - 10 + 4 X 40) = 805 kN/m2
(GWT I m BGL. K = 4; 9' = 38°, and depth of bulging 2 m)
Q,1, per stone column = 0.2 x 805 = 161 kN
rJ
~11 per stone column = -
Q.,, • -161 = 80.5 kN Say 80 kN
FS 2
(g) Be3ring c•pacity of treated ground,
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
344 + Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
Barron, R-A. ( 1948), Consolidation of Fine-grained Soils by Drain Wells, Trans. ASCE,
Vol. 113. pp. 71&--734.
Brown, R.E. (1978), Vibroflotation Compaction of Cohesionless Soils. Joumal of
G.orec/rnical DivL<ion, ASCE. Vol. 103, No. OT 12, pp. 1437- 51.
Dastidar. A.G., S. Gupta, and T.K. Ghosh (1969), Application of Sandwick in a Housing
Projtct, Proceedings 7th International Conference on SMFE, Mexico. 2:. pp. 59-64.
Dastida.r, A.G. (1985). Treatment of Weak Soils--An Indian Perspective, Ceoteclmicol
Engineering, Vol. l, pp. 17?,..._229.
Datye. K.R. (1982), Simpler Techniques for Ground Improvement, 4th lOS Annual Lecture,
Indian GeotechniCGI Jounu>l Jan., 12(1 ): pp. 1-82.
Datye and Nagaraju (1977). Design Approach and Field Control of Stone Columns,
Proceedings lOth ICSMFE, Stockholm. Vol. 3.
Dhar, P.R- (1976), Soil Densijication by Compaction Piles at a Refinery Site, Symposium on
foundations and Excavations in Weak Soil. Calcutta.
Engelhardt, K.. W.A. Flynn. and A.A. Bayak (1974), Vlbro-replacement Method to Strengthen
Cohesive Soils in ..situ. ASCE NatWnol Structural Engineering Meeting, Cincinnati,
p. 30.
Greenwood. D.A. ( 1970), Mechanical lmprovem•m of Soil below Ground Surfau,
Proceedings Ground Engineering Conference. I.C.E., London. pp. 11- 22.
Hughes. J.M.O. and N.J. Withers (1974), Reinforcing of Soft Cohesive Soil with Stone
Column, Ground Enginuring. Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 4~9.
Hughes. JM.O., NJ. Withers, and D.A. Greenwood (1975). A Field Trial of the Reinforced
Effect of a Stone Column in Soil, Geoteclrnique. Vol. 25, pp. 34-44.
Kjellman. W. ( 1948), Accelerating Consolidation of Fine-grained Soils by means of
Cardboard Wicks. Proceedings 2nd International Conference on SMFE, Rotterdam. 2:
pp. 302-305.
Mitchell, l.K. and R-K. Katti (1981), Soil improvement: Stote-ofthe-ort Report, Proceedings
lOth International Conference on SMFE, Stockholm, p. 163.
Nayak. N.V. (1982). Sum~ Columns alfd MonilOrbrg Instruments, Proceedings Symposium on
soil and rock improvement: geotextiles, reinfoit:ed earth and modem piling techniques,
Asian InStitute of Technology, Bangkok, December 1982.
Nayak, N.V. (1983). Struclurts on Ground lmprow!d by Stont Columns, Proceedings
lntemalional Symposium on Soil Structure Interaction. Roorkee, India.
Pilot, G. (1977), Methods of Improving -the Engineering Properti.s of Soft Clay, State-of-the-
an Report. Symposium on soft clay, Bangkok.
Copyrighted material
Ground lmprovemem Techniques • 345
Som. N.N. (1995). Consolidation Seulemt!.nt of Lorge Diameter Storage Tank Foundations on
Stone Columns ;, Soft Clay, Proceedings International Symposium on compression and
consolidation or clayey soils. Hiroshima, p. 653. Balkema Publishers.
Som. N.N. (1999), Stone Column Foundation for Lnrge Area Loading-Some Case StudieJ,
Symposium on Thick Deht,ic Deposits, Asian Regional Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Geotcchnicru Engineering. Seoul. Korea.
Thorburn. S. (1975), Building Supporred by Stabilised Ground. Symposium on ground
treatment by dee-p comp~c1ion, Institute or Civil Engjneen. London.
TsytOvich. N., V. Berezantzev. B. Dalmatov and M. Abelev (1974), Foundation Soils and
Substructures. MIR Publishers. Moscow.
Copyrighted material
Earthquake Response of
Soils and Foundations
13.1 INTRODUCTION
Earthquakes can cause extensive damage to foundations and structures built on them.
Earthquake motions are initiated in the soil and they are instantaneously transmitted to the
foundation causing adverse effect on lhe behaviour of the superstructure. Damage
may occur due to instabiHty of lbe soil which res-ults in extensive ground..movement including
differential movement. While structural damage is ultimately manifested in tilt or damage or
even collapse of the supenttuciUre, the initiating cause can often be identified as the advenc
response of the soil- foundation system under seismic forces.
Geotechnical considerations are. therefore, important in the development of an eanhquake
resistance design. It is not only the type of soil deposit that detennines the kind of response to
be expected during a strong earthquake. The type of structure also influences the seismic
response. The field of geotechnical earthquake engineering is quite complex. Much of its
applications are based on empirical studies made on the basis of case histories which illustrate
the effect of earthquake on engineering structures.
13.2 . 1 Magp.ltude
The most widely used magnitude scale to define the severity of an earthquake was developed
by Richter (1958). Accoroingly. the magnitude of an earthquake is given by the logarithm of
the ampliiUde on a Wood-Andenon torsion seismogram located at a distance of 100 km from
the earthquake source. Thus,
M = log(AIT) + /(IJ., h) + C, + C, ( 13.1)
where
II =amplitude in (0.001) mm.
T = period of seismic wave in seconds.
/(IJ.. h) = correction factor for epicentral distance (IJ.) and focal depth (h).
C_, = conection factor for seismological station, and
C, :a regional correction factor,
346
Copyrighted material
Earthquok Response of Soils and Foundations + 347
Natural seismic events may have magnitude as high as 8.5 or 9. Magnitudes below 2.5
. are not generally fell by humans. The frequency of occurrence of earthquake in a global
scale (based on observations since 1990) is shown in Table 13.1.
TabltiJ.I Frequency of occu......,. of eanhqllllkes {since 1990)
13.2.3 Intensity
The magnitude of an earthquake as obtained by the Richter's seale give s measure of the amount
of energy released by the earthquake, not its damage potential. The intensity of an earthqu'il<e is
a measure of the effect of an earthquake at a given location. Severa) intensity scales have been
proposed, the most widely used being the MIJ!Iiticd Mercalli Intensity (MMI) ~ale, as given in
Table 13.2 (Newmann. 1954). The value assigned to, tlje ·MMI scale gives qualitative
description of the damages based on physical verification at site. The equivalent value of the
magnillJde by Richter's scale is given alongside the MMI in Table 13.2.
Tabltl3.l Modified Mu,caiJi intensity (MMO scale (abbreviated vcrsioo)
Table 13.2 Modifted MerealJi intensity (MMI) scale (abbreviated version). Cont.
MagniJud~
(Richur scalt}
'VUI lksuucti,.·e Sc:rious damacc: to structures in cenerat }
IX Ruinous Seriou.s dam~e to struc::turn: almosc tOCal desuuction of
nonseismic ttSistant $tNCCUJ'tS
. Only seismic resistant structures remain standing
X
XI
DisastrOUS
Disastrous in
extrtme .,
l General panic; aJnlosc total destruction; the ground
cracks and opens
} 7-7.9
aw
w
I I
Flg. 13.1 Horizontal force due to ear1hquake.
Copyrighted material
Earthquake Response of Soils and Foundations • 349
0.9
5% Damping
0.8
SCTsile
. 0.7
0.8
(depth to hard layer,
D"' 37m)
~
~
0.5
~• o.•
~• 0.3
fi
0.2
Rock and
O.t ..... SOil
Period (s)
3 • 5
F~ 13..2 Acceleration response spectrum as recorded in Mallioo City earthquake, 1985 {Seed et al., 1987).
The response spectra shown in Fig. 13.2 illustrate the pronounced influence of local soil
conditions on the charac<eristics of the observed earthquake ground motions. Since Mexico
City was located approximately 400 km away from the epicentrc. the observed res~nsc at
rock and hard soil sites was fairly low (that is, the speclnll accelerations were less th~ O.Ig
for all periods). Damage was correspondingly negligible at these sites. At the Central Market
site (CAO). spectral accelerations were significantly amplified to 0.3-Q.35g at periods of
around 1.3 s and within the range 3.5-4.5 s. Since buildings at the CAO site did not
generally have fundamental periods within these ranges. damage was minor. The motion
recorded at the scr building site, however. indicated significant amplification of the
undertying bedrock motions with a maximum horiz.ontal ground acceleration (the spectral
accelemtion at a period of zero) over four times that of the rock and hard soil sites and with
a spectral acceleration at T = 2.0 s over seven time.c; that of the rock and hard soil sites.
Major damage including collapse, occurred to structures with fundamental periods ranging
from about 1 s to 2 s near the SCT building site and in areas with similar subsurface
conditions. At these locations. lhe fundamental period of lhe soU aJmost matched with that of
the overlying Sln.IC·tures. creating a near resonance condition that amplified the shaking and
caused heavy damage.
The Uniform Building Code of USA (UBC. 1991) recommends the response spectrum,
shown in Fig. 13.3. to determine the peak ground acceleration for a given fu ndamental
period T for different soil conditions. For T > O.S s. ground acceleration for deep soil strata
is considerably higher than that for rock and hard soils. It is to be no<ed that the period of
ground motion at a particular site is important in determining the effect of earthquake motion
on the structure. lf the fundamental period of a building is close to that of the site. a
resonant condition is created. This amplifies the shaking and increases the potential to
damage.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Earthqull.U Response of Soils and Foundations • 351
After
'
·. ..
.. ·.. ; .'•
463.5'
.. ...
Ftg. 13.A Ground set3ement around well casing at Homer in AJaska earthquake 1964 (Grantz el al., 196A).
2.6 m at Ponagc in the same earthquake in Alaska. This caused widespread flooding in the
lltea during high tide· periods and the town had to be relocated at a new location. Similar
subsidence was noticed in other earthquakes also and the data is given in Table 13.3.
Liquefactjon is caused in sand by ground vibration which tends to compact the sand and
dec-rease its volume. Jf drainage does nol occur, the tendency to decrease in volume resultS in
increased pore water pressure. lf the pore pressure builds up to an extent whic.h i.s equal tO
the overburden pressure. the effective stress becomes zero and the soil loses its strength
completely and gets into a liquefied state. Liquefaction may be initiated at the surface or at
some depth below the ground surf:Jce. Once liquefaction occurs a1 some depth. the excess
pore.pressure tends to dissipate by upward flow of water which. in turn. induces liquefaction
in <he upper layers of !he soil.
Copyngilteu r'lai nal
Hidden page
Earthquake Response of Soils and Foundations • 355
Ground aurface
.!,t..~=A
(10 (1(1
1_......._, a - u0
A • • · If water table
Is at dOp4h h
A • 2a, if table wa..,
1cr = 8(1
Is at surface
(a)
0.7
•
li 0.6 • liQuefacliM •
~ o.s •No- • •
0
• o... • • 0
-2
,:
0.3
•
•• •• 0
0
' lquofadlon • ••
'"' 0.2
0.1 •
0
o 10 20 30 o«~ 50 eo 10 eo so 100
Appa~$~11 ...- density, o, (%)
(b)
Fig. 13.1 Field obMMtion of lquoladion (Bymo, 1978).
20 6.1
g g
"2:
a. 30 High
possibility of
9.1
"
a.
2:
ltQuefaciJon 12.2
<I()
50 15.25
eo 18.3
Fig. 13.9 Relationship between lquelactlon potential and N valut: as a function o1 depth
(Kishlda, 1969).
Copyrighted material
356 • T1~eory aud Praclice of Foundation Desig11
0.6
...
.---..,.--"""""!l.r,---- , - -- -,------,
" ~·
percent fines a 35 15 45
: I
o.sl - - - + ----l!!-+--+-----+-----1
'' '
'
'
'''
o.•l----+- --+...-f--lft-----1----1
" '
'''
'
':' ..
I '' ''
... I
I
I
I
' ' I
I
I
'
I
'
''
I
I
..
r-.conwnc 5%
McOfied dWieM o:de ~ Icily CICII'IIenl • 5,_J ..
........ No.
liqu!f!c:llii!?l u,..t!c!On Ugu!!.clialt
P~dalll • D
(Nolo.
Fig. 13.10 Uqoef.adion potential as function d depth and standard penetration resistanc:e fol' different
percentages of fine• {Seed et al., 1984),
(13.3)
Copyrighted material
Earthquake Response of Soils (lltd Fou,dotions • 357
Fig. 13.11 Time history of shear stress during earthquake (Seed and ldriss. 1962).
where.
(...!...)
~.-
- average cyclic shear stress developed during eanhquake,
r=~
(r_ ),
04 .
05 .
06 07. .
08 09 1.0
8 I
g 9 1/
6
~ 12 /
/'
v
15
/
18
/
v
21
Fig. 13.12 Stre:s.s reduction factor tot liQuefaction analysis (Prakash. 1980).
For exampl e~ let us consider a site where the ground water table is at the ground surface and
a= 0.2 g. At a depth or S m, the average cyclic stress ratio during earthquake works out as
0 .29 (refer Eq. (13.3)].
Copyrighted material
358 • Theory a11d Practice of Foundatiot~ Desig11
The corrected N value at a depth of 5 m is 10 for clean sand with less than 5% fines.
From Fig. 13.9. ·
(_!_) = 0.11
qo I
This gives.
- ~ > - ~)
(7~
(u: I
It appears dlat liquefaction generally occurs in fine to medium sand within a depth of
10 m from ground surface. With increasing overburden pressure the chances of liquefaction
us ually decrease.
.,.
work. between the postcyclic and precyclic undrained shear strength. Accordingly.
c.. ( )
cw -= 1-u,
o;.
(13.4)
where,
C.,. = postcyc lic undrained shear strength.
c" = precyclic undrained shear strength.
11¥ = excess pore-pressure due to cyclic Joading,
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Earthquake Response of Soils and Fouudations + 363
approximate distribution~ as shown in Fig. 13.16. decreasing from a maximum at the top and
zero at the base. The potential damaging effect of a base motion may be considered 10 be
proponional 10 the product of the force developed and the period for which it sets, that is,
Acceleration disb1bu1ton
In ftrtt modi
In order to carry out seismic design of foundation in an ~hquake region. soil parameterS
required for dynamic analysis should be determined. The imponant soil parameters relevant
to eanhquakc design fonn a subject matter of this section.
Figure 13.17 gives the liqucfac:tion potential of granuJar soil based on grain ~size distribution
as obtained from experiences of J"'SI earthquakes (Oshal<i. 1970). The grnin·siu distribution
of the soil may be determined by slllndard t.,;ts.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Earthq11uke Ruponse of Soils atttl Foundations + 367
Sob<tion
The cyclic stress ratio at a given depth during an earthquake is given by Eq. (13.3). For a
horizontal ground acceleration of 0.2g, the depthwise variation of cyclic stress ratio (t/a~)d is
calculated. as in Table 13.6. To calculate the effective stress, the ground water table has been
taken at I m below GL. Now, from Fig. 13.10, for silt content 3S%, the cyclic stress ratio
required to cause liquefaction for different N values is oblllined as
N (blows/30 em) : I0 IS 20
Tla; 0.18 0.2S 0.4
With factor of safety of 1.2, the allowable cyclic stress ratio would be O.!S, 0.208, and 0.33
for N values of 10, IS, and 20 rc:spcodvely.
Looking at Table 13.6. it is evident that liquefaction potential does not exist beyond a
depth of 14 m. Here, N value is greater than IS and (T/a~) is less than 0.208.
Above 14 m depth. T/!1~ should be greater than 0.2 to prevent liquefaction. This will
require an N value of 20. Hence. den.sification of the soH has to be done by vibrocompaction
within this depth.
Example 13.2
During an eanhquake, the maximum intensity of ground shaking at a site is 0. lg. The subsoil
consists of a 20 m deposit of sand (fines c<>ntent IS%) with SPT blow count of 10 blows/
r
30 em. Determine the tone of liquefaction (Take = 18 kN/m 3 and water table at ground
surface).
Sol..,ion
(a) Average shear stress in the soil
Copyrighted material
368 • Theory a11d Practice of Fo1mdorion Design
3 0.1 54 24
'•
0.98 0.143
6 108 48 0.96 0.140
9 162 72 0.94 0.137
12 216 95 0.85 0.124
15 270 120 0.74 0.108
18 324 144 0.64 0.094
21 378 168 0.60 0.088
T': = 0.15
a.
with FS = 1.2
3
/
6 I
g 9 /
/
112 ------ -- . . -- ------ . ./.': ------ --·---
15 /
v
18 / .
21
Copyrighted material
&nhquake R<spons. of Soils and Foundations • 369
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Construction Problems
14. 1 INTRODUCTION
Foundation design is made on the basis of available knowledge about the structure to be built
and the subsoil condition available at the given site. The structural design is done in a way to
suit the facilities to be created for a given architectural layout. In general, the loads that arc
imposed on the soil can be evaluated fairly acc~ly. Foundation design requires evaluation
of the safe bearing capacity and settlement, both immediate and long term. These factors
require knowledge of the subsoil characteristics which are determined from an appropriate
site investigation. However, soil being deposited at a site by natural geological processes over
long periods of time, there are inherent variations which may not be fully reflected by even
an elaborate subsoil investigation. Hence, simplifying assumptions are made about boundary
conditions and average soil properties are to be assigned to the different strata for working
out the detailed design. Also, the land use pattern of the area surrounding the site determines
the vulnerability of existing buildings. Different degrees of precaution are to be taken to
implement a given design withoot causing any dist:ress to adjoining structures. The job of the
foundation engineer does no~ therefore, end at prllduclng a design only. It is equally
important to determine if any problems are 10 be anticipated during constriJction and work
out proper conatruction procedure and remedial measures in time.
The construction problems vary widely and are often site specific. However, some
general problems associated with foundation construction are discussed in !hi$ chapter.
When a foundation design has been finalized, tho job is given 10 a con&tnJ<:tion agency for
doing the constnJ<:tion. Inevitably tho work requires excavation of varying depth and
magnitude. The problems multiply when excavation is to be made below the gmund water
table. The major construction problems, therefore, arise u a result of
I. stability of excavations.
2. dewatering. and
3. effect of adjoining structures.
571
Copyrighted material
37'2 • Tlreory and Practice of Fo,ndation Desigll
81'11Ced cuts essentially consist of making vertical walls in the soil and suitJibly propping
them by steel struts as the excavation is done. When the final excavation level is reach~ the
foundation is cast and backfilling done to restore the original ground s urface as the struts are
progressively removed, as presented in Fig. 14.2.
Ground,._..
1st strut
2. 1 SMB 500
=--l
2nd strut
2. t SMB 600=--i
r-----------,
I - ----.. - - - - - . . 1
~
III II
.. 1I I
OIWall - -->1 11 3td Strut 1I
:1 2.1SMB600 t 1
~
1 1, ____ , I I, ____ .,1l1 N cBo"::'a.rt levet
~
Fig. 14.2 Bta<ed cut.
Copyrighted material
Construction Problems • 373
For · shallow footings and raft foundations. the depth of excavation seldom exceeds
2 m and elaborate support is J>Ot required. However, if heterogeneous fill exists
near the ground surface. sjde protection with timber planks and small suuts should be
sufficient.
Deep excavation for two or three basements (excavation depth: ~10 m) would require
adequate lateral support with diaphragm walls or contiguous bored piles and struts. Because
of large excavation width, it may not be feasible to have horizontal struts which would tend
to deflect under their own weight. In such cases. inclined props supported between the
diaphragm wall and the already cast base raft at the centre may be adopted. Otherwise, a
number of H·piles may be driven at close intervals and the struts be made to span among
them to reduce the effective length. Figure 14.3 depicts inclined props to support diaphragm
wall and Fig. 14.4 shows struts in wide cuts.
lAgend:
1. Dlap!Vagm wall
2. Exc8Yation a b c d e
3. C..StbaiO slab
4. Put Inclined struts
5. E>o:IVollon up to ~ ...,u
6. cast balance base slab
7. Erect - wal lhrough ' " " '
Strut 1- - '
Slrut2 ~
Strut 3
1950
Copyrighted material
374 + Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
The design of braced excavation involves two distincl yet intemlated features~ namely
' .
(a) stability of the excavation, ground movement. control of water into the excavatjon,
effect on adjoining structures, and so on and
(b) design of structural elements, lhat is, diaphragm wall or sheet pile, struts or anchors
and so forth.
Although the overall s tabillry of braced cuts in soft ground does not depend to any
great extent on the number and spacing of struts or anchors~ lhey very much influence lbe
pattern of ground movement expected in a given situation. The depth of diaphragm walV
sheet pile determines both the slllbility of the system and the ground movement associated
with it. Depending on the subsoil stratification, one may get adequate Slllbllity against bottom
heave by having the diaphragm wall exteruled to a stiffer layer existing no more than a few
metres below the cur depth. However. this may not give adequate fixity to the diaphragm
waH to minimize ground settlement.
The essential featur"s of the design of braced cut in soft ground are discussed in the
subsequent subsections in details.
F=
c•• N, + y,D, + r.D, + L:C.<H + D, + n, )/ n, (14.2)
!;r<H + D-: + D1>
s
-2.0m
-1.!:1m '"" 1 Stratum I
O.Om
Desk:caled brOwniSh grey
clayey silt
-3.8 m
,~.Om 2
~.5m Stratum II
l
~.Om 3 Dar1< ""y lilly day wilh Deplh below ground
Sligo Ill -9.5 m d~WOOd level in meuw
-11.0m ~
Slago IV -11.5 m
-13.2m
soage V · ;-.
-13.5 m Ser.tum Ill
Bluiolo ~ ..ly day
of WI f.. Yri1h kankar
~ -17.5. . - 17.2m
Stntum IV
Yellowjsh brown sandy
dayfry silt
G.l..
c,.,
)I !
H
c..
I tI " ! - o f cui
•
I I
I y, I
IV
I
\ I
I o,
!
\
' ' ,_ / '
-- g' '
/
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
378 • Tlreory a11d Practice of Foundation Des;gn
variation of ground settlement for the final cut level may be obtained from Peck's
normalized plot for braced cut with sheet pile suppons in different types of soil. as depicted
in Fig. 14..9. Different zones of settlement proposed by Peck are shown as zones ), II, and
ill for different soil conditions below the cut (Peck, 1969).
Zone I
Sand and soft to hold cloy
Zono II
Very 80ft to soft clay:
•••
•• lmiiOd dep4h of clay below
• excavation
• Zono Ill
Very - ., - clay:
elgnlftcant deplh below -
of excavation
14.4 DEWATERING
Dewatering is required for any deep excavation to facilitate consbUCtion of basements, power
houses, pumping stations. and so on. lbeoreticaiJy, any excavation below ground water table
would necessitate some kind of dewatering. However, low permissibility soils, for example,
clay and silty clay (K < tcrcmls) do not present much problem with seepage because the
discharge is generally small and elaborate dewatering is not required. For medium to high
degree of permeability (K > 10·> cmls), suitable dewatering scbeme has to be worked out.
The basic purpose or dewatering is to control seepage into the excavation either by
pumping the water out of the excavation or by lowering the water table sufficiently below
the bouom of the cut till the underground works are over. The extent of dewatering depends
on the subsoil stratification, presence of water bearing stratum. aquifer parameters, and in-
situ permeabiliry.
Copyrighted material
Construction Problems t 379
~I G<Ound surface
CU<VO Orawdown
curve\
2r-
- {_~~
Initial water
1m-
Impermeable Pata
trK(H 1 - h 1 )
( 14.3)
Q = log,(R/r)
(b) Partially penetrating well [refer Fig. 14.10 (b))
(14.4)
where,
Q= discharge from a fully penetrating well in an unconfined aquifer (m3/s),
Q, = discharge from a partially penetration well in an unconfined aquifer (m3/s),
K= coeffictent of permeability of soil (mls),
H = height of ground water above the top of aquifer before drawdown (m),
It = height of water in the well above the top of aquifer after d"'wdown (m), that
is, drawdown = H - h(m),
r = radius of well or equivalent well (m),
R = radius of influence (m), and
h, = penetrating of well below water Ulble (m).
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
382 • 71uwry and Practlce of Foundation Design
Deep wells should be constructed in such a way that they can remove large volumes of
water without nllowing large quantity of soil to enter the casing. When the soil consists of fi ne
snnd and silt. a sand filter should be provided. Figure 14. 14 depicts the construction of such
deep wells. Deep weJI pumping invol\'eS the following steps for the well to be constructed.
(i) Take sink cased borehole diameter 200-300 mm whose diameter should be greater
than that of the well casing nnd depending on size of pump.
(ii) lnsen inner well casing.
(iii) Provide perforated screen over the length where dewatering is required with 3.5 m
length of unperforated pipe below for collec.tjon of fine materials.
,M.,~~~W ''-'rRislog
·- _ ...
,,...'_"
water
level
(iv) Place graded gravel between casing and outer borehole casing over the dewatering
length.
(v) Fill the space above the screen by soil.
(vi) Water is 1hen ·surged ' by a boring tool to promOfe flow of wat.e r back and fonh
through the filler and fines collected at 1he bouom are bailed out
(vii) Insert submersible pump.
Copyrighted material
Collstructiou Problems + 383
The filter is designed on the conventional filter criteria suggested by Terzaghi which is
(a) D., (of filter) 4 (b) D15 (filter)
0., (of soil) < o., (soil) > 5
(Piping criterion) (~il ity criterion)
Collecting space
T
Original
water table
lnleC ports 1o rtser pipe
The filter wells or well poinrs usually consist of a 1 m long screen, 60-75 mm
diameter surrounding a central riser pipe. The well points are installed by pus hing or jening
them into the ground.
Capacity of a single well point with 16 m riser pipe = 10 lirreslmin. (approx.)
The spacing of well points depends on the permeability of soil and the rime available for
affecting rite drawdown. The spacings normally adopted for different soil types arc ns follows:
Fine to medium sand 0.75-1.0 m
Silty sand of low permeability 1.5 m
Copyrighted material
384 • Titeory 011d Practict of Foundation Design
Well point dewatering is suitable in both fine and silty sands. In highly previous soil.
the spacing required to handJe the water may be too smaU and impractical. Well points are
not generally suitable for clays because of slow water seepage.
Well points can lower a water table to a maximum of 6 m below the header pipe. For
lowering water table to greater depth. multiple stage well point system may be adopted.
Under average conditions. any number of stages can be used, eac-h stage lowering the water
table by about 5 m. A typical set-up for a two stage system is shown in Fig. 14.16.
Multistage well point may be used for greater depth of dewatering but this requires additional
header pipe. additional pumps, and larger excavation width for the provision of berms.
Stage 1 Original grOI.Wld
Ground level -lill.. .. _.__.t.~t!!.~~.!!l.--·--·
Stage 2 Separate pt.rnps provided
for each stage
•.,
·•·•., Stage 3
.,.• ""li.--- -
..-·· -···-···-···-·····-··· ., . ...•.•·······-
·~·•.
! ~·~C:.red ground
watet level
(a) (b)
Fig. 14.1 & Mu1tistage dewatering.
(f) The effect of ground subsidence on :adjacent structures due to dewatering should be
evaluated ond adequate precautions taken to prevent major damage.
Copyrighted material
386 • 111eory ond Practice of Foundatitm D~.sign
24
22 \
\ Zero-air-void
curve (G, • 2.7)
~"'- 20
,r
., 18
~
:t I /" ~ I:-
f 16
I
~
~
g 14
....
• Standard pmctor
12
....
.. Moclffied prodor
5 tO 15 20 25
Mobture a:wttent. w('4)
Fig. 14.11 Dry density versus moisture content tlla:llonshlp from Proctor tesl
' \ Zero-air-void
'' \ CUM
\ Zero-alr-YOid
( \ ,,,curve
L------
Type t: Bell-shaped 0<
Single peak Type II: One and - peob
L__ _ ____,~Mols-
(a)
"""'""' (%)
(b)
"""'*'' (%)
Dry "'" welgnt
''
\ \\
\ Zero-air-void \
' curve Zero-air-YOid
curve
',
'
(C)
Moisture content (%)
'-----·Mob-
con"'"' (d) (%)
Fig. 14.18 Typical moisture density relationships ol c:oheslve soil (after Lee end Suedkamp, 1972~
Copyrighted material
Co!lstructio" Problems • 387
h may however be understood that irrespective of the type of compaction curve. the
highest value of MOD as marked by point A should be taken for specifying the field
compaction parameters in cohesive soil.
Granular soil, predominantly sand, happens to be the mos1 suitable material for land filling.
Well graded sand (D001D 10 > 4) gives good compaction when saturated and vibrated. These
give high bearing capacity and low settlement potential and sand appears to be best suited for
under water filling.
The compaction of granular soil is determined by the relative density, defined as
R = t:mal( - e x 100% (14.6)
0
tmak emi"
where.
emak = maximum void ratio under loose condition,
t'mi• = minimum void ratio under dense condition, and
t: =: void ratio achieved at site.
•
In terms of dry density, the relative density can be expressed as
For field compaction. a relative density of at least 80% should be specified. This can be
easily achieved by placing lhe loose sand in 300 mm layers, nooding it with water and then
compacting it with vi bro:~tory rollers to 250 mm thick.
Numerous buildings have suffered damages due to inadequate attention given to the
ground filli ng in the construction area. Som and Sahu (1993} report the collapse of a
4·storey building soon after construction near Calcutta. The building was supported on a
c,entral raft with two-.way interconnected strip placed 5.3 m below the ground which had
indicated a bowl·shaped profile sloping across the building. A diffc,rential excavation was
made 10 locate the foundation below the lowest point Subsequent filling on the foundation
put an overburden pressure of varying magnitude across tile building area. This caused a non·
unifonn foundation pressure varying from 16 tlm1 on western side to 11 t/m2 on the eastern
side of the foundation, as shown in Fig. 14.19. The factor of safety against bearing capacity
failure was only 1.5. This is believed to have led to significant yielding of the soil and the
building tilted towards the western race due 10 heavier stress concentnnion. Subsequent
consolidation settlement (the building collapsed almost 3 years after St.."lrl of construction)
appears to have led to further tilting of the building and an estimated angular distortion of
1186 occurred towards the western side as against a permissible angular distortion of ll300 for
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
390 • 17ltory and Practice of Fou,dation Desigu
3
A-Sand and soft day and
average workmansnlp
e-Very soft to soft Clay:
limited in depth below base
of excavatlon
2
c-
Vet'f soft to soft day. Great
depth below excavation
• • (%)
H
Time is the essence of underground construction. Fasrer the underground works are
compleled, lesser will be the problems of 5ettlemenL Deep excavation should never be kept
open for long periods of time as this invites additional settlement and damage to adjoining
stnlctures. Figure 14.22 shows the effect of Calcutta metro eoostruction on a building close
1s r---------~============~
nne (monl'ls)
16 20 2. 28 32
o~r-~T-~~~~~~
E
19.8 m -
::l
0 C 8 A
6.5 m
i 120
-~ ·---------
" - - Diaphragm -
J.eo L
Ayg. ol A , 8, C, 0
200L---------------------------~
Fig. 14.22 Effect of time on building settlement a<tjacent to braced cut.
Copyrighted material
Ccnscruccion Problt!ms + 391
to the diaphragm wall. For various reasons, the metro work was stopped repeatedJy at this
section and the construction took the best pan of three yean. The excavation was kept open
for 90 days at 8 m depth and thereafter for almost two years at 14 m depth. It may be
noticed that out of a total settlement of 172 mm, no less than 93 mm had occurred during
stoppages of construction. The data clearly show the effec.t of time on ground settlement
adjacent to a br>Ced cuL
1000
Pooolbly
-.s
~ 100 J
/ unsafe for
buldlngs
f v Objection-
~ J
1!. 10 Unpleaunl
~ /
/ NoU<>eablo
I
10 100 1000
Sealed distance• .Jo!D
Fig. 1•.23 Partide velocity versus di$tanoe <Jue to a single rnpact (after Mayne et al.. 1982).
where.
E = energy per blow in KJ. and
D = distnnce between the source and the structure under consideration.
A maximum peak particle velocity of 50 mm/s is normally considered safe for conventional
buildings.
Copyrighted material
392 • 111e.ory and Practice of Fo11ndaJiOtJ De.sig11
If the vibration level is intolerable, the soil foundation system may be modified lO
minimize the effect of vibration. This may be done by providjng vibration barriers. Trenches
may be made around the vibration source for activ~ isolation or may be made near the object
to form pa.uiv~ i.wlalion. For active isolation. lhe depth of trench should be 0.6 times the
distance from the structure. This would reduce the ground motion to one quaner of the
amplitude of 'no lrench' condition. For passive isolation, a semkircular plan area behind the
trench at a distance LR with lhe depth of trench equal to 1.33L~ would give effective
isolation.
Lee and R.J. Suedkamp (1972), Charoct.ristics of ln·<gular Shap<d Compaction Curv.s of
Soils. Highway Research Record No. 381, National Academy of Seeing. Washington
DC, pp. 1- 9.
Mayne, P.W., J.S. Jones and R.P. Fedosick (1982), Su/J-surface Improvement du< to Impact
Dmsification. ASCE Geotechnical Conference, Las Vagas, Prepriat, Session B 2.
Peck, R.B. (1969). Braced Excavation and Tunnelling. State·of-the-art R<part. Proceedings
Sth International Conference on SMFE, Vol. 3. pp. 225- 290.
Soda. S. (2001), Offshore Artificial lslat~d Co~tstruction in Japan- Example of Offsltore
Airports. Proceedings 2nd Civil Engineering Conference in the Asian Region. Tokyo.
p. 77.
Som, N.N. (2000), Rectification of BuildU1g Tilt- An Unconventicnal Approach, Proceeding
Indian Oeotechnic;U Confereoce, Bombay. Vol. 2.
Som, N. and I.R.K. Raju (1989), Measuremenl of i~t-sltu lAteral Stress in Normal Calc.ulla
Soil, Proceedings 12th ln1emational Conference on SMFE. Vol. 3, pp. 1519-1522.
Som. N.N. and R.B. Sahu (1993). Investigation of Co/lapS< of an Apartm•nt Building du< to
Differential FUiing. Proc. Third lnlemational Conference on Case Histories in
Geotechnical Engineering, Missoorie-Rolla, USA.
Copyrighted material
Appendix
•
1'..,-,11+1~
--~~~~-L--•
II•~ qlunit ..a
X
•• z
•
·; .. • <r,l)
(b) Venical stress influence coefficient for uniformly distributed strip load
~.::.·-lqtunit ....
I II ! X
•
:z
•
-,- ~ (r, Z)
z
(11 e ql11
Copyrighted material
394 • Appendi:r
Table A.2 Vah»es or lv
qfui'Wt area
•• X
••
--·;····• ••
(Z, X)
1
z
a, = ql.
~·
0 0
0 o.s
o.s 0.5
I
0
2
Copyrighted material
Index
Caissons, 266.
Band drains. ll.Q box. 266
Ba.semem 1'1.1\. 1&1 open, 266
Beoring capacity, 1J!. UL 1.21 pneumatic. 266.
allowable. !L 11m Capachy of pile group. 224
from field tests. lll Causes of defect in piles, 246.
of non·homogenoou.s soil. 121 Cellular raft. L8ll
During capacity analysis Chemical And mineralogjcal d.ala. 6ll
bearing capacity factors, W Chemical injection and grouting, .Yl6
depth factcn 126 Chemical tell on water samples. 6ll
Hansen's method. 1.26 Choice of foundation type. 10.
inclination factors, 1.26 Class.ificatioa of sweJJing potential. 221.
local shear failure, 1.26 Clay minerals. 2
Mcycrl>ors method. 1.25 Illite, 2
Prandtl's analysis. 120 Kaolinite. 2
shope facton. 126 MornmorHionite. 2.. 22.5.
SktmplOn' s method, 115 Coerlicient or earth prtSSu re at rest. 1L lM
Ten.aghi's :malysis. l22 CoerfiCicnt of consolidation. 2S
VC$ic's method. 126 Cohesive fill, l81
Blad cotton soil, 22:1. Combined footing. f& l.6!l
8ortd and cast·in·situ piles in cohesionle$.<> soiL 212 Common construction problems. lll
Bored piles. 2Jl1 Components or well roundation. 268
in cohesive soil. lOS bouom pl·ua. 2.62
in cohesionless soil 205 w uing edge. 262
595
Copyrighted material
396 + f11de.T
Copyrighted material
111dcx • Jn
Fallu~< mechanism, U! GrouNI improvement In cranulat soU, J26
ccncnJ .,....., failure. w __....piles. 332
1oco1 • • r..~m<. ta coocro1 or fidd WO<t. 332
punchin& • • foil=. 111 dynamic coruoi•dallon. m
heavy tampina or drop hammer. 126
triiLIJround improvement. Jll
F"~<ld conuol for pn:loadin&. lll vibrocompaction. l30
f ' o d c l - - fa< prcloodooc. ll.Q Ground impvvc:mmt
lidd I<Siin& or IOils. 40 priftcipks or. Jill
dim:t she• ,... (ln·litu). tl Oround ldllcm<nl. 350, 377
dynamic cone penetJ ation ltst. !3: Ground treatment in cohtsive soil. ~
Menard pressuremeu:r, 49. Ground waaer table, 1.1
plate burin& OtSI. !18 0<-oolndw-. lll
~- 4! aquif<f. IJl
SIIDdardpct..badooOtSI. 41 aquifuJ<. II
Sialic cone pcnetr.rion tdt. U. aquitanl. lJ
V aoe lhear test. ~ capillary zone. ll
Flooting r...da·ion. 11& r<eharac. lll
Wlltf table. lQ
- - IWCOII<. l. JIIS
Foras Odin& .. well foundadoo. m ..... o r - tt
-
d1<mleal
obi"' in expons~~ 1011.
,...,m-. m m
CNS layer. Jll.l Honeycombed suvcture, 1
c:ootrollinl swellina. 300.
~--- lim
_....oowidulaodxa- m LS. code - 2Ml
aurdlata< loodinr,. 3W lrnmcdi... ldll<JO<tO. w
under-reamed piles. 2!1.8 lndlan Randud ctwlncmion syau:m. 8
Foundations lnllucn« of ....,.poll>. u.&
deep. 6l. 6& lnlluentt zoot in bnccd cuL liD:
..,ca.y. U& Wa<madoo roquiml f,_ soil invad&- ll
... ....s. ll2 ln-11tu compusibi.bty. 2S
,.n or mil. 61 1n-·siru stress. l6
shallow, 66 lnteariCY ICSiin& of piJel. ~
Frtt-sweU teSt. ~ lncerference dfm.. Ll2
Friction pila. 200 I......,...,W.~ IS
F'iidiooal fHtPMW"e. 206 l -. t l
in cch<sionleu soil. 210 Jtolll<d roo11nr.. ~ ~IoA
in cohesive soil, 2D1
Fuodamcntal period. l:i2
Llbonta<y 1<$1 ....... 60
Labanlo<y ...... 11
GcoloP<aiiWV<l' tepOIU .... . . _ y Locey' s silt ,....,, 2l1
Oc<>phys>Cil - - y l..lnd fil1ing. l&S
Orain-siz.c d1mlbution. 1 Lara• area loadina. 325
Onmular nn. l81 Lateral liability ot wells. m
Granular soil llombaymcobod. llS
SlrU<IIIrt or. m bulthcad_.,..m
Gtoos ...S net sod ........,.., sofc beain& ~'Y·
IRCmcobod. llS
llJ Layout and nwnbcr or bord>olcs. 51
Gross ultimate bearina capudty, 10 Llmitatlons or lheorttJcal analysis. 129.
(iround aceckr~cion. lil8
398 • Index
Copy
CopynQhled naler. '
Hidden page
Prentice· Hall of India
Hidden page