See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/298921324

Review of historical buildings' foundations

Article  in  Géotechnique · June 2005

DOI: 10.1680/geot.55.5.363.66017

CITATIONS READS

5 10,386

3 authors, including:

Jarosław Przewłócki
Gdansk University of Technology
95 PUBLICATIONS   116 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Analysis of behaviour of old building's foundations View project

reliability analysis in civil engineering View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jarosław Przewłócki on 15 November 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Przewłócki, J., Dardzińska I. & Świniański, J. (2005). Géotechnique 55, No. 00, 1–10 No. 5, 363-372
Review of historical buildings’ foundations
J. P R Z E W Ł Ó C K I * , I . DA R D Z I Ń S K A * A N D J. Ś W I N I A Ń S K I †
The paper presents in brief some aspects of the history
of foundation engineering, with particular regard to its
development, applied techniques and materials. This
study concentrates on medieval and modern foundations
and is limited to the Europe area, with special emphasis
on Poland. Several types of historical foundation in
various soil conditions are considered. Basic methods of
preservation of such foundations, their drawbacks and
advantages are discussed. Several examples of historical
foundations as well as past and contemporary preserva-
tion techniques are presented in the paper.
KEYWORDS: footings/foundations; historical review
INTRODUCTION
OO
The construction of foundations is one of the oldest arts of
human activity. The Neolithic inhabitants of Switzerland
possessed knowledge of deep founding more than 12 000
years ago. They built their houses on long wooden piles
driven into the soft bottoms of shallow lakes, high above
dangerous animals and hostile neighbours. A few thousand
years later, the Babylonians found only deep alluvium in
their floodplains between the Tigris and Euphrates, which
settled under the weight of their constructions. Therefore
they raised their great monuments on mats made from reed,
allowing for high settlements. The ancient Egyptians sup-
ported pyramids on stone blocks resting on the bedrock.
Also, the ancient Greeks founded their buildings mainly on
stones, even if soil conditions were not favourable. The
greatest development in foundation engineering took place
in ancient Rome, where suitable rules were laid down and
pozzolanic concrete was utilised. The principles established
in the ancient treatise by Vitruvius were being applied in
Europe up to the 18th century, until the new ones, gained
from knowledge based on practical experience, superseded
them. Medieval builders supported their structures on stones
and brick masonry foundations, on rafts of timber, or on
wooden piles. Sometimes buildings had no foundations at
PR
all, in the modern sense.
A variety of architectural styles in successive periods, as
well as various soil conditions in particular geographical
regions, contributed to the development of different founda-
tion techniques. However, the design of historical founda-
tions was based entirely on previous experience, ancient
rules and intuition. In fact, foundation engineering was
almost always the most neglected topic of building technol-
ogy.
Many historical buildings collapsed because of wars,
floods and earthquakes; others, which still exist, suffer from
cracks and more or less serious stability problems. Some of
them badly need preservation. This requires, most of all, a
good knowledge of the character and actual state of the
Manuscript received
Discussion
* Gdańsk University of Technology, Gdańsk, Poland.
† Keller Polska Sp. z o.o., Gdańsk, Poland.
1 363
Article number = 3374
FS
(French summary)
foundation, and its interaction with the structure and under-
lying subsoil. Analysis of that interaction, together with the
structural aspects of intervention, is much more complex
than the design of a new structure. The existing historical
foundations have already passed through different, usually
unknown, stress levels. So even modern tools of geotechni-
cal investigation are unable to give a reliable model of the
mechanical soil–structure behaviour.
Preservation projects should be undertaken by technical
teams consisting of structural engineers, architects, histor-
ians, archaeologists and geotechnical engineers, where the
last have an important, and precisely defined role. Several
stabilisation methods, in relation to the historical nature of
the foundation and soil–structure interaction, should be con-
sidered. The preferred technique should lead to the least
modification of both the object and the interacting soil,
although it may often be a very expensive solution.
There is a noticeable lack of literature concerning the
foundations of historical buildings. Most papers either deal
with singular cases and their specific problems, or are
limited to particular periods and regions. Only a few papers
try to approach the subject in a more general way (e.g.
Jappelli & Marconi, 1997; Kerisel, 1975, 1985). A concise
review of foundation development over the last millennium,
based on a study of the structures of the Old City of Gdańsk
in Poland, is given in Dardzińska & Przewłócki (2002). The
aim of the present paper is to present more information on
this subject, and to discuss some of its aspects, including
foundation development, foundation types and preservation
methods.
FOUNDATION TYPES
Most medieval buildings were founded on shallow founda-
tions. Usually they were constructed of stone or brick, and
various types of mortar. In the pre-Romanesque period (5th
to 10th centuries), the common way of making foundations
on bearing soils was to drop rubble or debris into an
excavation, equal to or slightly wider than the underground
part of the building, and pour poor mortar onto it. Founda-
tion size usually depended more on the available space than
on the active loading and bearing capacity.
Typical Romanesque foundations (11th to 13th centuries)
were made in such a way that large boulders were put at the
outer sides, and debris or smaller stones were dropped into
2 364 PRZEWŁÓCKI, DARDZIŃSKA AND ŚWINIAŃSKI
the middle. Lime or clay-lime mortar was then poured.
Photographs of such foundations of Polish churches in
Głogów (Ś wiechowski, 2000), Mogilno (Chudziakowa &
Czaharowski, 1977) and Trzemeszno (Józefowiczówna,
1964), are shown respectively in Fig. 1(a), (b) and (c).
Taking into account the low quality of the mortar, it is
obvious that such foundations could not interact properly
with the structure.
The Tower of Pisa is an example of the most famous
Romanesque building founded on soft soil (Jamiołkowski et
al., 1994). Its foundation was constructed by limestone faced
with marble, resting on a layer of cemented debris, with an
underlying stone layer (Fig. 2).
Gothic foundations (12th to 16th centuries) were, in
general, more adequate, with mortar of good quality and
better-cut blocks, or later with regular bricks. Often, the
external layers of foundations were lined with ashlars. Also,
the building’s location was usually (but not always) well
selected, and the soil conditions were checked.
Three examples of Gothic foundations in Poland are
shown in Fig. 3 (Borusiewicz, 1985). The widening type of
stone foundation is presented in Fig. 3(a). Moreover, soil
conditions indicate that the soil–structure interaction was
taken into account. Many historical buildings had no founda-
tions in the modern sense, because their footings were made
OO
by extension of the cellar walls, generally without any or
with very little widening. An example of such a foundation,
underlying the Saint Maria Church in Kraków, is given in
Fig. 3(b). There is no widening of the foundation of the
Teutonic castle of Gdańsk (Fig. 3(c)), and its brick walls are
founded directly on the stone layers. In effect, the unit
pressure of the foundation wall on the ground was very
intense.
Gothic buildings were sometimes supported on shafts and
arches. These were employed mainly in cases where small
sources of groundwater or archaeological remains were
encountered during excavation. In this technique, regularly
spaced deep excavations in the form of columns were made
and filled with masonry. Then arches were constructed,
which joined the tops of the columns at a given level. Two
examples of such arch foundations—the castle of Wrocław
(Małachowicz, 1994) and the church of Saint Bartholomew
in Gdańsk (Strzelecka, 1958)—are shown in Fig. 4(a) and
(b) respectively.
Some Gothic foundations were sealed off above ground-
water level, often with clay, which prevented the capillary
rise of moisture to the brickwork of the facades and walls
above. In Venice, Istrian marble (an impermeable calcareous
PR
rock) was commonly used as the sealing agent during this
period.
The Renaissance (13th to 16th centuries) and Baroque era
(16th to 18th centuries) saw the use of foundation methods
similar to those applied in previous periods, and even some
regression. The turning point in foundation engineering took
(a)
Fig. 1. Romanesque foundations of Polish churches in: (a) Głogów; (b) Mogilno; (c) Trzemeszno
4·09 m
Facing
marble Inner
wall wall
6 0·00 m
Inner
Stone floor
filling 21·80 m
Stonerubble
1·60 m
FS
with mortar 2·7 m
2·02 m Calcareous
4·09 m
1·43 m stones
7·54 m
Silty sand
with clay layers
Fig. 2. Romanesque foundation of the Tower of Pisa
place in Neoclassical period (18th to 20th centuries). It was
strongly connected with technological advances, and the
application of new materials, such as hydraulic mortar—
called Roman concrete—and steel.
Most historical cities were situated along rivers in places
where high groundwater levels occur. The techniques of the
medieval period did not allow for excavation below ground-
water level in order to construct foundations. It was there-
fore also not possible to replace soft or organic soils
underlying foundations with sands or gravels. The effective
methods of dewatering of excavation pits were also un-
known. So short and closely spaced timber piles (like a
brush) were often driven into the weak ground in order to
compact it, to transfer load to the deeper layers and so to
improve the bearing capacity of the foundation. Such a way
of founding became commonly used in the Gothic period,
although it was already known in ancient times. Sometimes,
when weak and compressible soils were encountered at the
depth of the excavation, the builders tried to improve the
soil conditions by forcing stones into it or by placing on its
bottom a layer of flat claystones or cobblestones. At other
times no improvement at all was made, and the foundations
were placed directly on such subsoil.
Generally, buildings situated on soft soils had foundations
in the form of several beds of large stones or bricks resting
on wooden piles and/or rafts. Often, foundations in the form
of masonry walls increasing in width with depth were
founded on gravel or large flints put directly over the peat,
into which short vertical timber piles were driven. Some-
times gravel, stones and weak mortar were placed inside a
wooden form, which was then pushed into the peat layer.
Timber foundation elements were always placed below the
lowest, expected groundwater level, because builders from
the oldest times had known that timber does not decay in
water. Piles were made from various types of wood (oak,
pine, alder, beech), which after little or no treatment, except
for debranching, were hammered into the ground with the
thinner top-end downwards. Timber rafts were situated hor-
izontally beneath layers of bricks or stones. Different types
(b) (c)
 REVIEW OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS’ FOUNDATIONS 365 3
0·28 m 1·46 m 0·28 m
0·25 m 1·30 m 0·25 m Brick
masonry
Brick
masonry Masonry
10·00 m with dressed 1·07 m
limestone
facing
Ashlar
1·45 m limestone 0·60 m

FS
0·25 m 1·60m 0·25m
Rubble
60·00 m limestone
masonry
Humus
0·85 m 0·10m 2·10m 0·10m 3·55 m
Boulders Fill
masonry material
1·00 m
NN
CLAY
24·15 m
22·40 m Sand
with silt 2·02 m
2·30m Sand
(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 3. The Gothic foundations of: (a) the church in Trzemeszno; (b) the Saint Maria church in
Kraków; (c) the Teutonic castle of Gdańsk

OO
(a) (b)

Fig. 4. Gothic arch foundations: (a) castle of Wrocław; (b) church of Saint Bartholomew, Gdańsk

of timber construction were used over the centuries (Borr-

mann, 1992; Ladjarevic & Goldscheider, 1997). The simplest
consisted, independently of soil layers, of sharpened short GW
GW
piles (1.5–3 m long) driven close to one another into the
soil (Fig. 5(a)). This type of foundation was used until the
18th century. Other types of timber foundations commonly
used in the Middle Ages consisted of horizontal timber
sleepers put lengthwise and crosswise under the foundation
base (Fig. 5(b)), or a combination of short piles with an
overlaid grillage of sleepers (Fig. 5(c)). Later, such construc-
tion methods were improved by joining the timber elements
with tendons, clamps or iron flaps, in the form of a grillage. (a) (b)
PR

In the 16th century, longer and thicker piles, combined

with different kinds of grillage, started to be used (Fig. 6).
Such sophisticated structural systems were able to transfer
the load to the deeper layers of the hard soils below.
The scheme presented in Fig. 7(a) is an example of a
Gothic foundation laid down on a soft subsoil (Dembicki et
al., 1995). It shows the western brick wall of the castle of
Malbork in Poland, which is founded on a stone layer,
resting on the timber construction. The latter consists of two
rows of piles of 3 m length, and a large number of short
piles in the middle, designed to compact the underlying
GW
GW
,3 m
(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Timber shallow foundations and on short piles
Fig. 6. Timber deep foundations
loose sand. Fig. 7(b) represents the so-called ‘Cistercian’
foundation, as used in the Cistercian Lure Abbey in France
(Bustamante & Gianeselli, 2000). The masonry wall is here
built directly on the timber platform, resting on oak piles
(120–150 mm in diameter and of unknown length). There
are no signs of stepping out of the wall to form a footing.
So the foundation appears to be inadequate, with little
awareness of the part played by the underlying soil. It is
worth noting that the 18th-century architects in charge of
restyling the Abbey showed no better understanding.
GW Two examples of modern foundations are shown in Fig. 8.
The first (Fig. 8(a)) confirms the conclusion that no progress
was made during the Baroque period (Ortolan et al., 1988).
In contrast, the foundation of the Reichstag building (Fig.
(c)
8(b)) is an example of good modern foundation engineering
(Quick et al., 1997). Different foundation elements were
used in this case. The connection between adjacent deep-
4 366 PRZEWŁÓCKI, DARDZIŃSKA AND ŚWINIAŃSKI
4·00 m
Brick Sandstone 2·10 m
60·00 m
masonry masonry
0·40 m with lime
Humus mortar 60·00 m

Limestone Fill 20·50 m

with lime 3·00 m Stone
Limestone Fill 1·50 m fragments
mortar Fill

FS
on the clay material with lime mortar
Clay layer 0·40 m
22·20 m
2·50 m
Medium Timber
Dense clayey
sand gravel with platform
Wooden 0·50 m peat lenses
piles Oak piles
18–22 cm in 3·80 m
Wooden piles 24·40 m 120–150 mm
diameter 4·50 m Silty clay with
30 cm in diameter
5·50 m lenses of soft clay

(a) (b)

Fig. 7. Foundations of: (a) castle of Malbork (14th century); (b) Cistercian Lure Abbey (sixteenth century)

60·00 m Stones

0·40 m 60·00 m

0·90 m
Fill 22·20 m 2·45 m
material
Stones
with 22·10 m
Chalk 1·40 m

Clay
OO
1·95 m

0·80 m
mortar
Fragments
of wood
Timber piles
Fine–
stone wall

medium
sand
0·15 m

Wooden
sheet
wall
3·85 m

10–15 cm
Sand·
gravelly Timber
medium dense 1·00 m
1·40 m piles

(a) (b)

Fig. 8. (a) North wall foundation of Greater Savina Monastery in Herzegovina (18th
century); (b) foundations with inverted arches and timber piles of Reichstag building in
Berlin (19th century)

reaching, highly loaded parts of the building and the shal-
lower, less loaded foundations was achieved through the
continual transition in the foundation thickness and through
an ordering of inverted arches, in the best interest of saving
material and regular pressure transfer. The foundation
scheme indicates the designer’s great knowledge of structural
and soil mechanics. It is worth noting that, before the
construction of the foundations of the Reichstag building
started, several boreholes and excavations had been per-
formed, and the soil condition was carefully analysed. In
PR
interesting to see the large deformation of the timber
grillage.
PRESERVATION METHODS
Causes of preservation actions
Many historical buildings are still undergoing various
changes. Some of them were badly constructed and founded.
Their performance is greatly affected by soil properties, type
of foundation and soil–structure interaction. The main pro-

addition, some foundation elements were dug under the
protection of wooden sheet walls.
Photographs of two Baroque foundations for the historical
granary in Gdańsk (Poland), founded on the swampy subsoil,
are shown in Fig. 9. The timber and arch foundations were
constructed beneath different walls of the granary. It is
blems are poor characteristics of the subsoil, low quality of
mortar in the masonry structure and in its foundations, and/
or deterioration of supporting wooden constructions.
Many buildings were severely damaged as a result of rain
and changes in the groundwater, subsidence produced by a
decrease of water level caused by pumping from deep wells,

Fig. 9. Timber and arch foundations of the historical granary in Gdańsk

 REVIEW OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS’ FOUNDATIONS
dissolving of bedrock minerals, mining cavities, movements
of nearby slopes, failure of sewage systems or careless
occupation.
In many cases the load distribution on the bearing mem-
bers was significantly modified by various later events, such
as restoration works or the construction of adjacent build-
ings. Extensive destruction of historical buildings was also
caused by industrial pollution, or by deterioration of the
construction materials of walls and foundations that usually
occurred in places exposed to long-lasting, extensive moist-
ure. Many historical buildings, especially churches, were
erected on the foundations of previous objects. Very often
this led to large differential settlements induced by non-
uniformity of contact pressure.
Groundwater level has a significant influence on the
durability of timber piles. Usually, piles show strong decay
after groundwater lowering. Even a temporary change in the
environment around the piles may cause rapid and severe
decay of the foundation. However, whether such decay
develops depends strongly on the type of soil surrounding a
wooden element. There are ideal conditions for decay in
sandy soils. For clay, capillary lifting of water in combina-
tion with the superficial activity of clay particles lessens the
possibility of the process. In peat, the development of decay
is in fact not possible, because it contains natural wood
OO
preservatives, which are able to hold up the moisture.
Preservation strategy
In order to protect historical buildings, an exact picture of
the structural state of the existing structure is required, and,
in particular, the nature of its foundations. To define the
current situation, the first step is to analyse the historical
background of the construction in connection with the load
processes it has undergone. Unfortunately this is often
difficult, as old documents are rarely available, past survey
measurements are frequently unreliable or non-existent, and
restorations following damage have often masked the origi-
nal construction. When dealing with historical foundations it
is important to have precise data about the dimensions of
the existing foundation, and the characteristics of its material
and underlying subsoil. In the case of pile foundations,
knowledge of the state of preservation of the timber and of
the piles’ dimensions is of the utmost importance. Archae-
ological studies play an essential role in understanding the
behaviour of historical foundations. The type, dimensions
and depth of the foundations have to be determined by
subsurface exploration. Exploratory pits and trenches are
PR
most suitable for this purpose. Some other important data,
used in analysis, may be obtained with modern technology
and sophisticated in-situ methods. Coring and video camera
surveys may be applied first to determine the structural
characteristics of the foundation or the masonry.
Geotechnical problems usually play an important part in
the past behaviour of historical buildings, and they influence
the design of preservation works. The geotechnical engi-
neer’s role is to assess the behaviour of the foundation and
the underlying subsoil, and to make proper use of modern
foundation engineering techniques. Foundations of historical
buildings must fulfil the requirements of sufficient bearing
capacity and serviceability. If the bearing capacity is insuffi-
cient, suitable strengthening of the foundation is essential. A
certain amount of additional settlement can be accepted
(mainly in the interests of cost savings), and action should
be taken only if it endangers the serviceability of the
structure.
In order to preserve an historical building subject to the
harmful influence of geotechnical factors, the foundations
and/or the underlying subsoil must generally be improved.
367 5
According to Calabresi & D’Agostino (1997), and some
modifications by the present authors, the appropriate meth-
ods of preservation can be divided into the following
groups:
(a) replacing the whole historical structure or its foundation
(b) widening the load-transmitting surfaces, lowering the
FS
foundation level, strengthening the existing foundations
(c) inclusion in the soil of structural elements such as
piles, micropiles and tendons, and underpinning or
substituting foundation structures
(d) improving the subsoil by chemical or cement grouting,
or electro-osmosis
(e) modifying the effective stress field in the soil by
drainage or consolidation
( f ) restoring or preserving the original conditions of soil
and structure (soil water content, masonry moisture
conditions, anti-bacterial protection of wooden struc-
tures).
The main problem in the preservation of historical foun-
dations, given the present state of technology, is to make an
adequate choice out of the many methods available that can
produce satisfactory results. The preferred method should
lead to the least modification of the object and the interact-
ing soil, although it may not be the cheapest one. If the aim
of the preservation works is to save the material history of
the building, then any redundant change of its characteristics
should be avoided. In any case, the various methods should
be analysed, and the advantages and disadvantages of each
of them must be considered in relation to the particular
foundation.
It should be emphasised that there is no one universal
method that can be uncritically applied in every circum-
stance. Even the most modern, effective and reliable techni-
ques, such as micropiles or jet grouting, can in some cases
cause deterioration of the foundation and eventually lead to
the collapse of the building. Sometimes it is better to do
nothing than to try to improve the structure in an unsuitable
way, which, unfortunately, is what happens sometimes.
Replacing the whole historical structure or its foundation
In sporadic cases, the material history and intrinsic value
of historical buildings determine the method of intervention.
For example, because of the construction of the dam, the
only way to save the Izyda Temple in File Island (Egypt)
was to dismantle it and rebuild elsewhere, at the cost of
losing part of the original structure. Despite the enormous
financial cost of this enterprise, the tremendous historical
worth of this great heritage of Egyptian civilisation more
than justified such a procedure. Another way of saving the
intrinsic value of historical buildings may be their relocation
without dismantling. The first such case took place in the
15th century, when the 25 m high masonry bell tower of the
Saint Maria Church in Bologna was displaced a distance of
almost 25 m.
Available records describe numerous ‘engineering’ at-
tempts to improve the foundations of historical buildings to
stop differential and excessive settlements. Some of these
attempts were very complex. An example of the total
replacement of the foundation underlying one of the pillars
of St John’s Church in Gdańsk (Poland), executed a few
centuries ago, is shown in Fig. 10 (Bukowski, 1948).
Strengthening, deepening or widening the foundation
Some historical foundations can be effectively recon-
structed by grouting, using a cement–sand–clay–water mix-
ture. Cement grouting can also in some cases strengthen the
6 368 PRZEWŁÓCKI, DARDZIŃSKA AND ŚWINIAŃSKI
Bricks Bricks
with lime with lime
60·00 m mortar 60·00 m
mortar
Small stones, Bigger Refill
brick pieces, stones (sand
lime without Large and
lime stones peat)
with lime
Wooden mortar Wooden

FS
22·80 m box beams on
fascine
0·30 m mattress
Field stones 23·50 m
with clay 3·00/3·00 m
0·35 m
3·00/3·00 m
(a) (b)

Fig. 10. Foundation under a pillar of St John Church in Gdańsk: (a) initial (1460);
(b) rebuilt (1693)

soil under the foundation and around it. In addition, tradi-

tional improvement methods include such techniques as
increasing the depth of the foundation or enlarging its base Sea
and underpinning. level
Reconstruction of the foundation by deepening it is widely
used when sumps, filled-up wells or subsoil-loosening zones
exist under the building or in its vicinity. Increasing the
foundation depth by underpinning with bricks may be Old foundation
applied in cases of considerable fissures and cracks in the
building construction.
OO
Enlarging the base of the foundation while maintaining
the existing depth should be used when only small damage
to the building has occurred. It permits the enlarged founda-
New foundation New foundation

Fig. 12. Foundations of the bell tower of St Mark’s in Venice

tion to remain on weak subsoil, as a result of the consider-

able reduction of the unit pressure on the ground. The
concept of conventional underpinning of the foundation by
increasing its effective bearing area for the Cathedral of St
Martin in Landshud (Germany) is presented in Fig. 11
(Hilmer, 1981). The advantage of this technique is that the
new concrete foundation embraces and confines the old one.
The bell tower of St Mark’s in Venice is a spectacular
example of foundation reconstruction (Colombo & Collesel-
li, 1997). The original tower had collapsed, and was to be
rebuilt exactly in the same place. Because the original
foundation was found to be in good condition, it was
retained and enlarged by a grafted outer wall (Fig. 12),
which consisted of over 3000 larch piles. Additionally, a
new grid formed of three layers of oak planks penetrated
and overlapped the old ones, strengthening the historical
foundation.
PR
the new piles, pile-caps are constructed and attached to the
old foundation with prestressing tendons. However, such a
system depends mainly on the quality of the historical
foundations. Also, this solution could cause undesirable
‘hard spots’ beneath the strengthened foundations, which
could lead to redistribution of stresses in the structure if
additional ground settlement occurs.
At present, micropiles are the most commonly used
method for underpinning. They can be applied for almost
any kind of restoration of the foundations of monuments and
historical buildings. This method is often chosen because of
its supposed minor risk of uneven settlement during installa-
tion and its relatively low cost. The application of micropiles
allows for operation of a rig in a confined space (such as a
cellar), and usually results in a considerable reduction of soil
disturbance. The technique does not disturb the existing, old
foundation, and is relatively free from vibration. The dis-
advantage of the method is that it relies entirely on the old

Underpinning with piles foundation to transfer the load to the new pile-caps. Also,
In underpinning by piling, vertical shafts are bored to the the low capacity of a single pile may necessitate the installa-
top of the rigid soil layer, or a little deeper, and filled with tion of a large number of piles, which may tend to weaken
concrete reinforced with steel bars. To transfer the load to the historical foundation. Increased pile length, required if
the load is to be transferred to deeper hard soil layers,
Brick makes the method more expensive. It should be pointed out
Cemented
gravel masonry that underpinning with micropiles destroys the soil under-
lying the foundation, and decreases the possibility of analy-
Concrete
sis of the sedimentary layers of the historical construction.
1·50 m To connect the micropiles to the structure supported by
them, piles can be drilled through the old foundation. They
can be also drilled either on one side or at both sides close
1·00 m to the old foundation and then connected to the wall with
anchors, crossbeams or concrete plates. The choice of the
0·50 m appropriate connection depends on the dimensions of the
supported wall or pillar, on the spatial conditions, and on
Cross-beam the bearing capacity of the subsoil layers. The very ‘rigid’
1·25 m 1·70 m 1·25 m behaviour of micropile underpinnings is often welcomed, but
becomes unfavourable if neighbouring, untreated foundations
Fig. 11. Underpinning of Cathedral of St Martin in Landshud will continue to settle, resulting in additional differential
with a new concrete foundation settlement. If the foundation of the historical building with
 REVIEW OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS’ FOUNDATIONS 369 7
ongoing settlements requires only partial stabilisation, a to the type of treated soil, the type and parameters of
‘soft’ underpinning is recommended. The settlement rates Soilcrete process, and may reach from 0.3 m up to 2.5 m. In
can be reduced step by step, according to the settlement practice, the jet grouting method allows the creation of
rates of the non-restored areas, and can thus be smoothly Soilcrete columns up to 3.5 m in diameter, and of inner
adjusted. For this purpose, micropiles are recommended with unconfined strength from 1 MPa for organic soils and up to
a short and enlarged foot, or with an adjustment device. 20 MPa for sandy-gravely soils.

FS
An example of underpinning by means of micropiles for The application of jet grouting requires both experience
the castle of Malbork (Poland) is presented in Fig. 13 and flexibility in the design, and a particularly careful
(Dembicki et al., 1995). execution of the work. The beginning of the Soilcrete works
Photographs of some details of underpinning with micro- is usually the most difficult stage of the operation, because
piles of the castle of Malbork, such as pile-caps or prestres- of the risk of additional unacceptable settlement or local
sing tendons, constructed in succeeding stages, are shown in failure of the existing foundations. It is important to make a
Fig. 14 (Najder, 2004, private communication and unpub- proper survey of the subsoil and an inventory of the existing
lished data). foundations before jet grouting begins. Further checks and
monitoring should be made during the construction period.
A few examples of the application of jet grouting methods
Underpinning with jet grouting are presented in the following.
The Soilcrete jet grouting process (¼ soil + concrete, Because of heavy floods along the Odra River in 1997,
name introduced by Keller Company) is a type of soil increased damage and differential settlement were observed
stabilisation with cement. With the help of high-pressure on the chapel walls of the old castle in Raciborz (Poland).
(20–40 MPa) cutting jets of water or cement suspension, Organic deposits (peat and mud) reaching a depth of 3 m
with a nozzle exit velocity of 100 m/s or more, the soil were found. The observed damage was attributed to a de-
around the borehole is eroded. The eroded soil is rearranged, crease of some of the soil parameters, and to the decay of
mixed with cement suspension and partly flushed out to the timber piles and organic soil compounds due to long-lasting
top of the borehole through the annular space between the moisture. Originally, the castle was founded on short wooden
OO
drilling and jet grouting rod and the borehole. Different
geometrical configurations of Soilcrete elements, such as
piles situated directly under the stone foundations. The
underpinning of the foundation by means of two rows of
lamellae or panels, quarter, half and complete columns, can piles in a form of pile trestle made with the help of the jet
be produced. The erosion distance of the jet varies according grouting technique is shown in Fig. 15 (Noga & Kościk,
2001). First, small-diameter drilling and grouting rods were
0·90 m 3·00 m 0·90 m
driven through the brick and stone masonry. Then jet grout-
0·60 m Brick 0·50 m 60·00 m ing piles 60 cm in diameter, reinforced with steel pipes,
masonry were constructed under the existing foundation level. Pile
0·90 m trestles were spaced at 1.0–1.5 m along the chapel walls. It
Prestressing Brick Drainage0·90m is worth noting that all stone foundations had previously
ropes in and stone
plastic tube masonry Reinforced been strengthened by a cement injection. Then, the partly
girt beam decayed wooden piles were cut and flushed out.
24·00 m Brick 3·20 m The important difference between the latter case and that
Wooden rubble
grid
presented in Fig. 15 is that the jet grouting piles fulfilled
Sand their static function without the additional caps or reinfor-
Wooden cing beams that are usually necessary when using micro-
piles
piles.
Micropiles The second example refers to the already mentioned St
c/c 85 cm John’s Church in Gdańsk, where prevention attempts under-
40 cm in
diameter 5·80 m taken a few centuries ago (Fig. 10) had failed. The eastern
part of the walls and a few pillars of the church located
Micropiles
c/c 85 cm closer to the river and founded on deeper organic deposits
40 cm in had settled over the centuries by up to 75 cm, and the
diameter
PR

settlement rate has nowadays increased owing to the lower-

1·00 m ing of groundwater level. The eastern wall suffered tilting,
resulting in 140 cm of horizontal displacement at the top of
Fig. 13. Underpinning by means of micropiles, Malbork Castle the wall. Six of the eastern pillars have shown excessive

Fig. 14. Details of underpinning of foundations of Malbork castle

8 370 PRZEWŁÓCKI, DARDZIŃSKA AND ŚWINIAŃSKI
20° 1·75m 20° were strengthened by low-pressure cement injection to avoid
Floor decomposition of the whole stone structure by the drilling
20·50 m chapel 60·00 m
level 1·00m Drilling and jet grouting. After that, a closed vertical wall made of
1·00m level Soilcrete panels was constructed around the whole founda-
1·90m tion to ensure its stability and minimise additional horizontal
2·70m Planned
floor
displacement. Then the other Soilcrete elements were made

FS
crypt level according to the design.
To avoid unacceptable additional settlement, jet grouting
Injection piles work under all foundations was carried out step by step, to
60 cm in
diameter allow time for hardening of Soilcrete elements made in a
reinforced of previous sequence. During 100 days of underpinning works,
steel pipe
the foundations of the eastern walls have settled, without
damages, by about 7 mm and the pillar foundations by up to
11 mm. Geodetic measurements taken over the subsequent
four years (1995–2000) have shown significant settlement
Fig. 15. Jet grouting piles made for underpinning of foundation stabilisation within an average deviation of
0.5 mm.
of chapel of castle in Raciborz The application of the jet grouting technique to increase
the bearing capacity of historical foundations due to changed
usage of the historical granary in Bydgoszcz is shown in
settlement, horizontal displacements and dangerous buckling Fig. 17(a). The four-storey, 150-year-old granary building
(Topolnicki, 2004). was to be converted to a modern hotel and commercial
The underpinning of the pillars was the most complex centre, but the old facade and main construction elements
task. Up to 32 Soilcrete elements (panels, sectors and had to be preserved. The new usage increased loads and
complete columns) had to be installed over several weeks to introduced a few new construction elements, such as lift and
stabilise just one pillar, for example No. C7 shown in Fig. stairs shafts. Some of the new shafts had to be erected close
OO
16. Prior to the jet grouting works, the stone foundations

a
to existing old brick pillars, as shown in Fig. 17(a). Origin-

a–a

60·0

23·5
24·0
Peat
a min.
25·0
max.
25.5
Organic
soil

27·0
Sand
27·5

Fig. 16. Layout of Soilcrete elements made for underpinning, and cross-section of C7
PR

pillar foundation of St John Church in Gdańsk

1·13 m
1·00 m 0·90 m
Outside 0·20 m 0·20 m
brick wall
Planned slab Present
of reinforced Brick floor
concrete pillar level

0·40 m Brick 0·48 m

foundation
Lean
concrete Planned
B10 2·40 m floor
level
NN 1·20 m
4·80 m 1·80 m 1·50 m
Additional
Soilcrete
Medium strengthening columns 1·00 m 0·30 m 1·00 m
of pillar Soilcrete 100 cm
sand by 4 special columns
Soilcrete in diameter 1·90 m
panels 80 cm in diameter
(a) (b)
Fig. 17. Soilcrete columns underpinning foundations of: (a) historical granary in Bydgoszcz; (b) hotel in
Warsaw
 REVIEW OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS’ FOUNDATIONS
ally the pillars were founded on old fills and medium-dense
sands, locally containing some organic additives. The geo-
technical task was to increase the bearing capacity of the
pillar foundations and to avoid additional settlement due to
the construction of new plate foundations for the commu-
nication shafts. First, four Soilcrete panels under the pillar
foundation were made step by step to transferring the pillar
loads to deeper, dense sands. In the second stage 80 cm
diameter Soilcrete columns, the supporting slab and plate
foundations of the new communication shafts, were in-
stalled.
The application of jet grouting to the general reconstruc-
tion of an historical, six-storey hotel in Warsaw is shown in
Fig. 17(b). The new level of the underground floor after
renovation had to be lowered by 48 cm, which significantly
reduced the bearing capacity of the existing brick founda-
tions. To avoid foundation failure, underpinning of the
foundations with the help of the jet grouting technique was
proposed. To facilitate static analysis for the new design, 40
trial pits and trenches were dug to examine the geometry
and foundation levels. Inventory has shown that the assumed
lowering of the underground floor would reduce the mini-
mum foundation embedment depth Dmin to below 50 cm for
more than 75% of all foundation types examined in the trial
pits. Therefore, under each foundation two rows of short
OO
Soilcrete columns with length from 1.0 m to 2.4 m were
constructed (see Fig. 16(b)). Pairs of Soilcrete columns of
100 cm in diameter were spaced along the walls at between
1.0 m and 1.5 m intervals. Using a specially developed
calculation sheet, based on the Polish geotechnical standard
for shallow foundations, the column lengths and spacing
were adjusted to satisfy the bearing capacity limit state. In
all, 570 short Soilcrete columns have been installed under
the foundations of the building. An increase in bearing
capacity of 30–50% has been achieved by using the above
design procedure and solution.
Other preservation techniques
The Tower of Pisa is one of the most spectacular cases of
the need for structural protection. The stabilisation of the
bell tower has proved to be an immensely difficult challenge
for civil engineers. A permanent solution was sought that
would result in only a small reduction of inclination. Various
methods have been considered to preserve its foundation,
including drainage, consolidation beneath the north side by
electro-osmosis, consolidation by loading the ground around
part of the tower with slabs, and loading with anchors. None
PR
of these methods proved satisfactory: there were too many
doubts about their effectiveness. Any disturbance to the
ground on the inclined side could be very dangerous, which
ruled out such conventional geotechnical processes as under-
pinning and grouting. The technique of soil extraction (Bur-
land et al., 2002) has provided a gentle method for
increasing the stability of the tower, and at the same time is
fully consistent with the requirements of architectural con-
servation. In this method, small amounts of soil from
precisely determined locations beneath the tower foundations
are slowly and carefully removed. This technique requires
special equipment, and involves the installation of a number
of soil extraction tubes just beneath the foundation. Its
implementation has involved advanced computer modelling,
large-scale development trials, an exceptional level of con-
tinuous monitoring, and an exacting communication and
control system.
The wooden foundations of historical buildings may be
saved using the EUROBOR method (Brick & Jerbo, 1997).
EUROBOR is a suspension consisting of certain boron com-
pounds (borate, boric acid). For higher soil porosities, it is
371 9
applied with the bentonite. Boron compounds kill all the
corroding microbes and fungi, and protect the timber against
reinfection. The EUROBOR is mixed on site and fed to the
injection pipes through pumps and flexible hoses. Then it is
injected at low pressure into the ground around the corroded
or threatened piles or rafts. The EUROBOR method is
FS
unique in its flexibility, low cost, and safety to the environ-
ment.
Some silty soils, such as loess, lose much of their suscept-
ibility to collapse after being wetted. In cases of humidifica-
tion of such foundation soils due to the infiltration of water,
special measures should be taken. They include use of
drainage systems, a rational levelling of the area and/or
sewer lines, and measures to maintain the groundwater at a
constant low level. Traditional or present-day improvement
methods of strengthening foundations in such soils can be
less effective or even useless.
CONCLUSIONS
Numerous historical buildings were destroyed or collapsed
a long time ago, and all that remains is their foundations.
Other historical foundations still support successfully mar-
vellous structures. Many ancient and medieval architects
possessed a knowledge of foundations for structures based
on experience, guesswork and intuition. However, they were
not able to anticipate various problems of the soil–structure
interaction. Also, they knew little of proper building techni-
ques, and they did not have sufficiently good building
materials. In fact, foundation engineering was one of the
most neglected topics in the history of architecture.
In general, there was no significant progress in foundation
engineering in the medieval period compared with the
ancient period, with the possible exception of Gothic founda-
tions. No significant progress, and even some regression,
took place in modern times. The turning point was the
Neoclassicical period, thanks to technological advances and
the development of new materials, mainly Roman concrete
and steel.
The methods used to preserve historical foundations
should ensure the least possible modification of the object
and of the interacting soil. Modern techniques with different
kind of piles and soil improvement may save the building,
but quite often the original foundation, which forms a part
of the cultural heritage, is lost. These methods do not cause
considerable violation of the primary state of stresses, so
they do not lead to disturbance of the soil under and in the
vicinity of the foundation. They result in a significant im-
provement of soil resistance, and do not pollute the environ-
ment. The expansion of new methods of stabilisation of
historical foundations depends strongly on the development
of special equipment. Traditional methods of underpinning
are both laborious and expensive. They require either partial
or complete exposure of the foundations. This can result in
a significant change of stresses, which may lead to addi-
tional settlements. Also, deep excavations may be a menace
to building stability. However, these methods are usually
associated with hand excavation, which sometimes results in
interesting archaeological finds.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to express their gratitude to Keller
Polska and the Najder Engineering for their kind coopera-
tion, and for providing some data used in the study.
 10 372 PRZEWŁÓCKI, DARDZIŃSKA AND ŚWINIAŃSKI
REFERENCES
Borrmann, M. (1992). Historische Pfahlgründungen Institut für
Baugeschichte der Universität Karlsruhe, No. 3.
Borusiewicz, W. (1985). Masonry buildings in Poland Warszawa–
Kraków: PWN (in Polish).
Brick, C. & Jerbo, A. (1997). EUROBOR–Venezia care: highlights
of the in situ preservation of wooden foundation. Proceedings of
the international symposium on geotechnical engineering for
the preservation of monuments and historic sites, Napoli, pp.
427–433.
Bukowski, B. (1948). Foundation engineering anno domini 1460–
1693–1769. Przegla̧d Budowlany, No. 3, 98–101 (in Polish).
Burland, J., Jamiolkowski, M. & Viggiani, C. (2002). Preserving
Pisa’s treasure. Civil Engineering Magazine, March, 1–8.
Bustamante, M. & Gianeselli, L. (2000). Underpinning of Second
Empire Justice Court. Proceedings of the international confer-
ence on preservation of the engineering heritage, Gdańsk Out-
look, pp. 49–56.
Calabresi, G. & D’Agostino, S. (1997). Monuments and historic
sites: intervention techniques, Proceedings of the international
symposium on geotechnical engineering for the preservation of
monuments and historic sites, Naples, pp. 409–425.
Chudziakowa, J. & Czaharowski, A. (1977). Benedictine abbey in
Mogilno. Toruń: PWN (in Polish).
Colombo, P. & Colleselli, F. (1997). Preservation problems in
historical and artistic monuments of Venice. Proceedings of
the international symposium on geotechnical engineering for
the preservation of monuments and historic sites, Naples, pp.
435–445.
OO
Dardzińska, I. & Przewłócki, J. (2002). Characteristics of founda-
tions of historical buildings of Gdańsk City. Inżynieria Morska i
Geotechnika, No. 6, 329–336 (in Polish).
Dembicki, E., Odrobiński, W. & Sanglerat, G. (1995). Chateau des
Chevaliers Teutoniques de Malbork. Les Cahiers de l’expertise
judiciare 7, No. 3, 83–100.
Hilmer, K. (1981). Saving old buildings. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Soil
Mech. Found. Engng, Stockholm, 111–116.
Jamiołkowski, M., Lanceelotta, R. & Pepe, C. (1994). The leaning
Tower of Pisa,. Inżynieria Morska i Geotechnika, No. 1, 17–26
(in Polish).
Jappelli, R. & Marconi, N. (1997). Recommendations and preju-
dices in the realm of foundation engineering in Italy: a historical
PR
View publication stats
review. Proceedings of the international symposium on geotech-
nical engineering for the preservation of monuments and his-
toric sites, Naples, pp. 191–212.
Józefowiczówna, K. (1964). The pre-Romanesque and Romanesque
explorations in ancient abbey of regular canons in Trzemeszno.
Archeologia Polonia VI, PAN (in Polish).
Kerisel, J. (1975). Old structure in relation to soil conditions.
FS
Géotechnique 25, No. 8, 433–483.
Kerisel, J. (1985). Histoire de l’ingénierie géomécanique jusqu’à
1700. Proc. 11th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Engng, San
Francisco, Volume de jubilee.
Ladjarevic, M. & Goldscheider, M. (1997). Determination of the
length of old timber piles by the hammer-blow method. Pro-
ceedings of the international symposium on geotechnical engi-
neering for the preservation of monuments and historic sites,
Naples, pp. 215–223.
Małachowicz, E. (1994). The castle of Wrocław and Saint Cross
Church in Ostrowie. Wrocław: Oficyna Wydawnicza PWr. (in
Polish).
Noga, L. & Kościk P. (2001) Application of jet grouting technique
in soil and foundation improvement. XVI Ogólnopolska Kon-
ferencja: Warsztat Pracy Projektanta Konstrukcji. Ustroń (in
Polish).
Ortolan, Z., Stanić, B., Tušar, Z., Cvijanowić, D. & C̆ukvas, N.
(1988). Conditions des fondations, dégradations et mode de
réfection des bâtiments du monastère Savina à Herceg Novi,
Yougoslavie. Proceedings of the international symposium on the
engineering geology of ancient works, monuments and historical
sites: Preservation and protection, Athens, pp. 469–477.
Quick, H., Katzenbach, R. & Arslan, U. (1997). Reichstag-building,
Berlin: interaction between the historical and the new founda-
tion. Proceedings of the international symposium on geotechni-
cal engineering for the preservation of monuments and historic
sites, Naples, pp. 773–781.
Strzelecka, I. (1958). Church of St Bartholomew in Gdańsk. Labora-
tory of the Preservation of Historical Monuments (in Polish).
Świechowski, Z. (2000). Romanesque architecture in Poland. Wars-
zawa: Wydawnictwo DiG (in Polish).
Topolnicki, M. (2004). Underpinning and strengthening of the
foundations of the St John Church in Gdańsk with a help of jet
grouting method. Proceedings of the international seminar
CURE on revitalisation of city areas, Gdansk.