crrli Keywords: EPRI TR-105000 — Foundations Projact 1493-04 Foundation design Final Report Foundation movements July 1995 ‘Transmission line towers Reliability-Based Design of Foundations for Transmission Line Structures Prepared by Cornell University Ithaca, New YorkINTEREST CATEGORIES Overhead planning, analysis and design Reliability KEYWORDS Foundations Foundation design Foundation movements Transmission line towers REPORT SUMMARY Reliability-Based Design of Foundations for Transmission Line Structures This report develops probability-based design equations for both drilled shaft and spread foundations for transmission line structures. It includes probability-based design equations for the uplift, compres- sion, and lateral-moment loading modes of drilled shafts and for the uplift loading of spread foundations under varying limit state and drainage conditions. BACKGROUND _ Reliability-based concepts, which explicitly account for uncer- tainties, are becoming more prominent in all areas of structural design. This ‘approach is appropriate for the design of transmission structure foundations because present deterministic practice does not address the variability and uncer- tainty in foundation design models, site geology, soil testing methods, and charac- terization of soil properties from test results. Presently, foundations for transmission line structures are designed with a single global factor of safety. This factor of safety does not have a unique value, but can vary over a wide range depending on its defi- nition. This approach makes less efficient use of past experience because it is not defined within a consistent and common framework, and engineers can not commu- ricate and share their experiences with it effectively. Furthermore, the approach does not distinguish between model and parameter uncertainties, which makes it difficult to justify any reduction in the safety level if there is additional information or advance in the state-of-the-art. It is also unclear how the factor of safety can be extrapolated rationally and consistently to accommodate new design scenarios. OBJECTIVE _ To develop reliability-based design (RED) methodology for trans- mission line structure foundations. APPROACH _ The investigators adopted the probabilistic load model used by the ‘ASCE Task Committee on Structural Loadings for their study to maintain statistical compatibility between the RBD procedures for transmission structures and founda- tions. The basic goal of BD is to calibrate the resistance or deformation factors in some simplified design formats until a selected target reliability indexis achieved. In this instance the investigators selected the Load and Resistance Facior Design for- mat and a multiple resistance factor format for calibration. They computed the relia~ bility index using the First Order Reliability Method. They used the relabilty indices implicit in existing designs as a basis for the selection of the target index. For relia- bility analysis, they assumed the wind speed was Gumbel distributed with a coeff- cient of variation of 30 percent and load assumed to be proportional to the square of the wind speed. They systematically evaluated geotechnical variabilty from inherent soil variability, measurement error, and transformation model uncertainty using sec- ‘ond-moment probabilistic models. EPRI TR-105000s Electric Power Research InstituteRESULTS _ The rout ofthis study indicat that a target olabty index is most appropriate for foundation ultimate limit state design. For the Serconblty iit slate, a lowor target relablty Index of 28 was chosen because of the less severe failure consequences. Both simplified design formats can be calibrated to achieve the target reliability index. However, the multiple resistance factor format is more meaningful physically and ‘generally more suitable for foundation design conditions. The resistance and deformation factors in both design formats were evaluated and tabu- lated for practical use. EPRI PERSPECTIVE _Reliabilty-based methods provide a promising foundation design alterative because they can account for the uncertain- ties in determining soil properties at investigation sites and in translating these properties to each foundation location. They will also assist design- ‘rs in evaluating existing foundations for upgrading studies. Basic EPRI research on drilled shaft foundations has been published in EPRI reports EL-2870 and EL-6800. Other EPRI research on this subject hes been pub- lished in EPRI report EL-507, volumes 1-4 PROJECT RP1493.04 EPRI Project Manager: Anwar Hirany Power Delivery Group Contractor: Cornell University EPRI Members: For ordering information about this report, call the EPRI Distribution Center (510) 994-4212. For membership information, call (415) 855-2514,Reliability-Based Design of Foundations for Transmission Line Structures ‘TR-105000 Research Project 1493-04 Final Report, July 1995 Prepared by CORNELL UNIVERSITY Geotechnical Engineering Group Hollister Hall Ithaca, New York 14853-3501 Principal Investigator FH. Kulhawy Authors: K. Phoon EH. Kulhawy M. D. Grigoru Prepared for Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, California 94304 EPRI Project Manager A. Hirany Transmission Business Unit Power Delivery GroupDISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTTTUTE INC (EPR). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI ANY CCOSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, () WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ‘781 INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FTTNESS'FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (I) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OF INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED IGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (il) THAT THS REPORT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE: OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR AY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS REPORT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT. (ORGANIZATIONS) THAT PREPARED THIS REPORT. CORNELL UNIVERSITY ORDERING INFORMATION Requests for copies ofthis report should be directed to the EPRI Distribution Center, 207 Coggins Drive, P.O, Box 23205, Pleasant Hil, CA 94523, (510) 934-4212. There is no charge for reports requested by EPAl member utilis. Electric Power Research Instiute and EPRI are registered service marks of Electric Power Research Institute, In. Copyright © 1995 Comell University, All ighs reserved.ABSTRACT ‘The application of reliability methods to foundation design constitutes 2 signifi- cant improvement over the traditional deterministic approach. However, the number of reliability-based design (RSD) procedures that are suitable for practical use is limited. This study was undertaken to develop practical RBD equations for drilled shafts subjected to uplift, compression, and lateral-moment loading and spread foundations subjected to uplift, with emphasis on application to transmissicn line structure foundation design. All of the above categories were subdivided further according to the limit state (ultimate or serviceability) and drainage conditions (drained or undzained). ‘The basic goal of RBD is to calibrate the resistance or deformation factors in some simplified design formats until a selected target reliability index is achieved. ‘The Load and Resistance Factor Design format and a multiple resistance factor for~ mat were selected for calibration. The reliability index was computed using the First-Order Reliability Method. The reliability indices implicit in existing de- signs were used as a basis for the selection of the target index. For reliability analysis, the wind speed was assumed to be Gumbel-distributed with a coefficient of variation of 30 percent, and the load was assumed to be propor- tional to the square of the wind speed. Geotechnical variability was systemati- cally evaluated from inherent soil variability, measurement error, and transforma~ tion model uncertainty using second-moment probabilistic methods. ‘The results of extensive reliability studies indicate that a target reliability index of 3.2 is most appropriate for foundation ultimate limit state design. For serviceability limit state, a lower target reliability index of 2.6 was chosen because of the less severe failure consequences. Both simplified design fornats can be calibrated to achieve the target reliability index. However, the multiple resistance factor format generally is more suitable for foundation design, because the format produces more uniform reliability over different design conditions, and it is more meaningful physically. ‘The resistance and deformation factors in both design formats were evaluated and tabulated for practical use. autACKNOWLEDGMENTS: The authors appreciate the assistance of numerous people during the course of this study and want to acknowledge their contributions. At Cornell University, H.E. Stewart and C.H. Trautmann contributed many useful ideas. K.J. Stewart prepared the report text, and A. Avcisoy assisted in report preparation. Outside Cornell University, a number of colleagues assisted us in defining overall utility design practice via responding to questionnaires. These included: J.1. Adams, formerly of Ontario Hydro; D.H. Beason, Alabama Power; J.8. Billo and M-E. Kozlowski, Niagara Mohawk; G. Boos, Central Hudson Gas & Electric; A.M. DiGioia, Je., GAT Consultants; 8.R. Hart and G. Spisak, New York State Electric & Gas; L. Kempner and J.W. Rustvold, Bonneville Power Administration; J.P. Lee and T.E. Rodgers, Virginia Power; ¥.S. Radhakrishna and T. Tong, ontario Hydro? and J.J. Wolf, Western Area Power Administration. Speciel thanks go to Barzy Hart of NYSEG for assisting the first author with much background and information on design prac- tices. Special thanks also to Tony DiGioia of GAT for providing mich background on the development of the ASCE Transmission Line Loading Guide and for providing liaison among J.D. Mozer, A.H. Feyrot, himself, and us in clarifying some short- comings of this ASCE guide when applied to foundation design. And finally, several colleagues graciously responded to a request for review and evaluation of the first draft of this report. These included: 8.R. Hart, NYSEG; J.J. Wolf, WAPA; D.R. Mayo, Alabama Power; A.M. DiGioia, Jr. and J.D. Mozer, GAI; M.W. O’Neill, University of Houston; C.H. Trautmann, Cornell; and A. Hirany, EPRI Project Manager,1 2 3 Section CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Observations on Traditional Design Practice Limit State Design Non-Probabilistic Limit State Design Probabilistic Limit State Design Scope of study References RELIABILTTY-BASED DESIGN ASCE Design Problem from a Reliability Perspective Formalization of Uncertainty and Risk Assessment of Reliability Normal Random Variables Log-Normal Random Variables First-order Reliability Method Reliability-Based Design Target Probability of Failure Reliability-Based Design Format Derivation of Load and Resistance Factors Definition of Nominal Soil strength General Calibration Procedures Summary References STATISTICAL GUIDELINES ON LOADINGS Load-Producing Events Wind Speed Ice Thickness Combined Wind and Ice Special Load Events ASCE Load Model ASCE Reliability-Based Design Approach Problems in ASCE Approach Summary References vid 2-13 24 2-47 2-20 2-21 2-23 2-26 2-26 B12 31 31 3-6 38 29 3-10 3-12 au 3-20 aanSection 4 STATISTICAL GUIDELINES FOR SOIL PROPERTY EVALUATION Background Inherent Soil Variability Coefficient of Variation of Inherent Soil Variability Strength Properties Field Measurements Index Parameters Scale of Fluctuation Measurement Error Laboratory Test Field Tests Transformation Uncertainty Variability of Design Soil Parameters Undrained Shear Strength Effective Stress Friction Angle In-Situ Horizontal Stress Coefficient Young’ s Modulus Summary References 5 UPLIET OF SPREAD FOUNDATIONS Background Ultimate Limit State Under Undrained Loading Conditions Random Variables Parametric Study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration studies Serviceability Limit State Under Undrained Loading Conditions Random Variables Parametric Study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration Studies Ultimate Limit State Under Drained Loading Conditions Random Variables Parametric study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration studies Serviceability Limit State Under Drained Loading Conditions Random Variables Parametric Study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs y calibration studies 41s “19 4-20 4-21 425 4-25 4-27 431 4-39 442 aaa 4-48 4-52 Sel Se1 5-2 54 37 5-12 S17 S18 5-19 5-23 5-25 5-26 5-26 5-29 5-30 5-31 5-33 5-34 5-35 5-37Section Pag Summary and Design Recommendations 5-39 References 5-41 6 UPLIFT OF DRILLED SHAFTS 6-1 Background 61 Ultimate Limit State Under Undrained Loading Conditions 6-2 Random Variables 6-2 Parametric study 63 Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs 65 calibration studies 6-7 Serviceability Limit State Under Undrained Loading Conditions 6-8 Random Variables 6-10 Parametric study 6-12 Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs 6-13 calibration studies 6-15 Ultinate Limit State Under Drained Loading Conditions e-16 Random Variables e193 Parametric study 6-19 Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs 6-22 calibration studies 6-22 Serviceability Limit State Under Drained Loading Conditions 6-24 Random Variables 6-25 Parametric Study 6-25 Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs 6-28 calibration studies 6-29 Summary and Design Reconmendations 6-29 References 6-33 7 COMPRESSION OF DRILLED SHAFTS 7 Background 74 Ultimate Limit State Under Undrained Loading Conditions 7-2 Random Variables 13 Parametric study 1-3 Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs re calibration studies 1-6 Serviceability Limit State Under Undrained Loading Conditions 7-10 Random Variables 7-13 Parametric Study 733 Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs q-16 calibration studies 7-16 Ultimate Limit State Under Drained Loading Conditions 7-7 Random Variables 7-22 Parametric study 7-22 ixSection Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration studies Serviceability Limit State Under Drained Leading Conditions Random Variables Parametric Study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration Studies Summary and Design Recommendations References @ _LATERAL-MOMENT LOADING OF DRILLED SHAPTS Background Ultimate Limit State Under Undrained Loading Conditions Random Variables Parametric study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration Studies Serviceability Limit State Under Undrained Loading Conditions Random Variables Parametric Study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration studies Ultimate Limit State Under Drained Loading Conditions Random Variables Parametric Study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration studies Serviceability Limit State Under Drained Loading Conditions Random Variables Parametric Study Range of Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Designs calibration studies Summary and Design Recommendations References 9 SUMMARY AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS Reliability-Based Design ASCE Statistical Guidelines on Loadings Statistical Guidelines on Soil Property Evaluation Reliability-Based Foundation Design Reconmendations uplit of Spread Foundations Uplift of Drilled shafts Compression of Drilled shafts Page 7-28 1-25 7-27 7-33 7-34 7-35 7-35 7-36 142 en BL 8-2 a3 a4 8-6 8-6 8-8 e-12 8-13 e-14 8-17 e-17 e-19 8-19 8-22 8-22 8-25 8-26 8-26 8-26 8-28 8-30 8-33Section APPENDIX A. APPENDIX 8 APPENDIX € APPENDIX D APPENDIX E Lateral-Moment Loading of Drilled Shafts Concluding Remarks References STATISTICAL DATA FOR GEOTECHNICAL VARIABILITY References ILLUSTRATIVE RELIABILITY-BASED DESTGN CALCULATIONS SPREAD FOUNDATIONS IN UPLIFT Undrained Loading Drained Loading ILLUSTRATIVE RELIABILITY-BASED DESIGN CALCULATIONS DRILLED SHAFTS IN UPLIFT Undrained Loading Drained Loading ILLUSTRATIVE RELIABILITY-BASED DESIGN CALCULATIONS DRILLED SHAFTS IN COMPRESSION Undrained Loading Drained Loading ILLUSTRATIVE RELIABILITY-BASED DESIGN CALCULATIONS DRILLED SHAFTS IN LATERAL-MOMENT LOADING Undrained Leading Drained Loading xh FOR FOR FOR BL BL Ba Doi Dea EL EL B-4Figure at 12 ILLUSTRATIONS Components of Geotechnical Prediction Evaluation of Probability of Failure Normal Probability Distribution and Probability Density Function for 9 Reliability Assessment for Two Normal Random Variables, Q and F heg-Normal and Equivalent Normal Random Variables Evaluation of Probability of Failure in Original space First-order Reliability Method Tilustrative Cost-Benefit Analysis Empirical Rates of Failure for Civil Engineering Facilities Simplified Reliability-Based Design Definition of § Percent Exclusion Limit Partitioning of Parameter Space Gumbel or Extreme Type I Probability Density Function Statistical Data for Annual Maximum Wind speed Basic Wind Speed Map in ASCE Guidelines Definition of 50-Year Return Period Wind speed Radial Ice Thickness Map in ASCE Guidelines Reliability of Components Designed Using Qg = 59 Definition of Basic ASCE Reliability-Based Design Equation Effect of Wind Speed COV on Reliability of Components Designed Using Q% = F5q Uncertainty in Soil Property Estimates Inherent Soil Variability Estimation of Vertical Scale of Fluctuation cov of Inherent Variability of sy versus Mean sy COV of Inherent Variability of § versus Mean § wastcov cov cov and cov cov cov and cov cov cov cov cov cov cov cov Yr cov of of of of Inherent Inherent Inherent Inherent B Readings of of of of Inherent Inherent Inherent Inherent Epyr of of of of of of of of Inherent Inherent Inherent Inherent Variability Variability Variability Variability Variability variability Variability Variability Variability Variability Variability Variability Total Variability of Total Measurement Total Measurement Total Measurement and wp of Total Measurement of of of of of of of of of of of of Dr Error Error Error Probabilistic Characterization Relationship Relationship Relationship Relationship Relationship Between Between Between Between Between CPT ge and gp versus Mean go and ap sy (VST) versus Mean sy (VST) SPT N versus Mean N DMT A and B Readings versus Mean A PMT py, versus Mean py DMT Ip versus Mean Tp DMT Kp versus Mean Kp DM? Ep and PMT Epyp versus Mean Ep Wp versus Mean Wp wy, and Wp versus Mean w, and wp PI and LI versus Mean PI and LI y and 7q versus Mean 7 and yg versus Mean Dy of sy versus Mean sy of versus Mean > Of Migr yy and Wp versus Mean wp, of PI versus Mean PI of Transformation Model sy and SPT N-Value Sy and Kp from DMT Bey and PI for NC Clays Epy of Clays and SPT N-Value Ep and SPT N-Value for Piedmont Sandy Silts Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit State Design of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Performance of Ultimate Idmit State RED Formats for Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Load-Displacement Curves for Spread Foundations in Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Performance of Serviceability Limit State RBD Formats for Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift xivFigure Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift Performance of Ultimate Limit state RBD Formats for Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift Performance of Serviceability Limit State RBD Format for Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Uplift Performance of Ultimate Limit State RED Formats for Drilled shafts in Undrained Uplift Load-Displacement Curves for Drilled Shafts in uplife Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Uplift Performance of Serviceability Limit State RBD Format for Drilled Shafts in Undrained uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit State Design of Drilled Shafts in Drained Uplift Performance of Ultimate Limit State RBD Formats for Drilled shafts in Drained uplift Reliability Level Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled shafts in Drained Uplift Performance of Serviceability Limit State RBD Format for Drilled Shafts in Drained Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit State Design of Drilled shafts in Undrained Compression Performance of Ultimate Limit State RBD Formats for Drilled shafts in Undrained Compression Load-Displacement Curves for Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Performance of Serviceability Limit State RED Format for Drilled shafts in Undrained Compression Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit State Design of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Performance of Ultimate Limit State RBD Formats for Drilled shafts in Drained Compression Average Load-Displacement Curves in Axial Compression Load-Displacement Curves for Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression e168 6-18 6-30 6-32Figure 7-10 Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled shafts in Drained Compression Performance of Serviceability Limit State RBD Format for Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Calculation of Ultimate Lateral Capacity Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Performance of Ultimate Limit State RBD Formats for Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Load-Displacement Curves for Drilled Shafts in Lateral-Moment Loading Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Performance of Serviceability Limit State RBD Format for Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Performance of Ultimate Limit State RBD Format for Drilled shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Performance of Serviceability Limit State RBD Format for Drilled Shafes in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Design Example of Spread Foundation in Undrained Uplift Design Example of Spread Foundation in Drained uplift Design Example of Drilled Shaft in Undrained uplift Design Example of Drilled Shaft in Drained Uplift Design Example of Drilled Shaft in Undrained Compression Design Example of Drilled Shaft in Drained Compression Design Example of Drilled Shaft in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Design Example of Drilled shaft in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading xvi 8-16 18‘TABLES Design Capacity Example Examples of Partial Factors of Safety for Foundations at Ultimate Limit state Examples of Resistance Factors for Foundations at Ultimate Limit state Relationship Between Reliability Index (B) and Probability of Failure (pf) Coefficients of Variation for Influence Coefficient Coefficients of Variation for Gust Response Factor, Force Coefficient, and Terrain Factor Resistance Factors for YOs = F5q Statistics of Capacity Ratio for Undrained Uplift Statistics of Capacity Ratio for Lateral Loading Variability of Capacity Ratio Statistics for 15° Truncated Cone uplift Model Variability of Capacity Ratio Statistics for Reese and Hansen Lateral Loading Models Summary of Inherent Variability of Strength Properties Surmary of Inherent Variability of Field Measurements Surmazy of Inherent Variability of Index Parameters Sunmary of Scale of Fluctuation of Some Geotechnical Properties Surmazy of Total Measurement Ecror of Some Laboratory Tests Measurement Error of Common In-Situ Teste Seconé-Moment Statistics of Dx Available Correlations for Cohesive Soils Available Correlations for Cohesionless Soils xvidTable 4-10 S12 Approximate Guidelines for Inherent Soil Variability Approximate Guidelines for Design Property Variability Guidelines to Evaluate Horizontal Stress in a Backfilled Neat Excavation in Cohesionless Soil Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Effect of Foundation Geometry on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Effect of Friction Angle and Horizontal Stress Coefficient Statistics on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Undrained Uplift Resistance Factors for Spread Foundations Designed Using Fs = YuQun Undrained Uplift Resistance Factors for Spread Foundations Designed Using F59 = Ysu@sun + ¥eu®eun + Full Average Deviation from Target Resistance Reliability Index for Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Undrained Uplift Load-Displacement Data for spread Foundations Drained Uplift Load-Displacement Data for Spread Foundations Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Effect of Allowable Displacement Limit on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Effect of Foundation Geometry on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Effect of Friction Angle and Horizontal Stress Coefficient Statistics on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit State Design of Spread Foundations in Undrained uplift Undrained Uplift Deformation Factors for Spread Foundations Designed Using F5q = YuSuan Average Deviation from Target Serviceability Reliability Index for ‘Spread Foundations in Undrained Uplift Designed Using F59 = YuQuanTable Page 5-18 Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Ultimate Limit state Reliability Level of spread Foundations in Drained Uplift 5-27 5-19 Effect of Foundation Geometry on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift 5-28 5-20 Effect of Friction Angle and Horizontal Stress Coefficient Statistics on Ultimate Limit state Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Drained uplift 5-28 5-21 Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift 5-28 5-22 Drained Uplift Resistance Factors for Spread Foundations Designed Using Fsq = YuQun 5-31 5-23 Drained Uplift Resistance Factors for Spread Foundations Designed Using Fsq = Ysusun + Yul 5-32 5-24 Average Deviation from Target Resistance Reliability Index for Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift 5-32 5-25 Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift 5-34 5-26 Effect of Allowable Displacement Limit on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift 5-35 5-27 Effect of Foundation Geonetry on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift 5-35 5-28 Effect of Friction Angle and Horizontal Stress Coefficient Statistics on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Spread Foundations in Drained uplift 5-36 5-29 Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Spread Foundations in Drained uplift 5-36 5-30 Drained Uplift Deformation Factors for Spread Foundations Designed Using F5q = FuQuan 5-38 5-31 Average Deviation from Target Serviceability Reliability Index for Spread Foundations in Drained Uplift Designed Using Fs = ¥uQuan 5-38 6-1 Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Ultimate Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Uplift 64 6-2 Effect of Foundation Geometry on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Uplift 4 6-3 Effect of Undrained Shear Strength Statistics on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in undrained uplift 64 6-4 Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Drilled shafts in Undrained uplist 6sou 6-22 Undrained uplift Resistance Factors for Drilled shafts Designed Using F50 = FuSun Undrained Uplift Resistance Factors for Drilled shafts Designed Using F590 = Ysu®sun + eu@tun + Ful Average Deviation from Target Resistance Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Undrained Uplift Undrained Uplift Load-Displacement Data for Drilled Shafts Drained Uplift Load-Displacement Data for Drilled shafts Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Uplift Effect of Allowable Displacement Limit on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained uplift Effect of Foundation Geometry on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained uplift Effect of Undrained Shear Strength Statistics on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Undrained Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Uplift Undzained uplift Deformation Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using Fs9 = Yuan Average Deviation from Target Serviceability Reliability Index for Drilled Shafte in Undrained Uplift Designed Using F59 = YuQuan Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Uplift Effect of Foundation Geometry on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Uplift Effect of Friction Angle and Horizontal Stress Coefficient Statistics on Ultimate Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit State Design of Drilled Shafts in Drained uplift Drained Uplift Resistance Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using Fso = ‘YuQun Drained Uplift Resistance Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using F50 = Ysusun + Yu Average Deviation from Target Resistance Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Drained Uplift 14 e14 6-17 6-22 6-256-27 Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Uplift Effect of Allowable Displacement Limit on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Uplift Effect of Foundation Geometry on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained uplift Effect of Friction Angle and Horizontal Stress Coefficient Statistics on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Drained Uplift Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled shafts in Drained Uplift Drained Uplift Deformation Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using F50 = YuQun Average Deviation from Target Serviceability Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Drained Uplift Designed Using Fs = YuQun Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Undrained Compression Effect of Foundation Geometry on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Undrained Compression Effect of Undrained shear Strength and Modulus Statistics on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Undrained Compression Resistance Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using F59 = FoQen Undrained Compression Resistance Factors for Drilled shafts Designed Using F590" Yec@sen + Veclten ~ Ful Average Deviation from Target Resistance Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Undrained Compression Load-Displacement Data for Drilled shafts Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Effect of Allowable Displacement Limit on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Effect of Foundation Geometry on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression xxd 6-31Table qaz 7-16 7-17 Effect of Undrained Shear Strength and Modulus Statistics on serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Undrained Compression Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Undrained Compression Deformation Factors for Drilled shafts Designed Using F59 = ¥clcan Average Deviation from Target Serviceability Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Undrained Compression Designed Using Fsq = YeQcan Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Compression Effect of Foundation Geometry on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Effect of Friction Angle, Horizontal Stress Coefficient, and Modulus Statistics on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Drained Compression Resistance Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using F5q = Yon Drained Compression Hesistance Factors for Drilled shafts Designed Using F59 = ¥scQsen + Fee®ten ~ Fw Average Deviation from Target Resistance Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Drained Compression Load-Displacement Data for Drilled shafts Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Effect of Allowable Displacement Limit on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Effect of Foundation Geometry on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Effect of Friction Angle, Horizontal Stress Coefficient, and Modulus Statistics on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Drained Compression Deformation Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using F5q = ¥oQcan wed 124Table 1-30 Average Deviation from Target Serviceability Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Drained Compression Designed Using Fsq = YcOcan Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Ultimate Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Effect of Foundation and Loading Geometry on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Effect of Undrained Shear Strength Statistics on Ultimate Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit State Design of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Undrained Lateral-Moment Resistance Factors for Drilled shafts Designed Using F59 = Yhihn Undrained Lateral-Moment Resistance Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using Fso = Yspiisnn - Yentehn Average Deviation from Target Resistance Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Undrained Lateral-Moment Load-Displacement Data for Drilled shafts Drained Lateral-Moment Load-Displacement Data for Drilled shafts Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral- Moment Loading Effect of Allowable Displacement Limit on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Effect of Foundation and Loading Geometry on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Undrained Lateral- Moment Loading Effect of Undrained Shear Strength Statistics on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit state Design of Drilled shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Undrained Lateral-Moment Deformation Factors for Drilled shafts Designed Using F59 = YnEhan Average Deviation from Target Serviceability Reliability Index for Drilled shafts in Undrained Lateral-Moment Loading Designed Using F509 = YhHhan wxddd ead 8-15 8-16 e-18Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Ultimate Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Effect of Foundation and Loading Geometry on Ultimate Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Effect of Friction Angle and Horizontal Stress Coefficient Statistics on Ultimate Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Ultimate Limit State Design of Drilled shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Drained Lateral-Moment Resistance Factors for Drilled shafts Designed Using F59 = ¥hEhn Average Deviation from Target Resistance Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Designed Using F590 = Ynlnn Effect of 50-Year Return Period Wind Speed on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled Shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Effect of Allowable Displacement Limit on Serviceability Limit state Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Effect of Foundation and Loading Geometry on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Effect of Friction Angle and Korizontal Stress Coefficient Statistics on Serviceability Limit State Reliability Level of Drilled shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Reliability Levels Implicit in Existing Serviceability Limit State Design of Drilled Shafts in Drained Lateral-moment Loading Drained Lateral-Moment Deformation Factors for Drilled Shafts Designed Using Fsq = Yhhan Average Deviation from Target Serviceability Reliability Index for Drilled Shafts in Drained Lateral-Moment Loading Designed Using F50 = YnHnan Reliability-Based Foundation Design Recormendations Inherent Variability of Undrained Shear strength Inherent Variability of Friction Angle and Tangent of Friction Angle Inherent Variability of Cone Penetration Test Measurements Inherent Variability of Vane Shear Test Measurements Inherent Variability of Standard Penetration Test Measurements 24Inherent Variability Inherent Variability Inherent Variability Inherent Variability Inherent Variability Inherent Variability Inherent Variability of of of of of of of Dilatoneter Test Measurements Pressureneter Test Measurements Natural Water Content Liguid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity and Liquidity Indices Unit Weights Total Variability of Relative Density Vertical Scale of Fluctuation of Some Geotechnical Properties Horizontal Scale of Fluctuation of Some Geotechnical Properties Total Measurement Error of Some Strength Tests Total Measurement Error of Some Index TestsSYMBOLS ENGLISH LETTERS - UPPER CASE A ~ dilatometer A reading Atip ~ tip or base area Ay > area exposed to wind B ~ diameter of drilled shaft or width of spread foundation; dilatometer reading CIUC - consolidated isotropic undrained triaxial compression test cov ~ coefficient of variation COV - COV of load COVg - COV of shear modulus COVg ~- COV of operative horizontal soil stress coefficient COvg> ~ COV of in-situ horizontal soil stress coefficient COVg ~ COV of capacity (Ova - COV of capacity ratio COVe - COV of measurement error COVgy - COV of undrained shear strength covy - CoV of annual maximum wind speed COV, - COV of inherent variability cov, - COV of model uncertainty COVgq ~ COV of spatial average COVeq - COV of design property COVE - COV of effective stress friction angle CPT - cone penetration test CU ~ consolidated undrained triaxial compression test Cz ~ force coefficientFS Fo") Fy) han depth of drilled shaft or spread foundation model slope for sy and gp correlation dilatometer test direct chear test relative density Young’s modulus electric cone penetration test dilatometer modulus pressureneter modulus generic load S0-year return period load nominal dead load nominal live load load (normal random variabl First-order Reliability Method factor of safety load (standard normal random variable) probability distribution function of capacity probability distribution function of annual maximum wind speed nominal load shear modulus gust response factor objective function ultimate lateral capacity allowable lateral capacity based on displacement limit nominal allowable lateral capacity nominal ultimate lateral capacity side resistance under lateral-moment loading nominal side resistance under lateral-moment loading xvidLe Lr RED Ww MCRr tip resistance under lateral-moment leading nominal tip resistance under lateral-monent loading dilatometer material index rigidity index critical rigidity index reduced rigidity index operative horizontal stress coefficient dilatometer horizontal stress index coefficient of active soil stress initial stiffness of load-displacenent response in-situ coefficient of horizontal soil stress Ko for normally consolidated soils coefficient of passive soil stress spread foundation length failure load defined at initiation of final Linear region Liquidity index Load and Resistance Factor Design laboratory vane shear test averaging length safety margin mechanical cone penetration test ultimate moment capacity standard penetration test value bearing capacity factors lateral bearing fact overconsolidation ratio performance function plasticity index pressuremeter testPS(oy +) Prob(*) 25 250 Suan Sud un, ‘transformed performance function in standard normal space probability of an event occurring generic capacity 5 percent exclusion limit of @ 50 percent exclusion limit of 0 capacity (normal random variable) capacity (standard normal random variable) compression capacity allowable compression capacity based on displacement Limit nominal allowable compression capacity nominal compression capacity reference nominal compression capacity measured capacity nominal capacity compression side resistance nominal compression side resistance uplift side resistance nominal uplift side resistance compression tip resistance measured compression tip resistance nominal compression tip resistance predicted compression tip resistance uplift tip resistance nominal uplift tip resistance uplift capacity allowable uplift capacity based on displacement Limit nominal allowable uplift capacity design capacity in uplift nominal uplift capacity