Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
AND PRACTICE OF
Copyrighted material
Foundation Design
T h.1e
On e
Copyrighted material
Foundation Design
N.N. SOM
Prof.ssor of Civil Engin<ering
Jadavpur Univ~rsity, Kolkala
S.C. DAS
Professor of Civil Eng inuring
JiUUJvpur UniverJ;ry, Kolkalo
Rs. 275.00
THEORY AND PRACTICE OF FOUNDATION DESIGN
by N.N. Som and S.C. Das
0 2003 by Prentic&>Hall o1 India Private limited., New Delhi. All tigh!S resetved. No part ol tNs bOOk
may be reproduced il 8frJ fonn, by mimeograph or any other meens, vNiout permission h writing
from the J)l.C)Iistwtr.
ISB,..._I1-2032191)..1
The export l"ighls ot this book are vested solely with the publiShet.
Thh'd Printing
June, 2006
Published by Asoke K. Gh0$h. Prentice-Hall ot India PMte Umited. M-97, COnnaught Circus,
New Oelhl-1 10001 and Printed by Jay Print Pack Private Limited, New Oelhi-110015.
Copyrighted material
To
Copyrighted material
Contents
Prtau
I
I I
Introduction
I 2
N amrc of Soil
1.3
Th~ phase
1.3. 1
1.3.2
System J
Defiojcjons 4
Weight/Volume Relationships
1.4
S
1.6
SITE INVESTIGATION
/6
32-53
12
2.1
Jotmductjon
2.2
2.3
2.4
I-3I
J4
2 4 1
Trial Pirs
2.4.2
Wash Boring
J4
Ytl
Copyrighted material
YIU Ctmteuu
2.6
27
Field Iesrs
2.5
2.8
41
2.7.1
2. 7.2
2.7.3
2 7 4
2.7.5
2.7.6
2 7 7
J?u:ssurc:merer Tesr
46
49
Lahoratory -Tests 51
51
2.10 Planning of Exploration Programme 51
2.10.1 Layout and Number of Boreholes 51
2.10.2 Depth of Boreholes 52
2 9
Rtkrtncu 53
3
Introducrion
54
Soil Investigation 55
3.2.1 Responsibility of Designer 55
3.2.2 Information Required from Soil lnveotigation 55
3.2.3 Soil Test Report 55
Reference 64
3.2
4.1
4.2
Jnu!lduction 65
Iypes of Foundation 65
4.2. I
4. 3
65- 75
Shallow foundadons 66
Deep Foundations 68
4.2.2
4.2.3 Choice of Foundation Type 70
Design Criteria 70
4.3.1 Bearing Capacity 70
4.3.2
71
References 75
Copyrighted material
Contellls + ix
5
sou s
76:116
76
5 I
Introduction
52
5.4
76
Stresses due to Foundation Loading 78
5.3. 1 Boussinesg Analysis: Point Load 78
Venical Stresses below Unifonn Rectangular Load 8/
SS
5.6
5.3
5. 7
S8
S9
In-situ Srress
8!
Newmark's O,an 89
Pressum Bulb 9/
/Ot
/06
11)
l ntrodnrljno 117
Fajlure M ecbanjsril
117-137
118
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
62 S
Ham;ens M ethod
6.2.6
Vesjc's Method
/26
126
6 3
1 a! Shear Eajlure
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.9
126
127
Bearing Capacity of Nonhomogeneous Soil
127
/29
Rfere11ces /36
Copyrighted material
x + Comenu
7
SETI'LEMENT ANALYSIS
7 I
7.2
lntrOOnctinn 1 JR
7 I I
Definjrjons
138- 163
118
7,3
Rote of SettlemenJ
7 ,4
Foundatjon on Sand
7 .4.1
7 .4.2
146
151
152
Elastic Theory I 52
Semi-empirical Method (Buisman. 1948)
7,4.3
74 4
I 52
/ 51
151
Re(trenets 161
8
164-!98
164
8 I
lntmductjon
8.2
Design
8.2. 1
8.2.2
8.2.3
of Footings 165
Depth of Footing /65
Allowable Bearing Capacity 166
Effecl of Ground Wa1er Table 168
82 4
Senlement
8.2.5
8.2.6
8.2. 7
8.2.8
De.<ign
8.3.1
8.3.2
8.3
169
177
8 .3.3
Scttlcmenl
8.3.4
Aoating Foundation
8.3.5
Basement Raft
178
/81
182
PIJ.E FOUNDATIONS
9 I
9.2
9.3
lntroductjon 199
C!qs..,jfie.ation 200
9.2. L Classi fication Based on Composition 200
9.2.2 C!assjficatjoo Based on Merbod of lnsta!larjoo
Pile Behaviour Under Axial J.ood 201
199- 265
201
Copyrighted material
Coments xi
9.4
9.5
9.5.2
9.7
9.8
End Bearing 2I 3
9.6.1 End Bearing in Cohesive Soil 2/3
9.6.2 End Bearing in Cohcsionless Soil 213
Critical Depth 215
Pile Capacicy from l n-siw Soil Tests 217
2 .9
Under-reamed Pj!es
9.6
21 7
234
247
Copyrighted material
IXii Cnntem.r
10
266-293
WELL FOUNDATIONS
10 I
10 2
lntrodncrjon 266
C lassificarjon 266
10.5
I 0.6
I 0. 7
10.8
10.9
267
269
281
294=303
lntroductjon
294
294
Me.a~ures
to Wj!hstand Seulernent
102
Re[uences 302
12
lntaylucrjon
304=345
10:1
106
Sronr O J!umns
V4
Copyrighted material
Conttllf.f + xiii
13
344
346-370
358
ReJere11ces 369
14
CONSTRUCTION PROBLEMS
14.1 lntroduction 371
14.2 Common Construction Problems 371
14.3 Stability of Excavation 372
14.3.1 Design of Bmced Cuts 373
14.4 Dewatering 378
14.4.1 Rate of Seepage 378
14.~.2 Methods of Dewatering 380
14.4.3 Field Con1r0l 384
14.5 Land filling 385
14.5. 1 Cohesive Fill 385
14.5.2 Granular fill 387
14.6 Effect on Adjoining Structures 389
14.6. 1 Effect of Vibration 391
R~ftmmces 392
371-392
Appendix
393-394
lntfu
.195 .!99
Copyrighted material
Copyrighted material
Preface
Over long years of association with the profession of teaching and research in civil and
geotechnknl engineering. our experiences sugges1 that foundations arc ofte-n designed without
lllking all the ess<:nlial parameters into consideration particularly those with regard to geology
of the site. soi.l dara! ground conditions. type of structure. and )and use pattern in the vicinity of
the construction area. Though the theoretical aspects of foundation design are well understood.
the fie ld situations are usually not given the due imponance. As a co nsequence, the
implementation of the proposed design runs into problems necessilllting changes in constrUction
methodology or in some cases. even the design.
The book covers the essentiaJ features of foundation design through fourteen chapters.
The foundation design requires underslJinding of the soil type, its strength and deformation
characteristics. ground wate-r tab1e, and other details of the site and the structures. We have
striven to incorporate all these criteria so as to acquaint the reader with all necessary aspects or
foundation design. This treatment begins with Chapter I that details the engineering properties
of soil as required for the design of sound foundations. Chapter 2 discusses site investigation as
lhe next step towards foundation design. This chapter elaborates on the various methods of soil
exploration and testing. The design parameters and the importance of proper interpretation of
the data collected from soil i11vestigation arc described in Chapter 3 while Chapter 4 introduces
different types of foundations and lheir charac.tetistic-s.
Chapters S through 7 offer de<ailed study of the mechanical prope11ies of soil including
the stress distribution, the bearing capacity of foundations, and settlement. The effect of non~
homogeneity and nonlinearity of the stress-strain relationships on the stress distribution in soils
is elucidated and the concept of streSS-path method of settlement analysis is introduced in these
chapters. The imponant considerations for obtaining the design parameters from a Jarge amounl
of soil test data are highlighted. The design procedures for shallow and deep foundations. a..;;
also for well foundations are presented in Chapters 8 through 10. The special requirements of
expansive soils are covered and the earthquake response or soils and foundations are empha..;;ized
in Chapters II and 13 respectively. The ground improvement techniques commonly used in
practice and the constJUCtion problems generally encountered at site are adequately dealt with in
Chapter 12. The reader should also find in the book a comprehensive treatment or the design
procedures
vis~ a ~vis
the construction problems and practices (as discussed in the final chapter).
The chapters on analylical aspects are followed by worlced-out examples taken from real-life
problems which make the reading bolh topical and interesting. Besides, numerous references
have been made to actual cases of foundations for better clarity and understanding of the topics
covered.
XV
Copyrighted material
xvi Preface
We have drawn upon our experiences in teaching and consultancy in geotechnical
engineering to compile this volume. Almost forty years of tcachjng and research at Jadavpur
University have given us the opportunity to face many field situations which hod to be treated
in unconventional ways. The inter.&
ction with our students has been very helpful during all these
years. This book is designed to serve undergraduate and postgraduate students of civil
engjneering with interest in foundations-their design, development, and maintenance. lt will
be equally useful for practising civil and structural engineers who have to design fou ndations of
structures in difficult subsoil conditions.
We acknowledge the immense help derived out of our association with colleagues
in che civil engineering department at Jadavpur University, Kolkata. We are thankful to
Prof. R.O. Purkayastha, Prof. P. Bhattacharya, Prof. S.C. Chakraborty, Prof. S.P. Mukheljee.
Or. S. Ghosh, and Or. R.B. Sahu who participated in many fruitful discussions on the
subject and gave their invaluable suggestions. We are also grateful to our staff at the soil
mechanics division. particularly Mr. Robin Pal, Mr. Apurba Banerjee, Mr. Sisir Monda ),
Mr. Ranm Jana, and Mr. Bhupesh Ghosh for their skilled help in many ways. The painstaking
task of compiling the manu.~eript was undertaken by Mr. Bivas Roy, Mr. Subhasish Ghooh, and
Mr. Hrishikesh Nayak with great interest and patience. We express our sincere thanks to
them all.
Last but not the least, we express our sincere gratitude to our spouses Smt. Rita Som
and Smt. Sikha Das for bearing with the demand of time that was needed to complete the
task often under trying circumstances.
N.N. SOM
S.C. DAS
Copyrighted material
Soil as an Engineering
Material
1.1 INTRODUCTION
From an engineering viewpoint. soils and sof1 rocks comprise all the loose ond fra-gmented
materials that are fou nd in the em1h's crust They arc distinguished from solid rock. i.e., the
hnrd ond compnct mass i n the earth's body, which cannot normally be excavated by manual
means. Soils 3re fonned by disintegr:uion or decomposition of a parent rock by weathering
or they moy be depOsited by cr:mspOnation from some other soun.e.
Soils which are formed by the disintegration of 3 parent rock and remain 01 their place
of formation are known as re.sidual soils. The disintegration of the. parent rock is caused by
physical agents such as tempcroture changes. freezing. thawing etc. or by chemic.al agents like
ox.id:.uion, hydration etc. When the soil is transpOned from its original bed rock by forces of
gravity. wind, water or ice and re-deposited at another location it is known as tra11sporttd
soU. Tmnsported soils arc gcnerully sorted out according to their gmin s ize as the velocity of
the transporting medium gets reduced away from the source. A fter deposition at a new place,
these soils may be subjected to further weathering with the passage of time.
Tnmsported soils tare c lassified into differe nt types according ro their mode of
1ransponmion. r.>eposits of soil thar nre formed by willd 11re called Aeolian deposi1s. Sand
dunes and loess are examples or these de.positS. Loose sand is geJle.rally swept by wind and
transported close to the surface. If the motion is stopped. it is depOs ited in the form of sand
dunes. The common lrllllSported soils are, however, those which have been carried by water
or ancient glaciers. Mariue soils which have been canied by sea w:atcr and Alluvial soils
which have been carried by rivers 3nd streams constilute probably the largest group of
transpor1ed soils on earth. These deposits may also be called sedimemary deposits ns they
hnve be.en formed by deposition from e ither standing or moving water. The deposilion is
primarily caused by the graduaJ decrease in \'elocity or river carrying the sedi ment~. A larger
part of the great Indian plains is made up of alluvial deposits. Gltrcinl deposit~ are remnants
of the icc age thai were carried along by the moving ice. They are generally found as big
boulders at places away from their parent rock and nrc heterogeneous in nature with linle or
no stratification. Other sedi mentary deposits :;ti'C the Lacustrine .soils which are depos ited on u
lake bed and the Esluaritre soils which arc deposited at the mouth of ::tn estuary.
1
Copyrighted material
A 14 Si0 4 0 1o(OH)a
Kaolinite
":w=o::::oooc:o=; Potasslum
'
L,r----~ Strong
r - - - \ o - l>OO<I
Weak
bOOd
(a) Kaolinite
"-'r-----{/ Slrong
r---\o-bond
molecules
) =weak
<:Jooc::c:c:~ Potassium
'(b) Montmorillonite
Fig. 1.1
molecules
(c) tulle
Copyrighted material
(a)
(c)
(b)
(a)
(b)
eohesl~
SOilS.
Fig, 1.4
Thre&1)t'lase system,.
Copyrighted material
1.3.1
Definitions
r.. =
Water
W..,IV.,
Solid particles
r,= WsfV1
Specific gravity : Gs =
= W,IV"y_.
rirw
IV = (W.IWJ x 100%
(d) Porosity,
(c) Degree of sawnuion.
1.3.2
(a)
Weight/Volume Relationships
11
( b) Se
= el( I
+ e) or
=n/( I
- n)
= wG,
r=
r= (I
vW = Se1 ++ G,e )( r.
~
G,
1 + t0
r.
+ w) Yd
( f) Submerged densi<y,
r' = r - r.
(G - I) - (I - S)e
I
I
...
G - I
The range over which the typical values of the above parameters vary are as follows:
(i) G,= 2.60-2.75
(ii)
= 1.60-2.25 glee
= 1.30- 2.00 glee
(ii i)
(iv) " = 0.25-0.45 (for sand)
0 (for dry soil}-100% (for fully saturated)
(v) S
r,
Copyrighted material
SemiSOid
state
content
Legend
Sl-Shri'lkage limit
PL~astic limit
U -4.iquid limit
Moisture content
Slarting with a low water content a clayey soil first appears to be a solid and moves to
the plastic state with increasing water contenl. The word plastic here refers to the ability of
a soil to be moulded into different shapes without breaking up. At even a higher water
content. the soil begins to flow as a viscous fluid. The Atterberg limits. that is, the liquid
limit (LL), the plastic limit (PL), and the shrinkage limit (SL) indicate the limits of water
content at which the consistency of clayey soil changes from one state to another.
The Atterberg limits along with the natural water content give useful indication of the
nature of the clayey soil. A natural water content close to the liquid limit indicates a soft
compressible soil while a natural water content close to the plastic limit is characteristic of a
stiff and Jess compressible c lay.
Plaoticlty Index, PI
The range of water content over whic-h a soil remains plastic is called the plastic limit.
i.e.
PI = U - PL(%)
( 1.1 )
Liquidity Index, LI
It is the ratio of natural water content, w of a soil in excess of its plastic limit to its plasticity
index and is indicative of the state of the water c.ontent in relation 10 the liquid limit and the
plastic limit of the soil.
U=
IV -
PL
LL- PL
100%
( 1.2)
Copyrighted material
11r~ory
1.4.1
Pluticity Chart
It has been observed that propenies of clay and s ih can be correlated at least qualitatively with
the Auerberg limits by means of the Plruricil)l Chart, as shown in Fig.l.6. The liquid limit and
the plastic limit or a soil are ploned on the plasticity c-h art and the soil is classified according 10
the region in which it falls, the A-line being an arbitrary boondary between inorganic clays and
inorganic silt/organic c lays. Table 1.1 gives the liquid limit of some cohesive soils.
70
//
60
U-lino
50
PI 0.9 (LL - 8}
Ci:
'>
~ 40
30
/
/
20
10
0
0
. /!
10
'
20
CL
or
OL
/,
Cl-ML
/
/
or
OH
/'
A-tine
PI 0.73 (LL - 20)
v,;L
MH
or
or
OH
OL
30
CH
40
50
60
Liquid limit, LL (%)
70
60
90
100
Table 1.1
Soil
Alluvial Deposits
41
20
,S8
21
55
28
MariMIE.'Itwtrint
London Clay
75
40
90
Illite
Kaolinite
MontrooriJJonite
29
17
90
40
45
97
)2
Clay Minerals
100
45
so
25
500
50
Copyrighted material
Tlu~ory
Gravel
100
.........__
'
['\
.: eo
1];
60
&
~
~
6
10
0.6
-.... kj'"'j I
0.2
0.06
0.1
0.02
.........__
t'
Oispeo>ed
\kaolinite
Ctaye~
I'-
sandy silt
I
Flocculated
Graelty\
sand
20
..... '""--J~montmo1111onlte)
00um ~ton""'
'
Silty
ne s*nd
Ctay
nne
r---
['\
"()
!'I
c
..
Silt
fine coarse meclk.m
ooarse
"'
.......
0.006 0.002
0.01
....
'
0.0006
0.001
0.0001
Grai~size
distribution w rve.
whe.re Dro is the diameter of panjcles correspOnding to 60% fi ner and D 10 is the diameter or
the panicle corresponding to 10% finer. The gradation of soil is detennined by the following
criteria:
c11 = l
Uniform soil
Poorly-graded soil
I < c. < 4
c. > 4
Well-graded soil
It must be considered, howeve,r. that the pilrtic1e size alone is not an adequate criterion for
the classification of a soil. as the shape or grains and clay fraction may vory widely depending
upon the constituent minerals. More elaborate soil classification systems. making use of the
Auerberg limits. in addition to che particle size distribution. have since been evolved.
The roost comprehensive of lhese systems are the Unified Soil classification system and
the Indian Standard Classification System. The Unified Soil Class(ficotio" System divides the
soil.into coarse-grai ned soil (having more than 50% retained on number 200 sieve) and 6 ne
grained soil (more than 50%. passing through number 200 sieve). Further subdivisions are made
according to gradation for coarse-grained soils and plasticity for fine-grained soils and each soil
type is given a group symbol (Table 1.3). The Indian Standard Classification System (lS 1498)
is simii3C in some respeccs except that the fine-grained soils are divided into three ranges of
Jjquid limit as opposed to only two in the unified soil classification system.
(1 .4)
Copyrighted material
Soil
Gmiogk:
Mexioo City
BW.t dms#y
(8/<c)
9.0
1.6
0.7
0.4
1.3
1.0
1.8
1.9
2.0
1.7
350
o.s
2.0
30
2. 1
0.8
1.0
1.5
80
2.0
30
1.9
38
Volcanic
Eslultrine
Marine
Glacio!
Alluvlal
AlluvW
Marine
Marine
Morine
WaJ~I'
Void
m1io
contmt (Sf!)
60
35
20
so
Soil consisJs of solid grains that have various sizes ranging from coarse grained
particles such as boulder. gravel and sand down to the fine g.rajned particle$ like, siJt and
clay. The grains are classified according to their sizes. The most common system of
classification is the M.I.T. system as illustrated in Fig. 1.7.
2.0
CoMU
0.6
0.06
0.2
Medium
Sand
Fine
0.006
0.02
Coarse
Medium
0.002
Flnt
$lit
0.0006
eo.roe
.
00002
Medium
Flnt
(co/IOhJIII)
Clay
Natural soil generally consists of mixture of several groups and the soil, in such cases,
is named after the principal constituent present. For example. a soil that is predominantly
clay but also contains some silt is called silty clay.
The grain-size distribution of a soil is best represented by the grain-size distribution
curves. refer Fig. 1.8. The shape of the curve indicates whether the soil is uniform or poorly
graded. or well-graded.
llte unifonnily coefficient of the soil is defined as
D
c., = !:12.
D,o
( 1.3)
Copyrighted material
The properties of granular soil an: also dependent on their particle size distribution, that
is, whether the soil is well-graded or poorly-graded. In well-~ soils, the smaller grains
~ to fill the void$ between the larger grains and thus, malte the soil more compact. The
shape of grains (angular sub-rounded or rounded) may also have some effect on the
propenies of granular soil.
son.
TYPES
Apart from the common soil types that may be identified by the different soil classification
sY1(ems, cenain natum soils are characterized by the properties of their chemical and mineral
constituents. Such soils exhibit characteristic features with regard to their streJigth and
compressibility and need particular care when used to support a foundation.
Or1anic soilJ are those which contain large quantity of organic/vegetable matter in
various stages of decomposition. Natural soils may contain varied percentages of organic
matter and only a small percentage may be sufficient to affect its properties. In organic clay,
vegetable matter is intermixed with the predominant clay mineral while P<Qr consists almost
wholly of vegetable matter. Peat is characterized by high liquid limit and sponzy mucture
with low specific gravity. The top 10-12 m of the normal Calcutta deposit is a common
organic clay of the Bengal basin. A thin layer of peat is often encountered in this depoait at
many locations as shown in Fig. 1.9.
Dosa1ption ol strata
II Glwy/doltl -
semi
2...
55
12
28
2.5
0.005
..-..s
10
30
60
25
8.0
0.002
20
38
20
30
4.5
25
65
25
10.0
~-pieooa
Ill Bluilll -
0.001
Copyrighted material
IJ,
of Panicl~s
f*rllum
Probabl~ o:pa~rsion.
Shri>Wge
limit (CJ,)
0.001 mm
1.8
undtr prtuure of
0.07 kg/cm2 (Dry 10
Dtgrtt of
apaJUiolt
S41tlrvttd cond;IIOII)
28
20-31
13- 23
3S
II
2S-41
7-12
IS-41
IS
18
10-16
IS
30
20-30
10-20
10
Vesy hish
Hlsh
Low
Low
GROUNDWATER
The water which is available below the ground surface is termed as groundwatu or
subsurface water. Practically all ground water originates from the surface water. The process
by which the s~rface water infiltrates into the ground surface and percolates deep into the
ground is termed as natural ruluJrge and artificial recharge. Main sources of natural
recharge of groundwater include precipitation, rivers, lakes, and other natural water bodies.
Artificial recharge of groundwater occurs from excess irrigation, seepage from canals,
leakage from reservoirs or tanks, or from water purposely applied on the ground surface to
augment groundwater storage. Water from any of these sources infiltrates into the ground and
percolates downwards under the action of gravity through soil pores and, rock crevices until
further movement is prevented by an impermeable stratum. It is then stored as groundwater.
The groundwater exposed to atmospheric pressure beneath the ground surface constitutes the
wat~r table. Water table rises and falls based on the amount of precipitation, the rate of
withdrawal or recharge. and climatic conditions. Groundwater held by the geolog.ical
formation is. however, not static but moves slowly in the lateraJ ctirecdon towards some point
of escape and appear as springs, infiltration galleries or wells, or reappears to join the river,
or lake. or the sea.
Copyrighted material
Soil-water zone
Intermediate zone
Capillary zone, and
Zone of saturation
Ground aurfaca \o
~- """'
ln~a1e
zone
!
Cooilary
zone
f
I'
Soil water
Pellicular and
grv....tional
water
cap111ary
wale<
Wolef
.:le
1-
Ground water
1lmpermeoble
FJg. 1.10 Zones of subsutface water.
Soil-water zone
The soil- water zone extends from the ground surface to the major root zone. The soil in this
zone becomeS saturated either during irrigation or rainfall. The water in the soil- water zone
is gradually depleted by evaporation from within the soil and by transpiration by vegetal
growth on the ground surface and if it is not R:plenished. the water content may be reduced
to such an extent that only thin fi1m of moisture known as hygroscopic warer remains
adsorbed on the surface of the soil particles.
Copyrighted material
1be intermediate zone occupies the space between the lowe.r edge of soli-water zone and
upper limit of the capillary zone. This zone usually contains static water which is held by
molecular and surface tension forces in the form of hygroscopic and capillary water.
Temporarily. though. this zone may also contain some excess water which moves downward
as gravitational water. The thickness of this zone may vary from zero when the water table is
high to more than 100 m under deep water table conditions.
Capillary zone
The capillary zone extends from the water table upto the limit of capillary rise of water. In
this case, the pore space may be considered to represent a capillary and hence, just above the
water table almost all pores contain capillary water.
Zoae of oaturattou
In the zone of saturation, all the interstices are filled wi!f! water under hydrostatic pressure.
The zone of saturation is bounded at the top either by the ground water table or an overlying
impermeable stratum, and stntches upto underlying impermeable strata (or bed rock).
Generally, all soils below ground water table are fully satunoted.
1.9
ENG~G
PROPERTIES OF SOU.
Ducy'alaw
Darcy' s law which governs the flow of fluid through porous media is also found to be
applicable to soils when now is due to a combination of pressure and positional gradient.
With the exception of flow through coarse gnovels, the flow of water through soils is
streamiined, and can be expressed as:
v = ki
( 1.5)
where.
For any given soil, depends on the porosity of the soil. the struCtural amngement of
panicles. the size of panicles. the propenies of pore fluid (e.g. density and viscosity) ciA:.
(Taylor 1948). The temperature of the pore fluid should theorelically have some effect but
for practical purposes. the variation of k with the range of temperature normally encountered
in the soil is small.
The coefficient of permeabili[)' of a soil can be meuured from the laboratory constant
head test. variable head test. or the field pumping test. In view of the hetrogeneity and nonhomogeneity of natural soi~ field pumping tesiS give a better measure of the permeability of
the soil in the field. Typical values of permeability for different types of soil are p ven in
Table 1.5.
Tillie 1.5 Pameobility of cliff.- !ypes of soil
Soill)p<
Grsvd
C>ane sand
Medium sand
-Fine 5aDCl
Slllysand
Sllllweuta.d clays
lntiCl days
t- to-'
tcr- ur'
tO"'-to-'
tcr'-tcr'
to-'- tcr'
tcr'-tcr'
Oood
Poor
Very poo<
Darcy's Jaw is valid only for laminar flow. Since Reynolds number serves as a criterion to
distinguish between laminar and turbulent flow. the same may be employed to establish the
limit up<o which Darcy's law holds good. Reynolds number for this case Is expressed as
.-
_ pvd
(1.6)
Jl
Most of the natural groundwater Oow occurs with R, < I and hence. Darcy's law is
valid. However. Darcy's law is not applicable in aquifers containing coarse gravels. rocklills.
and also in the immediate vicinity of wells where the flow may not be laminar due to steep
hydraulic gradients.
Copyrighted material
(a) The volume change of a soil is controlled not by the total normal stress applied on
the soil, but by the difference between the total normal stress and tile pressure in the
nuid in lhe void space. termed the pore pressure. For an all-round pressure increase.
this can be expressed by the relationship.
6V
--
= C (6<7. - 6u)
'
(1.7)
where.
6 V/V = volume change per unit volume of soil
6.G,. = change in total normal stress/pressure
6u = change in pore pressure
ct' = compressibility of soil skeleton
This relationship can be illustrated by a simple teSt where a Sllturated soil sample is subjected
to undrained loading followed by drained compression as shown in Fig. 1.11. Not until tilere
is a change of effective stress. is there a change of volume of the soil. This is the primary
cause of long term consolidation se-ttlemenl of foundation on clay. This also explains the
settlement or an area due to ground water tabJe Jowering, either for construction work or for
water supply.
Undrained
Total 1ress
(A<)
-- .-- .
,pi;
' , 'l<i><;r.----
,,...
Streu
! .'
.! ,
. , ... '
r:-
AV
-v
Pore
--
Time -
........
--
-+
(b) The shear strengtil of a soil is determined by tile frictional forces between tile solid
panicles. These are clearly a function of the component of normal stress that is
carried by the solid grains rather than the total nonnal stress on the plane considered.
This may be expressed by tile equation.
(1.8)
where,
c'
= apparen1 cohesion
Copyrighted material
In most engineering problems, the magnitude of total normal stre..c;s can be estimated
from considerations of statics while the magnitude of pore pressure depends on the hydraulic
boundary conditions. Bishop (1955) has shown that the effective stress in a soil can be
related to the intergranular pressure at the points of contact.
For a unit area perpendicular to the plane X- X through a soil rru~ss, the total s tress, u
acting on lhe plane of contact can be divided into two components, (refer Fig. 1.1 2) .
lll l l l l l
u
ll l l
"'
a = o' + u
( 1.10)
where.
u = Pore water pressure and
u = Effective stress
If a = effective contact area per unit area of the plane and
pressure, then, for a unit area
u
or
x I
= u1 x I + (I -
o-1 = ( U- u) + au
O;
= average intergranular
a)u
(1.1 I)
o-1 = (u-
u)
( 1.12)
o1 = a'
(1.13)
Thus, for practical purposes, effective stress may be considered equal to the intergranular
pressure. the average pressure between the solid gains.
In a natural soil deposit, (refer Fig. 1.13), the total stress at any depth is given by the
overburden pressure at that depth while the pore pressure. in the absence of any artesian
condition, is given by lhe hydrostatic head of water at that deplh. The distribution of total
and effective stress in the soil is shown in Fig. 1.13.
Copyrighted material
16
Tlr~ory
Ground surface
G.~t
___j'___
Depth
Poro
pressure
T-
tlrMS
(1.14)
r.
= r.<z - l t )
(1.1~)
=
when:
l\l t
r.<z - :,)
+ y '(t - : ,)
(1.16)
practical problems.
Copyrighted material
where.
Au = change in pore-pressure
Aa1 = change in total vertical pressure
Aa3 = change in total lateral pressure
A and B = pore-pressure parameters
By putting Aa3 and (Aq1 - Aa3) equal to zero successively, it can be shown that the
parameters B and A represent the effect of the aJI round stress increase and the deviatoric
stress increase respectively on the pore-pressure developed in a soil element. Accordingly,
Au = BAa3
when Aa1
Aa3 = 0
when Aa3 = 0
and
( 1.18)
The parameter B depends on the degree of saturation of soil (for fully saturated soil B = 1).
1be parameter A. however, depends upon a number of factors such as srress history of the
soH. stress level. strain level. and so on, the most influential being the stress history. that is.
whether the soil is nonnally consolidated or overconsolidated (Lambe 1962). Table 1.6 gives
typical values of pore-pressure parameter A for different stress history of the soil.
Table 1.6 l'on:pru$U,. parameter A of differont soil types
VQ/u of A aJ failun
Sensiti~
clay
1.2-2.S
0.7-1.2
1.9 .4
0.~.7
-0.~.0
The shear strength of a soil under any given condition of drainage is defined as the maximum
shear stress which the soil can withstand. When a structure is erected on a soil, the soil elements
beneath the foundation are subjected to increased shear stresses. The capacity of the foundation
to bear load is a function or the shear strength of the soil. The maximum shear stress a soil can
withstand depends to an appreciable extent on the manner of loading and the boundary
conditions. A soil specimen does not. therefore. have a unique shear strength and it depends on
factOrs such as rote of sttain, drainage condition, and size of sample.
The faj lure. criterion most commonly used for defining the shear strength of a sqil
along a plane is expressed by the Mohr-Coulomb equation. as illustrated in Fig. 1.14,
r = c + a.
tan;
(1.19)
where
Copyrighted material
.!!
"
eli
'
c
Normal stress
Ffg:. 1.14 Mohr-Coulomb faJiure criterion.
In Eq. (1.19). the shear strength parameters c and 9 for any panicular soil depend on several
factors, the most important being the condition of drainage. Therefore, Eq. (1.19) expressed
in tenns of the total normal s-tress on the plane considered may be used to study the shear
behaviour of soiJ under undrained condition. A more general expression may be written in
terms of effective stress (Bishop 19SS) as:
r: c' + (a. - u )
9'
or
where c' and
tan
(1.20)
Luclte chamber
Chamber fluid
Sol
specimen
To drainage and!Of'
pcwe watet preuure
Copyrighted material
Soil
41
an Enginuri.ng
Mat~nal
+ 19
shows triaxial test set-up. Here, a cylindrical soil specimen is enclosed in a thin rubber
membrane with rigid caps at top and bouom. The soiJ is placed inside a triax.ial cell which is
then filled with water. Pressure is applied to the specimen through water and deviator stress
is applied through the end caps until lhe specimen fails in compression. Drainage or waler
from the pores or the soil may be conttolled through suitable valves at the base or lhe
triaxiaJ ceiJ. If required~ volume change and/or pore water pressure can be measured. Tile
details of the triaxial apparatus and various tests that can be performed with it have been
described by Bishop and Henkel (1962).
Typeo of trlulaJ teot
There are, in general, three conditions of drainage under which the triaxial lest is performed,
namely unconsolidaled undrained (UU). consolidaled undrained (CU), and consolidated
drained (CD).
In the unconsolidated undrained (UU) test, dte sample is first subjected to an all round
pressure a3 and !hen to a deviator sttess (a 1 - a 3) under undrained condition. The deviator
stress is applied rapidly-usually at a rate of strain of 1-2% per minute, ana failure is
achieved in 10:.20 minutes. For saturated soil, lhe Mohr envelope remains hOriZ9ntal giving
;, = 0. The shear strength obtained from lhe UU test is called lhe undrained shear strtntrh
or the soil c., see Fig. 1.16. The sbear sttength obtained from lhe UU lest is used in the
study of bearing capacity of foundations on clay or in the rapid construction of embankments
on clay. The unconfined compression test is a special case or UU test, where no confining
pressure is applied to the specimen prior to shear.
She
Sire
- (,0)
Normal
stress
Fig. 1.1S Unoonsolictated undrai'led (UU) test on sah.nled clay.
In the consolidoled undrained (CU) leS~ the sample is allowed to consolidale under an
all round pres..~ure a3 but no drainage is allowed during shear. If pore pressure is measured
during the test, both the pore pressure parameter A and 8, and the shear strength parameters
c' and , can be determined. Figure 1.17 depicts consolidated undrained (CU) test on
saturated clay. The data from CU test may be used in the analysis of stability for stage
conslruction of embankments on clay.
Copyrighted material
2t
nu~ory
. u
______
... -- ---
~ -~-- --
\.
__,_
7.5"
'
_.,
Namal -
...
3.01P"q
u_.,. .o .,,,
."
(lcQicm')
on oalura1ed day.
The consolidated drnined (CD) test diffen from the cOIISOiidated undrained test in the
way that both, the initial all round pressure and the subsequent shear stresses are applied
under fully drnined condition. The test, therefore, gives the shear strength parameteiS of a
soil in terms of effective stress, as given by Fig. 1.18. The results of this test can be used in
the study of long tenn stability problems.
L--":!,o,. -,a~.-----~~=;:".:,;4
ai Normal stresS
r..-
Different types of triaxial test find their applications in specific field problems but, the most
important strength parameters required for the analysis of foundations on clay are those
obtained from the quick unconsolidated undrained (UU) triaxial test. For saturated clays, this
shear strength is expressed by the undrained cohesion c. '" should theoretically be zero. if
the soil is fully saturated (Skempton 1948). Therefore, the shear strength of the clay in this
condition may be expressed as
( 1.21)
Although the UU test is easy to perfonn in the laboratory. application of the test data
to field problem has to be done with care. Facton such as anisotropy, rate of shear, sample
size. and so on affect the test results significantly (Skempton and L. Rochelle 1955). For
stiff-fissured c lays, in particular. the shear s tre ngth of the clay mass in the field may be
Copyrighted malerial
Seu!ttnty
Most clays have been found to lose a part of their strength when remoulded. This remoulding
may be caused by physical or mechanical means such as pile driving. However, with time,
the clay may regain this strength either wholly or partly, by a phenomenon known as
thixotropic hanlning (Skempton and Northey 1952). From the point of view of sensitivity
towards remoulding, clays may be classified as fol lows (Table 1.7):
Tble 1.7 Sens.itivity of cl1ys
(Skempton and Northey 19S2)
Less than 2
2-4
4-8
8-16
16
loscnsitivc
Moderalety sensltivc
Sensitive
Very sensitive
Quiet clays
SensHivity. in chis context. is defined as lbe ratio of tbe undrained shear strength of lhe
1.9 .5 ConsoUdatlon
The gradual squeezing out of water from the pore space of a soil skeleton under the
influence of externally awUed load or gravity is called cosolidation. The process results in
a net change in volume of the soil and is time-dependent
When an element of soil is subjected to an increase of rotal suess under undrained
condition, the pressure is distributed among the solid grains and water depending on the
rclarive comprcssibililies of the two phases and lbeir boundary conditions. For a confined
saturated clay- water system with no drainage, the compressibility of the mineral skeleton is
so large compared to that of water alone that virtually all the applied pre&&ure is transmitted
as an excess pore water pressure. If drainage is now permitted. the resulting hydraulic
gradient initiates a flow of water out of the clay and the soil consolidates. There is a
consequent transfer of the applied load from the water 10 the mineral skeleton.
The mechanism of consolidation and the factOI'S that govern lhe process of consolidation
of c layey soils are studied experimentally in the laboratory in the consolidation test or the
oedometer test The arrangement for nedometer test is shown in Fig. 1.19. A sample. usually
76 mm dia x 20 mm thick, is enclosed in a mel2l ring and sandwiched between two porous
stones placed at top and bottom. A load is awlied to the sample through the porous stones
using a lever anangemenl. As the sample consolidates., thickness of the sample decreases.
Being laterally confined within the metal ring, the sample is prevented from expanding
laterally and the entire volume change takes place in the venical direction. The flow is,
therefore, one dimensional and the tate of consolidation is governed by the permeability of
Copyrighted material
Olal
..
~ ....
' 0.
1!>
~ ... ~
------~-----
.,:
p,,
... ;-
6P
Po:
,P,
Pressure
Pressure
Fig. 1.20 p,_...-wlcl ratio retotionohlp.
p, :
(log
scate)
The coefficient of volume decrease is defined as the volumetric strain per unit increase of
effective pressure and this can be expressed. in terms of void ra6o, as
m., =
de
dp 1 +
(1.22)
where.
t.o = in.itia.l
Copyrighted material
c, :
dV
and
c,
I+~
(1.23)
log 12.
(1.24)
Po
compressibility, the softer is the soil and vice versa. Again. the compressibility of a soil is
not a constant propeny. lt decreases with increasing effeetive stress, as is evident from the
decreasing slope of the pressure-void ratio relationship with increasing pressure. But for the
range of stresses usually encountered in practice~ Table I .8 gives one dimensional
compressibility of some representative clays.
Table 1.8 <Joe.<timemioo.al compmsibifity of some cl.tys
Szrtn His.tory
Qay
Nonnally Consolidated
Over Consolidated
m. (m2/lcN)
C,AI + ol
0.0015
0.0025
0.0005
0.0006
0.017
0.010
0.1~.20
0.20
o.os
(desiccaled)
(Dau from St cmptoa aDd Bitbop (19S4).
Erosion
'---~--~-- log
Fig. 1.21
Po
stresses in en
p,
Copyrighted material
24
Now, if some pan of the overburden is removed by, say. erosion and the remaining height of
deposition is only H. conuponding to which the pressure is Po- the e lement of soil will
undergo swelling and the void ratio will increase to e. This means that the soil in its past has
been subjected to a pressure greater than that exists now. Many <:lays and clay shales. for
example, London clay and Bearpaw shale, are heavily ovcrconsolidated in nature. The
strength and deformation characteristics of a soil depend to a large extent on it being
normally consolidated or overconsolidated. Soft clays are normaJiy consolidated and their
behaviour diffe.rs from overconsolidated c lays and clay shales. Structures founded on
normally consolidated clays. in general, experience much more settlement than those founded
on overconsolidated clays.
Although erosion of overburden has been identified as one of the causes of
overconsolidation. many residual and alluvial soils near the ground surface are rendered over..
consolidated by desiccation. Alternate wetting and drying due to seasonal Ouctuation of water
table and changes of temperature intrOduce capillary forces in the soil and the latter develops
a pseudo overconsolidation effect. This results in increased strength and decreased
compressibility of the soil. Depending on the severity of changes during desiccation, the over
consolidation effect may be quite appreciable. Most residual soils of India and occasionally
the alluvial soils near the ground surface appear overconsolidatcd due to desiccation.
Rate of eo.....Uclatl on
The rate of consolidation of clayey soils is governed by the theory of one-dimensional
consolidation (Terzaghi 1923), as shown in Fig. 1.22:
....,.
Z Ground
H - --- --
=0
(b)
(a)
ou
k o2u
- ;-St r.m., sr.z
(1.2S)
where u is ihe pore pressure at a depth z from the free drainage surface, at a time 1 after the
pressure increment; and k and m,. are the permeability and compressibility of the soil for a
particular pressure increment. Both k and m,, may vary with pressure but their ratio remains
Copyrighted material
writte.n as.
liu ~ C li u
lit
liz'
1
(1.26)
where.
( 1.28)
and H = length of the drainage path, to be taken as full depth of c lay when drainage is from
one end and half the depth of clay when drainage is from both ends.
The coefficient of consolidation is governed primarily by the size and nature of
particles as reflected by tbe water content or whether the soil is nonnally consolidated or
Send
0.8
2H =
IT41
Send
H,}H
0.2
10
v
v
...
~- -~~;:,
Sand
Rod<
j+-4u,.j
---
30
50
60
A""rage degree of consolidation, U{%)
70
80
90
This g.ives the C., value for one-dimensional consolidation or small size specimens. U.S.
Department of Navy (1971) proposed nn empirical relationship between C11 and liquid limit
ror determining che field c" for proclical use and lhis is shown in Fig. 1.24.
Copyrighted material
'
....
"\.
'
]
~
'
.... '
<5
"-<
"
'\
\.
~"
Undisturbed samples;
Cv in range or >nrgin ccmpres.sion _
'
['..
~
I'..
'-..
....
' ~lely remouldod.L~:
f"-t'--~
lies below this Uml
.......
., '"'
LIQuid limit I.L
'
\.
"'
.......
.. ..
..
...
Fig. 1.24 Yal'iation of C., with lquid limit (after U.S. department of Navy (1971)).
0-15
IS-35
JS-65
65-35
7-85
Nott':
(Btows/30 em}
().4
4-10
10-30
30-50
so
Anglt' of shroring
ruislana (f)
Very Loose
28-30"
Loosc
Medium
Dense
Very Omse
30-36'
3~ ) 0
41.
Pine-grained eoUa
Soils containing clay-size particles and large proportion of silt have low permeability and
their propenies vary wilh the rate of load application. Under undrained condition. their
sttength is derived almost exclusively from cohesion. These soils oflen possess low shear
strength and high compressibility, lhus mal<ing !hem poor foondation materiaL
A cohesive soil is described as ve:ry soft. soft. medium. stiff, and so on according to its
shear s1rength as determined from the unconfined compression test or from !he undrained
uiaxial test. Attempts have also been made to correlate thC standard penetration resistance (as
above) with the shear strength of cohesive soils. Table 1.10 gives the classification of
cohesive soils on !he basis of their shear strength (ferzaghi and Peck 1967).
Table 1.10 Shear $lTCngth of cohesive soils
(l'erughl and Peck 1967)
Undrained $hMt'
<AnsUttncy
strtngth. c.
N
(Blows ptr 30 em)
(lfm:)
~1.25
~2
1.25-2.50
2.5()-S.OO
2-4
Very Son
Son
Medium
Sliff
S.~IO.OO
Very Stiff
10.~20.00
4-8
8-16
16-32
> 20.00
32
Hllld
Stiff clay often possesses cracks and fissures which affect the shear slrCngth of 1he clay
mass. These fissures are planes of weakness and an: prone to softening by water. Laboratory
tests on small specimens do not often give lhe propenies of the soils in~situ (Bishop 1966,
Burland et al. 1966, Man;land 1971).
Elaatlc: parametera
Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio are impOrtant soil parameters thai are required to study
the defonnation behaviour of a soil. When a saturated clay is loaded rapidly. no volume
change of the c lay occurs during loading and Poisson's ratio can be taken as 0.5. When there
is volume change. typical values of Poisson 's ratio may be 1aken as those in Table: 1.11
(Barkan 1962).
Tablt 1.11 Poisson's nuio or di.fferent soils
(Barkan 1962)
Soil f)'Pt
Salurated clay (undrained)
CJ:ay with sand and silt
Un.sawrated clay
Lo<..
Sand
P<'iSJ()n s ralio
o.so
0.30-0A2
0.35- 0.40
0.44
0.30-0.35
Copyrighted material
lneltu compreselbllity
The pre.ssure versus void ratio relationships of natural clays are vuy sensitive to sampling
disturbanc.e s and the linear e versus Jog p relationship is not always obtained even for a
nonnally consolidated clay. Also, there is a pseudo overconsolidation effect on the sample
because of the removal of in-s itu stresses by sampling. Consequently, e versus )og p
relationship obtained from laboratory consolidation tests on undisturbed samples geniraiJy
takes the shapes as shown in Fig. 1.25. The curves move downwards as the sampling
disturbances are increased. Schmertman (1953) observed that. irrespective of sampling
disturbances. the straight Jine portions of all the curves meet at a void ratio equal to 0.42 ~0
where e0 is the in-situ void ratio of the sample. Then joining this point with that
corresponding to t 0 and Po (where Po insitu effective overburden pressure) would give the
virgin consolidation curve. For norma11y consolidated soil, the e.0 -p0 point lies to the right of
the extension of the straight line in the laboratory e versus log p curve while for overconsolidated samples. the point would lie to the left. The field versus log p relationship for
the overconsolidated range is obtained by drawing a line parallel to the laboratory rebound
curve and the point of intersection of this line with extended straight line of the laboratory
curve would give the pre-consolidation pressure (Fig. 1.25).
Void
ratio, e
----
'
LabOratory
.,
Po=Pt;
''
-'~~,~ VW'gin ~ression
\
curve. slope c f:
oonsoCidalion 1 \
curve
\
---- -- ~-
1
I
I
I
I
'
I
I
_ _,__;__~ Pressure,
p, P2
p (tog scale}
Copyrighted material
Figure 1.26 shows the di01ribution of predominant soil deposits in India (Ranjan and Rao
2000).
32
2$.
2&
23.$.
zo
~AA.MIIt
18"
.-all
mo.-.-
m---
tr
r;m~on~~-
12"
IZ3-~
54
aa
1'2"
16
eo-
54
aa
92"
ga
1ocr
Allu..W aoUa
Large parts o( northern and CIStern India lyina; in the lndo-ao.naetic plains and the
Brahmaputra valley arc covered by the sedimentary deposits of the river> and their
tributaries. Tiley often hove thickness greater than 100 m above lhe bed rock. Tile deposits
..-ly constitute layer> of sand. sdt. and clay depending on lhe pDOJtion of lhe river away
from lhe soun:c.
llarlDe depoe.IU
India has a long coast line extending along lhe Arabian sea. Indian ocean, ond lhe Bay of
Bengal. n.e deposits along the coast are mostly laid down by lhe sea. 11leiC marine c lays of
India are generally soft and often contain organic matter. 'They pOCSC$$ low shear strength
and high compresSibility.
<..opynghted matenal
Laterite IOU
This soil covers wide areas of Kerala. Karnati.lka. Maharasua, Orissa. and pans of West
Bengal. Lalerites are residual soils fonned by decomposition of rock which fonns oxides of
iron and aluminium.
Desert IOU
Large areas of Rajasthan in lhe Thar desert are composed of wind blown deposits of desert
soil. like loess. The sand dunes are often 15 m high and are formed under highly arid
conditions.
Boulder depoetto
Boulders are deposited is hilly rerrains where the rivers flow wilh high velociry and carry
large size boulders. These deposits are found in the sub-Himalayan regions of Uttar Pradesh
and Himachal Pradesh.
Barkan. 0.0 (1962), Dynamics of Bases and Foundations, McGraw Hill Book Co., New
York.
Bishop. A.W . (1959), The Principle of Effective Stress, Teknisk Ukebald, Vol. 106, No. 39,
pp. 859-863.
Bishop, A.W. ( 1966), Strength of Soils
pp. 89-130.
Bishop, A.W. and OJ. Henkel ( 1964), The Meilsuremeni of Soil Prop<rtus in the Triaxial
Tw, Edward Arnold, London.
Bjerrum. L. (1964). R~lasjon M~lom Malte og Berengnede Serninger av Byggverk pa Leire
og Sa11d, Norwegion Geotechnical Institute, Oslo, Norway.
BoWZ<~k
ond G.A. Leonards (1972), The G/oucnt<r Test Fill. Proeee&ngs ASCE Speciality
Conference on performance of earth and eanh retaining Sln.lctures, Lafayette. Indiana.
USA.
Burlond, L., F.G. Buller. and P. Ouniean ( 1966), The Behaviour and Design of lArge
Diometu Bored Piles in Stiff Clay, Proceedings SympOsium on Large Bored Piles. The
lnslilUtion of Civil Engineers. London, pp. 51- 71.
Copyrighted material
Skempton, A.W. (1948), The ~ = 0 At~alysis of Stability and its Theoretical Basis,
Proceedings 2nd International Conference on SMFE, Vol. 2.
Skempton, A.W. and A.W. Bishop ( 1954), Soils, their Elasticity and Inelasticity. North
Holland Publishing Co. Amsterdam.
Skempton, A.W. and R.D. Northey (1952), 17re Sensitivity of Clays, Geotechnique. Vol 3,
pp. 30-54.
Taylor, D.W. ( 1948), Fundamentals of Soil Mechanics, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Terzaghi, K. and R.B. Peck (1967). Soil Mechanics in Ei1ginuring Practiu, 2nd edition,
Copyrighted material
II
II
Site In estigation
2 .1 INTRODUCTION
ll is essential to carry OUt site investigation
preparing the design of civil engineering
works. The investigation may range in
from simple examination of the surface soils.
with or without a few shallow lrial pits.
a detailed s1udy of the soil and ground water
conditions for a considerable depth below
ground surface by means of boreholes and in
situ and/or laboratory tests on lhe soils :~~~~~!. 1be extent of the investigation depends
on the imponance of the stNCture. the c
of the soil conditions. and the infonnation
already available on the behaviour of
foundations on similar soils. Thus, it is not the
normal practice to sink boreholes and
soil leSLS for single or two-storey dwelling
houses since normally. there is adoquale
of the safe bearing pressure of the soil in
any particular locality. Only in
soils such as peat or loose fill would it be
necessary to sink deep boreholes.
supplemented by soil tests. More extensive
investigation for light st~tures is needed
structures are buih on filledup soil or in
ground conditions where there is no
available on foundation behaviour of similar
structures. A detailed s ite investigation
deep boreholes and laboratory testing of
soils is always a necessity for heavy
such as bridges~ multi-storeyed buildings or
industrial plants.
Thus. the major objectives of site inveftigatuon are:
2 .2
A lot of information is extracted from site iqvestigattion to facilitate foundation design. This
includes
I. General topography of the site whii h affects foundatio n design and construction,
presence of water courses. and so on.
e .g .. s urface c.o nfiguration, adjacent
Copyrighted material
Sile lnvesn'gation
33
2. Location of buried services such as power lines, telephone cables, water mains,
sewers pipes and so on.
3. General geology of the area with particular reference to the principal geological
formations underlying the site.
4. Previous history and use of the site including information of any defects and failures
of struc.turcs built on the site.
5. Any special features such as possibility of earthquake, flooding, seasonal swelling etc.
6. Availability and quality of local construction materials.
7. A detailed record of soil or rock strata, ground water conditions within the zone
affected by foundation loading and of any deeper strata affecting the site conditions
in any way.
8. Design data which comprises strength and compressibility characteristics of the
different strata.
9. Results of chemical analysis on soil or ground water to detennine pos.'ible deleterious
effects on foundation structures.
2 .S
Different stages of site investigation for a major civil engineering project may be summarised
as shown in Table 2.1.
T able 2.1 Stages or site investigation
ReconMissance Study
(I)
Geological -
Dt-roild JnwstigatWtt
(I) Boring
(b) Sampling
(C) Ttstioa
(i) Lab test
Study
(I)
further testing
lnsuwn<nwion
(c) Paformance evaluation
(b)
2 .S . l
ReeonnaisaaDee Study
Roconnajssancc study involves the preliminary feasibility study that is undertaken before any
detailed planning is done-mainly for the purpose of selection of site. This is to be done at
minimum cost and no large scale exploratory work is usually undertllken at this stage. The
required data may be obtained from:
Copyrighted material
34
Geolo~cal
Geological interpctation of land forms and underlying strata give !he .sequence of events
leading to the formation of subsoil deposits. They help to define the propenies of the
material in a general way.
Pedolo~cal
dot&
2.4.1
~al
Pit
Trial phs arc the cheapest way of site eltploration and do not require any specialized
equipmenl. A pic is manually excavated to get an indication of the soiJ stratification and
obtain undisturbed and disturbed samples. TriaJ pits allow visuaJ inspection of any .change of
strata and facilitate in-situ tesling. They are. however, suitable for exploration of shallow
d4:plh only. Figure 2.1 is a diagrammatic representation of trial pitS.
Test pit
Brownish grey
silly (jay
Soil Strata
F1Q. 2.1
2.4.2 Wash
Trial pit
BoriDC
A hole, usually 150-200 mm diameter, is advanced into the soil through a suitable cutter at
the bonom of a drill rod. The soil is loosened and removed from the borebole by a stream of
water or drilling mud, issuing from the lower end of the wash pipe which is worked up and
Copyrighted m3\erial
Sitt' Juvestigtaion 35
down or romted by hJind in the borehole. Water or mud now carries the soil up the onnular
space between the wosh pipe ond the cosing. ond it overflows ot ground level where the soil
in suspension is allowed to settle in a tank and the fluid is recirculated or discharged to
waste as required. Samples of the settled soil can be retained for identification purpOses.
Figure 2.2 shows the arrangement for wash boring.
Waktr
Winch._
awiveJ
Pump
Engine
Sump
Wash pipe
'
Flg. 2.2 Wash boring,
The method is simple and cheap. The structure of the soil below the boring apparatus is not
disturbed and thus, both disturbed and undisrurt>ed samples can be obtained.
1- Dril
-~
....
I
I
I
I
II
Post.flole auger-
'
rod
I
I
I
I
:''
I
Copyrighted material
2 .4 .4
Rotary Drllling
Rotnry drilling is done by rapidly rotating drilling bits attached to the bottom of the drill rod
to cut and advnnce chc borehole. Rmary drilling can be used in sand, clay or inl,act rocks
wilh warer or drilling mud being circulnted through che drill rod to remove the cuttings as
the mud returns u pwards chrough che annular space between the drill rod and the side of the
hole. Core bnrcls wilh diamond bits may be used in r01ory drilling co obtain rock cores.
:::r-
t--Outer casing
r-
ll-+Fig, 2.4
Cutting shoe
Stabilizaclon or t>orehose
by castng.
Copyrighted material
Sit~ l11~srigation
+ 37
Exccpr when undisrurbed samples ore required in ~nsitive clays. !he casing is genernlly
driven by repeUicd blows of a drop hammer. Casing prevcnrs side caving, bur nor always
bottom caving. This can be achieved by filling the casing with water or driiJjng fluid.
However. casing should nor be filled wirh warer if bonom of casing is above ground warer
table and undisturbed samples are required.
2.5
SAMPLING
The different types of sample obtained from boreholes are shown in Table 2.2.
Table l..l Types of sample
SampJ~s
Undisrurbed
OiSIWI>cd
I
RtmdUidcd
R~ve
2 .5.1
Block samples (refer Fig. 2.5) are hand cur from trial piiS or open cxcavarions. A block of
clay is c--arefully trimmed with a sharp knife. taking care that no water comes into contact
wilh rhe sample. Good quolity samples can be obtained by this merhod. but if the soil does
nor possess ony cohesion. ir may be dirticuh, if 001 impossible. 10 obi:Un block samples.
Fig. 2.5
2.5.2
Undisturbed samples may be obtained from boreholes by open drive samplers or piston
samplers. An open drive sampler is shown in Fig. 2.6.
Drift
rod
Copyrighted material
Table 2.3 lists the requirements of a good sampling tube (ll:fer Fig. 2.8) as follows:
Copyrighted material
Site brvesagotiou 39
T able 2.3
(a) Area ralio, C. =
o..1 - oc1
o'
This represents the amount of soil that is displattd when the sampler is forttd into lhc: ground. Thicker the
tube. more is tht diswrbanet". The ateil ratio of a good sampling tube should not cxct:cd ISIJt.
(b)
For
o.scx,
c. =
D,.;, D,
:Z..J'h
'Tbis dearance is provided to mluce &he drivlog fOl"Cle requlttd to penetrate the sampler into the soil.
DiametO" of samples should 001 be less !han 38 mm. In gcn<nl. SO. ISO mm diamelel' undUwrb<d samples
are obtained from boreholes.
Paraffin coat
~b'a<allin coat
(Paraffin wax +
P&ttOiel.wnjelly)
$ample Wooden box
Saw dust
(b) Tube sompte
Fig. 2.9 Preservation of sam ples.
Copyrighted material_
l .4
ProJHTt'JI of soil
Qualiry of samplt
C/4ssifo:4tlon
I.
2.
3.
l~ fication
RID
Consistency limits of
cohesive soils
}
RID
Moisture content
Unit weight
UKit~tuing
I.
2.
3.
4.
Moisture contctlt
Spcdfic gravity
UD
0
propntin
Shear stren&th
Cornpr=ibility
UD
UD
1<$1)
l'<rnle>bility
Compaction characteristics
5.
composition
(b) D.T.A.
UD
RID
RID
D-Dishubcd
T able 2.5
UD-Undistu.rbed
TyfH of tat
ch!lncteriscics
S. Testing of piles
6. Compaction conU'OI
7.
test
or soil
Copyrighted material
Siu lnvestigalion 41
2 . 7 FJEI.D TESTS
2 .7 .1 StiiDdard Penetration Test (SPT)
It is extremely difficult to obtain undisturbed samples of granular soils, so in-situ SPT is
performed at frequent intervals along the depth of a borehole. A slllndard split spoon sampler
(Fig. 2.10) is driven 45 em into the gnnund by means of a 6S kg hammer falling freely from
a height of 75 em. The toW number of blows required to drive the second and third depth
of IS em (i.e. total 30 em) is called the slllndard penetration resistance (N blows per
30 em). After the blow counts are recorded. the spoon is withdrawn and a representative
sample is obtained for identification tests.
To dril rod
SIOOI somplng
. _ 2"(5(1).8)
(split klngiludinally)
For cohesive soils. a simple correlation between the slllndard penetration resistance (N)
and the undrained shear strength, c, has been proposed by Stroud (1974),
c, = kN
(2.0)
when: k is a constant having an average value of 4.5 kN/m2. Similar relationship has been
obtained by SengupUI (1984) who studied the correlation for some cohesive soils and
obUlined a value of 4.2 for the consUlnt k. Terugbi and Peek's relationship has been widely
used to obtain the consistency of cohesive soils in terms of the undrained shear strength, as
shown in Table 1.9 (Terzaghi and Peck, 1967).
In granular soils, the SPT blow count is affected by the effective overburden pressure,
u.;. So. N value obtained from the field should be corrected to correspond to a standard
vaJue of
a...'. Accordingly,
(2.1)
Copyrighted material
= 15 + 0.5(N.., - 15)
(2.2a)
The relative density and the degree of compaction of granular soil can be obtained from
Tenaghi's empirical correlation, as in Table 2.6.
Table l..6 Relative density from SPT blow oount
No. of blows
R'latiw tki&Sity
(N/30 em)
R0 = ( ., - ' ) x 100\1&
'-... - ~"min
C)-4
Q-15~
4-10
tQ-30
IS-35%
25-65\1&
6S-85'.6
> 85
3o-SO
>so
Very 10050
Loose
Mcdlum
Dense
Very Dense
Many attempts have been made to obtain empirical correlation between NC!OI and the angle of
shearing resistance of sand. The most recent attempt by Halanakar and Uchida (1996) appears
to agree well with laboratory test data, which gives
,z,j20N~ + 17 degrees
(2.3)
(2.4)
where C 1 and C2 are functions typical of the type of sand. Some C 1 and C 2 values
corresponding to different soil types are given in Table 2.7.
Copyrighted material
Sitt lmestigotUm 43
Table 2.7
Soil t}JH
C, (kstcm'l
C1 (tgtcm1/blow)
52
3.3
4.9
I.
2.
71
39
38
43
4.5
lOS
11.8
24
5.3
12
5.8
A similar correlation between the compression modulus E and the SPT blow count N
has been obtained by Papadopoulos (1992). This is given by
E = 75 + 8N (kglcm2)
(2.4a)
Bowles (1988) also gives useful relations to evaluate the srress~strain modulus of sand
from SPT blow count, as shown in Table 2.8. But they generally give very conservative
values.
Table 2.8 Stress-strain tNXlulus of sand (Bowles. 1988)
TyfH' of sond
Silty sand
E (kglem2)
S(N + IS)
2.S(N + IS)
7.S(N + 24)
12(N + 6) for N > IS
&_N + 6), N S IS
3(N + 6)
Copyrighted material
(2.5)
These correlations can be used to obtain the SP'f blow count, N from DCP'f data.
2.7.3
The static cone penetration test (SCPT) is a direct sounding test which is done to obtain a
continuous record of soil characteristics with depth and to estimate their e ngineering
properties. The test does not need any borehole. A 60" cone having an apex angle of 60" and
a base area of 10 cm1 with a friction jacket above. is pushed into the ground at a steady rate
of 20 mmfs. Modem static cone penetrometers have e lectrical measuring devices with wires
from the transducers attached to the cone and the friction jacket giving continuous record of
the cone and friction resistances as illustrated in Fig. 2,1 J.
1
Fig. 2.11 Strie cone penettomeetr (tltettic:al). 1. Conical point (10 crn2): 2. lOid ctll; 3. Strain gauges;
4. Friction sleoYO {!50 an'); 5. Adjuslment ring; 6. Walerpf<>Of bushing;
7. Cable; 8. connection with rods
The test measures the cone resistance. q~. developed against the penetration of the cone and
the frictional resistance, /, developed between the sleeve and the surrounding soil as in
Fig. 2.12.
,,~hn'l o, kNJm'
2.5
,)
' 5
1000
2000
S_ ..,_
_...
..
~._
"' 'l::..
b:-'~
-~y
.--'...
$
20
1:
~
;;;;;.:
'
,s
25
Copyrighted material
Site Investigation 45
Typical penetrometer test data give a continuous variation of the cone resistance and the
frictional resistance with depth. In recent years. the static cone penetrometer has been
modified to incorporate an electrical piezo-cone to give simultaneous measurement of tip
resistance. side friction and the pore pressure as the cone is advanced in lhe soiL The
development of pore pressure makes the interpretation of soil type more accurate in terms of
permeability of che soil.
Lancellotta (1983) and Jamilkowski et al. ( 1985) proposed an empirical correlation
belween the relative dens-ity of nonnally consolidated sand. D, and q,..
D..(%)
= - 98 + 66 1og10
(}?)
(2.6)
where a' := verticaJ effective stress at depth considered and both qt' and a' are in units of
tonnes per sq. m.
This relationship is based on che oorrelation obtained from several sands as depicted in
Fig. 2.13.
95
85
D, = -98+
IW!tog,o((q~~)
75
a; In ten (meltlcYm'
Ticino aand
0t1awa sancs
q, and
45
Edgar sand
Hol<l<Mindsand
Flo. 2..13
The peak friction angle of normally consolidated sand may be obtained from the
expression. (Kulhawy and Mayne 1990),
;- = tan-(o.l ...
o.381og~)
(2.7)
For cohesive soil, Mayne and Kemper (1988) gave the following relations for the
undrained shear strength c,., preconsolidatjon pressure Pr o.nd the overconsolidation ratio.
OCR as
Copyrighled material
.... q, - a.,
c. -
20
p, = 0.243 (q,)"-'16
(2.8)
1.0 1
where a" and a:. are the total and e ffective vertical stresses at the level of test respectively.
Some useful relalionship be1ween q, and !he SPT blow counl have also been oblained
by Robertson and Campanella (1983). The range of variation of q,JN, wilh mean grain size
D, is illus1ra1ed in Fig. 2. 14.
Clay
Silly sancl
1000
//
900
800
//
700
v,.....
300
200
100
0
,....."
--,..----
___ ....
<
.).. _..;>..;:
~-.::
:---
~--- -
lnela
..... .....
,.....'
~/
~
..
0,01
0.001
0. 1
(1963)
1.0
D,o (mm )
Meyemof's (1965) simple correlation between q, and N for fine 10 medium dense sand is also
eX!eliSively used. This relation is expressed as
q, = 4N
where qr is in
(2.9)
kg/cm 2
Copyrighted material
Site ltrvestigotio" 47
A four bladed vane ac the bouom of a drill rod is pushed into the soil and a torque is
applied by turning a handle at lhe top to create a cylindrical shear surface. as depicted in
Fig. 2.15.
p
go
1<---s--+1
go
Torque head
Torque
rod
Vanes
-Pvanes
~<'-0->0
At failure. the shear strength of the soil is related to the applied torque by the relationship
2
= 1<D H
2
(I +.!_ D )~
3H
(2.1 0)
where,
diameter of vane
=Height of vane
T = Shear strength acting along the surface as weU as at the top and bottom of the
sheared cy Iinder.
The assumption that the shear stress is uniformly distributed across the top and bottom
is questionable but the variation due to any other assumed distribotion is not great. Normally.
SO mm diameter x 100 mm Jong four bladed vane is used and the vane is rotated at the rate
or 0.1 degree/s. Both undisturbed and remoulded strengths can be determined by first finding
the undisturbed strength and lhen rotating the vane fully to obtain lhe remoulded strength.
Copyrighted material
Tlt~ory
48
Peak
strength
-~~~
strength
J...----tr Hydraulic
jadt
Test
1'S
Shear displacement
jack
Ftg. 2.1&
1M:
I
I ~------
:CN!t
I
I
The failure load is given by the intersection of initial and final tangent. If no well
defined failure point is reached, the data are plotted on logo versus logp scale to obtain the
point of intersection. failure may also be taken to be the point corresponding to an
arbitm.rily chosen limit of settlement., depending on the requirement of the suucrure.
Knowing the failure load and deformation char.acteristics from plate load te,st. the shear
strength and modulus of elasticity of the soil may be obtained from corTelation with be:lring
capacity and settlement equations of shallow foundations.
Copyrighted material
Sitt
lnv~stigalion
49
(i) Extrapolation on the basis of theory of elasticily and/or empirical relation is only
approximate due to non-homogeneity of the soil. Some agencies recommend the use
of plates of different sizes and extnlpolation for the actual foundation.
(ii) Load test data reflect the ch311lCteristics of a soil only within a depth aJ>I.roXimately
equal to twice the width of the plate.
(iii) Plate loading test is essentially a short term test (run in a few hours), so no
indication of the long tenn consolidation behaviour is oblained.
(iv) The load toot data alone do not give full indication of the properties of a subsoil.
Bu~ used judiciously in conjunction with other test data, it has valuable use in
design, particularly in estimating the settlement of cobeslonless soil.
2 .7 .7
Preuuremeter Test
Menard (1956) developed the pressuremeter test to measure the strength and deformation
characteristics of soil in-situ. The test is done at different depths in a borehole with the help
of a pressuremeter which consists of an expandable probe with a measuring cell at the centre
and two guard cells at top and bottom. One such lfl1lRgement is shown in Fig. 2.18.
Cowlter Ll'lit
gas IUPil'Y
Tubing (gas
and ---l-o-/
wablt lines)
The probe is inserted in a pre-boned hole and is expanded in volume either by liquid or
air pressure until the soil fails or the expanded volume of the measuring cell reaches twice
lhe original volume of the cavity. The guard cells are used to minimise the end effect on the
measuring cell. Table 2.9 gives the typical dimensions of the probe and borehole.
Copyrighted material
Hole
Dlamtrtr of
1..
tksignation
pro!>< (nun)
(m)
(m)
Ax
44
36
Bx
Nx
S8
21
66
42
70
2S
so
72
48
Figure 2.19 shows typical resulcs of a pressuremecer test. The expanded volume of the
meaSllring probe is plotced against the applied pressure. The curve is divided into three zones.
Zone I represencs reloading of the soil during which the soil is pushed hack into the initial
state of stresS. The pressure p11 represents the in-situ overburden pressure. Zone n represents
the pseudoela.stic condition when the cell volume increases linearly with the pressun:: and p1
defines the yield stress. Zone Ill gives the plastic zone, p1 representing the limit pressure
which is obtained by extrapolation.
Presswe, p
~~~~~~~--~~~T~aM~
V0 + Vt
2(V0 + V 0 )
YOkme, V
V0
Vo +
V"'
Correlations between relevant soil parameters and pressuremeter data have been
developed by many investigaton. Kulhawy and Mayne (1990) proposed the relationship,
p,
= 0.45 p,
p~
where
(2. 11)
c _ Pt - Po
.. NP
where c., = undrained shear strength of clay. Also.
N, = I +
Here.
lo~( z)
E= 266(v + v. +2 t)(PtVI p
(2.12)
Po )
VQ
Copyrighted material
SiJe /uvtsrigation 5 1
Further innovations in insitu testing have been achieved through the flntphue
dilatomettr test (Marchetti 1980, Schmenmann 1986). This is a further development of the
pressuremeter test. But these tests are rather expensive and are yet to be adopted as a part of
routine soil investigation.
The remaining field tests indicated in Table 2.5 arc not directly relevant to foundation
design. field pumping tests are done to obtain the insitu permeability of the soil which is
required for working out a dewatering schc.me. Compaction c.ontrol tests are done to control
the field compaction of soil in land reclamation and embankment construction. Load test on
piles, which are required to check the safe load capacity of piles will be discussed in the
chapter on pile foundations.
2.8
LABORATORY TESTS
A sci of routine laboratory tests are required to be done to obtain the soil parameters for
foundation design. These tests are indicated in Table 2 .4. Care needs to be taken in choosing
the appropriate tests for a panicular soil type. Classification and identification tests are
nonnally done on representative or disrurbed samples while engineering properties are to be
determined from tests on undisturbed samples. Sufficient number of tests should be done for
each identified stratum to assess the relevant design parameters. The procedure for laboratory
tests arc given in I.S. Codes and other building codes.
2 .9
The ground warer table and seasonal fluctuations of the same are important parameters that
are necessary for foundation design and for working out dewatering schemes for deep
excavations. The position of ground water table is determined at the time of investigation by
observations in open wells or boreholes allowing sufficient time for stabilization. Depending
on the time of investigation, the measured ground water table may give the highest or lowest
position of the same. To obtain the seasonal fluctuation of ground water table observations
may be made in suitably placed piezometers at regular intervals of time.
Copyrighted material
52 1lu!ory and
Practk~
of Foundation DeJigu
o lnitial bOrehOle
Supplementary boreholes
(b) Large building
.'. I '
..
'' ~
'
ri
Fllled-vp pond
Heavy plant
..
Mufk101oy biOd<
(C) Fac10<Y
building
2 . 10.2
bor-..
Depth of Boreholes
Depth of boreholes is governed by the depth of soil affected by the foundation loading. It
should be at leaiS one and a half times the width of the loaded area. In case of nanow and
widely spaced strip foundations. the borings may be comparatively shallow. But for large raft
foundations or pile foundations, the borings have to be deep. Where foundations are extended
to roek. it is necessary to prove that rock is, in fac~ prese.nt at the assumed depth, so
boreholes should be taken down to establish the depth to the rock surface. In general, unless
hard soil bed rock is encountered at shallow depth the boring should be done to such depth
that the net increase in soil pressure due to the foundation loading is less than 10% of the
average foundation pressure or 10% of the venical effective overburden pressu:re, as shown
in Fig 2.21.
Depth
l
, j :
\ - - In-situ o"odMo
stress (A,) ' .
z, v
Increase of
vertical pre$SUre
(q..,)
1,
ol-es
Obcaln cjepth
f>li/Po 0.10
Z 1 SUCh
11\at
t.ptq,.. = 0.1
3. Depth of borehole should
be z, or Zt ~k:h
,. ever
Is less
Copyrighted material
SUe ltrvestigatioll S3
S~tength
Menard, L. (1956), An APparatus/or Measuring the Srrengrh of Soils in Piau, M.S. Thesis,
University of Jllinois, Urbana, lllinois, USA.
Meyerhof, G.G. (1965). Shallow Foundations. Joumol of Soil Mechanics & Foundation
Divisioro. ASCE, Vol. 91. No. SM 2, pp. 21- 31.
Robertson, P.K. and R.G. Campanella (1983), Interpretation of Cone Penetration Tests.
Pan I: Sand, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 718-733.
Schmcnmann, J.H. (1986). Suggested Me,thod for Performing the Aat Dilatomcter Test.
Geoteclmical Testing Joumat ASTM, Vol. 9. No. 2, pp. 93-101.
Skempton, A.W. (1986), Standard Penetration Test Procedures and <he Effect in Sands of
Overburden Pressure. Relative Density, Particle-size, Aging and Over consolidalion.
Geotechnique. Vol. 36. No. 3, pp. 425447.
Copyrighted material
The extent and nature of investigation depends on !be impo!Wlce and type of lhe structure.
There should be a desired degree of interaction between !be designer, lhe investigation
agency. and the construction agency so that problems of design and constructjon may be
identified in time and measures taken to tackle them before things get out of hand.
Figure 3.1 is a schematic representation of interaction of various agencies involved in
construction work.
Soareport
Design
Project
oompletlon
eons ttuellon
agency
Construction
54
Copyrighted material
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(0
(g)
(h)
soil test report should contain data regarding the following information:
Project and site description
Regional and site geology
Dates of field and laboratory work
Layout of structures and location of boreholwfield tests
Method of investigation
Field work
Laboratory tests
(0 Details of field and laboratory work
(g) Ground water characteristics
(h) Field test data
Copyrighted material
56
Tlr~ory
Some of these parameters are discussed in the remaining part of this sectlon.
Existing buitding
\(&-storey)
.' ''.
,.. ..
,
-
~
Routine soil exploration is carried out through boreholes. insitu standard penetration test
within boreholes. and field te-s ts such as static and dynamic cone penetration tests. Laborataty
Copyrighted material
D~slgn
Parameters 57
tests are carried out on disturbedlundistUibcd samples collected from the boreholes. For a big
project. a limited number of boreholes may be supplemented by dynamic cone penetration
tests which arc particularly useful for determining the depth of fill, if any, through
appropriate correlation with borehole data. It is, however. necessary to do at least one
dynamic cone test adjacent to each borehole. The Jocation of a filled-up pond in the HUDCO
project area in Ultadmlga, Calcutta was de=ated in this manner with the help of dynamic
cone test, as shown in Fig. 3.3.
Cone pene. .tion
(bl0wS/30 em)
BH
Arm
cloy
Soft
day
"1 2 3
BH1
-s
~
I
1
Very
soft 1 //'8112
i" 8113
day
. --
Soft
ela)'
Boreholeo
Flg. 3.3 Location of lllledup pond In HUOCO project aile, Calcutta.
Date or lnvestlgatlon
The date of investigation is imponant in evaluating the fluctuation of ground water table
(O.W.T.) at a glven site. If there is seasonaJ fluctuation in water table. measurement at the
time of investigation does not necessarily give the highest or lowest position of G.W.T. In
ease investigation is done in the dry season. local enquiry should be made about seasonal
fluctuation for proper evaluation of O.W.T. The date of investigation becomes imponant in
such an evaluation.
The method of boring adopted at a given site should be given due imponance in evaluating
the soil data. The report should clearly specify the technique-shell and auger, wash boring.
or bentonite mud drilling~hat has been used to make the boreholes. Also. the usc of casing
or chiselling done, should be clearly indicated in the report.
Sampling is an important aspect or soil investigation. The quality of samples detennine
the reliability or otherwise of the laboratory test data. The relevant data on sample and
sample collection are:
Copyrighted material
Not much care is always taken in collecting samples 'at regular intervals of depth or at
changes of strata' as is generally specified. Figure 3.4 iUustrates a case where samples were
required to he collected at depths of 3 m, 6 m. 9 m, 12 m, 15 m, 18 m and 21 m but those
from 6 m, 15 m and 18 m depths were not actual.ly collected. As a consequence. there were
some depths of soil for which no soil properties were available. The report should also
clearly indicate whether samples have slipped while lifting.
0
G.l.
3m
6m
.J
.;
9m
.!l
~
Joj.----21 m
lo f - - - - 2 m
Testing
Laboratory testS on disturt>edl\lndisturbed samples are done for the purpose of classification
of strata and also for detennination of their engineering properties. The schedule or tests
s hould he drawn up with care, reflecting the soil type, and the narure of problem to he
solved. This should beuer be done in consultatjon with the de...-igner to avoid a random choice
of the l)'pe of test from the schedule of tests given in the bill of quantities. figure 3.S gives
a schedule of tests on samples from different strata of normal CaJcutta deposit. 11le types of
Copyrighled material
+.;-
0
0
0
Arm...,
day
18
Soft lilY
cloy
8.~1
S..ndy
lilt w(th
el e)l
Bind
B.H 2
Arm dly
24
LL
Pl.
0
0
0
0
0
0
6.0
6.5
11.0
13.5
18.0
19.5
2..25
... 75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
:1.5
12
(ml
DenM
10.0
12.5
15.0
11.5
21.0
0
0
GS
.ae uc
0
0
T
t\JU)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
conlent
uc
u..
Unc::onlhld
Uquld~
Pl P1Mic limit
GS Grein tim
0
0
T Tl1ulol (Wl
Coneolctdon
0
0
0
0
Flg.U -ollobcllobyiMit.
tests should be so chosen ., to give lhe properties of all lhe strata relevant for design. One
should avoid going for unconfined compressioo test in a predomlnandy silty soil.
Similllt'ly. oon.'IOiidation teSt$ are required for cohesive strata only. For sandy strata. one
has to rely more on rield tc5U. such as SPT. Even undisturbed samplu in sand do nor
provide much help.
Soli proftle
Soil profiles should be drawn through a number or boreholes, if not through all of them. to
give the subsoil stratification along a chosen alignment. Such soil profiles dsown for a
number of carefully chosen alignments give a comprehensive picture of the variation of soil
strata, throughout the site. Plotting separately for individual boreholes does 001 cive lhe true
picture ar a &,lance. Therefore. the best way is to pl01 lhe soil profile on a desired alignment
with nespeet to the vanation of N value with dep<h. The relative consistency of dlffeseot
str.wo emerg<S clearly from sucb a diagram. as depic:tecl throuJb Fla- 3.6.
The position of around water table at lhe time of investiaation should be clearly
indicated in the soil profile. Design or foundations should take appropriate ])OCe of any
seasonal noouation In around water table.
t _,,.yrighted ma ,noll
w (8Jows/30 em)
0 10 20 30
4()
so
g
~
(j
1
1
12
12
16
'
'
c--.
24
28
=;
30
Fig.
ihrough -
or data, thereby becomes difficult. While the basic b:St data should always be there, the
engineer should be in a position to make proper assessment of the engineering propenies of
different strata to be used for design.
The basic test data may be summariud under the foUowing categories for each major
Stratum of a s-ubsoil deposil:
(a)
Classification data
Bulk density
Natural moisture content
Atterberg limits
Grain-size distribution
(b)
Engin~ering pro~rlit!s
Penneability
Consolidation test data: m...,
Compaction characteristics
c,.. eli
Data Interpretation
The consistency data should be established before choosing the design parameters for a given
problem. Further, the reliability of data and their consistency may be studied qualitatively
from the results of individual testS. For example.
Copyrighted material
Parami!IUl t
'1
Atterbera Umits
Grai,..aia:e
Mlneralosr
Classification
Auerbera limits'
Natural moisnue conu:nt
Slandanl peneuation resiSW>Ce (N value)
Undrained
war wenglh
Consolldadon characleristic:s
Cl4st~" t~stt:
Ooulllcaloft ICfU
Tobk 3.1
s-pt.
I
2
)
GroU.Iu
S<wJ
7
2
16
20
6
Sili
60
Sl
........!1 , _
u. 1"1 I'L 1" 1
t!
Clay
.,
sa
))
2M
2&.2
76
u .o
39
72
19
8
62
30.2
46
46
35
2S.O
6S
ConsilttiiCJ: The variation or Atterberg limits and natural moisture conlent with depth
gives a clear indication of the relative consistency
or different
content cl0$C to the plastic limit and a high bulk density eonfinns a finn to stiff clay whereas
a natural moisture content approaching liquid limit should generally give a lower unit weight
and thus. indicau:s a soft normally consolidated soil, Fig. 3.7.
00
W(~)
y(thn')
. .
10 15
'""
20
-.
2
'
16a
/.
10
12
II
w
u
1Q edIT'"
;. =
Somple
c. (tlm2)
Grain-.siu (~~
SoNI
SiJJ
60
2
3
16
S3
6S
20
72
ciil!
U~ le-SI
33
4S
19
8
3.2
4.6
2.3
3.4
25
7.3
28
5.6
1J'lJ I~SI
lNpth
U 'To
PL'To
WI!>
6
8.5
76
S8
62
28
26
30
48
30
38
36
42
37
no.
I
z
3
10.5
14.0
N
(Biowt/30 cOl)
4.2
26
4.0
4.5
4.9
O.te of Sllmpling;: OS 04 16
c.,
:!
c
-- ----
"
..
NOfmal stress
Fig.
uu
Copyrighted material
D~sig,
Parameurs
63
Efftctiv~ str~ss JHlramd~rs: The effective stress parameters are required for analysis of long
term s tability when all the excess pore pressures developed during construction ha ve
dissipated. However. in ca~ of granular soils. effective stress parameters are to be used even
for short-term stability because me high permeability of lhe soil generally ensures that all the
excess pore-pressures get dissipated during construction itself. The effective shear parameters
of a soil arc determined from consolidated drained triaxial test or the consolidated undrained
rriaxial test with pore-pressure measurement. TI1e latte-r is particularly useful in problems of
stage constnJction of embankment where stability of me embankment is to be investigated for
undrained loading afte r each stage of construct.i on (Gangopadhyay and Som. 1974). The
pore-pressure parameter A is aloo required for such an analysis.
For purtiaiJy saturated soils and for soils with high silt content where partial drainage
may occur even during load applicaajon, the total suess parameters of soil (c. and ; .,) may
have to be evaluated for stability nnnlysis.
Consolidation: Consolidation tests are often done for pre..detennined press-ure ranges without
any referenc-e to the depth of the samples. In panicular. if the Si'mple is derived from deeper
strata or it appears overconsolidated. the virgin compression curve has to be determined by
loading the sample to sufficiently high pressures for es~blishing the field compression curve.
Only men is it possible to determine if n soil is normally consolidated or preconsolidated. In the
latter case. the Ct' value in the overconsolidation range and the preconsolidation press ure are
important in selecting the design parameters. Moreover. calculating the m., value for different
srrcss ranges from the laboratory curve may not represent the field behaviour correctly because
of sampling disturbances. h would be more appropriate to obtain the virgin curves from the test
data-using Schmcrtm:mn's procedure. as shown in Fig. 3.9.
1.0
0.8
8
e
"~
~Po
-"
''
-~
,p,
r-...."\fiet
0.6
'"'
Lab
0.4
0.1
: p, 0.9(kglcm')
0.5 1.0
p~cmz)
~
~
5.0 10 20
. ~' J!2.
:
.
"'
0. 1
0.5 t .O
' ""
tO 20
p(l<ol<m')
DeaiCD puametezs
On the bas is of field nnd laboratory test data, it should be possible to assign appropriate
values of design parameters for each stratum. Considerable judgement is required to evaluate
the data. Individual values may be erratic for various reasons described earlier. But an over.tll
assessment for a particular stratum is necessary. Figure 3.10 gives the resultS of a controlled
exploration programme for a foilurc investigation. The consistency of data bec.omes evident
from such presentation and the results inspire confidence. The average engineering properties
of each stratum can thus. be obtained without much difficulty.
Copyrighted material
-0
-0
.....: ''
'''
'
Jo '
: '
f,
'
'
:--.!
I
i..
l!
....... ;..
.. f-.. - -d
e;
:!
,._
..
~
~ J
N
:r
n
..t:
h
u
~!
ij
:h
!t
N
,,
fl
I
I
\"
~
~
!<I
:;:
!:1
II
Iii
Oangopadhyay, C.R. and N.N. Som (1974). An Approach to ' = 0 Analyis for Stage
Constr11ction, Proceedings ASCE, Vol. 100, OT6, pp. 699-703.
Copyrighted material
Foundations: Types
and Design Criteria
4.1
INTRODUCTION
Foundation is that part of a structure which provides s uppon to the structure and the loads
coming from it. Thus, foundation means the soil or rock that ultimately suppons the load
and any pan of the structure which serves to transmit the load into the soil. The design of
foundation for a structure, therefore involves the following:
4 .2
TYPES OF FOUNDATION
Foundations can be classified as shallow and deep foundations depending upon the depth of
soil which is affected by the foundation loading and. consequently. affect the foundation
behaviour. These can be further divided into different types of foundations which are
nonnally 3dOpted in pmctice. This classification is shown in Fig. 4.1.
Foundation
Deep
ShallOw
Ran
Footings
Isolated
Combined
I
PileS
I
Wei/Caisson
Buoyancy raft
85
Copyrighted material
4 .2 . 1 Sballow Foundations
In shallow fo undations. the load is transmitted to the soil lying immediately below the
substructure. as shown in Fig. 4.2. Such foundations are used when the subsoil near the
ground surface has adequate strength to support the load.
Ground
surface
.....-
'
J.l'oot!D.ga
lso/aJ$d footing:
...
...
-rni'F
B
c,
c,
c,
0E
I
Combined footing: Combined footings arc designed to support two or more adjacent
columns in a building frame where isolated footings either overlap or come very close to one
another (refer Fig. 4.4).
E""'1_6;"
Az
Ground
surface
x..J
B,
c,
B,
1!1-''----fil' '
c,
Fig. Combined toocing.
Copyrighted material
D~s;gn Crit~ria
+ 67
Strip footing:
A,
c,
-ng.
or
A large number
columns or often~ the entire sttucture is founded on one single slab or
raft. When individual column footings are, together, found to occupy more than 70% of the
plan area of the building, raft fouodations are provided. This is shown in Fig. 4.6. The basic
difference between footings and rafts lies in their size-the latter being mue-h larger and
affecting a greater area of the soil in determining its behaviour.
,--------:1
I
I
.I
U
L_ ____!
1 X
Section on-XX
L---------------
Flg.
Raft foundatiOn.
ConventioiUII rq/1:
Bodo 111
Raft
Copyrighted material
raft: Buoyancy rafls are placed at some depth beneath the ground surface but no
backfilling is done on the raft. A ground floor slab is provided at the desired height above
the ground and the space betW<:en the ground floor slab and the foundation raft ;. kept void,
refer Fig. 4.8, to provide relief of overburden pressure at the foundation level. Basement
rafls are typiC11l examples of buoyancy raft foundation.
Gould
"f'
V
4 .2 .2
Deep FoundatloDa
In deep foundations. tbe load is transmitted well below the bottom of the subsuucture, as
shown in Fig. 4 .9. Deep foundations are provided when soil immediately below the structure
does not have adequate bearing capacity but the soil at deeper stralll have.
Grcund
I
I
I
I
',' ___.,
I
I
lnftuence zone
Pile foundation
Piles transfer the load lhroogh soft upper strata either by end bearing on hard stratum or by
friction between the soil and the pile shaft and are accordingly called end bearing piles or
friction piles, Fig. 4.10.
t
Ann to
sUff day
t
t
t t
t t
t
Soft
Clay
Rod<
(b) End bearing pile
Copyrighted material
Usually a column load is supponed on a group or piles through a pile cap. as shown
in Fig. 4.11. Rafts and piles are sometimes combined 1.0 form a piled rafl illustrated in
Fig. 4.12.
0
0
ot
ol
to
to
CaOJmn
r:!:1:PVe
0
0
Pile"
cap
Plies
IH::f::::>,..,Pies
U..J...H1T> Plies
Hard SOil
f9
HFL
Rmr bed
\
Caisson
Well fourdatlon
Copyrighted material
On account or the interplay of many factors. there can be several acceptable solutions to a
given foundation problem but faced with a situation, experienced engineers may arrive at
conclusions which are different to some extent
Oftc.n tile choice of the type of foundation is arrived at by the process of elimination.
An experienced engineer first discards, almost instinctively, the most unsuitable types of
foundation and conc.entrates on a few most promising ones. When the choice has been
narrowed down to two or three, detailed analyses are made and their relative economy
studied before arriving at the final decision.
4 .3 . 1 Bearing Capacity
Net ultl.mate bearlJIC capacity
The net 1dlimare bearing capacity, (qutJ,. of a foundation is the applied pressure at which
complete shear failure of the subsoil occurs. This can be obtained. for a given foundation and
for a given subsoil condition. from an appropriate analysis-theoretical or empirical.
(4.1)
where yD1 is the total overburden pressure at the foundation level (ybeing the unit weight of
the soil ond D1, the depth of foundation) as in Fig. 4. 14.
Copyrighted material
Allowable
bearl.aC capeclty
The allowable bearing capacity of a foundation is the muimum allowable net pressure on
the foundation deccrmined from considerations or shear failure of the ground. This is
obtained by dividing the net ultimate bearing capacity by a suitable factor of safety. that is,
- (q,ul,
qauF
where. F = factor of safety.
The determination of allowable bearing capacity of a foundation from shear failure
consideration involves a bearing capacity analysis of the foundation with the relevant soil
propenies and the choice of an appropriate safety factor.
A factor of safery is applied on the ultimate bearing capacity of a foundation to
safeguard against:
(i) natural variation in the shear strength of the soil.
(ii) uncertainties in the accuracy of test results to detennine shear strength.
(iii) uncenainties in the reliability of theoretical and empirical methods of determining
bearing capacity.
(iv) excessive yielding of the foundation when the soil apprOOches shear failure.
Of the above. narural variation in subsoil propenies and uncenainty about the accuracy of
test results are the primary reasons for requiring an adequate factor of safety in determining
the allowable bearing capacity of a foundation. Subsoil propenies
a1
nature, are heterogeneous and there is usually wide variation of rest resultS. Therefore. a high
degree of judgement is required in selecting the shear strength parameters for design. Any
general guidance in thjs regard is neither possible nor always desirable. but a safety faclOr of
2.5- 3.0 may be adopted to guard against the variations and uncertainties listed above. Lower
factor of safety, say, 2.0 may be adopted for a temporary construction or on sites where
subsoil condition is well known and uniform. Lowering the factor of safery even funhet may
lead to locaJ yielding and excessive shear deformation of the soil.
The first step in a foundation design is to determine the net allowable bearing capacity, as
described above. It would, then be required to estimate the selllement of the foundation for a
bearing pressure equal to the net allowable bearing capacity and then to see if the estimated
seulemcnr is within the permissible Umirs. lf not, lhe foundation is to be redesigned.
4 .3 .2
Let us consider the columns in a building frame which were originally at the same level but
have settled differentially after application of the building load, illustrated in Fig. 4.15. The
different settlement criteria c:Jn then be stated as:
Copyrighted material
Original level
offoundotion
-:...._
-:-
4-
All these criteria can be evaluated from an adequate settlement analysis of the foundation.
However, it is obvious that mere prediction of settlement is only of limited practical value
unless some idea about how much settlement the building is going 10 tolernte without suffering
damage. is obtained. If a building frame settles uniformly over its area. no matter by whatever
amount. it has no adverse effec.t on the behaviour of its stnJc.tural components. Maximum
settlement is important in relation to access and services of the building and is generally of not
much significance when it is within reasonable limits. Damage to suuctural components may.
however. occur if there is excessive differential settlement.
Damages due to differential settlement may be classified under the following categories
(Skempton and McDonald 1955),
(i) Structural damage involving frame members. namely, beams, columns, and their
joints.
(ii) Architectural damage involving the walls, floors, and finishes.
(iii) Combined structural and architectural damage, and
(iv) Visual effects.
Building frames are generally designed 10 achieve uniform ~ttlement.
Since differential seulement occurs in most cases, secondary stresses are induced in the
members of the framed structure. the evaluation of which is yet to become a 5tandard
practice. althougb with the advent of numerical analysis using computers, it is now possible
to undertake theoretical analysis of complicated buiJding frames for different conditions of
total and differential settlement.
In steel frames, local failure may be prevented by yielding of the joinlS, provided mild
stoel is used because the relative rotation required to cause fracture is in most cases greater
than that which can occur. However, with increasing use of we1ding in recent years.
secondary stres.ses are of greater importance since yielding of welded connections would
result in rupture and failure.
SlnlctMral dalftDge:
Architectural damage: This refers to cracks in the wal1s. floors. and finishes which is
apparently a more immediate effect of differential seulement than the overstressing of
structural members. Excessive c-racking may cause damage to the functional aspects of the
building. For example, major cracks are considered detrimental to hospitol buildings, cold
storage, und the like. Hence., in most cases, the cracks or the architectural damages are the
guiding fac tor in de-termining the allowable se.ulement of buildings.
Copyrighted material
Co...biMd tudrilutura/ and strudluvl t/4maf.: Usually. archileetural dAmage occur1> long
before there is structural damage in beams and columns and consequently a stn>Ctural damage
is almost invariably accompanied by architectural damage.
VlsiUII efful: Even before there is any architectural or structural damage. excessive
differen1ial settlement or tilt which can he recognised by naked eye cannot he accepted either
psychologically or aesthetically.
Allowableeettlemeat
The allowable settlement of a building can he determined from an integrated analysis of the
building frame for given magnitudes of settlement. This is, however, laborious and time
consuming and has to he done separately for each building. Therefore. attempu have been made
to estimate the allowable settlement from statistical correlation between damage and settlement
criteria.
The allowable settlement of buildings depends upon the type of con$11Uction, the type
of foundation, and the natwe of soil (sand or clay). The angular distortion appears to he the
more useful criterion for establishing the allowable limits. Terzaghi (1938) studied the
settlement pattern of a number of brick walls in Vienna. He found that the walls reached
their ultimate strength when the angular distortion was 1128S and concluded that an average
settlement of S-7.5 em woold be considered normal.
Skempton and McDonald (19SS) derived a statistical correlation between damage and
settlement of 98 buildings from different partS of the world and coocluded that an angular
distortion of 11300 should be considered the allowable limit for conventional buildings.
Jappeli (1965) obsaved the damages to a three-storeyed building on clay due to differential
settlement and confirmed that an angular distortion of greater than 11300 would lead to
severe damages in walls of ordinary buildings. Whitman and Lambe (1964), on the other
hand, studied the settlement pattern of buildings in MIT Campus and observed that an
angular distortion of as little as 11800 was sufficient to cause cracks in bricks and masonry
elements. Mackinley (1964) made a study of more than fifteen structures damaged by settlement. He observed that there was no simple rule to define the tolerance of structures to
settlement. A cement silo had collapsed in New York after ortly 5 em of differential settlement whereas some public buildings in Mexico City had been in u.c;e even after differential
settlement of more than 10 em.
Rethatl (1961) carried out an investigation of twelve buildings on fill. This time. the
rigidity or the structure as represented by the number of storeys was also considered. While
the critical angular distortion of 11300 agreed well with those proposed by Skempton and
McDonald, it was found that 91% of the buildings that suffered structural damage were two
storeys or lower. Hence, the author concluded, the critical angular distonion should he
related to the rigidity of the building. Some funher studies on allowable settlement have been
made by Feld ( 1964) and Grant et al. (1974).
While much work still remains to he done on the subject to recommend some readily
acceptable values of allowable settlement. it seems there is a common agreement that an
angular dis tortion of more than 11300 may lead to damages in conventional load hearing wall
and framed construction. There is, as yet, no agreed guideline as regards the allowable
maximum settlement of a building. Skempton and McDonald (1955) have proposed some
tentative damage limits which are shown in Table 4.1.
Copyrighted material
Damage limilS for load bowing walls in tr.ldilional cype framed buildings
4.1
IsoJa1~d formdation
Raft fotmdalion
S em
S-1.5 em
1~12.5 em
Sand
Clay
7.5 em
SamJ/hard
day
Sttt'l structure
Atu~~.
ROC SU\IC:IUte
cS'I
Po...
cS'I
MuJtistorey buildings
RCO.O.eel fr:uned Bldg.
"'cS'I
Raft jOtln.dalion
SaNl/h4rd
PlasJk
day
day
Pllutic
day
50
so
75
11300
11300
11300
50
75
75
11666
11666
11500
60
75
75
11500
11500
11400
11300
11300
100
1/500
125
11300
An allowable limit of angular distortion of 11300 has been proposed for frnmed
buildings of bolh traditional and modern coosltuc.tion. This may not eliminate lhe chances of
cracks in walls aod floors altogether, but structural damage would. by and large, be
eliminated. Bjcrrum ( 1963) has given the damage limits for different performance criteria.
which are shown in Table 4.3. To eliminate cracks in a building. the angular distortion
should be less than 11500.
Table 4.3 Damage limits of an&ular distortion for different ~ttlemc:nt criteria
Angular distortion
2oii 300
100
I
400
I
500
600
I
I
700 800
I
900
iOOO
h/1 <
Copyrighted material
Net permiaolble
bearlD& preosure
Bjcrrum. L (1963), Relation /Mtwun Obstressed and Calculated Settlement of Structures iJr
Clay, and Sand, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute Bulletin, Oct 1969.
Gnmt, R .. J.T. Christian, and E. Van Man:ke (1974), Differential Smlement of Buildings.
Proceedings ASCE, Vol. 100. GT9, pp. 973-991.
I.S. 1904 ( 1986), Code of Practice for Design of Shallow Foundations, Bureau of Indian
Standards. New Delhi.
Jappeli ( 1965), Settlement Studies of Some Struct11res in Europe, Proceedings 6th International Confere.nce on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 2,
pp. 88-92.
Rethati (1961), Behaviour of Building Foundations on Embankments. Proceedings 5th
ICSMFE, Vol. I , p. 781.
Skempton, A.W. and D.H. McDonald (1955), A Survey of Comparison Between Calculated
and Observed Settlmrent of Structures in Clay, Proceedings Conference on Correlation
of Calculated and Observed Stresses and Displacement of Structures, Institute or Civil
Engineers, London, Vol. I, p. 38.
Terzaghi. K. (1938), Settlement of Structures in Europe and Met/rods of Observation,
Proceedings ASCE, Vol. 103, p ..J432.
Whitman, R.V. and T.W. Lambe (1964), Soil Mecha11ics. McGraw-Hill Publicatjon,
New Yorlc..
Copyrighted material
Di~tribution
Stress
Soils
in
5 . 1 INTRODUCTION
An essential step in foundation design is to determine the magnitude and distribution of
stresses that are develOped in the soil due to the application of structural load. It is these
stresses which not only cause settlement of the foundation but determine its stability against
shear failure.
The stresses and strains in soil mass depend on the stress-defonnation characteristics.
anisotropy and nonhomogeneity of the soil. and also on the boundary conditions. But the
task of analyzing stresses tWng all these fac10rs into consideration is extremely complex and,
therefore, the attempts that have been made to date are based on simplifying assumptions.
The most widely used method of analysis is based on the consideration of soil as
homogeneous. isotropic. elastic medium.
It is well understood that the assumption of linearity of the stresHtrain relationship
which fonns the basis of elastic behaviour i-s a questionable s implific-ation because soils in
their behaviour are ~ntially nonlinear. No other widely acceptable theory )las yet been
developed for pnoc.tical use to describe the response of soils to stress changes. Also within the
comparatively sman range of stresses that are normally im.p<>sed by structural loads, the
assumption of linearity. for most soils, may be considered to be reasonably valid. Also.
lintlted field evidence reported by Plantema (1953) and Turnbull et al. (1961) show that
measured stresses correspond fairly well to those predicted by elastic theory. Therefore,
refinement of the methods of stress analysis based on the theory of elasticity-still assuming
the validity of lhe linear stress-strain relationship, but taking into consideration the variations
of properties within the soil mass-has often been attempted.
5 .2 IN-SITU STRESS
The stresses in the subsoil due to the over burden are called
Figure S.l shows the in-situ sU'esses in a soil element at a depth
Tota.J vertical stress,
where.
<T.,
= yz
in ~ situ
z.
or geostatic stresses.
below the ground surface,.
(5. 1)
Copyrighted material
z
h
Flog. 5.1
(5.2)
uo
=Ywh
(5.3)
a: =~ - uo
"
= rz - r..h
=~
...,"-uo
= Kyz - Ywh
(5.4)
(5.5)
where K0 = coefficient of eanh pressure at rest with respccl to effec.tive srress.
The value of K., depends on the type of s.oiJ and its stress history. For normally
consolidated soils. it varies from 0.4-0.7. For over consolidated soils. K., depends on the
overconsolidation ratio and generally becomes greater than 1 for overconsolidation rotio
= 0.95 -
(5.7)
sin
(5.8)
(K.)NC (OCRl
where A is a facror depending on rhe plasticiry index of !be soil and is given by
1, = -281 log(l.85A)
(5.9)
Copyrighted material
5 .3.1
Boussinesq (1985) (sec Terz.agbi 1943) was lhe first 10 obtain solution for the slresses and
deformations in the interior of a soil mass due to a vertical point load applied at the ground
surface, refer Fig. 5.2. He considered the soil mass as a half spoce bounded on lhe top by a
horizontal plane (ground surface) and extending to infinity along ~.pth and width.
/ y
z
Fig. 5.2 Stress In the soil due
Copyrighted material
3Q [ x'z
l-2v{
I
<>x = 2~r R' 3 - R(R + l)
u,
=3Q [y'z
2lr R' -
l-2v{
3
~1 =
'
Here,
3Q
2~r
z}]
(2R+ zll
z }]
a~ =
'fx~
(2 R +z)x
(R + z)' R3 + R3
3Q z'
21< R'
3Q xz1
= -2Jr R'
R'
(5. 10)
(R+ z)'R'
h may be observed !hal the vertical slreSs is independent of bolh the stress-strain mndulus
and Poisson's ratio. The lateral stresses and shear stresses. however. depend on Poisson's
ratio but even these are independent of stress-strain mcxlulus. Values of v = 0.5 for saturated
cohesive soils under undrained condition (no volume change) and 0.2-0.3 for cohesionless
soils. are genera11y valid.
In cylindrical coordinateS, !he stress components (refer Fig. 5.3), are:
"
Fig. 5.3 Stresses in the aoil due to poin.t load at surface (cylindrical coordinates).
Copyrighted material
80 +
111~ory
3Q '
(}'.- = 21r R'
u=
Q 3tr
'
21r R'
1-2v
R (R + z)
(5. 11 )
2]
Q
a, = ii<(l
- 2 v) [ R(R+ t) - ?
3Q t 2r
21r R'
The above expressions for stresses are valid only at distances, away from the point of
load application. At the point of load application, the stre:s..~s are theoretically infinite.
For foundation analysis, the venical stresses on horizontal plane (uJ are mostly
required.
Puuing
= J<x' + y' + t 1 )
U,=
where Ill
J<r' + z1 )
-Q, I,
,-
(S. I 2)
3
21r[l+(rill'J'"
Ill is the influence coefficient for vertical stress at any point within the soil mass. for the
Boussinesq problem. The vaJues of /8 for different values of rlt are given in Fig. 5.4.
0
'
l:'
A
0.5
- -~ -
-.......
0.4
(u, }" = 2 Is
0.3
'
"' """
0.2
0.1
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
r--1.0
1.2
1.4
rtz
FliJ. 5.4 Str.,. Influence fO<Wr for point load
(Boussl~).
Copyrighted material
o,
Fig. 5.5 Venlcal S1noU In ... sal duo 1D 1 rumbor ol point loocll.
In this case.
(5.13)
where the coefficients I 8 1 I 81 and In are oblllintd from Fig. 5.4 for the eonesponding
ratios. rl;..
5 .4
The venieal stress at the point M at depth z below the comer of a rec~angular area of length
2a and width 2b, due to a uniform vertical pressure q per unit area, can be obtained by
integration of Boussinesq equation. which is given as Eq. (5.10). Figun: 5.6 depicts this
arrangement effectively.
y
(11, )1, Z)
z
Fig. 5.& Stresses below the comer ol rectangular lOaded area.
Copyrighted material
da, = 3dQ
'
2>< [I+ (rll)'f12
(5.14)
Integrating Eq. (5. 14) between [- a to +a) and (- b to +b) along the x and y directions
respectively we get,
(5.15)
Evaluation of this double integral gives the general expression fo.r vertical stress at any
point within the soil mass. Let us now consider the vertical stress at the origin (x = y = 0).
Then,
O'z(00
, , l) -
2q(
"
abz(a +b +2z
(~+ z )(b
2
+ SID -t
+ z )Ja + b + z
ab
)
2
Ja' + .' Jb +
( !6)
5.
Now taking one quarter of this expression, the vertical streSs below the comer of a
fledble rectangular area (a x b) (i.e. one quarter of the original rectangle 2a x 2b) is
obtained as
where m=
a
l
or
andn=
b
l
(5.18)
where
1(1 is called lbe streSs influence coefficient and is a function of two dimensionless parameters
m and n.
The value or Ia ror different values or m and n are given by Fadum (1948), are shown
in Fig. 5.7.
Copyrighted material
Fig. 5.7 Influence factor for vertical str8$.S below comer of rectangular lOad, Factum (1948).
Copyrighted material
!!I.
Ckde
!&.
z
i
1.2
8
7
8
flO. 5.1 -
--
~ unilonn -
load.
II[r +
J alJr
u, = Jqz
2t
0 0
rdrd8
b2 + z2 - 2brcos8)512
(5. 19)
(5.20)
where E{k) and n 0(k, p) are complete elliptic integrals of the second and third kind of
modulus k and parameter p.
t = ria
= I
n = <Ia
k' =
A =
4t
n 1 + (1 + 1) 2
-2I
if r<a
if r=a
=0 if r >a
For the special case of the points beneath the centre of me load, r = 0
Copyrighted material
----=--=-}
(a,),.o = q { [I + (all)'J"'
(S.21)
The vertical s-tresses beneath the centre of a uniform circular load are shown in
Fig. S.8. The stress influence coefficient for a circular loaded area for different values of
ria and tla is given in Appendix A.
5 .6
=- 2p
It
(S.22)
(x' + ~'>'
~(K(I+:2 /~ 2 )2 )
The stress distribution directly beneath the load {x = 0) is shown in Fig. S.9(a). The
variation of a,j(ph) with xl~ is shown in Appendix A.
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.5
.!!Lo
pl z
0.3
0.2
0. 1
r-.....
z
1.0
5 .6 .2
2.0
3.0
{a)
Fig.
J(
{b)
The vertical slresses in the soil due to a uniformly distributed strip load is given by the
expression,
Copyrighted material
tr
t
- - - tan 1 - - -
(x+a)
[ (x -)
a
a. = - tan
2?2]
2at(x - t - - a )
.,
,
(xl+ z-- a1)2 + 4a2x.
(S.23)
The corresponding stress distribution below the centre. line nnd the edge are shown in
Fig. S.IO. The variation of u,tq with xla and z/a is tabulated in Appendix A.
Slllp
width 2b
~
q
0.2 M
~
q
0.6
0
1
2
1.0
1.2
lh
;;
o.a
6
7
8
Fig. $.10 Vertical stress below unlfonn slrlp toad.
5 .6 .3
TrtBDgUJ.ar Load
The venicaJ stresses in the soil due to a triangular load increasing from zero at the origin to
q per unit area at a dislllnce a [refer Fig. 5. 11 (a)) is given by,
(uJA
or
a.
= !!!..[ran(_!_)
- tan (!.)]
- [-q
z---"-x-~a]
Jra
x- a
x
tr (x _ a)2 + z2
1
-q = 1l
x
a
tan (
;; ) -
tan!.!!.
ax
(S.24)
X -I
t _ __,a'-=--~
a(: -I)'+(J
Copyrighted material
'(Jt
-)
were
h
1 = - - - tan-.
1t
The variation off with va is shown in Fig. S.ll(b). The tabulated values of G/q for
different values of x/a and va are given in Appendix A.
Zl
00
o.
0.6
0.5
Stress
/'
q/Unit area
1.5
a,=
qr
A(x, Z)
l
0.2
(b)
(a)
Fig. 5.11 (8) Ver1lca1 stre:M due to triangular load. (b) Variation of f with ria (stress belOw point 8).
l!.p = ; [
where
81 + 8
B
B, ' (a, + a,) - ~
a., ]
q.
= yH
= Height of embankment
(5.25)
B, - tan!!!. rad
l
a,=tan - -B,
-
where I' =
l!.p = q.l'
-1'B.)
; .
(5.26)
f ( a
The variation of
with
~
l
Copyrighted material
(a)
0.50
0.05
0.41l
0.35
r
n
0.
"
0.01
0.1
S,l z
1.0
10
(b)
Fig. 5.12
5 .7
The principle of superposition allows determination of vertical stres:s at any point below a
rectangular looded area. For point A, for example, Fig. 5.13. the loaded area may be: divided
into four s maller rectangles keeping the point A at the comer of each rectangle. The n,
(5.27)
II
: A
---<)-----------
Ill
IV
where q is the applied load intensity and lal' l aw la 111 and larv are the stress influence
facrors for points below the comer of respective rectangular areas.
Similarly, for points outside the loaded rectangle. Fig. 5. 14, the vertical stress below
point B may be: obtained as.
(5.28)
II
:'
m 9"A:rv
:
----- ~ ---
5 .8
NEWMARK'S CHART
Newmark ( 1942) derived 3 simple graphical c.alculac.ion for determining the vertical stress al
any point within a soil mas.~ for any shape of loaded area.
Let us consider the stress beneath the centre of a loaded circular area. Fig. 5. 15.
Copyrighted material
qtunit
area
Fig. 5.15
O': = q 1-
(5 .29)
I .,
}
[I+ (ahtf 2
_,,
7 (-:' )
(5.30)
-1
The interpretation of this equation is that alt. ratio is the relative size of a circular
loaded area in terms of the depth t such that when loaded h gives a unique pressure ratio..
a,lq on the soil at that de pth. By substituting different values of <1,/q in Eq. (5.30),
corresponding values of aft can be obtained. as in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1
Relation~ip
ulz
atq
0.27
0.40
0.52
0.64
0.77
O.t
0.2
0.3
0.4
o.s
olz
0.92
atq
1. 11
1.39
1.9t
0.7
.,
0.6
0.8
0.9
t.O
Then, taking an arbitrary value of z (say. 1 em), a series or concentric circles of radius
0.27 em, 0.4 em, and so on can be drawn. The series of rings is further subdivided into a
number of units (say 200) by drawing radial lines from the centre, as shown in Fig. 5.16.
The value of each unit then becomes ( lnOO)q = 0.005q.
To obtain the Stees~ at a point A located at depth z below a footing. the loaded area is
drawn on a tracing paper to a scale z equal to the scale for which the Newmark's chart to be
used has been drawn. The plan on the uacing paper is placed on the Newmark's chart such
that the point A is placed at
\he
Newmark 's Chan (N) enclosed within. are counted. The stress at A is given by.
(<TJA
=q
Copyrighted material
By moving the plan of the building and bringing different points at the centre of the
Newmark's chan. the stresses at different points may be obtained. For different depths, the
plan of the building is to be drawn fresh to the appropriate scale.
I. Divide the half space in the vicinity of the load area into sufficient number of grid
points.
for strip loading, the depth of pressure bulb upto which significant vertical stress exists
Ca:lq > 0.1) is about three times the width of the load area. For circular loading. this depth
is about twice the width of load area.
Copyrighted material
92
17~eory
0.05
Strip
COde
wid1h b
dia. b
6 3~--~2~--~,----~0~--~,~---2----~3
rib
Ag. 5.17 Pressure bulb b
The pressure bulb gives the z.one of soil which influenced by the foundation loading
and is useful in planning soil exploration programmes. and in the study of settlement and
interference of footing.
the distribution of pressure on the footing base (contact pressure), and on the stress
distribution wi<hin !he soil mass.
According to Boussinesq analysis, the vertical defonnation of a point on the surface of
an elastic half space under the action of a concennted load P is given by
p
W=-(1-v)E
trR
(5.31)
For an arbitrary loading area (Fig. 5.13), !be vertical displacernen< of !he point A is given by
(5.32)
Copyrighted material
Str~n
Distribution in Soils 93
With an absolutely rigid foundation, all poiniS on lhe surface of contact will have lhe
s.ame vertical displacement Thus, the condition of absolute ri,g.idity of a foundation is.
v' II
w, = 11<E
p(~ - TJ)d~ dq
F~(x - ~)' + (y -
= const.
(5.33)
TJ)'
The solution of the integral equation for an absolutely rigid circular footing with a
central load gives the contact pressure at lhe point M as:
p(x. y) =
P.
(5.34)
2~[1-((/al'J
where,
a = radius of foundation base
' = distance from lhe centte of base to a given point (( S a)
p. = mean pressure per unit area of the base
'=
It can be seen from Eq. (5.34) !hat for ( = a (i.e. at footing edge). p(x, y) =
0 (i.e. at footing centre), p(x, y) = p.l2.
For a strip footing. the contact pressure at the point M is given by,
p(x. y) =
2p0
;rJ[I - (y/b)2 )
and for
(5.35)
where.
y = horizontal distance of lhe point M from tbe eenue of f()()(ing
b = half width of footing
The distribution of contact pressure for an absolutely rigid footing on an elastic half
space will have a saddle like shape wilh infinite pressure at lhe ends, as shown in Fig. 5.18.
However. in actual practice, there is redistribution of stresses over the base (the stresses at the
edge of footing cannot exceed lhe bearing capacity of lhe soil) and lhe contact pressure at lhe
base of a rigid footing tends to become more uniform.
Conlact
preS$ure
Copyrighted material
~(: =j,)({;)(f)'
(5.36)
where-,
5.11
NON-HOMOGENEOUS SOILS
The engineering propenies or a soil are not generally unifonn throughout its mass. This nonuniformity may manifest itselF in both spatial (non-homogeneous) and directional
(anisotropic) variation of the modulus of deformation. The variation of soil properties with
depth may be due to many factors. Often the subsoil consists of different geological
formations with different characteristics. for example. a clay deposit underlain by sand or
rock. If the underlying stratum is well below the surface of the clay re lative to the s ize of
the looded area, its influence may only be marginal. On the Other hand. even in a deep layer
of apparently homogeneous material, the rigidity of the soil generally increases with depth
due to the increase in effective overburden pressure.
ln dealing with the first type of non-homogenity mentioned above. a subsoil is often
considered as a layered system. Much work has been done on this subjecl, particularly in
conn~tion with the design of pavements and runways. (Biot 1938. Pickett 1938, Bunniscer
1943, Poulos 1967). In the case of continuous variation of elastic parameters with depth.
Gibson's analysis (Gibson 1967. 1968) may be referred to.
Copyrighted material
E, v
To
To
(I)
(b)
'IW<Ho)'Of olostic oya-.
Fig. S.1t
This situation is on.:n encounlered in the case or pavements when: stirrer layers are placed on
a soft aubpade. However. in the cue of foundations, the situation Is on.:n rcvened and one
may encounter a layer of soft soil overlying a llrOQger clepooiL
Blot ( 1935) and Picken ( 1938) were among the fust to solve the problem of..,....
dillribution in the two-layer ri&id bose syown. However. their rcaults could only be used to
ddetmine the ~tresses at the surface of the bose layer. In a series of papen in 1943 and 1945,
Bunnister (1943. J945a. b. c) presented the geocnl theory of ~tresses and displacements in
layetcd soils from which exact solutions could be obtained for axlaymmeuie loading. Using
Bunniltet's analysis, Fox (1948) published tabulated values of sueues clue 10 a uniform
circular loading wilh or wilhout friction at the inletface for the cue of Poisson's ratio, v =
112. The case of the line or strip loading was analyzed by Lemc:oe (1961) who developed
equations of stre&..a for a general two-layer system and ubulated numerical values for the
particular case of 112 SO and v 1 = v, = 1/4.
In the general two-layer syatem for a circular load, the SII'C&Iel depend on the valuea of
v 1 and on the two pllamtten (refer Fig. 5.19).
Q
b
=- and K- ._
h
-e.
(5.37)
where.
are the elastic modulii or. respectively the 1op and bOI2om layers.
In Ag. 5.20 are plotted the distribution of vertical streue1 benealh the ceniJC of a circle
for the special cue of a I and where the upper layer is stiffer lhan the lower. It can be
seen that the presence of lhe tirr upper layer has a considerable innuence on the stresses.
particulatly In the vicinity of the interface. For eumpk. a rigid upper layer which is five
times stirrer lhan lho aubgrade (i.e. 11~ = 5) tcduces lhe all'Css at the interface 10 60% of
the Bousincsq value. This load spreading capacity of the Iliff upper Ioyer has been
successfully employed In the deign of pavements on sort subgrades.
l OiJyrighted ma.enal
v, 0.2
"'J a
o.
b
"'l a 0 .
(a)
1i
(b)
Fig. 5.20 T- . loyer aysan: Etlect of rlgidl1y ol upper l~r on the vettical
tnss btne8lh centre of a uniform drcullr toed (after Boonisler 1963).
The effect of relative size of loaded areas and thickness of the upper layer on the
vertical stresses at the interface is shown in Fig. S.19b. The upper layer is most effective in
spreading the load when its thickness lies between b and 3b while for very thin and very
thick layers, they approach the Boussinesq values.
The case of a foundation where a sofllayer i's unde..Wn by a stiffer deposit (1/2 < I)
has not been evaluated but from exb'apolation. it can be concluded that the stresses in the
upper layer will, if anything, be greater than those for a homogeneous medium.
&mcle e!eotte la:rer oa a
J'l&ld -
This is a special case of the above problem with the elastic modulus of the bouom layer
E2 = "' The problem was first solved by Burmister ( 1956) who extended his earlier work to
analyze the stresses and sb'ains in the upper layer of a two-layer rigid base system. From his
influence charts, it is possible to obtain che complete pattern of stresses and displacements
under the comer of a uniformly loaded rectangle for Poisson' s ratio, v = 0.2 and 0.4.
The same problem was considered in detail by Poulos (1967), who used Burmister's
theory to compute a set of influence factors for stresses and surface displacements due to a
point load. for values of Poisson's ratio, v = 0, 0.2, 0 .4, and 0.5. By integration of these
point load factors, he then calculated the corresponding influence factors for different loading
types.
The vertical and radial streSSes beneath tbe centrt:. of a loaded circle for values of
hlb = 1, 2, 4. and 8 and v = 112 are shown in Fig. S.21. The stresses for the homogeneous
hal.fspace (Boussinesq) are also piOited for comparison. It can be seen that the presence of a
rigid layer at a shallow depth relative to the size of the loaded area significantly alters the
stress pattern. For small values of hlb just undemellth the load, vertical stresses may even be
greater than the applied pressure. However, with increasing depth, the effect of the rigid base
Copyrighted material
gradually diminishes and for hlb > 8, the stresses are almost indistinguishable from the
Boussinesq values.
Oia2b
q, !
.ll I I I J o.2 o.
0
.... --
~ 'i
,A
1.2
1.0
. 1
,2
0.8
....
q
0.6
~-\
.I
v.
..... b ~
'
'I j
.c
.8
5'
z
-
. .. ..... CJ,
.
8
Fig. 5.21
---- BouNinasq
Figures on curves are values of hlb
11187~
q
"'4.P ~
layer 1
E~o
Layer 2
E,. ,
Layer 3
Es. ''l
v,
.qu
a~
h,
a,,
Tow
~ig.
,.,
w(O.O)
k1
E1!~
k2 EiEs
= blh,
H h11hoz
Copyrighted material
98
Burmistcr's equations were used by Acum and Fox. (1951) to calcuhue lhe stresses at
the interfaces (for v1 = v2 = 0.5 and for fu ll continuity between the layers). Schiffman
(1957) presented methods for numerical solutions of influence values and tabulated resulrs for
a particular case. In later years. Bunnister's work wa..~ extended to compute the stresses and
deflections for any combination of thicknesses of the individual layers and size of the loaded
area. Jones (1962), Peattie (1962), and Kirk ( 1966) have published chans and table. giving
the stress fac tors for any combination of three-layer systems while De Barros ( 1966) and
Uyeshita and Meyerhof ( 1967) have published those for deflection factors.
The stress and strains in a three-layer medium are governed by the following
dimensionless paramelers:
b
h,
E
a= - ; H = - ; k1 =
(5.38)
and k 2 =
h,
E: ;
h,
where.
b is radius of the loaded circle
h 1 and h1 are thicknesses resptctivcly of the firs1 and second layers (The bottom
layer is semi ~ infi nite).
1 2 and 3 are the elastic modulii of the JM, 2"', and the 3,. layers respectively.
Figure 5.23 shows the effect of the relative thicknesses of the two stiffer upper layers
on the stresses and deflections beneath the centre of a loaded circular area. for the particular
case of h 1 + h'2 == 2b. For 1hc purpose of comparison. the Bous.sincsq stresses and the
deflections calculated on the basis of Boussinesq stress distribution are also plotted. It can be
seen that the actual values are lower than those given by Boussinesq although the maximum
discrepancy in deflection is not more than 25%.
1.2
1.0
...
0.8
tFIo-
0.6
.;:~
-- --
h,+h, 2b
v,
- -.-
;r;
' ~ '-.
\ ''
o.
=- 0.2
--
--
w (ll, 0)
1'-t.
\_: ' ~-
1?l.r
0.5
\ a ~
~
h,
Oia2b
-l- H
fH
W(O, 0)
E, =
a.,
4&
Ez. 2E)
a,, .I
r9
k,. 2
k2. 2
' ,,
- - - Rigorous solu1ion
.... Boussinesq
0.2
0.4
0.6
,.,
0.8
1.0
_!L
Fig. 5.23
I
)
I
l
Copyrighted material
'2
I .0
.;:~
..
..
....
0.8
o.2
:-J ..
0.2
-- -- "--'
0.8
-1-H
CTzt., ~ E
:
I
:a ,:-.,
''
--
Oia2b
"a~
~ >rlru.t,
0.6
0.4
h,+hz2b
+ 5
25E
k , 0.2
k2 0.2
' .0
-Rlgorou--- - 8 -
"'+">
F~.
5 . 11.3
Multilayer Systems
The problem of multilayer system involves immense complexjty and to dace no analytical
solution is available for anything consisting of more than three layers. Vesic (1963) has
5uggestcd an approximate method of c:alc:ulating the elastic settlement of a foundation on a
multilayered medium assuming Boussinesq stress distribution but using the proper elastic
modulus for the respective layers. His chans and method of calculation are shown in Fig. 5.25.
--
<
Oia 2b
- ...w,._ ,
w
La~r
;;
...
Settlement due to
dW,. = W,o -
la)'tf' n
1 - ,.
Wn 1
= 2qb"""'E,;'"""(/,.- 1n .. 1) =
4/
2qb~
Totll-
w0 =wn=2qb~
"
. I
Gopyngnteo n atena
Fig. 5.25 Approximate method of calculating set1tement In miAiilayer elastic syseemt (after Yeti<: 1963\
Vesic observed that in three-layered systems, the shape of the deHected surface computed by
this approximate technique agrees better with measured deflections of pavements than the more
rigorous analyses.
(5.39)
He found that using this technique and reducing a lhree-laycr system to an equivalent
two-layer one, the approximate method is correct to within 10% for lr21b > I and 14% fo~
h, tb > 2 .
An analogous expression was first proposed by Palmer and Barber ( 1940) to reduce a
two-layer system to an equivalent homogeneous medium which yielded deflections very close
to Burmister's two-laye-r analysis.
Sherman (1959), Golecki (1959). Hruban (1959). and Lekhnitskii (1962) have studied
particular problems of non-homogeneity. but no comprehensive
~eory
until Gibson developed the theory (Gibson 1967. 196&) of stresse. and displacements in a
non-homogeneous. isotropic elastic haJf.space subjected to strip or axially symmetric loading
_jq~!]!]f!]~r~~'!:'!ai..._.
I
i
I
I
I
G{l) = G{O) + mz
~ = G(O)
'
''
l
..
depth from zero at the surfa.:e (i.e. p = 0), behaves as a Winkler spring model. In other
words , the surface settlement of a. uniformly loaded area on such a medium is direclly
proportional to the applied pressure and iodependent of the dimensions of the load.
Copyrighted material
Str~ss
Di.ttribution
i11
Soils + 101
s._, Clrde
dia 2b
0.2 0.4
..-;,
2
.(,;.
,,
f
f
1.0
~
<
0
1
o.e
0.6
I
I
'
'
-_ _ _ Sir\?
Clrde, BouS$1nesq
Citde
'ftlb
Strip
= 0.1
8
I
f'u.
5.27 Vertical e.trass benealh centre of foundations: non-homogeneous medium (Som 1968).
1.0
1.0
(b)
Sir\?
width
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.6
!!..
q
0.4
0.4
l b
0.2
0.2
fllb
1 8
1 4
.,.
(ftlb)
2b
![
1
zl
4
8 181 4
fllb
. ,.
(~/b)
I . I
vOfJytlgn.co ma ena
Fff!J. 5.28 Effed of noo-homogenei ty on the vertical stresses beneath centre of foundation&.(Som 1968).
between the settlements of the centre of a uniformly loaded circle obtained from rigorous
computation and the approximate settlements calculated from Boussinesq stress distribution.
11\c latter underestimates the settlement ror all values of {jib 1hough the max..imum enor (in
the range 0.5 < {Jib < 1.5) is no more than 10%.
0.5
100
o.
.I
/J
,
O.J
/..'
./ ,
qb
w(O,O)/ G(O)
0.2
/.
,,
0.1
I"
r-'
o.
-0
--
80
60
..!!..%
wo
2(1
o.s 1.0
o.&
1
fllb -->!<--- (Ptbl
non~lty
o.2 o
In orde,r to obtain an indication of the effective depth that contribu1es towards most of
the settlement beneath a loaded circle. Fig. 5.30 has been constructed by successively
integmting the venical strains for various depths using Bous.sinesq stress distribution. It is
observed that 80% of the total settlement is contributed by a depth of only 1.5b for
{Jib = 0.1 and 5b for {Jib = ao while a depth of Sb accounts for as much as 90% for all
values of {Jib. This is consistent with the st:n:ss-dislribution in a two-layer Jjgid base system.
where, it has been s hown, the presence of a rigid layer at a depth of Sb does not significantly
o.ff~t the s1resses.
Copyrighted material
Cia 2b
b
0
10
Oe(>UI (Zib)
Fig. S.30 Ef'fec:ltve depth ol soil beneath a circular foundadon: non-homogeneous medil.m.
5 . 12 NONLINEAR SOIL
The problem of s1ress analysis in a soil medium with a nonlinear stresS-stroin relationship is
immensely complex and no general solution is available yet. Huang (1968) presented a
method of analyzing stresses and displacements beneath a circular load in a nonlinear soil
medium whose modulus of elasticity is a function of the stresses.
= Eo (I
+ c6 (u, + u, + u 8 + c 7 yjb)J
(5.40)
where CJJ (the nonlinear coefficient) and c1 (the body force coefficient) are material
parameters. He divided the semiinfinite medium into a multilayer system assuming a rigid
base at a depth of IOOb (see Fig. 5.28) and assigned to each layer, a modulus corresponding
to the stres.ses at the midpOint. Employing Burmister's boundary and continuity conditions
(Bunnister 1943. 1945} and using the method of successive approximationS. Huang c.a lculated
tbe stresses and displacements until two consecutive iterations gave thd &arne modulus. His
results are shown in Fig. 5.31. Again a close agreement with the Boussinesq stres.s
distribution in noted. Comparison between the actual settlements calculated rigorously by
Huang and the approximate settlements calculated on the basis\ of Bous.sinesq stress
distribution but using the proper variation of E with depth show that the two methods do not
differ by more than 10%. as shown in Fig. 5.32.
However. the assumption made by Huang. that each layer has uniform modulus means
that the problem is, in effect, reduced to a multilayer Burmister problem with the elastic
modulii detennined by the stresses in the centre of the individual layers as shown in
Fig. 5.32.
Copyrighted material
Ilia 2b
0.2
o.
0.6 q
1.0
0 .8
./
1
'f
/
~ c1
= o (BousslneSQ}
q..wi2b
E,
...c
E,
E.
"'<>
E.
c, . 0.02
.....
E.
E,
- :a"
...
i
E J RKikl
Ftg,. 5.31
1.8
r\
qb
w(O,O)/ Eo
c,
5
10
- - Rigorous computation
~
100
Fig. 5.32
' 5
''
'
'
z
0.2
2 3
0.8
r:.::- -----
'
1.2
~--....;
'' i
' !E: E0 (1 c1(a,.
' .,., + c,rtlb))
'' i
' !
'
' '
'
'' i''
' !
'
' '
'' ;'
' '
'
' '
"'
- - c, = 1
----- c, 3
-- ~
.. c, = 5
c, 0.02
''
''
'
'
'
Copyrighted material
+ 105
At present. the problem of nonlinear soil medium is best solved by numerical melhods
using computers. Finite element modelling is most widely used (Zicnkiwicz 1971). However,
a detailed treatment of the finite clement analysis is beyond lhe scope of this book. The
reader may refer to the relevant liternture for furlher details (Desai and Abel 1972. Desai and
Christian 1977, Smith 1988).
The distribution of venical and horizontal stresses wilh depth, along the centn: line of a
model c::ircular footing resting on a saturated normally consolidated clay. with a load
intensity, qtu:~ = 0.35, 0.77, and 1.05 (q = applied pressure, u;. = effective vertical
consolidation pressure). as obtained from a nonlinear finite element analysis ((Das 1975) and
(Das and Gangopadhyay 1978)). is shown in Fig. 5.33. On the same figure are plotted the
stresses. obtained from clastic analysis and lhose obtained by measurement at qla'w, ;; I.
using pressure cells. It can be !;Ceo that vertical stresses do not change mucb with load
incrementS and elastic theory c,an predict the stresses quite well but horizontal stresses are
significantly dependent on load increment. When the loading is smaJI (qlu~ = 0 ..35 in this
case), the elastic theory may be capable of predicting horiront~l stn:sses but at higher loads,
nonlinear analysis is necessary to predict horizontal stresses satisfactorily.
Normalized stress !?t.~
q' q
02
04
06
l.k'-
/.;
v/ v
10
08
1-'-
12
:?
l
I
Legend
I
6
I
8
Fig. 5.33 Compalfson ol ,,...... obtained from linea< and no<Hinear analySis (Das 1975).
Copyrighted material
or
course, be significancly affecced buc from !he foregoing ic can be deduced chac !he seulemenl
can be obtained with reasonable accuracy, by assuming lhe Boussinesq stress-distribution but
coking accounc of the proper scress-strain relationship and/or non-homogeneity in calculating
the scrains. Also, as long as che pressure bulb due co a footing load is reslricted wilhin !he
upper layer of a soil deposic, the Boussinesq analysis should be reasonably valid,
notwithscanding any non-homogeneity below chac layer.
at a depth. In !he approximate melhnd, !he scress dispersion is assumed along lines through
the edge of !he footing 01 an angle ex = 26.5, that is, 01 a slope of 2 horizontal co I vertical,
as shown in Fig. 5.34.
r;
l
..
2~
..
1'
lri~~Hiiiiiil~~;hq,
Fig. 5.34 2:1 dispersion method for dlsmbution of vertical stress due to surface toad.
z.
the venical
u. =
s ires.~
is given by.
qLB
(8 + z)(L + z)
(5.41)
The stres:.~ thus calculated will be unifonn over the dispersed area. However, in actual
practice. the s tress wiJI be more towards the centre and Jess towards the edges as shown by
broken line in Fig. 5.34. The approximate method is not generally recommended for detailed
design. although the method comes handy for rough calculations in the absence of necessary
charts and tables.
Copyrighted material
Example 5.1
Figure 5.35 shows four vertical loads of I000 leN each placed at the comers of a square of
side 5 m. Detennine the increase or venical stress 5 m below
(a) each load
(h) midpoint between adjacent loads
(c) the centre of the rectllngle
Sm
0, "1-- - -0,
:::-1"
Ftg. 5.35
Solution
u, = ~ 11 ,
Point A
where /8 = / (rlz)
= 7.07 m;
(UjA
~ z 7 ~
= -100
[0.478+2(0.084)+0.03 1J =27.1JcN/m2
2
5
Point 8
r
2.5
Q, = Q, = 1000 leN; - = z 5 = 0.5; ' = 0.27
r
Q3 = Q. = 1000 kN; -
J5
...
2.52
=
5
(u,)s =
100
5'
= 26.6
= 1.12; '
= 0.062
Copyrighted material
Qt
:.
= 27.2 kNim'
Example 5.2
Figure 5.36 shows the plan or a nexible rafl fou nded on lhe ground surface. The area
suppOrts a uniform vertical load or 200 kN/m 2. Estimate the increase in vertical stress 15 m
below point A.
,.
30m
15m
"!"
.,
15m
l__
A
Fig. 5.31
Sol uJion
Consider <WO rectangles (I + II) and II wilh lhe point A at lhe comer of each rectangle.
(UJA
=q(latll -; lau)
Rectangle (I + II): 15 m x 45 m
nr
45
"i5
15
= 3.0; n = 15
= 1.0,
= 0.201
/tn
m=n=
(u,}A
IS
15
= 1.0; /
= 200 [0.20 1
= 0.174
I
0.174]
= 22.8 kN/m2
Copyrighted material
Example 5.3
Figure 5.37 shows a raft foundation (10m x 20m) built 5 m from a tower. Detennine the
increase of stress 5, 10, 15, and 25m below the tower and draw the stress distribution. (Take
q. = 100 kN/m 2)
15ml
20m
oi [--------'--------r_:~;J~.w"
(<1J. I<Nirn'
10
,..s,
.o_-\
96
15 F ==----l
g 10r
25 7
Fig. 5.37
Solution
Consider rectangles 0 II) and U with point A below each rectangle.
Recungle (I Il): 25 m x 5 m
Rectangle II: 5 m x 5 m
Influence f!!.ctor
Depth (m)
5 m
"
10 m
n
15 m
"
25 m
n
'
s
0.204
Example 5.4
kN/m2
Ia u
+ II
2.5
0.5
1.67
0.33
1.0
0.2
Ia = 2(/oi + IJ
0.136
0.094
0.054
1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.33
0.33
0.2
0.2
0.174
0.06
6.0
0.096
0.08
8.0
0.046
0.096
9.6
0.017
0.074
7.4
Figure 5.38 shows the section of an eanh dam. Determine the increase in venical stress 3 m
below points A and B.
Copyrighted material
110
6m
6m
6m
- ,_
3m
'''
'''
'
/('((~
3m
__
3m ._
- '- B -
''
''
''
'
'~
,.,
Fig. 5.38
$elution
Point A
Stress due to strip load qmt:
2a = 6m
z=3 m
q = 50 k.N/ m 2
a,
Here. -
= 0; -
= -
Eq. (5.23)
= 1.0: Ia = 0.96
= 6m
z=3 m
q = 50kN/m2
<1.
=qUa> where Ia
Here,
=I(!.~).
a a
l
- - - - 1.
5 - - - -- 0 5 I q- -0 06
a
6
a
6
Point B
Stress due to strip load: qurt
X
-;; =
39
= 3.0;
l
0
= 1.0; Ia = 0.003
= 0;
a =
= 0 .5: 10 = 0. 13
Copyrighted material
Str~ss
Distribution in Soils I 11
= 3: -l = 0.5: 1, = 0.002
a
(a,)8
kNJm2
Example S.S
Figure 5.39 shows a 20m dia x 15 m high ste<:l storage mnk founded on RCC raft (SOO mm
thick) 5 m below GL Determine the increase in vertical stress along the cenue of the tank
10m. 20m and 30m below the foundation when the tank is filled of water. Draw the
distribution of vertical stress increase with depth and superimpose the same on the insitu
suesses to obcain the variation of stress increment ratio llptp0 with depth. Take unit weight
of soil = 18 lcN/m3.
20m
I
10m
5m
t.piPo
---,--.-T
Ol
!
E
i
0.~
Po+ AP
10J
'
!
!
I
a 20~'
'
.'.
.
'
''
'
''
t.O
'
'
''
'
'
''
'
1
30-i- - - - - ' L-..J
Fig. 5.39
Soluti<Jn
q,..,
Copyrighted material
Depth (m)
0
10
20
0
0
30
0
0
40
D~~ign
lq
1.0
1.0
2.0
0.65
0.28
3.0
4.0
0.13
0.08
90
72.0
46.8
180
20.2
360
540
720
9.4
5.8
llp
<0.8
0.26
0.06
0 .17
0.008
Example 5.6
A reinforced concrete tower is provided on a ring foundation of inner diameter 6 m and
outer diameter 12m, as shown in Fig. 5.40. If the foundation carries a distributed load of
150 kN/m2, de.termine the vertical Slte$S distribution at a depth of 6 m below lhe foundation.
Use Newmark's chan.
/~\
I
I'
II
I
I
I
I
'
I
I
II
l?@ml
IB !A
~ e\n
I
~
II
12 m
Fig. 5.40
Solution
Draw the plan of !he foundation to scale, 3m = lhc seale of the Newmark's chan to be used,
as in Fig. 5 .41. Then place poiniS A. B. and C successively at the centre of the Newmark's
cha.n and count the number of units enclosed in CD4il case. Then,
0: :
11(0.005)
q.
0.005
Copyrighted material
Fig. 5.41
Example 5.7
Solve Example 5.2 by Newmarlc's chart.
Sofuhon
Draw the plan of the raft on uacing paper to a scale, 15 m = scale of the Newmark's chart,
Fig. 5.41. Place point A at the centre of the Newmark's chart and count the number of unitS
enclosed by the diagram. Then,
(CTJA
= 23.5 X 0.005
= 23.5 kN/ m2
X 200
Ahlvin. R.G. and H.H. Ulery (1962), TabulaJed Values for Det<nnining the Complete
Paltun of Str~.nes, $/rains. and DejUcrions Beneath a Unifom Circular Load on a
Homogeneous Half Space, Highway Research Board Bulletin No. 342, p. I.
Biot. M.A. (1935). The Effect of Certain Discollfinui/ies
Loaded Soil. Physics. Vol. 6. No. 12, p. 367.
011
Bishop, A.W. (1952), The Stability of Earth Dams, Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.
Copyrighted material
Borowicka. H. ( 1938).
Burmistcr. D.M. (1943). Tlteory of Str~nes and Displactmtmts in lAyertd Systems, Proc.
Highway Research Board, Vol. 22. pp. 127- 148.
Burmister, D.M. (1945 a). The General Theory of Stresses and Displacements in Layered
Systems. Joumal of Applied Plrysics, Vol. 16. No. 2. pp. 89-96.
Burmister. D.M. (1945 b). The General Theory of Stresses and Displacements in Layered
Systems. Joumol of Applied Physics. Vol. 16, No. 3. pp. 126-127.
Burmistcr. D.M. (1945 c). The General Theory of Stresses and Displacements in Layered
Systems. Joumal of Applied Plrysics, Vol. 16. No. 5, pp. 296-302.
Carothers. S.D. ( 1920), Plane Strm'n: Direct Detenm"uatio" of Stresses. Proc . Royal Society
Scrie.< A: Vol. 97, pp. 110-123.
Das. B. (1997). Adanced Soil Mechanics. 2nd ed., Taylor and Francis, Washington, D.C.
De Barros. S.T. (1966), Deflection Factor Charts for Two and 17tree lAyer Sysums,
Highway Research Record No. 145, p. 83.
Desai. C.S. and J.F. Abel (1972). lmroduction 10 Fiuilt! Element Mttlrods, Van Nostrand
Reinhold, New York.
M~tlrods
in Geotttclrnical 11gineeri~rg,
Das, S.C. (1975). Predicted and Measured Valuts of Stress and Displace.mellls Downloading
and Construct;on undu Circular Footings R~stiug on Saturat~d Clay Mtdi11m, Ph.D.
Thesis. Jadavpur University. Calcutta.
Das, S.C. and C.R. Gangopadhyay (1978), Undrained Stresses and Deformations under
Footings as Clay, Proc. ASCE, Vol. 104, GT I, pp. 11 -25.
Str~sses
Fox ( 1948), The Mean Elastic Se11lemem of a Uniformly Loaded Area at a Depth Below
Ground Surface. Proc. 2nd ICSMFE. Rouerdam. Vol. I, p. 129.
Gibson. R.E. (1 967) . Some Results Concerning Displacements and Stresses in Nonhomogeneous Ela.<tic Half Space. Geotechnique. Vol. 17, No. I.
Gibson. R.E. ( 1968), Letter 10 Geoteclmique. Vol. 18. No. 2.
Copyrighted material
115
lncompr~ssible
Hruban. K. (1959). 71Je Basic Problem of a Nonlinear and a Nonhomogeneous Half Space.
Noulromogeneity in Elasricity a11.d Plasticity. Pergamon Press, London.
Huang. Y .H. (1968). Stresses and Displacements in Nonlinear Soil Medjum. Joumal ASC
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division. Vol. 94. SM I.
Jaky, J. ( 1944), The Coefficient of EArth Pressure at Rest (In Hungarian). Proc. 2nd Int.
Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Rotterdam. Vol. 2. pp. 16-20.
Jones, A. (1962). Table of Str.sses in Three-layer ElasTic Systems. Highway Research Board
Bulletin No. 342.
Jurgenson. L. (1934), Application of Theories of Elasticity and Plasticity to Foundation
Problems. Journal Boston Soc. of Civil Engineering. Vol. 21 , No. 3.
Kirk. J.M. (1966). Tables of Radial Stresses in Top lAyer of Three-layer E:losric Systtms at
Distance from Load Axis. Highway Re.-tean:h Record No. 145.
Korenev, B.G. ( 1957). A Die ResTing on on E:lasric Half Space, the Mad11lus of Elasticity of
which i.r an Expanential Function of Depth, Dokl. Nank S.S.R. Vol. 112.
Ladd (1 977). Stress Defamation and Strength CharacterisTics, State-of-the an repon. Proc.
7th ICSMFE. Vol. 2. pp. 421-494.
Lekhnitskii, S.G. (1962). Radial Distribution of Stresses in a Wedge and in a Half Plane
with Variable Modulus of Elasticity. PMM, Vol. 26. No. I.
Lemcoe, M.M. (1961). Stresses in lAyered E:lastic Solids. Trans . ASCE, Vol. I26, p. 194.
Love. A.E.H. (1928). The Stress Produced in Semi-infinite Solid by Pr<.uur< on Part of tile
Bourukuy, Phil. Trans. of Royal Society, Series A. Vol. 22&. p. 377.
Newmark, N ..M. (1942), Influence Charts for Ccmputation of StresseJ in EJastk Foundau'ons,
011
a Runway, Proc.
Pickett, G. (1938). Stress Distribution in a Layered Soil with Some Rigid Boundaries, Proc.
Copyrighted material
Th~
Copyrighted material
Bearing Capacity of
Shallow Foundations
6 .1 INTRODUCTION
The bearing capacity of foundation is the maximum load per unit area which the soil can
support without failure. It depends on the shear strength of soil as well as on the type, 'siu,
depth, and shape of the foundation.
Figure 6.1 shows a typical load versus settlement relationship of a footing. As the
footing load is increased, the settlement also increases. Initially the settlement increases
almoot linearly with load indicating elastic behaviour of the soil. Thereafler, the settlement
increases more rapidly and then continues to increase even without any appreciable increase
of load. The foundation is then said to have failed. that is, the soil has reached its capacity to
bear superimpooed load.
160
200
q, (Ultimate load)
10
8: 0.6m
B 0.75m
8 0.9 m
40 ~----~----~~----~-----L----_J
Fig. &.1
l oad versus settlement relationship of footing. (Test data from Das 1999)
117
Copyrighted material
6.2
FAILURE MECHANISM
From model nudies. it has been observed that there are possibly four stages of deformation
in the soil leading ultimately to a bearing capacity failure. These include:
Elastic defoi'11\Lltion or distortion
2. Local cracking around the perimeter of the loaded area
3. Formation of a wedge below the footing which moves downward, pushing the soil
s ide ways.
4. Formation of a rupture surface which may extend upto the level of foundation. The
footing then sinks rapidly into the soil followed by bulging or heaving at the top.
I.
These stages are illustrated in Fig. 6.2(a) and the corresponding loa<kcttlcment curve is
shown in Fig. 6.2{b) where a method of dclermining failure load is also indicated.
,
I
Rupture surface
(a} Stages of failure: 1. Elastic deformation; 2. l ocal aackiog; 3. Wedge formation; 4 . Rupture sutfaoe.
Load.'unit area
Elaslic Tmnsition
(Local
~~ Plasli<:
(Rapid
vement)
Copyrighted material
This type of failure is called Gt.ntral Shear Failure where large settlement of footing is
not ~uired for the development of rupture surf;>ce. This is generally observed when the
ratio of depth of footing to the width of footing is relatively small and the soil consists of
medium to stiff clay or medium to dense sand.
In loose sand, much larger settlement would be required for the s hear surfa.ce to
develop upto lhe level of footing. The footing may be considered to have failed by excessive
settlemcnl before thai stage is reached. This type of failure is known as Local Shear Failure
and is illustrated in Fig. 6.3(a). The corresponding load- settlement curve is shown in
Fig. 6.3(b). The point on the load- settlement curve where the slope becomes steep and
almost constant is considered as the failure point. If the settlement corresponding to this point
is more than a chosen critical value, say 10% of the width of the footing, then the load
corresponding to that critical settlement is considered as the failure load.
variable slOpe
Point of fali1ure
Cons&ant sbpe
When the soil is predominantly sofl and cohesive. the settlement increases at a very
rapid rote and reaches the critical value even before the rupture surf<lcC is fully deve-loped.
This lypc of failure is known as punching .shear failure, refer Fig. 6.4.
Copyrighted material
j ________
Point of failure
Flo. 8.4
Vesic (1973) gives the range of relative density of granular soil for punching shear,
local shear, and general shear failure, depicted in Fig. 6.5.
Relative density. 0,
0.8
1.0
' !.:.~~~
Pund'lfng
Local shear
shear failure
6 .2 . 1 Prandtl'a Analysis
A method for analysis of bearing capacity, considering an apparently realistic mechanism of
failure was fi rst suggested by Prandtl in his plastic equilibrium theory (Terzaghi, 1943).
According to Prandtl. the failure mass consists of three zones. widt the failure sudace given
Copyrighted material
r r0 etanf
(Logalllhmlc spiral)
Fig. 8.6 PtandU's bearlt.g eapadty anatya.is: failure surface and zones of failure.
When the applied footing pressure reaches the ultimate bearing pressure. the soil fails
along a surface ACDE or BCGF. The failure mass consists of three zones. Zone 1,
immediately below the footing is under active pressure where failure surfaces AC and BC
develop. inclined at (45 + "2) to horizontal. The soil is assumed to be weightless, and the
stresses in this zone are assumed to be hydrostatic. As the wedge ABC tends to move
downward along wit:.'l the footing, it pushes the surrounding soil side ways. Passive state
develops in zone ill where failure planes FG. AO or BD, and DE, all inclined at
(45 - '12) to the horizontal, develop. Zone II is the zone of radial failure plane.<. The
surface CO or CD is assumed to be a logarithmic spiral, with B or A as the pole. The
equation or the spiral is r = r(/! 9 lllll' where r0 = BC or AC, and r is any radius BX at a spiral
angle CBX = 9.
From the Mohr's circle for c - ' soil, the normal stress corresponding to the collesion
intercep~ is a 1 = ccotf. This is tenned as initial stress, which acts normally to BC and AC
(assumed hydrostatic pressure in zone 1). Also the applied pressure, q4 is assumed to be
transferred nonnally on to BC or AC.
Thus, the force on BC or AC,
The disturbing moment of this force about B is
M 4 = r0 (a1 + qd )ro/2
= (c cot 9 + qd)rJ/2
(6.1)
where. N; = tan(45 +
'12)
This is because a1 due to cohesion alone, is transmitted by the wedge BDE. The
resisting moment My is given by it~ moment about B as,
P, BD
a1N0 (8D)2
2
Copyrighted material
= M.,.
q., as
= ccot;(N~e"""~ -I)
(6.3)
For soil with ; = 0, the logarithmic spiral becomes a circle, and Prandtl's Eq. (6.3) or
(6.4) gives on application of L'Hospillll's rule,
q = (>r + 2 )c = 5.14c
(6.5)
It may be noted that Prandtl's expression is independent of the width of the footing.
Also the assumed shape of the fai lure surface does not resemble the actual failure surface
because of the compressibility of soil. roughness of contact surface and other factors.
o,
g
II
LogarUhtnic spiral
(R Roe'""")
(a) Failure surface and zone
Copyrighted material
r ; --~: ..LLLL U.
l
P-
Pp
(e) Face 'be" as retaining wall
The soil mass above the failure surface consists of three zones:
Due ro rhe friction and adhesion between the soil and the base of the footing, this
zone cannot spread lateraUy. lt moves downward as an elastic wedge and the soil in this zone
behaves as if it is a part or the footing. The two sides of the wedge ac and be make angle ;
with the horizontaL
Zont 1:
Zone II: The wnes aef and bed are zones of radial shear. The soil in this zone is pushed
into zone Ill.
Zone 111: These are two passive Rankine zones. The boundaries or these zones make angles
(4S0
As the footing sinks into the ground, the filtes ac and be of the wedge abc push the soil
to the sides. When plastic equilibrium is reached, the fon:es acting on the wedge abc are the
ones shown in Fig. 6.6. The fon:es are
(a) The ultimate footi ng load Q, = Bq,
(b) The weight of the wedge, W = (l/4)yB2 tan f
(c) The passive resistance P, acting on the fates ac and be. Since lhe soil shears along
rhese planes, and the shearing is between soiJ and soil, P, is inclined at an angle ' to
the normal. Since ac and be are inclined at f to the horizontal, P, acts vertically.
(d) The cohesive force on the faces ac and be: C11 = c8/(2cos ') where c = unit
cohesion.
For equilibrium.
Q,+
!rB
tan,-2P,-Bctan9 =0
I
(6.6)
rB' tanjl
4
An expression ror P" may be obtained by considering the face be as a retaining wall.
or,
Q, 2P, ~ Be tan \I -
Copyrighled material
(a) P"' produced by the soil cohesion, assuming the soil to be weightless (y 0) and
neglecting the surcharge, q.
(b) P,.produced by lhe surcharge (q
yD1) assuming the failure mass is weightless
and cohesionless (c = 0).
(c) P,7 produced by lhe weight of lhe soil in lhe shear zone, assuming c = 0 and
q = 0 . II should be appreciated lhal different failure surfaces ace involved in lhe
determination of these three components. Superposition of the contributions from
these three sources may result in some error, which, however, &hould be &mall and
on the conservative side.
Q, = Bq,
= 2(P,.+ P,.+ Ppy) + Be1an4> - rB2 tan!l
Let 2Ppc + Be lall\1
=BeN,
(6.7)
2P,, = BqN,
2P,,- 4I y8 tant\
2
I
2
= 8 yBN7
= eN, + qN,
O.SyBN7
(6.8)
Eq. (6.8) is lhe Tenaghi's bearing capacity equation for a strip footing correspor>ding 10
gcneFIII shear failure. N., N., and N7 are dimensionless bearing capacity factors which depend
on 9 only.
The values of Terzaghi's bearing capacity factors for general shear failure given in
Table 6. 1.
Table 6.1 Tenaghi's bearing capocity fact<><s ror genenl shear failure
Q
N,
5.7
7.0
1.0
9.5
2.7
4.5
7.5
13.0
0.10
0.14
0.7
2.0
4.8
9.8
10
IS
20
25
30
35
40
13.0
17.0
24-0
37.0
58.0
98.0
1.6
23.0
42.0
n.o
20.0
43.0
98.0
For footi ngs on saturated cohesive soil, criJical condition for stability generally occurs
at end of construction. Here, undroined condition exists, for which '" = 0.
Corresponding values of bearing capacity fac tors (refer Eq. 6.8) ace N, = 5.1, N, = I and
N7=
Copyrighted material
q,
6 .2 .3
(6.9)
Although Terughi's method has been used widely in practice. other methods of bearing
capacity ;analysis have been proposM. Some of these arc presented below:
Skempton (1951) suggested a very practical method of obtaining bearing capacity of
footings on saturated c lay.
(6.10)
On the basis of theory, laboratory tests and field observations, Skempton obtained expressions
for N, for various shape and depth of roundation. These are:
For strip footings:
N, = S(
1+0.2D1 )
8
for N, s 7.5
(6.11 )
where,
6(1+0.2 ~)(1+0.2~).
for N, !.9
(6.12)
v, = depth or footing
= width (or diameter) or footing
,_ = Length or footing
6.2.4
Meyerhof's Method
Meyerhof (1951) suggested o method or analysis in which the failure surface would extend
upto the ground surface. unlike thot or Terughi's analysis, in which failure surface was
considered to extend up10 lhe base level of the footing. The failure surface and the zones of
shear considered by Meycrhof are shown in Fig. 6.8.
logatithmk: spital
Fig. 6.8
Me~ofs
Copyrighted material
6 .2 .5 Hansen's Method
Brinch Hansen (1957, 1970) proposed a general expression for bearing capacity considering
effects of shape and depth of footing and inclination of applied load:
(6.13)
(6.14)
I.S(N - I) tan 9
6 .2 .6 VesJc's method
l'be failure surface considered by Vcsic is similar to that of Tcrzaghi's with the exception
that the zone I below the footing is in active Rankine state. with inclined faces of the wedge
at (45 + 4JI2) to the horizonml. The bearing capacity equation is the same as Eq, (6.13).
The factors N, and N are identical to those of Meycrhof and Hansen. N.,. given by Vesic, is
a simplified form of that given by Caq1 ll and Kerisal (1948),
N 7 = 2(N + l )tan
(6.15)
For shape, depth and inclination factors, the reader may refer to Vesic ( 1973).
1.$. 6403-(1981 ) incorporates the results of Hansen, Vesic, and Meyerhofs analyses
and gives the same fonn of equation as Eq. (6.13). The corresponding shape factors, depth
fac1ors, and inclinmion facrors are dealt wilh in Chapter 8 (see Seetion 8.2).
c,,
Copyrighted material
NY are
40
' '
Nq
...
30
N, -.....
120
,N..
'
'
' '
N'
'N'r
~~
\
'
,'f
\
\
N,
-=
....N,=260
=..o N,= 180
\ ..\~
10
0
70
(6.16)
60
!50
40
30
20
10
0
5.7 1.0
Fig. U
20
40
60
llO
100
Nr
(6.17)
Square footillg
qd
(6.18)
Copyrighled material
D~sign
(6. 19)
2.2
2.0
...
1.8
1.8
Smooth, Fs
1.2
1.0
0
12
16
20
0.05
0.03
!,.h\'8
0.01 0
Fig. 8.10 Bearing capaelly of non-hOmogeneous toll {aflor Oavls and Brcol<or 1973).
where A is a parameter which depends on the roughness of the footing and ~ is the rate of
increase of c., with depth.
Davis and Christian (1971) analyzed the case of cross-anisocropic soil and found that
c, = o.{; c,.)
(6.20)
where ''"' and c..,. are the undrained strength of the soil in the vertical and horizontal
direction respectively. Good prediction of bearing capacity of model footings in Boston blue
clay was obtained by using Eq. (6.20).
Vesic (197S) made detailed theoretical analysis of two-layer soil system, shown
in Fig. 6.11. with the bearing stratum either softer or stiffer than the underlying stratum.
In the first case. failure is partly by lateral plasLic now whereas in the second situation.
failure is caused by punching shear. The net ultimate bearing capacity of the footing is given
by.
(6.21)
where Nm is a modified bearing capacity factor which depends on the ratio of shear strength
of the two strata and the thlckness of the bearing stratum and is given as
(6.22)
Copyrighted material
II
12
10
9
long rectangular footing
3
5 8 1 8 9 10
lJnctrWntd lll'ength l'lllo, k cic,
(a)
6 .6
Acx:urate prediction of bearing capacity by theoretical analysis often becomes difficult due to
various reasons. This depanure from accuracy may be bec.au.sc
(a) Correct estimation of in-situ soil properties are not always possible.
(b) Bearing capacity factors are sensitive to ;. which may change even during the
process of failure.
(c) The unit weight of soil in the failure zones also changes during failure.
(d) The true shape of rupture surface is difficult to detennine.
6 .7
Bearing capacity depends on a number of factors. Some of the important factors are listed
here.
Copyrighted material
Practic~
of Fouttdalion Design
(6.23)
where y' is the effective unit weight and N, and N1 depend on ;. Here, y ' depends on the
position of water table, as depicted in Fig. 6.1 2.
For the strip footing shown in Fig. 6.12, the depth of failure surface does not extend
beyond a depth equal to the width of the footing 8 below the footing base. If the water table
is at or beyond this depth, it will have no effect on bemng capacity. If the water table is at
the base of the footing or above, then in the second tenn of Eq. (6.24) r ' =
which is
about half the value of y,... The second term of Eq. (6.24) can now be written as
(I/2)RwyBN7 where Rw is a water table correction which may vary from 0.5 to I and c.an be
expressed as
r:..
Copyrighted material
R. =
B~aring
o.s(
~)
(6.25)
I +
131
R',. =
o.s(1 + ~;)
(6.26)
q,
= R'.rv1N, + o.sR.rBN,
(6.27)
where y is the bulk unit weight, and R..,. and R:. are the water table correction factors which
may vary from O.S-1.
A pmc.tical method of considering the effect of ground water table is given in Chapter 8
(Section 8.2.3)
6 .8
The tool pressure transmitted to the subsoil by a foundation is the gross soil pressure. and
the maximum gross pressure at which the soil fails is known as the ult;IIIQte gron bearing
capacity. At the level of foundation, which is at a depth D1 below the ground surface, the
overburden pressure is yD1 The soil at this level was under this pressure prior to the
application of footing load. The pressure transmitted by the foundation in excess of the
overburden pressure is the net bearing pressure. The maximum net pressure at which the
foundation faiJs is known as ultimate nd ~Haring caf)Qdty. Safe bearing capacily is the
maximum intensity of pressure which the soil can support without the risk of shear failure.
This is obtained by dividing the ultimate bearing capacity by a factor of safety. Since the soil
is originally subjected to the overburden pn:ssure yD1, then: is no need to apply a factor of
safety to the component of gross bearing capacity which is due to yD1
Therefore.
q (all) = q,h(l + yD
'
Fs
7
It may be noted that there is a difference between safe bearing capacity and allowable
bearing pressure. The allowable bearing pressure is the maximum net pressure that can be
applied on the soil without the risk of shear failure or settlement beyond permissible limits.
6 .9
Fo< granular soils. estimation of field value of ; from laboratory test is extremely difficult
It is more convenient to estimate ; from results of penetration tests, for example. N value
Copyrighted material
132
from SPT. N, value from dynamic cone penetration test, or q, from static cone penetration
test. Methods ase also available to compute bearing capacity direc~y from penetration test
results. Some of these methods ase as follows:
I. Using chans given by Peck, Hansen, and Thombum (1976}:
Figure 6.13 is a plot of bearing capacity factors, N, and N1 against ' as well as N
value (corrected). Considerations of both general and local shear failures are
incorporated in the clwt. This chart can be used direcdy for N, and N 1 (according to
Terzaghi's method) for use in bearing capacity equation, Eq. (6.8).
,.
'
......
120
.. . ....
-IO<Y
rLoooe
II
20
').,
I"'
!
I
'
'
l' .
! '
N,,
: I
I /.'
: .''
'N,'
'\
\
\
Jfl
,,
20
~7,
32
36
40
44 46
q,. =
(6.28)
(6.29)
Copyrighted material
wy
3. Static
con~ t~st:
0~--~~--~~--~--~
0
100
200
300
(em)
Example 6.1
A square footing of width 2 m re.~ts at a depth of 1 m at a site where the subsoil consists of
soft to medium clay down a depth of 8 m below ground level, which is underlain by a dense
coarse sand deposit. The water table is at l.S m below G.L. The clay has c. = 30 kNim1.
9 = 0 and = 19 kN/rn 3.
Determine the net load the footing can safely carry with a factor of safety of 3 against
shear failure. \Vhat will be the safe load if the wotcr table rises to the ground surface?
Solulion
Since the thickness of clay layer beneath the level of footing base is more than the width of
the footing. the bearing capacity will be governed by upper layer of clay.
Copyrighted material
(q,.),.. = c.N,
N, = 6( 1 + 0.2D11B)
Here,
= 30 x 6.6 kN/m2
= 6.6
(q .,,,),..
30 X 6.6
2.5
= 2.5)
(Fs
= 80kN/m2
Net safe canying copocity of the footing = 80 x 2 x 2
= 320 kN
Since this is a total stress analysis, there will be no change in the safe load if the water table
rises to the ground surfoce, unless there is a change in strength of the clay.
Example 6.2
The subsoil at a building site consists of medium sand with y = 18 kN/ml. c' = 0, ~ = 32
and water wble at the ground surface. A 2.5 m square footi ng is to be placed at 1.5 m below
ground surface. Compute the safe bearing capacity of the footing. What wouJd be safe
bearing pressure if the water wble goes down to 3 m below G.L?
Solunon
Since ,. lies between 28 and
35~\
= 10 + [
18
we get.
N,
and
Nr = 6 + [24i;2
-2~8)) = 19.7
8.0
2,5
19.7
= 40 1.2 - 18
rDt
X
Copyrighted material
(Fs = 2.5)
= 152 +
18 x 1.5
= 179 kN/m2
Case II (Water table at 3m below G.L., that is, at a depth greater lhan width footing)
(q.,J.,....: 18
1.5
20.3 + 0.4{14
2.5)19.7
= 18.38
= 17.38cot30=
30.10
s, = I + 0.28/L = 1.14
sq
= I + 0.28/L = 1.14
s1 = I - 0.48/L = 0 .72
If. =
1 + 0 .2Dtf8tan (45 +
136
i,
= ;, = (1
- a/90)1 = 0.79
iy = 0.44
W' = 0.5
Hem:e.
q..,: ( 10
30.J X J.l4
0.79) + (0.5 X 18
X
X
X
J.5
1.4
X
X
J.25
2!
380 kN/ml
2!
1060 kN
Esample 6.4
Wbat will be lbe safe load in Example 6.3 if undrained condition prevails? Take c. = 30 kN/m2,
0, N, 5.14, N, =I, and N1 : 0.
;,. =
St>iuJU>II
: 30
5.14
1.14
1.5
0.79
= 208.3 kN/m2
kN!m 2
2! 70
Safe load : 70
= 196 kN
1.4
2! 200 kN
Brinch Hansen. 1. (1961). A General FomJUla For Bearing Capacity, Danish Geotechnical
Institute, Bulle.tin No. 11 . Copenhage.n.
Brinch Hansen. 1. (1970). A Revised and Extended Fomru/a for Bearing Copaciry. Danish
Geotechnical Institute, Bulletin No. 28, Copenhagen.
Davis and Brooker (1973), The Effect of Increasing Strength with Depth on the Bearing
Capacity of Clays, Geottchnique, Vol. 23. pp. 551-.563.
D'Appolonia. D.J. and T.W. Lambe (1970). Method of Predicting Initial Settlement, Journal
Soil Mechanics and Foundarwn Division. ASCE. Vol. 96. pp. 523-544.
IS 6403 ( 1981). Codt of Practice for Dettnninarion of Bearing Capaciry of Shallow
Foundations. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
Meyerhof. G.G. ( 1951), The Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Foundations. Geottchnique,
Vol. 2. pp. 301- 332.
Copyrighted material
7l~eoretical
Vesic, A.S. (1973). Analysis of Ultimate Loads of Shallow Foundations, Journal of Soil
Mtchanics and Foundation Division ASCE, Vol. 99, No. S M I, pp. 45-73.
Vesic, A.S. (1975), Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations. Chapter 3 of Foundation
Englnetrlng Handbook. Van Nootrand Reinhold Co., New York.
Copyrighted material
Settlement Analysis
7.1
INTRODUCTION
Foundacions on soft clay are liable to undergo excessive settlement and prediction of this
settlement is an imponant aspect of found<ltion design. A part of this settlemen~ known as
the immediate settlement,, is a result of undrained shear deformation of the soil and takes
place during loading. A major part of the settlement. however, occurs due to volume change
of the clay Cllused by the dissipation of excess pore pressure developed from imposed loads.
This is a gradual process and is known as primary cotuolidaticn. ln addition, there may be
settlement due to secondary consolidation caused by volume change of the clay apparently
under constant efFective stress. Except in clays which exhibit high secondary effec~
settlement analysis usually involves an evaluation of the immediate and primary consoHdation
settlement only.
Soft clays, in general, are normally consolidated and their behaviour differs somewhat
f<om overconsolidated clays and clay shales. A survey of case records of seulement of
shallow found<ltions on clay (Simons and Som 1970) reveals that structures founded on N.C.
clays, in geneJal. experienc~ more senlement than those founded on overconsolidated clay.
This is only to be expected because the main effect of overconsolidation is to reduce the
compres.sibilicy of the clay. However, it is more imporcant. that for normally consolidated
clay. only 15-20% of the total settlement occurs during construction. whereas for
overconsolidated clays. as much as 50-60% of the wr.al settlement may occur during
construction. This shows the imponance of consolidation on the settlement of foundations on
clay and evaJuation of this settlement becomes a major part of the settJement analysis.
7 . 1.1 Defl.nitions
Figure 7 . I shows the development of net pressure and the associated settlement of o
found<ltion on clay during different stages of construction. Before application of the building
load. there is usually an excavation down to the foundation level during which lhere is a
heave of 1he subsoil. The ml_gnitude of this heave is generally small. unless the excavation is
deep and is kepi ope-n fot a long time. After excavalion. lhe foundation load is gradually
applied and there comes a time when the applied pressure on the soil equals the pressure
1 58
Copyrighted material
S~ul~m~Jll
Analysis + 139
re l ea~d by excavation and the net foundation pressure becomes zero. The corresponding
settlement due to !he restoration of !he excavation load may be assumed to be equal to !he
prior heave. Any further increase of load is a net increase in foundation pressure and the
associated settlement is the net settlement of the foundation.
..
li
..
~
;;
'
p,
!Wve
p,
lmmedia1e setlement
1s
<!:
Consolklation
&elllement
<t
p,
".s:
Pt=P; + p,
(7.1)
method of settlement analysis for a foundation placed on a layer of clay is shown in Fig. 7.2.
The sett1ement is given by the equation,
.
Pr- =
(7.2)
Copyrighted material
~$
II
Deplh
where.
Immediate oettlement
lc is now the common practice to obtain the 'immediate settlement'. that is, the settlement
that takes place under undrained condition due to the shear deformation or rhe clay, from the
equations or elasticity. This has the general expression (given by Terzaghi ( 1943)).
_ ( q.B(1
P;-
v') )
1p
(7.3)
Copyrighted material
where.
(/p)RJOID; 0.8(/p)CEI<TRE
UB
Ctnlrr
t.O
t.S
l. t2
t.36
2.0
3.0
I.S2
1.78
4.0
s.o
t.96
2.to
6.0
7.0
2.24
2.32
8.0
2.42
9.0
2.SO
tO.O
Circl~ Oia. B
2.53
1.00
ofJ
Comu
0.64
Copyrighted material
850
060
0 70
0.80
0.1
090
00
10
o. t=:"[~=rr::!:::::!:~~~~~4~
0
25
0.3 -
O.~w~~~:~.~t~rt~5~,~2fjf,"'-~tltj
r.; 0.5~
r;;
0.6f--t-++-+--t-lll'f-l--t-+--l
D
+ifr
0.7
O.BI-f--+-t-t--Jfi
-t---1-t--H
o.9f--+-+-+--l---,f--+-+-+--lH
1.0f--t-++-+-r71r- t---+-+-+-l
Y/11
fjft-1--1--1--1--1--l
0.9
0.8
0.7
Jib
{)
IN
o.6f--+-+ -tffl'--f--+-+-+--lH
I II~
IJ'I
0.4 f--+--f'-,1/
,Ht,f-l --l---1-- 1 --l---f---1
o.5f--+--+~fH+-+-+--lf--+--+--l
1-., 1
o.a~::;t;tY.tl:~lllltl
I 9 I/ .
25
1
ConsoUdatlon aettlement
While Eq. (7.3) still remains the most widely used expression for calculating the immediate
senlemen~ the method of obloining the consolidation senlement has undergone some changes.
Skempton and Bjerrum (1957) recognized that there was lateral deformation in the c lay
during load application and that the consolidation settlement should be a func tion of the
excess pore pressure set up by the applied load. Therefore. taking accounc of the shear
s tresses. a modified expression for the total settlement was given as,
Pt = P; + JJP.,o
(7.5)
Copyrighted material
11 is lhe pore pressure com:ction factor which depends on lhe pore pressure parameter
A and the gcometty of lhe foundation and
p..., is lhe consolidation settlement obtained by the direct application of the nedometer
test results (Eq. (7 .2)).
The values of pore pressure correction factor as given by Skempton and Bjenum (19S7) are
given in Fig. 7.4.
"tB ..o.~
"~ -~ -
--
.....
...
0.21----11----+---+----'-------l
-
Circutar b.Jndation
-- Continuous foundation
OL-----~----~~----~----~~--~
0.2
Fig. 7.4
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Pen presswe cxwrection factor for rooodations on day (after Skemp4on and 8jerrum 1957).
For routine design. the following values of the pore pressure correction factor may be
used:
7 .2
1.0-{).7
Overconsolidated clay
Heavily overconsolidated clay
0.7-0.5
0.5-0.3
STRESS-PATH
precisely how a soil element is going to deform. To obtain a more complete picture. we have
also to know how the applied stresses change. at what rate and in what relation to one
Copyrighted material
u
A B Cl_ Efleetlve
A8
Qf stress-9ath
4a;;
Fig. 7.5 Sbeu-path of an element of soli beneath founc:taliOn In the fiekS.
Now, the increase of stresses Aa. and Aa111 which are the increase in principal stresses
in this instance, will set up an excess pore-water pressure in the element according to the
equation,
bu = B [flo-At + A (flo-.- flo-.,)
(7.6)
where A and B are S kempton's pore-pressure parameters (Skempton, 1954).
If the clay is saturated, as all clays below the water table are, B = L Then,
(7.7)
Therefore, immediately after the load application, the effee.tive streSSes become:
o-;o = p + flo-.- flu
o-;o
= K0 p + flo-At - flu
(7.8)
Copyrighted material
Since for lllOfit clays, the value of A is positive in the range of 1tres.ses normally encountered
in practice, the excess pore-pressure t.u is greatct lhan t.o-., . So while the effective vertical
stress increases on load application, the effective horizonaal sll'US decreases and the slreSS
point moves from ' A' to ' 8 '. The venlcal sltlln during, loading. that is. the immediate
settlement. is, therefore, a function of the stre"'palh AB.
The element now begins 10 consolidate. At the early saages of consolidation. the
increase in effective horizontal StresS is only a recompressioo until the original value lc.P is
reston>d. Beyond this point, any funher increase of horizontal 5treu is a net increase while
there is a net increase in vertical StresS durin& the entire process of coosolklation.
Now during load a.pplicalion, in undrained eondltion. a utunued clay behnu as an
incoiDJI"'SSlble medium wilh Poisson's mio, v 0.5. As the excus pod-pressures dissipate.
Poisson's ratio decreases and finally atUlns iu fully drained value at the end of OCli1SOIKialioo.
This ebange in Poisson's ,.tio does 1101 have much effect on the vertieal stress but the
horizontal StresS decreases by an amount 6 to ha new value K,p + bc>u. i..,.,
6 t.o-,. 1
t.u.,
(7.9)
So during consolidation. the element follows the effective wess palh BD while it would
have moved from 8 10 C had the total StresS remained unehansed. A&r full consotidation.
lherefon:. the stresSes are:
a;,. t.o.
0"' K. p + (t.o-., - 6)
(7. 10)
K. p+ 6o61
An ideal seulement analysis should take into account !he complete pauem of suesses an
element of soil will be subjected to in the field. In order to determine the relevant venical
sltlins, laboratory tests should be performed under Identical suess conditions and an
integration or all s-uch venica.l strains beneath a loaded area would give the settlement of the
foundation (Lambe 1964, Davis and Poulos 1967).
The methods most widely used in pracclcc. however. are the ones based on the
oedometer test. Figure 7.6 summarizes all these melhods indicating lhe effective stress-paths
associated with each of them. In plotting the stre..palh AF in Fig. 7 .6, it has been assumed
that an undisturbed sample when subjected 10 the In-situ vcnical stress also restores the insitu horizontal stress so lhat subsequent stress-path for loading sUirts from lhe point A .
....
MlhJd
I
2
3
....-
....
Streu-o~~th
AF
AS, M'
AS. EF
AS, 80
...,
ln'c>llod ..............
Copyrighted material
S~ttl~m~nl
Analysis 147
[6u,l, =
Horizontal:
11.u-
(7 .11 )
Vertkal:
where
6 = 6u, 1 - 6a.,.
The ratiO of the effective stress changes during consolidation, K' is then given by
K'
[Au,J.: I - .!.._
[Aa,l,
(7.12)
6u
Now. for the Boussinesq problem, the general expressions for stresses beneath the centre of a
uniform circular load (dlameter 2b and load intensity. q) are (Wu 1966),
u _
' - q
[I _
(tlb)
3
]
(I + t 2/b2 ) 311
(7.13)
3
u, = q(l - '1')
V)'l
+ '1'1
(7. 14)
where.
(7.15)
Using these expressions,
(7.16)
K' _ I _ [
I - 2v
]
I + IJ{l + 1J)(3A - I)
(7 .17)
Eq. (7 .17) can then be used co determine the mt.io of the stress increase during consolidation
at any depth beneath the centre or a uniform circular load.
Copyrighted material
7.2.2
Desig~t
It has been shown in the foregoing that the stress changes thai occur in the field during
consolidation are primarily dependent on the drained Poisson's ratio and the pore pressure
parameter A of the soil. Therefore. it is of considerable practical significance to study the
influence of scress-path, such as BD (sec Fig. 7.5) on che axial and volumetric strain during
consolidation. Expcrimenta J investigation with undisturbed London clay (Som. 1968).
normally consolidaced KaoliniiC (Das and Som e1 al., 1975) and undisturbed Calcuna clay
(Guha, 1979) show lhol lhe stress incrcmcnc mtio during consolidation has importanl effccc
on the deformation characteristks of the soil. Two things need to be considered here:
(a) the influence of stress incremenl mtio on lhe volumetric strain of the soil and
(b) the influence of stress increment ratio on the strain ratio (that is, axial strain/
volumetric Slnlin) of the soil.
There is conflicting evidence on the effect of s tress ratio on the volumetric
compressibility of clay. Some investigators have found that the volumetric compressibility is
independent of the stress increment ratio and can be expressed as function of vertical
effective stress only (Som. 1968). This means !hat !he results of one-dimensional
consolidation ccsts would be applicable irrespective of the changes in lateral pressure during
consolidation. Others hove found that the volumetric compressibility is not independent of the
lateral pressure and can be$1 be expressed as functions of mean effective stress during
consolidation (Dos, 1975). It seems chat the appropriate relationship has to be determined for
the particular soil under investigation.
The major effect of lateral stresses during consolidation is, however. manifested in the
axial strain associated with volumetric defonnation. Figure 7.7 shows some typical results of
stress-path controlled triaxial tests on different clays. The results are plotted as relationships
between the stress increment ratio. K' and the strain ratio, A during consolidation or drained
deformation. It is to be noted that one~dimensional consolidation implies a strain ratio,
A= L.O nnd that occurs at a pank,ular stress increment ratio only. For any other. stress ratio.
the strain ratio would also the difference and assumption of one...cJimensional strain
(i.e. 11., :: 1.0) would lead to significant error in settlement analysis.
4.0
3.2
2.4
1.6
- - - - Theoretical (""Isotropic
elastcity}
"z
0.8
"~~
-
-.
0.0
0.4
0.8
0.8
1.0
K' = Aa'.,IIJ.a ' 1
Fig. 7.7 Strain ratio, .t versus stress increment ratio. K for draln~~~~!iq'Xf
0.0
0.2
material
e,
I - 2~\/,K'
, = (I - 2v)) + 21)(1 - vj - Vz)K'
(7.18)
where.
v '1 = effect of one horizontal strain in the othe-r horizontal scrain;
v'2 = effect of horizontal strain on vertic.al strain;
v'1 = effect of vertical strain on horizontal strain;
Jf = ratio of venical drained dcformatjon modulus to the horizontal drained
defoTITUition modulus.
Equation (7.18) can also be expressed as
I - 2~V,K'
, = (I - 2v))[K'/K0 - 1)- 2~V,K'
1
(7.19)
The parameters v'3 and rJVi can be detennined from two tests with different values of K' and
measuring 1/e., in each case. The most convenient values ofK' to choose are u and 1.0. that
is, !hose from lhe standard drained compression test and lhe isotropic consolidation test.
7 .2 .3
The methods of settlement analysis in current use have been described earlier. These methods
have given satisfactory results in many field problems, particularly where lhe condition of
zero lateral strain is satisfied. However, more often !han not appreciable lateral deformation
occurs in lhe field and lhe currently used methods of settlement analysis become inadequate
to predict lhe seulemenL A method of settlement prediction by the stress-path method has,
therefore. been introduced for lhe case of axi-symmetric loading (Simons and Som, 1969.
Som et al., 1975).
Immediate oettlemeat
The common practice in estimating lhe immediate (elastic) settlement of foundat ion on clay
is to assume the soil to be a homogeneous, isotropic. clastic medium. thus, permitting the
application of Boussincsq analysis. However, in practice, the elastic modulus~ E of tt:e soil
varies with depth as a consequence not only of the inherent nonhomogeneity of the soil but
also of varying applied stress levels at different depths. Stress- strain relationship of soft clay
is essentially non-linear and the deformation modulus varies considerably with the stress
level. While it is possible to make theoretical analysis of undrained deformation using the
finite clement technique and taking the non-linear stress versus strain behaviour of the soil
into consideration, they are nor yet available in readily usable form. A ~il"ple expression for
immediate settlement following the stress-path method may be given as,
Copyrighted material
_ 'JAa, - aa.
p, -
(1.20)
e(z)
where C.a\. and L\a11 are the increase in toral vertical and horizontal stresses at any depth
re.pectively and E{z) is the corresponding deforrru~tion modulus, taking due account of the
vertical and horizontal effective stresses prior to and at the end of loading.
It has been shown by many investigators that the stresses in the subsoil due to a
foundation loadjng are not significantly dependent upon the variation of E (Huang 1968.
Som 1968). Therefore. in the absence of more rigorous analysis. the Boussinesq stresses may
be used in evaluating the settlement by Eq. (7.21), the integration being done numerically by
dividing the compressible stratum into a number of layers and taking the appropriate value of
E for the layer into account.
Conaolldatlon aetUement
In the conventional method. the consolidation settlement is given by,
p,
(m,), a a, dz
(7.21)
p, = J.1
'J(m, ) !!.a, dz
1
(7.22)
where J.1, the pore-pressure corTOCtion factor, is a function of the soil type and tbe geometry
of the foundation, (refer Fig. 7.4).
For the stress-path method. the settlement is given by,
p; =
).(m,)3 l!.udz
(7.23)
= ).p,
where,
tJ.u
Copyrighted material
K _ I _[
I - 2v
]
I + IJ(l + q)(JA - I)
where,
)-t/2
a'
v = Poisson's ratio
A = Skempton's pore-pressure parameter
Knowing the value of K', A. can be obtained from experimental relationships as shown in
Fig. 7.7. The value of (m,):, should, of cour>e, be obtained from appropriate stress-path test,
bu~ for practieal purposes, can be determined from properly conducted oedometer test. Then,
(m.)) may be taken as approximately equal to (m,) 1, the oedometer compressibility in terms
of venical effective stress.
It may be noted here that evaluation of the K versus A relationship for any problem
requires determination of Poisson's ratio and pore-pressure parameter, A of the soil. But for
most soils, Poisson's ratio varies between 0.1 and 0.3 and pore-pressure parameter, A
between 0 and I. Accordingly, K varies within a narrow range of 0.6-0.9 and A in the range
0 ..5-0.8. It would, therefore, be convenient to select a value of l within this range for most
practical problems (Som, 1968).
7 .S
RATE OF SETTLEMENT
The rate of settlement of foundations on clay is generally determined from Tenaghi's theory
of one-dimensional consolidation although tield..:onsolidation is often three-dimensional (See
O!apter I. Section 1.9.5).
According to this, the excess pore-pressure at any point at depth t within a soil mass
after a time from load application, is governed by the equation
C lflu = 8u
'8:'
where~
8t
(7.24)
Copyrighted material
1S2
Tlr~ory
U%
(u,Ju,) 0
o.s
1.0
s.o
T,
0
20
40
0
0.01
Cl.ll
o.os
0.049
0.64
0
0.014
0.081
0.19S
0.460
0
0.01
0.17
0.3 1
0.58
0
0.031
0.1 26
0.237
0.567
60
0.39
80
100
"'
"'
"'
"'
"'
O. ISS
0.420
For double drainage (any distribution of pressure, that is, u 11u: :;:; any value). take
H = 112 times thickness of cJay and T,. values fo r (u 1/ui) = I.
7 .4
FOUNDATION ON SAND
Foundations on sand do not present the !>arne degree of problem with regard to settlement as
foundations on c;:lay. Firstly, except for loose sand. settleme-n t is usually small and secondly.
because of high permcabilily the settlement is usually over during the period of construction.
In this case. there is no time dependent settlement similar to the consolidation settlement in
clayey soils. although large foundations may undergo minor settlement caused by fluctuations
of load due to wind, machinery vibrations. and storage loads.
Prediction of settlement of foundations on sand is, by and lange. empiric-al although
elastic theory has sometimes been used. The common methods used for this purpose are:
7 .4 . 1
Elastic Theory
6 = q.B (I - v) 2 /
(7.25)
where the different terms have the same meaning as in Eq. (7 .3). However. it is to be
considered thac because of volume change during load application, Poisson's rutio. v can no
longer be taken as 0.5. The value of E and v should be determined from tbe laboratory triaxial
tests for the appropriate relative dens icy and confining pressure-. The Poisson's ratio normally
varies between 0. 15 for coarse sand to 0.3 for fine to silty sand. The value of E can also be
determined from the standard penetration resistance or the soil (refer Otaptcr 2. Table 2.7).
Elastic theory. however, gives only a very approximate estimate of settlement, because
the assumption of homogeneity would be far from renlity.
7 .4 .2
Buisman (1 948) has given on empirical method or es timating the senlement of foundations
on sand by numerical integration of the strains occ urring in different strata. as s hown in
fig. 7.8. Accordingly.
Copyrighted material
Settlemtnt
log
10
Pu + l!.p dz
p.,
r
l l !
~)'Of
La)'llf
(7 .26)
l ! !
Po dl>
Layer 4
153
layer 3
llrr<~lysis
E,
z,
E,
z,
E,
z,
"'
z.
Fig. 7.1 Settlement calc:aJiatlon for foundations on sand (after Bulsman. 1948).
where,
= modulus of elasticity.
and
The sand layer is subdivided into a number of sublayers and the E values an: taken from
empirical relationship for the average N value for the layer, as described in Section 2,7.1
(Chapter 2).
s,
S, = (I
4
+ D,ID1 ) 2
(7 .27)
The use or this equa!ion is based on the assumption that the density of the soil within the
zone affected by the foundation loading is similar to that beneath the test plate. This may be
approximately true if the plate diameter is of the same size as the foundation. but for large
foundations, there is likely to be considemble difference in density.
Copyrighted material
154
nr~ory
,.
--....
2.3H " ' I og Po + t.p
o=
C
. (7.28)
Po
De Beer (1965) studied the settlement behaviour of fifty bridges on sand and concluded
that &j. (7.28) normally overestimates the settlement. He proposed a mOdi'fied relationship
for the compressibility coefficient. given by
C = 1.9C..,
(7.29)
Po
The cone penetration dat4 are plotted with depth and the soil is divided into a number of
compressibility.
Example 7.1
Figure 7.9 shows an isolated column in a buildin,g frame with a column grid of 4 m )( 4 m
which carries a venical load of 400 kN and is supported on a footing, 2 m x 2 m, placed
I m below G . L. The subsoil consists of S m of firm desiccated silty clay (c. = SO kNim',
C,/1 + e0 = 0.06) followed by medium sand (N = 20). Calculate the settlement of the
footing.
~- I<N
0
-1m
..
.' .'
e
N
2m
..
''
''
''
'
.........,:-+"
'
''
.'
~~
Deslc;cotoel b<Ownlsh
~~"
c., = 50 kN.tnr
~ - 0.06
-5 m -----'"--~'------Mt<ium sand
N 20
Fig. 7 .a tsolated JooUog on day.
Copyrighted material
/nunediare selflemtnl
and
q,
2m
0.5
4400
100 kNfm'
Also.
a
V a
600c.
30,000 kN/ml
(!,>..... :
1.12
Pt: 30,000
0.75
1.12
= 0.0056 m = 5.6 mm
D
depth correction,
0.86
Take influence zone extending to twice the width of footing. that is, 4 m. below footing.
Consider sin.gle layer within the zone of influence.
H Jog A> + lJ.p
A>
At A:
Po = I x 18 + 8 x 2 = 34 kN/m2
lJ.p
..
p ... =0.06x4xlog
a
0 .072 m
Depth correction.
..
(p..o),.,.
= 0 .86
34 + 34
34
72 mm
0.86
x 72
= 62 mm
Copyrighted material
156 +
Tlr~ory
p, = 0.7 x 62 = 43.4 mm
Final
se t~ emen t
= 4.8 + 43.4
= 48.2 mm
I - 2v
K' _ I _ [
I - 2 x 0.3
]
I + 0.3(1.3)(3 x 0. 7 - I)
= 0 .84
From Fig. 7.7, for undisturbed Calcutta soil
.l. = 0.6
{f, = 0.6 x 43.4 = 26 mm
PJ = 4.8 + 26 = 30.8 mm
Example 7.2
A raft foundation. 8 m x 12m in plan is to be placed 2 m below G. L. in the subsoil shown in
Fig. 7 . 10. The net foundation pressure is 50 kNfm2 Calculate the total settlement of the
foundation
Raft foundation
8 m x 12 m\
0
50 kNtm'
II I II II
--\
-2m
~~5Am
m
/
/
- Sm
f
f
I
I
I
'
Fig. 7.10
'-
+a
I
I
I
I
m'
Copyrighted material
Take influence zone extending to twice the width of foundation. thai is, 16 m below
foundation. Neglect the effect of settlement due to sand layer.
Solution
(a) Immediate senlement
P; =
For the given problem,
q. =50 kN/m2
8=8m
v = 0.5
l p (for UB = 12/8
for.
1 = 600 x 40
Stratum 1:
Stratum II:
= 24.000 kN/m2
Weighted average. E
24,000
3 + 15, 000
13
10
= 17,000 kN/m2
...
50
P; = 17,000
0.75
1.36
= 0.024 m = 24 mm
Depth correction = 1.0
Rigidity correction = 0.8 (Considering ran with interconnected beams providing rigidily to
the foundation)
(p;)""'
= 0.8 x 24 = 19 mm
!:.!
Pc.:,
+_;:
A~
p
-C,- H Iog-
l +tto
p.,
At A. p. = 18 x 2 + 8 x 1.5 = 48 kN/m2
Ap
= 0.82 x 50 = 41 kN/m 2
At 8, p 0 = 18 x 2 + 8 x 3 + 7 x 5 = 95 kN/m1
Ap
= 0.42 x 50 = 21 kN/m2
POl = 0.06 X 3
log
48 + 41
95 + 2 1
+ 0. 12 x 10 log
48
95
= 0.048 + 0.104
= 0.152 m = 152 mm
Copyrighted material
:.
p, = p(p.,..)""'
Take J1 = 0.8 (settlement being predominantly in soft normally consolidated soil of
stratum II)
:. p, = 0.8 x 121 = 97 mm
:. Pt = 19 + 97 = 116 mm
StrHs-poth method
p', = ).p,
from Eq. (7.17)
](' =
K' _ I [
I - 2 x 0.3
]
- I + 0.3(1.3)(3 X 0.8 - I)
= 0.84
From Fig. 7.7,
). = 0.6
.. Jf,=0.6x97=58mm
Pt = 19 + 58 = 77 mm
Eumple 7.3
A S m x S m foundation is placed I m below G. L. in the stratified sandy deposit as
depicted in Fig. 7.11. Calculate the settlement of the foundation.
1600kN
1m
5m
'I'
I
I,
--
Medii.ITI sane~
r 18~
\ N = 20
= 8000 kNim'
'\
' c..
5m
\\
+.
\
\
,,
I
I
r=
19 kNim~
N '2!5
Copyrighted material
Sttrlemeru Analysb
159
S<Jiution
Net foundation pressure.
q. =
1600
4 x 4
= 100 kN/m2
8= q,B (I - v 1 )1
E
P
Also.
q11 = 100 k:N/m2
8=4m
v = 0.3 (assumed)
lp
E
= 1.12
= C1 +
C1N (Take average N value of the two layers having almost equal depth
: 39 + 4.5
22.5
= 140 kg!cm2
= 14,000 kN/m2
...
4
X
14,000
= 0.029 m
8 : IOO
=29
For,
:.
0.91
1.12
mm
""
" - ....
At A,
Po
=I
2.3p. I
Po + bp d
E og,.
Po
x 18 + 2..5 X 8 = 38 kN/m2
E1 = 39 + 4..5
At 8,
E 1 = 39 + 4.5 x 25
...
_ 2.3 X 38 S I
38 + 56
2.3 X 80.5
I
80.5 + 11
8 - 12,900 x 0810 38
5
0810
+ 15,150 x
80.5
"=
2.3H
----c- 1og,o
p0 + Ap
P.
lAyer I:
II = 5 m; Po = 38 kN/m2; Ap = 56 kN/m2
9 c::lO!.
C = -..1..:.:
lAyer 2:
c=
1.9
10,000 : 236
80.5
2.3
= 400
51 0810
38 + 56
2.3
38
+ 236
80.5 + II
Slog,O 80.5
(0)""' = 14.7
0.94
14 mm
Examp1o 7.4
The "'suits of a plate load test on a sandy stratum arc shown in Fig. 7.12. The size of the
plate used is 30 em x 30 em. Determine the size of a square footing for a column carrying
a load of 1800 kN with a muimum permissible settlement of 50 mm.
--
200
400
..
r--- .....
600
""'""'
800
1\
60
10
Fig. 7.12 Plate load test data.
Copyrighted material
Settlement A11alysis
161
Solution
The problem has to be solved by trial and error.
First trial
Size of footing = 3 m x 3 m
sf
s,
(I+
.. s,
~;)'
~(~ + Ee.r
D1
= 4
= 50(~
+~r
4
3000
=IS mm
Allowable pressure (From curve) = 440 kN/m2
Second trial
Size of footing = 2 m x 2 m
q. =
Again,
s, ~
SO
4
(I +
= 16.S
1800
= 4SO kN/m2
2x2
300 )'
2000
mm
Copyrighted material
Practk~
of Foundation
tsign
Oas. S.C. (1975). Predicted and Mea.sured Va es of Stress and Displacem~nts Downloadi,g
and Constructiotr under Circular Fof ings Rtsting on Saturated Clay Medium,
Pll.D. Thesis, Iadavpur University, Calc ta.
Das. S.C. and N.N. Som (1976). Smlemm of Footings on Soft Clay, Proc. Symp. on
Foundations and Excavation in Weak S<fl, Calcutta, Vol. I.
Davis. E.H. and H.G. Poulos (1968). The usl of Elastic Theory for Settlement Prediction
under Three-dimensional Conditions. Ge4teclmique, Vol. 18.
rie
Fox. E.N. (1948), The Mean Elastic Senlemen of Unifonnly Loaded Area at a Depth INlow
Ground Surface. 2nd l.C.S.M.F.E.. Rottdidam. Vol. I. p. 129.
Guha, S. (1979). Effect of Initio! and Incremental Strain Ratios or Drained Defonnotion of
Calcutta Soil. MCE Thesis, Iadavpur u.Jversity, Calcutta.
Ladd, C.C. (1969), The Prediction of in-situ S ss-$tmin Behaviour of Soft Saturated Clays
during Undrained Shear, Bolkesj Sym sium on Shear Strength and Consolidation of
Normally Consolidated Clays. Norwegia Gwtechnical Institute. Oslo, pp.l4-19.
Lambe. T.W. (1964). Methods of Estimatin Settlement, Joumol of Soil M<ehanics and
Foundation DiviJion, A.S.C.E.. 90, No. SMS. pp. 43-67.
Raymond, G.P., D.L. Townsend, and MJ. Lo!asek (1971). Tbe Effe<:t of Sampling on the
Undrained Soil Properties of a Leda
Canadian Geotechnical Journal. Vol. 8,
pp. 546-557.
syl,
Simons. N.E. and N.N. Som ( 1970), Stttlt ent of Structures on Clay with Particular
Emphasis on London Clay, Construction dustry Research and Information Association
Report 22, p. 51.
Skempton. A.W. (1954), The Pore-pressure
fficients A and B. Gtotechnique. Vol. 4,
pp. 143-147.
Skempton. A.W .. R.B. Peck, and D.H. Me onald ( 1955), Stttlemtnt Analyses of Six
Structures in Clticogo and l.Andon. Proc I.C.E.. Part I, Vol. 4, No. 4, p. 525.
Skempton. A.W. and L. Bjerrum (1957), A ontribution to the Settlement Analysis of
Foundations on Clay. Gtotechniqut, Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 168-178.
Som, N.N. (1968). Tl1e Effect of Streu Pat 011 tire DeformaJ'on and Consolidation of
London Clay, Ph.D. Thesis, University o London.
Copyrighted material
Senlement Analys;s
163
Som, N.N. ( 1975), Regional Deposits: Co,tribution for Panel Discusslon, Proc. 5th Asian
Regional Conf. in SMFE, Vol. 2, p. 20.
Taylor. D.W. (1948), Fundamntals of Soil M.chuuics, John Wiley and Sons, Inc,
New York.
Terz.aghi, K. (1943).
n~<omical
Terzaghi. K. and R.B. Peck (1948), Soil Muhanics in Etrginuritrg Practia, 1st ed ..
Wiley. New York.
Copyrighted material
. . ...
-+-+C.J
r_,+-+(a) ISOlate<! tooting
~
~
~
-tt:8:+- ---+L.J-H4
(e)
Com- looting
16.
Copyrighted material
8 .2
8 .2 .1
DESIGN OF FOOTINGS
Depth of Footing
The minimum depth at which a foundation should be placed depends on the soil profile,
structural requirement. ground water condition. and so on. The following factors should
generally be taken into consideration in determining the depth of foundations.
(a) Depth of top soil, rubbish fill, if any.
(b) Depth of poor surface deposit such as peat, muck, or sanitary land fill.
(c) Location of ground water table and its seasonal fluctuation.
(d) Depth to poor or better underlying stntta.
(e) Depth of adjacent footings if any.
lf the subsoil near the ground surface consists of a heterogeneous fill of uncenain
propenies or compressible soi.l like peat, muck etc. the foundation should. preferably. be
taken below the fill. Figure 8.2 is a clear repn:sentation of the same. It is also desirable that
the foundation be taken beJow the zone of seasonaJ fluctuation of water tabJe where the soil
is not subjected to seasonaJ volume changes due to alternate wetting and drying. For this, the
foundation is generally placed l - 2 m below ground surface. However, if the water table
fluctuates over a great depth, it may not be economical to take the foundation to the desired
level. The foundation may then be placed at some convenient depth and the design done for
the highest position of the water table. The depth of foundation is also influenced by the
location of underground facilities below the building. ln case where a stiff clay is underlain
by n softer material, the foundation should be placed as high above as possible so that the
pn:ssure bulb may be restricted within the stiff c lay.
Pea~
Muck etc.
'
I
'
~Finn soil
Soft soil
Copyrighted material
In sandy strata, if there is marked increase in density of sand with increasing depth, it may
be tempting to take the foundation deeper than normal in order to take advantage of the
higher bearing capacity. This proc--edure may not be economical if it involves deep excavation
below the water table involving large scale dewatering. Further. there may be problems with
the stability of side s lopes and adjacent structures.
rl
- --
~
I'
/ ~ .sm.. \
I
I
\
\ , ....
3.Sm
I I<
-+1',
\
I
~U~
......_ftu
In eoce
--""zone
I
I
I
Ooplh
Stratum I
A rm desiccated
I
I,
'1 ,._
silty
day
IE
\
\
\
Pressure
lnftuence
zone
f',
Stratum II
Soft Otglnle
I
I
8illy ClOy
/
/
-8 m
- 8m
Stratum
tn:
Slitf clay
Keeping under consideration shear failure of the soiJ, lbe ullimate bearing capacity of
footings on different typeS of soil may be obtained as follows:
(a) Coh.siv soil (' ; 0)
q, (n) = c. N,
(8. 1)
Copyrighted material
The shear strength of the soil within the failure tone below the footing. that is. within
a depth approximately equal to the width of footing. should be used in design. In view of
the natural variation of soil properties at a building site. there is usually a wide spectrum
of test results and the designer is required to exercise his judgment in selecting the
design shear strength. For a stratified deposit. a weighted average shear strength may be
used in desi.g.n. However. it is to be realized that if the major portion of the failure surface
is coatained in stratum I , the bearing capacity of the foundation would be detennined
primariiJ by the undrained shear s..-ngth of stratum I. Figu"" 8.4 depicts a failure surfacein
stpotifi<:d soil.
Fallure
surface In sntum u
= 0)
q (n) = q(N, - I ) + 0.5sy'BN1
(8.2)
where.
q ; effective surcharge at the foundation level,
r' = effective unit weight of the soil below the foundation.
8 = width of foundation,
N" N1 = bearing capacity factors (see Chapter 6). and
s = shape factor (0.5-1.0).
(c) Soil lrnvlng both c and ;
The general bearing capacity equation given in I.S. 6403-1981 may be used to determine
the bearing capacity of soils having both c and ;.
(8.3)
The shape, depth. and inclination factors to be used in Eq. (8.3) are given in Table 8.1. The
effect of water level should be taken into account in determining the values of q and y '.
N(', N., and Nr are functions of the angle of shearing resistance of the soil obtained from
laboratory tests or from empirical c.orrelation with the field standard penetration resistance, N
(for details. sec Chapter 6).
Copyrighted material
Far:sors
Slwp~ facto rs
Valla!
~)
( J + 0.2
for rectangle
'
(1
+ 0.2
.Z,)
for reelan&)t
,,
d~plh
factors
d,
+0.2~ an(4S'+ i)
I + 0.1
1 for
~tan( 45 +
t}
for
~ > JO
< 10
Jndlnalion foctor:r
(I - ~)
,,
from the ultimate bearing capacity. the net allowable bearing capacity of a foo ting,
QaJJ(n), is obtained as
qau(n) --
q,. (n)
where. F
= factor of safety
8 .2 .3
(8.4)
(normally 2.5-3.0).
The effect of ground water mble on the bearing capacity of shallow foundations has been
discussed in Chapter 6.
The effective s urcharge. q at the foundation level is to be determined by using the
appropriate density (bulk or submerged) of the soil above the founda tion level. For ground
woter table coinciding with the ground surface. submerged density is to be used for the full
depth of soil above founda tion level. r' on the Olher hand, is lhe effective unil weight of the
soil below the fou ndation. As the failure zone extends to a depth approximately equal to the
width or footi ng, the effective unit weight within this zone is to be considered. For the water
~able at or above the foundation level. submerged density should be used while fo r the water
Copyrighted material
1
<D
o,
Ui
lo- B
iLU
r'
--oj
8.2.4 Settlement
Trial dimensions are chosen to accommodate the required footi ng as given by the allowable
bearing capacity of the footing. The settlement of the footing is then estimated for the actual
net foundation pressure, q,. given by,
q, =
-:---~':--,-
(8.5)
q,B (I - v 2 ) I
(8.6)
Area of footing
where,
(b) Consolidation
senle~nt
P~
where. C, /(1
H =
p0 =
tlp =
J1 =
C,
H log P. + l!.p
= J1""
L... J + <o
Pu
(8.7)
Copyrighted material
170
Th~ory
(8.8)
(8.9)
The depth correction and rigidity correction should be applied wherever applicable. If the
settlernen~ as estimated from the above, is within the permissible limits, the foundation may
be considered final. If not, the calculation should be repeated with revised footing dimensions
until the sen1emcnc criteria are satisfied.
Although settlement of footings on sand is generally small, unless the sand is loose
(N < 10)-it may be necessary to check the anticipated set~ement to see if it exceeds the
tolerable limits. As has been discussed in Chapter 7, the semi-empirical methods would be
preferable to any theoretical analysis (See subsection 7.4.2).
Some complications arise when two different kinds of soil (s.ay. sand and clay or vice
versa) fall within the inOuence zone. ln such cases, the set~ernent of the sand layer can be
obtained separately and added to the settlement caused by the clay strata. There is usually no
problem in determining the consolidation settlement of the relevant depth of clay strata using
appropriate expressions. However, if the clay stratum is of lesser thickness than the depth of
pressure bulb, the immediate settlement due to the clay layer may be overestimated. The
designer may apply his j udgment in evaluating the immediate settlement of individual stratum
giving due importance to the relative contribution of each stratum.
rr:=~;===-::-==~-;:==:-j
:r:r.~ ::
rn
:. :, r:.Gd
f'7A
! ,; P'7l
.~
~
r.Gf :, l
. _________
,} . . .......... ,)
l ........
. . .....
I :---- ;
I
'
r j
)..______
1:'
:.... .....:
:............: :
ll~ !
::
~-----*
Square
: ~ :
,----- I
!I
: ~! : ~ : 1
Rectangular
.~----':: 1
1
-------, ----
Property line
Fig. 8.6 Square and rectangutar footings.
Copyrighted material
Two or more columns in a building frame may be supported on a single footing. eithe.r
recmngular or trapezoidal when isolated footings tend to overlap or extend beyond the prope~~
1
line. If the allowable bearing pres..'\ure is known, the sjz.e of lhe footing may be determined for
a permissible settlement. In onder to get uniform bearing pressure. the footing should be so
proponioned that the resultant column loads pass through the centroid of the footing area.
Figure 8.7 shows typical combined footings of rccmngular and trapezoidal shape.
Cont>lned
::
:v
::
I
L_..!
Strip footing
AtJ ->WA
--- -----,-
, .-.
I
I
I
I
L - .-.
Brick wall
--.
I
I
I
I
I
I
__ I
Section AA
Copyrighted material
172 +
8 .2 .6
17~tory
tDterf~ce
effect
When a number of closely spaced colulllll$ ate required to be supported on ioolated footings,
the pressure bulbs under individual footings tend to overlap, as shown in Fig. 8.9. According
to Boussinesq stress analysis, the pressure bulb below a footing extends to a distance of 812
on either side of the footing (where B is the width of footing). If two adjacent footings come
to within a distance B from each other, the pressure bulbs overlap and the soil below the
depth. D behaves as if it is loaded by a combined footing. The settlement or the footing as
determined for an isolated foundation is no longer valid. The effect or superposition or
stresses should be taken into account in estimating the settlement. Appropriate stress analysis
for adjacent footings, taking into consideration the interfen:oce effec~ may be done to obtain
the soil stresses for calculation of settlement.
.J
IC
tl+-s-ol,
f
\
~I{
tl- s-..1,\
,jo
I
\
' ... __ ..
'
"
I
/
I\\
'
I
I
In order to ensure the behaviour of footings as isolated footings, the spacing between
adjacent footings should not be less than the width of footing. If the footing size varies, the
spacing between footings should be equal to the width or the larger footing.
angular distortion between adjacent footings are kept within pennissib1e limits or
interconnected beams may be provided at the foundation )eve) to increa..(iC the rigidity Of the
foundation.
Copyrighted material
The basic factors which affect the settlement of footings on a given soil are the
intensity of loading and the size of the loaded area. The settlement increases in almost direct
proportion to these parameters. It is a common experience that even though the foundation
pressure is the same under all footings. a bowl shaped defonnation trough is obtained with
greater settlement at the centre than along the edges of the building mainly due to greater
load in the central columns and the overlapping of stresses from adjacent footi ngs. Hence. to
produce uniform settlement, it may be necessary to adjust the pressure with size of footing,
that is, to impose greater pressure under smaller footings than under larger ones and also to
use larger pressure under the footings along the edge of the building. The principle was
utilized in the CB 1 Esplanada Building, Sao Paulo which was founded on moderately
c.ompact fine to medium sand. A pressure of 550 kN/m2 was used under the outer footings
and 400 kN/m2 under the inner footings. with the result that the maximum differential
settlement did not exceed 8 mm (Skemp<on, 1955). So. the bearing pressure of footings in a
building frame may be varied though it is always kept within the safe bearing capacity so as
to have the maximum and differential settlement within permissible limits. This may require
a number of trials before the final design is arrived at. A simple calculation for achieving
unifonn settlement of adjacent footings is shown in Example 8.4.
A satisfactory method of reducing the differential settlement of footings in a building
frame is to provide interconnected beams between columns at the foundation level. A framed
structure is tied laterally. from fin;t noor onwards, by beams and s labs but no such
connection is generally provided at the foundation level. Consequently, the individual
footings can settle differentially. Providing interconnected beams increases the rigidity of the
foundarion and differential senlement is substantia1ly reduced. An approximate way of
analysis would be to estimate the settlement of individual footings as isolated/strip footings
and then to design interconnected beams to resist the bending moment at the joints due to the
differential settlemenL For more accurate design. theoretical analysis of the building frame
may be done with predetermined sections of the interconnected beams and footings.
Figure 8. 10 shows a typical strip foundation with interconnected beams.
D D ~~;AS:,-~I
D Ej
tJ D d b
I
Sedion AA
.JA
Strip
-""
lnterc:onnecled
beam
_;r
j_p
ww
Slrip
Copyrighted material
174
D~.sign
00
(a) Coh<+
lltess soil
q
Edge
be
(b)
s may
velY large
l ive soli
p
the footing area while for combined footings, 1 e shape and dimensions of the footing are to
Copyrighted material
shear forces and bending movement for the appropriate suppOn conditions. For isolated
foolings. the cantilever bending moment at the column face will normally determine the
amount of reinforcement to be provided. In case of combined footings, the design is a simply
supported beam with overhang on both sides whiJe a strip footing is designed as a continuous
beam with support at the column locations.
8 .3
A raft foundation usually covers the entire area of the building, thereby distributing the total
load to a larger area than a footing foundation and reduces the bearing pressure to a
minimum. The choice between a raft and a footing foundation depends on the soil properties
and the weight of the building. If a preliminary design wilh footing foundations reveals that
the sum of the footing areas required to s uppon the. structure exceeds 60% of the total
building area, a raft foundation covering the entire area of the building should be preferred.
Moreover, where the soil properties vary largely throughout the site, the amount of
differential settlement may be excessive for a footing foundation, but with a raft foundation
the effect of weak zones scattered at random tend to even out. Therefore, the settlement
pattern is Jess erratic and the differential settlement is also reduced considerably. Also. a raft
fou ndation provides increased rigidity which reduces the differential movement of the
superstructure.
(a ) Conventioaal raft
In conventional raft (refer Chapter 4. Fig. 4.7) foundation, a flat concrete slab of uniform
thickness covering the entire area of a building is placed at some deplh beneath the ground
surface and the columns are built directly on the raft. Then backfilling is done upto the
ground level. This is followed by further fi lling, called the plinth filling, on which the
ground floor slab is placed. The ground floor load, therefore, goes to the raft by direct
bearing through the plinth and backfill.
Figure 8.12 shows some typical rafl foundalions. The columns may be placed directly
on the s lab or 1he slab may be thickened under large column loads 10 give sufficient s1rength
agains l shear and support moment. Rigidity of the raft foundation may be increased by
cellular construccion or rigid beam and s lab construction. Figure 8.13 shows a simple raft
foundation for the fourteen-storeyed block of tlars at Golden Lane, London (Skemplon,
1955).
Copyrighted material
t.
LlJJJ, J:WJJ ~
.---,.
B- B
A- A
E-E
E
''
-..
---.---.---.
---..J
.... .........
...'' ..'' ..
.
-:-~ -- --, -:-~~~.
';:.-.-. :-------,
Average gross
pressure under
raft: 190 kNim2
Clay
.2m
II
- L
. 13.4m
-~ . 1:!i/E
1:;;
London clay
Fi.g. 8.13 Raft foundation for Golden Lane ftats. LondOn ($kempton, 1955).
Copyrighted material
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _:..;
F.ootings nnd Raft Design 177
(b)
\Vith 1he incru.5Cd number of tall buildings now being buill for vanous commerei:d and
residential putpOSeS, rafl foundauons bavc been CO\'Coiendy combu!Cd Wllh !he: principle of
fkxlllluon. Buoyancy rafts (refer Chopccr 4, Fig. 4 .8), wnh or without ba!cmcnt. an: placed at
some depth beneath the around surface. but no backfilling is done on the raft. A struc1ural slab
is made. usually a linlc above the ground level to serve as the ground Roor of !he: building. The
space between the ground floor slab and the raft is kept void such that the net foundU~ion
pressure gets rtduced and remains within the permissible bearing pressure on the foundation.
That
is.
(8.10)
< q,.t{rr)
SPace
When a buoyancy ron has sufficient bead room below !he: around Roor lab. the
may be utilized u basement Roor below the ground. Although a ba!cment is. in effect. a
buoyancy raft. it is not necessarily designed for the purpose. The main function of a
basement is to provide addlt.lonaJ floor space in the buildlna and the fact that it n:duees !he:
net bearina pressure may be quite incidenllll. A buoyancy raft may, ho"'-ever, be designed
solely for the purpose of providing suppon to !he: slnl<:ture and to reduce the ta<al and
differential settlements within permissible limits.
8.3.2
Beartn& Capacity
The mechanism or benring capacity failure of raft foundation is similar co that of footings.
except that the former involves 11 much bigger and deeper zone or foilure.
The net ulcimnte bearing capacity of a roft foundation Qu1,(n) is. therefore~ given by the
same expressions ns or Footings, as illustrated by Eqs. (8. 1H8.3). However. rnn foundmions
being much larger than Footings. the pressure bulb ns well as the failure surface extend to
considernble depth below the foundation. A typical raft foundation on nonnnl Cnleuun soil is
shown in FiJ. S. J4. As 1een. more than one s-rnnum with different shear paramete.rs are
involved. A weighted a\erage strength or the strength or the most predomjnant strarum
within the failure zor.e may be used to detennine the bearing capacity.
8 .3 .3 Settlement
The immedtate and eonsoltdauon settlements of raft foundations on clay are obtamed an the
same manner IS for fOO<on&S. see Eqs. {8S) and {8.6). The <Ompt'eSSIOD Of all !he: stralll within
!he: signifocont depth below !he: foundation are to be calculated separately and !he: summation of
all these seulements woll give the ta<al settlement of the foundation. Use or Eq. (8.6) to
calculate the immeduue sculement presumes that the subsoil behaves as homogeneous. isotropic.
e.lastic medium. In case of non homogeneouslstr.ttified deposit. this is somewhat approximate.
but is often accepted for practical purposes. More rigorous analysis. taking into account the
variation of subsoil properties. can also be done. Depth correction Is no1 slanificant for raft
t u, righted materio1l
~-~'-i~~~~'~;;;t;;:;j;;;,;J;;:~t~lt":.;,~o..;:;!;..cca!~
, btcw.nlsh gtoy silty day:
'
'I
:~....
I
'
',
\\
... ... ___ ....... ,.. ' ~
"
.;
l
t
1 4-----~~----------------------+
~~~~
\
Ill Firm bluish
1
,
18 _____
_,'t-- - - - - - -- --_,,:./_7
,
',
caJcareous nodUles:
slit: N
=12
~ ----------~------------~--------' ....... ,
,..,/
v Mottfied brown
.......--
--
......
$llty clay:
+ Ito)
= 0.06
25----------------~~~---------------
=0
This condilion can be achieved by excavating the soil to such a depth that the weight of
soil removed is equal to the weight of the building. including lha1 of the substructure. This
principle can be adopced to construct even multistorey buildings on very soft clay by taking
the found.stion to the desired depth and providing one or more basement floors below the
ground surface.
Though examples of fully floating foundation (i.e.. zero net pressure) are of1en found,
it is only in exceptional cases that such a foundalion is necessary. An excellent example of
almost a fully buoyant foundation is the New England Mutu~l Life Insurance Building in
Bos10n. Massachussets (Casagrande 3nd Fadum, 1942). The building covers an area of
104 m x 6 1 m and consists of one 10-storcy section with two 2rstorey :and two 4~storey
sections to be supported on a soil containing 2 1 m of very soft Boston blue clay. The
construc.tion of a 10.7 m basement has been found to be extremelY successful even with such
differential loading. Out of a total senlemem of 62.5 mm (including the resettlement of the
he:wed soil). more than 35 mm occurred during c.onstruction of foundation. The long-term
Copyrighted material
iC!J8\CW P'JILJ6pAdO:::J
174 Theory and Practice of Foundation Design
8 .2 .8
Structural designing of footings is mostly done by the conventional 'rigid' method. Hen:. the
footing is assumed to be infinitely rigid so that the displacement of the footing does not
affec.t che pressure distribution. However, in actual practice. the pressure distribution below a
footing depends on the footing rigidity and the soil type. In loose sand, the soil near the
edges of the fOOting tends to displace laterally whereas the soil towards the inside nemains
confined. Cohesive soU has high shear stress conc-entration near the edges which leads to local
yielding even at high factor of safety against bearing capacity failure. Bowles (1988)
indicates the probable pressure distribution beneath rigid footings for different soil types.
nefer Fig. 8.11.
p
DO
W
QU t f f t~ l ~~
Fig. 8.11
iC!J8iCW P'Jilj6pAdO:::J
Footings curd Raft Design 173
The basic factors which affect the settlement of footings on a give.n soil arc the
intensi<y of loading and 1he size of the loaded area. The senlement increases in almost direct
proportion to these parameters. It is a common experie.nce lhat even though the foundation
pressure is the same under all footings, a bowl shaped defonnation 1rough is obtained with
greater settleme-nt at the centre than along the edges of the building mainly due to greater
load in the central columns and the overlapping of stresses from adjacent footings. Hence, to
produce uniform settlement. it may be necessary to adjust the pressure with size of footing,
that is. to impose greater pressure under smaller footings than under larger ones and also to
use larger pressure under the footings along the edge of the building. The principle was
u1ilized in the CB I Esplanada Building, Sao Paulo which was founded on moderately
compact fine to medium sand. A pressure of 550 kN/m2 was used under the OUler f()()(ings
and 400 k.N/m2 under the inner footings, with the result that the maximum differential
settlement did no< exceed 8 mm ($kempton, 1955). So, lhe bearing pressure of footings in a
bu.ilding frame may be varied though it is always kept within the safe bearing capacity so as
to have the maxjmum and differential settlement within permissible limits. This may require
a number of Dials before the finaJ design is arrived at. A simple caJculation for achieving
unifonn settlement of adjacent footings is shown in Example 8.4.
A satisfactory method of reducing the differential settlement of footings in a building
frame is to provide interconnected beams between columns at the foundation level. A framed
slructure is tied laterally, from firs! floor onwards, by beams and slabs but no such
connection is generally provided at the foundaHon level. Consequently. the individual
footings can settle differentially. Providing inten:onnec<ed beams increases the rigidity of the
foundation and differential settlement is subscantially reduc-ed. An approximate way of
analysis would be 10 estimate the settlement of individual footings as isolated/strip footings
and then to design interconnected beams to resist tbe bending moment at the joints due to lhe
differential settlement. For more accurate design. theoretical analysis of the building frame
may be done with predetermined sections of the interconnected beams and footings.
Figure 8.10 shows a 1ypical s:aip foundation with interconnected beams.
D D -~;dk,]~~
D EJ
0 L! D D
I
Section AA
_JA
Strip
lnterooonec::te'
,.....
1/
1---
beam
F~. 8.10
~ ~ ~
f-
Strip
settlemenlS due 10 consolidotion of the clay were reduced as can be seen from the very flat
slope of !he settlement curve in Fig. 8.1S.
0
'
(ye~rs)
9 10
,.-
,\
Muimum dl'**'lill
t'-...
1\.
f'
lr Mo>*num
75
Flg. 8.15
S e - ol ~ -
Life -
FacO.wn. 1942~
~.....
i
~
Pan Plan
0~
Fll
Brown Lonc:lon clay
1 ~m
I~
20
""""'
(grooal
....,_, day
6$ m 'ThlnM land
Flg. 1.16 8uoyoncy ...~ -
for High
1956).
edrr"
Boiler house
.AIIutar tllf'l
70 m x 100m
6mJ
~lDI
Turt:line house
F=
"
~ o.sm
rom
Fig. 8.17 Celular raft founda!lon for Cosslpore " " - Sta!lon, calcutta (Skempton,
1 955~
When the height of a building varies, it is possible to combine rafts under the heavier
part with footings under the lighter pan of the building. A good example of this is fou nd in
the Thomas Edison Building, Sao Paulo, refer Fig. 8.18, where a reinforced concrete mat
with foundation girders connecting all columns was provided under the twenty onc-sto rey
section of the building while s pread footi ngs were provided for the ten-storey block. The
maximum settlement at the end of construction was only 15 mm (Rios and P. Silva, 1948).
21
10
Depth (m)
4.9m
~~:j~
--.,::=-=::&---!
-~"':-!"'::"----! 10
Fig. 8.18 Combined raft and fooling foundalion for Thomas Edison Building, Sao Paulo
(Rios and P. Silva, 1948).
Copyrighted material
or
...
Property
Building line
Chase few
mm
Part< street
cable
vault
Approx. 7 m
Mud
lOOm
mat
Fig. 1!1.19 t.1urtiple basement for AJ)any telephone building (Giossop, 1972}.
Analysis of buoyancy ran foundation in normal Calcutta soil g.ives some interesting
observations. For a typkal 10 m x 20 m raft. the net foundation pressure is to be rcstricled
to 40 kN/m 2 to keep the senlement within the permissible limit of 125 mm (IS 1904: 1966).
According.ly, the depth of foundation for different gross foundation pressures can be
calculated. Table 8.2 gives the relevant data. II is clear that one, two, or three levels or
basement may be provided within the depth of foundalion to restrict the net foundation
press ure to 40 kN/m2 for eight. twelve, and sixteen-storey buildings respectively. That means,
four upper s toreys can be buill for e::ach basement floor for buildings beyond four s10rcys
high.
Tabl ~
4.0
qiWf q,_ -
ro,
q~
No. of
(tlm'l
s1orqs
4-0
..
No. of
basem~nl
10.0
3.3
4.1
16.0
6.6
4-1
12
22.0
10.0
4.0
16
jiDOrs
Copyrighted material
8 .3 .6
A ro.n foundation can be structurally designed in the same way as the reinforced concrete
floors of a framed building. However. in a foundation raft, the floor is inverted so that its
dead weight can be subtracted from the upward soil reaction.
Ks
In the simplified elastic method, lhe soil is assumed to consist of infinite number of clastic
springs each ac.ting independently. The Winkler model is (."Onsidcrcd valid. The springs are
assumed to be able to resist both tension and compression while the soil defonnation is
considered proportional to the pressure . The elastic constant of the springs is determined by
the coefficient of subgrade re,aclion or the soil (defined as the unit pressure required to
produce unit settlement). The analysis is carried out following the concept of beam on elastic
foundation , the rigorous analysis for which was done by Hetenyi (1946). The raft is
considered a.s a plate and the column loads arc distributed in the surrounding areas in the
zone of influence. The bending moment and shear force are calculated for each column point
and the data are superimposed to obtain the moment and shear for the raft foundation.
American Concrete Institute has recommended a procedure for design (ACI 1966, 1988).
Computer programs are now available to C-il.rty out the comple~ ma h~Yi~~~-~8uli\tffit 1
rnr
practical use. Finite element fonnulation can also be used to work out a computer program.
Given the scope of this book. the details are not discussed here.
Example 8.1
An isolated column in a building frame. with a column grid of 3.5 m X 3.5 m carries a
superimposed load of 450 kN. The subsoil condition is shown in Fig. 8.20. Design a suitable
square footing for the column.
450kN
Depth (m)
Fl
r=
c.,
18 kNim3
=0.05
r = 18 kNfm'
c., = 25 kNffnZ
C,/(1 sol = 0.16
12--------------------------------Ill 8tul$h
silty
with kankar
grey
day
r 19 kNtm'
c., = 60 kNfml; CcJ(1 So} = 0 .10
16
=2 m x 2 m
450
2
q..,=2 x2 = 112.5 kN/m
v,= 2m
Solution
(a) Bearing capociry
N,
= 5(t + 0.2
~)(1 + 0.2 ~)
= 7.2
Failure surface lies in Slnllum I. Hence, take c, = 40 kN/m2.
Copyrighted material
Qu11(n)
= c.,N~
: 40
7.2
= 288 kN/m
~. r.
288
112.5 = 2 '56 > 2 ' 5
q. = 11 2.5 kN/m2
B=2m
v = 0.5
IP<~"'>
= 1.12
=600c. =600 X
32
= 19,200 kN/m2
n. Therefore. weighted
average
is
...
c =
40
and
p,
2 + 25
= 32 kNim'
= qB o - v')l,
=
112.5 X 2
19,200
0.75
1.12
= 0.0098 m
Depth correc.tion (Fig. 7.3)
.fi.i
-LB
and
=1
=1
Pr = "" C, H lo P. + llp
L... I + "o
g
Po
Influence zone extends to depth of 4 m below footing, that is, 2 m in stratum I and 2 m in
Copyrighted material
2 I
( 44 + 67.5 ) +0. 16 x2 1og 60 + 16.9)
p,. - 005
. xxog
(
44
60
= (0.041 + 0.034) m
= 0.075 m
Depth correction = 0.73
Pore~pressure
correction, J1 = 0.7
=0.038 m = 38 mm
ToU\1 seulemenl, p1 = 7 + 38 = 45 mm
The foundation is therefore adequa1e
Example 8.2
Design a slrip foundation for !he column row C in the building frame shown in F1g. 8.21.
The soil data are also given in the figure.
Oeplh (m)
0
1
";i~~~~
I Brownish grey silty clay
-l~~
,' lc 2.5 m .-l'~---r-;_19k
Ni,;,---E
'
\
+A
___
_ ..._
0.06
35 kNfm
Cc/(1 + Oo)
tv =
+ B
,'
' ,,
...... __ ...,.,/
.;:
r = 18kNim!
Cv = 20 kNfm2
C,/(1 + ~Jo) = 0.15
-~ '~--~~~~--~
1
4@ 3.5 m
12--------------~--------------(b)
(OJ
Fig. 8.21
Copyrighted material
186
. . q," =
27 50
= 65 kN/m2
17 X 2.5
SoluJion
(a) Bearing capacity
N, =
s(l
+ 0.2
t )(1
s(1
+ 0.2
1)(1
+ 0.2
25
+ 0.2
n
~;)
= 5.6
: 35
5.6
= 196 kN/m2
Failure zone is resuicted in stratum I. Hence, take c.. of stratum I.
Fs
= 196
65
q 11 = 65 kN/m2
8
= 2.5 m
v = 0.5
lp =(for UB = 17125 = 6.8) 2 .32
E = 600 c. = 600 x 26 = 15,600 kN/ m2
Influence zone extends to 2 m in suatum I nnd 3 m in stratum II. Therefore. wejghted
;:~vcroge.
35 + 3 X 20
= 26 kN/m2
5
And
q.B (l - v}'t
65 X 2.5
,
15 600
0.75
2.32
= 0.0 18 m
Copyrighted material
187
Depth correction:
- =L
8
17
= 6.8
2.5
JL8
1.5
,)2,5
J.7
= 0.23
""
C,
L...1
+ t>.o
Two layers (I and If) are involved in the pressure influence zone.
At
At
B: Po
= 19 x
...
= 004
.
=49 kN/m2
21
og
28 + SS.2
0 IS
+ .
21
49 + 27.3
49
= O.Q38 + 0.058 m
= 0.096 m
Depth correction
= 0. 95
(Major contribution to settlement comes from strata I and II. Hence. J1 correction for N.C.
clay is considered.)
..
..
Total setdement. p1
= 17 + SS = 72
mm < 75 mm
Example 8.3
A column carrying a superimposed load of 1500 kN is to be founded in a medium sand as
Copyrighted material
N {Biow>/30 em)
Depth (m)
o--------~ ~~~----~~~~r;
18kNim3
2 --,.-,,..-----,
,. . ."'.
-5m
Nu., = 15
Average N value,
f =
34 (Eq. (2.5))
N, = 30
N1 = 41
qftll!f.=
"
_1500
_ = 240 kN/m'
2 5 25
Solution
(a) Bearing capaciry
= (J8
2(30- I)
1.2
1.15
1.0) + (0.5
2.5
41
0,8
1.15
1.0)
= 1440 + 424
2
= 1864 kN/m
Fs =
1864
= 7.8 > 2.5
240
(b) Settlement
fl log Pn + l!.p
Po
Copyrighted material
p. = 18
l!.p
2 + 9
6 =
2.3 X 58.5
I 58.5 + 84
5 og 58.5
x
10,650
=0 .024 m
= 24 mm
EXample 8.4
Three columns in a building frame spaced 4 m apart carry vertical superimposed loads of
500 kN, 720 kN and 600 kN. Design suitable isolated footings for the columns for equal
settlement. Subsoil condition is shown in Fig. 8.23.
Depth (m)
o --------~RI
~-------,-.~t7
s 7k~Nhn~,------
m~ = 0.0005 m'lkN
19 kNim1
c;.. 90 """"'
0.0003 m21kN
-10----------=....::;=:.:.::..=-----m..
Solution
Approximate q.,,(n) of slr.ltum I
= cll/Nt:
= 40 X 6.0 = 240 kN/m2
qo~,(n)
.
= 240
25
Choosing approximate fOOting size accordingly and carrying out detailed analysis.
Column A
Take footing size = 2.2 m x 2.2 m
Area
= 4.84
m2
500
2
q..,. = = 103.3 kN/m
4. 84
Copyrighted material
: 5( 1 + 0.2
1
) (1 + 0.2
22
1)
= 6.55
Qun(n) = cMN('
: 40
6.55
= 262 I<N/m2
262
. = 2.54 > 2.5
103 3
Fs =
(b) Immediate senlemelll
q. = 103.3 I<N/m2
8
= 2.2
v = 0.5
lp = 1.12
E = 700 x 40 = 28,000 kN/m2
P; = q.EB (I - v 2) / P
: 103.3 X 2.2
28,000
= 0.007 m
0. 75
1.1 2
Depth correction:
JL.B = 2 =0.5
L
= 1.0
p, = Drr,t,pH
At A:
l'lp (for
Copyrighted material
..
Pt- = m.,tjpH
: 0.05
36.5
4.4 = 0.080
ffi
p1 = 6 + 48 = 54 mm
Column B
Take footi ng size of 3 m x 3 m
Area =9m 2
q,.. =
720
= 80 kN/m2
9
N,
= 5( + 0 .2
= 5(1
~ ) (I + 0.2
+0 .2
1
2
9)<I+ 0.2)
= 6.4
qulc(n) = C11N~
: 40
6.4
= 256 kNtm'
Fs
= ~
80 =32
.
q.
= 89
kNtm'
8 =28m
v = 0.5
Ip(..,ey
= 1.12
40 x 4 + 2 x 80
= 53 kN/m2
Influence. zone extends approximately to 4 m in stralum I and 2 m in stratum II. Therefore.
Copyrighted material
Practic~
of Foundation
=700 x
Pr =
q/
D~sign
=37,000 kN/m2
53
(I - vl)IP
80 X J
37,000
0 .75
1.12
= 0.0054
. Depth coJTection:
L = I
B
D
JLB
= 0.33
..
..
Consolidation
settJ~ment
Pc = Lm~~6.pH
= (0.0005
= 0.074 + 0.006
for point B(Z/B = 1.67), 6p = 0.12 x 80 = 96 kN/m2
= 0.080 m
Depth correction
= 0.9
Pore-pressure correc1ion
= 0.7
2.5 m, and
area = 6.25 m2
q.,
2
= 6600
_ = 96 kN/m
25
Sellltm~nt
p, = 5 mm
p, =SOmm
Pt =5 +50 =55 mm
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
File Foundations
9.1
IN'fRODUCTION
Piles arc relatively long and slender structural members used to transmit foundation loads
throu~ soil of low bearing capacity to deeper strata (soil or rock) having high bearing
capacity. They are also used in normal ground conditions to resist uplift and lateral forces.
The principal uses of piles are:
I. To carry vertical compression load from builclings, bridges, and so on.
2 . To resist horizontal or inclined loads by retaining wall, bridge pier, water front
structures and structures subjected to wind or seismic loads.
( 3. To resist uplift forces in transmission towers and underground structures below water
table.
'
Piles are described as end bearing piles and friction piles depending on the manner in which
the load is transmitted into the surrounding soil. These can be defined as follows:
~
If the pile rests in a hard and relatively incompressible suatum, for example, rock or
dense sand/gravel, the pile derives most of its carrying capacity from end bearing at the pile
tip. Such piles are called end bearing or pcint-bearing piles. Figure 9. 1(a) depicts endbearing piles. The soft compressible layer through which the pile passes may not carry any
significant load by side friction.
0
t t
Soft orouod
Soil propeftieS
imp!O'Ing with depth
but no ftnn ground
Is reached
Frm ground
{a) End bearing pie
Copyrighted material
9 .2
CLASSIFICATION
(a) TimiHr pihs: In India, timber piles arc mostly made up of sal l!Ce l!Unks and arc'
called salballah piles. These arc commonly available in length between 4-6 m. with
diameter nonging from 15-25 em. These may be suitable where good bearing sl!atum
is available at a relatively shallow depth. Now a days. use of timber piles is
restricted due to the necessity for preservation of forests.
(b) ConcrtU piles: Concrete piles are either precast or castinsitu. Pr~casr piles may
be of various shapes but are normally suitable for short lengths. These piles should
be adequately reinforced to have sufficient structural strength to withstand handling
stresses. With precast pi les~ it is possible to have good control on quality as they arc
cast on the ground before installation.
Castin-situ concrete piles are commonly used where relatively long and large
diameter piles with or without enlarged bases are required to support heavy loads.
(c) Stu/ pihs: These arc usually of tolled H sections or pipe sections. These piles may
be used where less disturbance from driving is desired. H-piles and steel sheet piles
are commonly used to support venical sides of open exc-avation. Steel sheet piles are
also used to provide seepage barrier.
Copyrighted material
9.2.2
(a) Drit~tn pil~s: These may comprise of timber, steel. or preca.~t concrete. The piles
are driven by the impact of a hammer or by vibrations induced by a vibratory
hammer.
When n pile is driven inro the soil, i1 displaces a volume of the soil equal to the
volume of the pile. So. these piles are also called disp/acemem piles. In granular
soils. the driving operation densities the soil and increases strength of the soil in the
vicinity. When piles are driven in saturated clay, the soil instead of being compacted
gets remoulded often with reduction of strength. The soil, however, regains strength
with time due 10 consolidation and thixotropic hardening. Because of the
displacement of soil by !he piles, !here may be ground heaving around the piles.
/"~Jso, driving of piles impartS vibratjon to surrounding soil. which in some cases.
' may be detrimental to struciUres located very close to the site.
(b) Driven c4st-in-silu-pilts: These piles are also a kind of driven pile. Steel casing is
J driven into !he ground wi!h a shoe a! the bonom. The hole is then filled up with
concrete, and the casing is gradually lifted as the concrete is poured.
(c) Bo,..d piltf: These piles are formed in prebored holes in !he ground either using a
casing or by circulation of a drilling Ouid, such as bentonite slurry. Concrete is
poured into the hole by displacing benloni!C and then gradually lifting !he casing.
f'
'i
Bored piles are nolldisplacement piles and may be used when pile driving is
detrimental to adjoining structures.
9 .3
figure 9.2 shows a typical load seulemen! diagram for a pile under gradually increasing load.
At small dcform~tjons. say upt'O the point A in the figure. the piJe,..soil system behaves
elastically. as indicated by !he linear load ' 'ersus scttlemcm relationship. Up1o !his poin!. !he
entire load is carried by skin frictio n and there is virtually no transfer of load to the pile tip.
\Vith more deformation. the pile shaft carries more frictional fon,-es while a part of the load
is transferred to the pile tip also. At 8 , the pile tip carries the ma.ximum skin friction that
can be mobilized in the soil. Therefore. funhcr increase of load on the pile is carried out at
the pile tip and the pile is said to have failed, at C. when the tip lood has also re:~ched its
Copyrighted material
II
!!
"
202 TJreory and Pracn'ce of Fomula1itm Design
maximum value. Thus. the load c.arrying cap ily of a pile may be determined from separate
evaluation of the ultimale skin friction and t ultimate base resistance.
o1
I
Tolal
Oispl~nt --+
Fig. 9.2 Load settl
t relalionshlp ol plies.
Thus.
where
'
wp- w,
Q is the load carrying capacity of
pile.
e pile shaft,
In general. w. and W, are small in relation to QP and their differences even smaller. Thus.l
for practical purposes
Q, = Q, Q.
(9.2) ~Therefore. it is apparent, that full mobili 'on of Q1 and QP are primruily dependent on
the movement of the pile in the soil (refer Fi . 9.2). Cooke (1974), and Cooke and Price
(1973) have shown that. for an clastic soil, ful mobilization of skin friction in a cylindrical
pile occurs at vertical displacement of O.S-1% of the pile diameter. On the other hand, full
mobilization of base resistance requires a muc greater ddormation-even upto 20% of the
base diameter (Whitaker. 1976). This suggcs that skin friction is mobilized almost fully
before any appreciable base resistan<-e develo in the soil. Therefore, the entire problem of
load distribution through piles has to be \'iew as a pi~e-soil interaction where the response
of the soil to a given deformation in terms of 'n friction and end bearing has to be taken
into account.
An evaluation of the zone of soil that is i nuenccd by piling is important to detcnnine
the soil propenics that come into play in resi ting the movement of the pile in the soil.
Meyerhof (1959) and Kerise1 (1961) consider+ the influence zone as shown in Fig. 9.3.
According to Meyerhof (1959), the shear zone~ the base causing beruing capacity failure of
the soil e"tends to !\Qme distance above the
tip. The zone of skjn friction may extend
laterally to a distance of three to fou r times the iameter of the pile while compaction of lhe
pile m11y occur upto a distance of five to six mes the diameter. Cooke and Price (1973)
have. however, observed that displacement of
soil may extend to a radial distance of ten
pili
thl
Copyrighted material
Pile Fount/Qtions
+ 203
diameters around the pile. Pile driving cause.~ significant changes in dte soil within the zone
of influence. Therefore, it is important to study the various fac.tors that affect the soil during
piling.
p
..
are also reinforced to increase column strength and also to resist moment that may have
developed due to horizontal load or eccentricity of vertical loads. Reinforcements are also
fielpful in resisting tensile stresses that may develop due to heave resulting from driving of
adjacent piles in clay.
9 .4 .2
The static analysis relates the shear strength of the soil to the skin friction along the pile
shaft and end bearing at the pile tip. The carrying capacity of a pile is given by the sum of
the ultimate bearing capacity of the soil at lhe pile tip and the ultimate adhesion between the
pile and the surrounding soil, (refer Fig. 9.2).
(9.3)
Copyrighted material
Driven pil~s: When n pile is driven into a cohesive soil, two effects of pile driving become
significant.
J
The clay is displaced laterally and in an upward direction, resulting in a ground heave.
The soil close to the pile shafl gets disiUrbed to cause remoulding of the clay. This may lead
to considerable loss in strength of the soil. This has been discussed by Flame (1972! who
observed appreciable increase in wate r content and corresponding reduction of shear strength
of the soil between two adjacent driven piles in clay. With time. soft clay regains this
strength either completely or partially by thixotropic haroening (Skempton and Northey,
1952). A corresponding increase in load carrying capacity of the pile with time is shown in
Fig. 9.4 (Tomlinson. 1994). On the other hand. in stiff c lays, extensive crocking or the soil
occurs during pile driving. Clay in the upper part of the pile breaks away from the shaft and
nury 11ever regaitr contact with it (fomlinson, l977). Thus, the effect of pile driving on thilt
shear strength of the clay differs with the soil consistency. Considerable gain in strength may
be observed with time in sofl clays while no appreciable effect may be noted in stiff clays.
loor---~~-r~~-rfTTr----ll--~r-Tllfrn-=::=t~J=
r.- .-~-~-ffl1l1
2
'5ll-:;200;;;;-:-,-'.;2~15;-:m:m:-'cooae:::::::t::.-ttt-----t--tp-t-.:;le.f:fTt.r.~~"~=-.-~--~--..-. .-. t-..-..t.-..t.-t.r.t:-.11.H 25 o;
=
-~
(Gothooburg)
.....
. .- - - ...
E
-200
-r-::::"'::;;-~~~"'+""f+l+t-tt---t-HH+t+tl20lt50
.- - ... . . ~- ....
15
30
'ln......
.. .... ~.,..
t- ~50 x
f
v
150 mm tal)e(ed
.Wt00'f-:~~;_'~1-..,./?l-<4-++++l-..:1imbe:::=:::'..:1::0...
::::;m;:m:::en~)'-..--~-----i--l--HH+i+l to ~
:If
50
l0 /
150 mm (8 in) steel
/ ~ 125 mm t-Beam+---~,:"'::be:::.;I:::S:.;;...:,Fra;.::;:na:;:;co:;)T-----I--+-+-++++H 5
o /~ lG~~i:1'2h
1
r rr --,_
10
50
tOO
500
a>
tOGO
Gain in load carrying capacity with time of driven piles in soft clay (Tomlinson. 1994).
High porcprcssure is developed in the c lay due to pile driving fo rces. This porepressure often takes time to dissipate. When reconsolidation of the clay occurs, the soft clay
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
F,
1.1 - s inp
I
. ,. A,
= Pr -2
+ sm.,..
(9.4)
[, = kp tan 8
where
(9.5)
8 is
It poses extreme difficulties to seJec,t appropriate values of k and p. p is initially s mall due to
high porepressure developed during driving but its value soon increases with dissipation of
pore water pressure. In driven piles. k is also likely to be high initially because or the driving
forces whereas in bored piles, k will be small due to swelling of the soil. These values may
ulti mately attain some s tability after installation but uncertainties stiiJ remain regarding the
time required for drainage of the soil around the pile and about values of k and p that should
be applicable in a field situation. Burland made a further simplifying assumption that k = ko
(k0 is the coefficient or earth pressure at rest) and obtained the following expression for the
total shaft friction:
L
F, = JTB
(9.6)
Copyrighted material
[, = ac,
(9.7)
where'
driving may occupy a large part of the penetration depth. The average adhesion
factor would. accordingly, be low. For large penetration depth, the gap would be
small compared to the pile length and a higher average adhesion factor may be
adopted. Figure 9.S(c) shows the variation of adhesion factor with undrained shear
strength for piles in uniform clay.
(ii) If the pile is driven through a soft c lay with an underlying stiff clay, a skin of soft
c lay would b!: dragged into the gap formed near the lop of the stiff clay. This would
reduce the adhe.~ion over a cenain length of penetration depth into the stiff clay, the
effect being more predominant in the case of short penetration lengths. The
corresponding adhesion fac tors for different values of c" are shown in Fig. 9.S(b).
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
PU~
FoutulaJions 211
The unit skin friction, according to Eq. (9.1 0) varies linearly with depth along the pile
shaft. This is shown in Fig. 9.8. The total frictional reaistance for a pile of depth D1 can be
obtained as
(9.11)
K..-,
Dt
t~t~l
_},
_.,
1<7' O,tan I
flo. ~ -
In ploo -
Nnd.
where,
A1 is the amo of the pile shall In contaet with the soil and
y' D1 is the effective overburden JniSUre at the pile tip.
The values of K, and 6 as given by Broms (1966) are shown in Table 9. 1. While K, is
a furu:tion of the relative density of the soil. 6 is related to the angle of shearing resistance of
the soil and the nature of pile soil contact. In plies with liner. the sldn friction is even less
than direct soil-concrete friction and a reduced value of 6 should be used.
Tobie u
ltuiiJIIatiort IN!f/tod
P//t'-)U lrttttfact
I.S-2.0
S1t<Vsand
O.S~'-<1.7f
1.0-1.5
.......... <oncmclsand
0.7- 1.0
Cut-in-siN cona'ttdsand
0.8f-I.Of
I.Of
6.! ~
+ 100
UK
of the relationship
(9.12)
to dewmine the angle of pile soH friction ICCOUnting for the effect of pile driving, f being
the angle of shearing real StanCe prior to installation of the pile. However, a value of 6 greater
than ~ hould no< be used in view of the wide variation of driving methods in the field.
Tomlinoon (1977) hu indlea!ed a relationship between aventge unit skin friction and
relative density, bued on the reauh of actual pile !Old tesa. as depicted by Fig. 9.9.
According 10 litis relationohip, the skin friction auains 1 petk value of 107 kN!m' (10 !lmlj
foe high relotive density.
Hidden page
Hidden page
214
D~sign
10,000 .----.---.-----,-----r--,--,
02~5------~
30~----~35~------.~0~----~.~5------!
by dl~erent ln-tlga-.
It can be seen that Terzaghi (1943) gives the lower bound and De Beer (1970) gives
the upper bo<Jnd values of N,. Comparison of observed point resistances of piles in sand by
Nordlund (1969) and Vesic (1967) reveal that N 9 values established by Berezantzev et al.
( 1961) give better estimates of point resistance. Although N, values of Berezantzev are
dependent on the relative embedment depth DtfB, the variation is small. An average
Berezantzev curve has been given in IS 2911 (pan I, 1979), Fig. 9.12.
Copyrighted material
~-H~tHH+tH+tHK+t~trH+tH~Hi+rttH
~-rHH~++~~++.~Hit+~~t+~Hi+t~HH
o-+rrt+t+~HHbHRH~14+t++++++t+HHHHHH~HH
~-rHH~++~~++~Hit+HH~t++HHi+t~HH
10 -L~~~LLLUUUUUUU~~~~~~LUUUWU~WW
:zs.o
27.5
~.o
32.s
35.o
lw;Je or.~
37.5
-o.o
2.5
- ..... (~1. .)
.-
'5,o
t-nttov, 10&1 ~
z,
j_
9. 7
CRITICAL DEPTH
or friccionol
Hidden page
Pi/~
9 .8
Foundation., 217
The methods of dete-rmination of axiaJ Joad copac ity of driven and bored piles as described
earlier in the Chapter, make usc of the shear strength parameters of the soil as detennined
from laboratory testS. For cohesive soils. the undrained shear strength. c" can be detennined
from the field vane shear test also. For sensitive clays, in particular. sampling disturbances
may cause reduction of the cohesive strength of the soil. Vane test results may be
conveniently used in such cloys.
For cohesionless soil. the angle of shearing resistance of the soil is best determined
from the standard penetration te.~t. This test is performed at different depths within boreholes
and the average N value for a layer is related to the angle of shearing resistance. f .
A number of semi-empirical relationships have been proposed to obtain the skin friction
and end resistance direcdy from the standard penetration test and static cone penetration test.
Thorburn and MacVicar ( 1970), based on their experiences in Scotland, proposed an
empirical form ula for the evaluation of pile capaciry direcdy from the standard penetration
resiSUUICe of the sand as
Q. =
;:;
6" A1 + 4NA,
(9.19)
!annes
i r = average cone resiS"tance over the embedded length of the pile shaft. and
A1 = surface area of pile shaft in sq. m.
For taking unit base resistance as qr the pile should penetrate at least 8 diameter into the
bearing stratum and sand should be present to a depth of al least 3 diameter beneath the base.
9 .9
UNDER-REAMED PILES
Under reamed piles are often used as load bearing and anchor piles in expansive clays. A
single underreamcd pile is sujtable for anchor pile while double under~ piles are used
to incrcose the load bearing c~pacity of the pile, this is shown in Fig. 9. 16. The ultimate
capacity of an underrcamed pile is given by
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
- Q,+Q.
2.5
all -
or
Qf
Q.
(9.22)
'" = 1.5 +4
The typical case of piles in normal Calcutta soil (see Example 9.3) shows that for s.m.all
diameter piles (Dia < 600 mm) !he allowable load obtained by using an overall factor of safety
of 2.5 may be just about the same as the skin fricton component. That means, at working load,
only the skin friction is mobilized and the entire end bearing is kept in the reserve.
Design of a pile foundation involves not only the determination of the allowable load on
a pile from consideration of ultimate resistance of s ingle pile but also ensuring the stability of
the pile group where a large number of closely spa~ piles are provided to support lhe column
load. The entire soil inc luding the pile group wiU be stressed as a block and lhe settlement of
the pile group wiJI have 10 be evaluated under the working load and the design should ensure
that the settlement is acceptable. Group action of piles is discussed in Section 9.12.
WH = RS
(9.23)
Copyrighted material
220
where
W=
II =
R =
S =
The lefl hand side of Eq. (9.23) is !he energy supplied per blow, and !be righl hand side is
the corresponding work done to facilitate the penetration or pile. The basic elements involved
in the driving analysis is shown in Fig. 9.17.
,ft..!:,""' fall
L__j-Wtight. W
Hoigl\1 Of lal,
HI i
t._ ,
Reaetion,R
s--*---J
T
WH RS + losse!;
WH = Q.(S +C)
Copyrighted m&?~M.~
~vised
to a
mo~
generalized form,
EWH W + n 2W,
Q.= S+C W + Wp
when:
(9.25)
'
TfNH W + n 211'
S+C/2
W+W,
soil.
c).
that is.
c = Ct + c2 + c,
The approximate values of C1, C2, and C3 to be used in Hiley formula for concrete
piles ~ given in Table 9.2.
Tabk 9.2 Values of C1, Cto
Q. =
NWH
~(L/50)
L (i + S)
(9.26)
Copyrighted material
EH
(9.27)
Q. = K S
where
K, =
c"
cd(1 + J~ + ~}
=. o.1s +
o.l4(~}
and
EHL
The ultimate pile capacity as detennined from tbe pile driving formulae may be used to
determine the safe load capacity of a pile by using a fac tor of safety. ln view of the
uncertainties involved in tbe calculation, a high factor of safety, not less !ban 3, should be
used. The early ENR formula even recommended a factor of safety equal to 6.
Sorensen and Hansen (1957), Housel (1966), and Olsen and Flaate (1967} made
comprehensive studies on the use of different pile driving formulae in predicting the pile
capacity. It appears from tbeir studies, "if driving formu lae are to be used, those which
involve the least uncertainty arc the Hiley and Janbu formulae while the most uncertain is the
ENR formula",'' (Poulos and Davis. 1980).
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
(a) For piles bearing on a hard stratum and deriving their strength mainly from
end bearing. the minimum spacing shall be 2.Sd, d being the diameter of the
pile.
(b) For friction piles in clay. the minimum spacing shall be 3d.
(c) For piles driven through loose sand or fill, the minimum spacing may be 2d.
However. the most commonly used spacing is 3d. Figure 9.21 shows some typical pile
groups with different number of piles.
, ..._,A
f.
~~
~
0.87
...
rr-~ ~o"'()'':e:.
t ....... o:
;,
4
$
3 piles
~ ttf
'
~.J!
'
0
'
'
6 piles
........0''
5 pUes
:o
r----
:O
:o
tt.t.-f
1
0
it-1~-f
8 piles
7!llles
-&!-+'
9piles
:rr--~r-1:
..~- -;10
-~J~:.
11 piles
10 piles
(a)
Double
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
228
= M rCI
11
Lx;
!':!.Jz.
Z.u
On the other side or CG. the reaction is upward, that is, P1 is negative.
P _ Ma x, _ Mu
Thus.
where
" -
L,x; -
Z.u
where.
Thus,
MuYJ
~
~ y"
Mu
t
yy
I I.
load
V
" 1 M,.y1
pile =P= NMyy.<, ... x.
(9.30)
It should be noted here that for large moment on a pile group, the reactions due to
moment may be even greater than the reactions due to the vertical load. In such cases, the
outermost piles on the leeward side of the moment may be subjected to uplift forces.
Hidden page
9 .13.2
Pile foundations in sand are not expected to undergo appreciable settlement because of the
low compressibility of medium to dense, where piles are usually terminated. Still, if
necessary, the settlement of pile groups in granular soil may be determined by using the same
methods as given for rnft founda tions. The load distribution in the soil and the equivalent
raft concept proposed for cohesive soil may also be adopted to obtain the geometry of the
problem to be solved. Funher, for the methods described in Chapter 7 for foundations on
sand, Schultze and Sherif ( 1973) used case histories to establish a method of predicting the
settlement of foundation on sand. The same method when adopted for pile groups gives
S=
where
Sq.
(9.33)
~ 81 (1 + 0.4~ )
S = settlement coefficient.
p -
sp
N'"(1 0 .40,18)
D,JB
D,
V~/////PP//////////H/////////1'
Reduction factors for
1~8
Dsl
0.1L-'---'--'-.L...I.-...L..-L-l-'-l
0.5
1
2 3 4 5
10
20 30 4050
Breadth, 8 (m)
FJg. 9.24 Setltement coefficient.
s versus
1.5
1.0
0.5
o;s
< 2
100
0.91
0 .76
0.52
0.6\1
0.72
0.87
0.69
0.43
0.85
0.65
0.39
0.48
Copyrighted material
ttttt
~!.-- Btocl<
Btocl< of sol-
I.s .
L....
of soil
lifted by piles
lifted by piles
{b)
(a)
F~. 9.25
for cohesive soils, the uplift resistance of the block may be obtained by summing up
tbe undrained shearing resistance around the periphery of the block and the weight of soil
enclosed by tbe group as
(9.34)
Q. = 2(L + 8)D1c, + IV
where
A safety factor of 3 should be used to determine the safe uplift capacity of tbe group.
Copyrighted material
Vertical piles can resisc lateral forces to a certain extent depending on the strength
and stiffness of the pile and the soil. According 10 I.S. 2911- 1985, permissible
lateral load of a vertical pile is 2-5% of the permissible vertical load. For greater
horizontal load. addjtional reinforcement is to be provided in the pile or raker piles may
be used.
Ullimate lateral resistance and load-deflection behaviour of a pile under lateral load is a
complex problem of soil-si!Ucture interaction. The lateral load on the pile head is initially
carried by the soil close to the ground surface resulting in elastic defonnation of the soil. As
the load in<:reases. the soil yields and transfers the load to greater depths.
the soil.
Load
,._
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
..e o1
L~--c.n
I
I
I
rotation
L-
(a)
( b)
Fig. 9.21 Failure mechanism of rigid pile under hori:zonlal load: (a) free head, (b) ftxed head.
For a long pile, the passive resistan<:e is very large and pile cannot rotate or till. The
lower ponion remains almost vertical due to fixity while the upper part deflectS in flexure.
The pile fails when a plastic .hinge is formed at the point of maximum bending moment,
Fig. 9.27.
As a consequence, a shon pile fails when passive resistanc-e of soil is exceeded
~ap<lcity
Copyrighted material
Pil~
1~'/l'illlli'
Foundations t 233
'!
, If.._
r-- Fracture
L
(a)
(~)
Fla, 1.21 Fan... , . . , _ , o1 1oog p1o under horiza>tal lood: (a) -
head, (b) -
head.
For development of ultimate resistance, the lateral movement is generally too large.
Therefore, after c,aJeuJating lhe ultimate resisrancc and dividing by a facror of safety, it is
nec.essary to check that the perrni ..ible deflection or pile head is not excuded.
9 .15.2
The stiffness factors, R and T, of the pile-soil system determine the behaviour of a pile as a
short rigid pile or a long flexible one. These factors depend on the stiffness, / or the pile
and the compreosibility of the soil expressed in terms of a soil modulus. The soil modulus
depends on the type of soil, the width of pile, and the dep<h or influence area and is related
to Tert.aghi's modulus or subgrade reaction.
For stiff overconsolidated clay, the soil modulus is assumed to be constant with depth,
and the s tiffness factor is given by
R=
where
~ :~
(9.35)
in units of length
=diameter of pile.
According to Tenaghi (1955), K 1 is rela1ed to the 'undrained shear strength or the clay as
shQ.wn in Table 9.3.
Tablt 9.3 Values of K1 for different consistencies of clay (after Teru~Jhi. 19SS)
Uncq,ifintd ootnp.
suiT
Very stiff'
Hard
"""''It, q.(lcNim')
100-200
200-400
>400
(kNim'J
R<tMtnathd, K1
(tN!m')
18-36
36-72
>12
27
S4
>108
R4nse of K1
Copyrighted material
T=
where
~ E./
"
in units of length
(9.36)
The " values for granular soil may be obtained from Table 9.4.
Tablt 9.4
Typ< of sand
U>ou
Mnlium
TXIrsr
2500
7500
1400
5000
20000
12000
For son
organic silt,
..
Copyrighted material
Q,.(g)
11"
--pile
Embedment qth. uo
Fig. 1.21 Oulgn chafls for short pleo in coho5Ne ooll (llroms 19M).
Lenglll, LID
Fig. 8.21 Design charts fot Short plies In coheslonleas 8041 (Stems, 19&4).
Copyrighted material
100
60
40
+;
20
10
6
1
3
10
20
Ulllmollo -
40
100
-:1J
200
men-. U..tc,D'
600
19&4~
i; 1000Hf f
.
I 10~~~~L-J
"'.
i!'
...1
'
100~-~
~~
~o~r--------+--------+-~~
Free head
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
s,.
A,
-1
0
~---~~
!;;
~~
:::::
4::',. ~
2 ...
3 ~
.... 3
,tl
10
0
1
!;;
...
1\,
02 04 06 0.6 10
. 12
. .
r-:-'
.
~
y
'l.
,. -'l
/'
2 ...
'f
IKo
3 ~
10
Fig. 1.32 Pile c:lefJecllon ltld moment In CXJheslcnleu SOit: Elulc anatysis
111- and Mallock (19S6~ Oas (1998)~
, Q1 R3
M1 R2
x,(z) = A, "'E[" + B, E 1
,
I'P
(9.43}
PP
(9.44)
and
wbere A:r, 8', A~. and B'.. are coefficients and R = ~ EPI,IK .
The variation of A~. B'p A;,., and B'. with
z is given in
Fig. 9.33.
8~.
-1
-2
z
3
v
3..._,
&"'
0
~"'
j. 1
-;:::;-. 2
'
' .
l~ 3
Z..2
8'.
-- a;.
Fig, 1.33 Pile denection and moment in CXIhesive soil: Elastic analysis (0avi$SOO and Gill, 1963),
Copyrighted material
~~~5 )
1!.!> = ( ror Z IB =
6p
-=
p.,
1
;;
1
= 0.09 < 0. 1
33 + 49.8
81 + 37 .5
+ 0.08 x 12 log
33
81
139 + 17.8
+ 006
x 4 1og
139
p, : 0 ,03
15
1Og
E><amp1e 8.6
, Design of a buoyancy raft foundation for a 4-storey donnitory building with two columns in
0
1
0.6ml
Basement
..,E
3m
I
9m
/ I
I ',\
+A
I
I
I
+B
I
I
I
\
15.5
\
'\
7.5
19.5
c_, 30
'' '
+c
'
....
_____ .
I
I
'
Firm Cf3y
c, = 60 kNtm'
I
I
I
I
..,
'
4
C,/(1 . . ., 0.08
N = 30
1
Mediurn sand
~
m
Copyrighted material
Solution
Size of rnft = 9 m x 90 m
Area of each column bay = 3 m x 9 m = 27 m1
Load in each bay = 2 x 900 = 1800 kN
1800
2"7
= 67 kN/m1
:.
q1,.., = 84 kN/m1
= 84 - 18 X 3
= 30 kN/m1
25
4.5 + 20
4.5
= 22.5 kNim2
and
N,
= 5( I + 0.2
~)
= 5(1 + 0.2
io)
= 5.2
qult(n) = cllN~
= 22.5
q. = 32 kN/m1
8 = 9 m
v = 0.75
lp
4.5 + 20
16.5
8 + 60
= 32 I<N/m1
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
I
i
~length.~
9 . 15.5
..3a
~
'
l1
' , "--
1.9
\
1.7
- - FrMheadpllo
t.m:jm.
~..
L1
.1.
r=
L Forplleoln-and
------}
normally-~
'' '
1.5
--- -----}For-in
po-
1.3
0
8
L,IR or L,IT
2
Fig.
ue
days
10 ..
IS CX>de meltlod.
Copyrighted material
Pilt! FoundationJ
241
Considering lhe pile as on equivalent cantilever. the pile load deOection, y is obtained as
y
Q(!., + L1 l'
3,1,
(9.45)
Ld
Q(l., +
=
12, 1,
=Q
!., +
(9.46)
~.,
2
The actual rnornent is obtained by opplyln& ttduc:tion factor. as depicted in Fig. 9.37. which
is given by
At
mCMrt
1.0
-- -- In1---
0.8
~
J!
0.6
0.4
0.2
1
,7
kL::
1?-
L,
For piles
di)'S
11~
...
1/
L
2
10
12
1.2
L.--
0.8
----V'
0.5
1--L~G~
T'~
days
tO
;I {
tS
20
2.5
LvR or Lv T
(b)
Flo.
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
0.6-0.8.
4. Estimate the ultimate pile capacity, Q..p as consisting of point bearing and shaft
re.~istance over the length where there is no negative skin jricrio11.
5. Calculate factor of safety, F from
F =
Q.P
(Q + Q.,)
where
(9.51)
In a pile group. the total downdrag force on the group. Q., is the minimum of the following
values.
(9.52)
Q., = NQ.,
and
(9.53)
Q"' = yL"P
the weight or soil enclosed with the pile groups,
where
N = no. of piles in the group,
r = unit weight of soil.
L,. = length over which negative friction develops, and
P = perimeter of the group.
Poulos and Davis (1980) have described a method based on elas1ic lheory. wilh
allowance for pile-soil slip, to estim:ue downdrag force. ln this method, the dependence or
downdrag on the settlement of the soil can be included, rother than assuming that sufficient
soiJ movement occurs to mobilize the full adhesion along the pile shaft. Based on a study of
the various parameters responsible for negative skin friction, the authors have presented
charts which can be used very con..,eniently to calcul::ue downdrag force.
9 . 17 TESTING OF PILES
Recent trends in foundation design follow the use of large diameter, high capacity piles fo r
supporting heavy s tructural loads. Till the early sixties, driven piles of diameter upto
SOO mm were nonnally in use in India. These ptles would have safe load capacity upto
100 lonnes depending on the deplh of pile and s ubsoil condition. Wilh 1he coming of bored
castin..:situ systems, large diameter piles are now common and typical 1500 mm diameter
piles with safe capacity of 500 tonnes or more have frequently been used in recent years.
This obviously necessiunes o strict quality control in the installation of the pile so chat each
pile carries the des ign load with certainty.
Copyrighted material
246 +
17u~ory
There is no readily available method of checking tbe condition of the soil at the pile tip
prior to concreting. Normally, at the end of boring. reverse circulation is done to remove all
debris from the bottom of the hole and the depth is finally obtained from the length of the
tremie pipe and the depth of boring. Even then. un<:ettainities remain about the possible
existence of any thin layer of loose soil at the pile rip.
9 .17.2
Defects in pile shaft normally occur in the form of unfilled voids which cause discontinuity
in the pile shaft. Major causes of such defects have been listed by Tomlinson (1981) as
Encrustation of hardened concrete on the inside of the casing which may cause the
concrete to be lifted a~ the casing is withdrawn.
(b) The falling concrete which may arch across the casing or between the casing and
(a)
the reinforcement.
(c) Falling concrete may ger jammed between the reinforcing bars and not move
towards the borehole wall.
(d) Clay lumps may fall into the hole as the concrete is placed.
(e) Soft or loose soil may squeeze into the pile shaft from the bottom of the lining.
Most of these defects can be minimized. if not eliminated. by having the inside of the casing
properly c leaned. using a high slump concrete and by avoiding conjestion of reinforcing bars.
Also, proper care needs to be taken in lifting the casing while concreting, particularly in
unstable soils.
9 .17.3
lnte~ty
Testing
Often excavations for pile caps show defective construction near the pile head. Similar
defects may be there at greater depth also. Therefore. integrity testing is done to check the
soundness of the pile shaft after installation. The following methods of integrity testing of
piles are generally available (Weltman. 1980; Robertson, 1982)
Copyrighted material
Pi/~
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Foundatimu + 247
Excovarion around the pile shaft Is only possible for shallow depths. It is hardly
conceivable that a deep pile can be fully exposed for visual inspection. However. shon piles
or limited length or pile near the ground surfoce ClU1 be examined thoroughly.
Drilling/l>ori~ rhro,gh the pile shaft is pclUlble through IIIJe diame~er piles. Cores of
concrete can be examined for soundness and they can be tested to determine their
compressive strength. Even a TV Camen may be lowered onto the hole to look for cavities
and honeycombs.
Various mditMtric 1111d aroustic ttsts ate also done in drilled holes. Pairs of ducts m:
made in the pile shaft at the time of concretin& and suitable scanning devices are inuotluecd
to scan the concrete between the ducts. However. these require specialized equipment. Sonic
inu:grity testing is one sueh lC$1 which Is gtlnin& popularity.
S4!ismic and dynamic response ttsts o.re extensively done because of their simplicity and
adaptability. No hole is required to be made in the pile shaft. In the seismic method. a
weight is dropped on the pile head and the time for return of the seismic wave after
reflection from the toe is measured. In the dynomic,: response method. an eleclfodynamic
vibrator is mounted on the pile head to apply o constant amplitude stress wave at the pile top
and the response or the pile Is seen through an ~cillogrph or digital indicator. Various types
or pile diagnostic syStems/pile d.rivlng analyzers are now commcrc:iruly available to facilitate
such testing.
Load rest is the most direct method or determining the c11p:w:ity of the pile. While other
methods of integrity testing determine primarily the soundness or the concrete, the load test
gives an integrated method or determining both the JOundncss of the conc rete and the
response of the soil under load. It also permits an evaluation of the load carrying capacity of
the pile on the basis of soil te$ponse. The next section discusses lood tcsl on piles in a much
greater depth.
Hidden page
.......
1000
2000
3000
.........
" ~ 1-
'\
r60
\
b
According to IS 29-11- 1985. the safe load from initial load test is taken as the least of
the following:
(a) Two third of the load at whieh gross settlement is 12 mm or
(b) 50% of the fi nal load at which gross setllement becomes 1/IOth of the pile
diameter.
The ultimate load obtained by these methods for the pile test data, as depicted through
Fig. 9.43, is shown in Table 9.5.
Table 9.5
MttiJod
UllimoU l(JI((iJ (k N)
Sa/~
lood (k.N) FS 2
t900
t320
950
2300
tl50
t300
870
II SO
I. S. /985
213
lo3CI at 12 mm sculemc:nt
so~ o( load a1 sculemenl o( 10% pile diameter
gTOS$
2300
In routine load test. the pile is considered to be safe if the gross settlement under 1.5
times the working load is not greater than 12 mm. However. this criterion of 12 mm gross
settJement should be related to the pile diameter particularly a large diameter piles.
Maintained load test is very time consuming. Also. some amount of consolidation and
creep may take place during the test. So, it may be difficult to correlate the test results with
undrained shear strength data obtained from laboratory tests.
Gopynghteo m;nenal
Hidden page
Pil~
Foundatio11s
251
Slu of pUtt
U..sh
(mm)
(ml
5.
Residual Soil
Cone. 280 x 280
Cone. 325 x 3 25
Stc<t 3S6 X 368
Sted 356 X 368
St..J 356 X 368
6.
I.
2.
3.
4.
Design load
(m)
at.. 1987)
Hil~
formula (I)
(I)
(!)
272
360
310
250
400
268
380
390
283
390
372
330
2.1. t
25.6
40.8
29.4
28.0
t20
120
t20
220
355
368
352
427
11.0
110
252
93
liS
Ullimatt- Load
PDA
Lood f~M
Alluvium
A field test with POA is shown in Fig. 9.45. Major defects such as crocks. soil
incursions, necking, and changes in cross section are easily detected using this cesl. For
complete pile driving analysis, two specially designed combined acceleration and strain
transducers are mounted on the side of the pile near the pile top. During driving of piles,
signals obta.i ncd through the mounted transducers are passed on to the signal conditioning
subsystem for processing and finally to the computer. The processed signal for each blow is
stored in o hard disc memory and displayed on the computer screen. After pile driving. a full
record of all relevant parameters are ovailable with respect to the number of blows as well as
depth. Typical test data obtained for structuraJiy sound piles and piles with discontinuity are
shown in fig. 9.45.
Copyrighted material
=~ +-!- r1
5.4 cm/s 0
i l l-l-H I :~:
10 -
12
14
16
18
20
Crackldecrease In
77
.
aoss secllon
-tr-H Yl I I I I I
4.5 m
5.6m
Fig. 9.4S
10
Example 9. 1
A closed ended steel pipe pile, 30 em in diamerer and 20 m long is driven to a sand deposit
with cut off at ground level. The depth~wise variation of N and
values is given in
Fig. 9.46. The waler table is 3 m below ground level. Compute the ultimare load capacity of
!he pile based on soil support, using
H (Biows/30cm)-+10
(m)
20 30
0~----~----~~~~~~~~
--------- ----------7
27.6 kl<lrn' _.,._
''
2
3 : ----- -
IH S
-...;::~
f---
Skin friction :
I
--- .......
16
Vartallon
of
22
Copyrighted material
(i) N value.
(ii) Overturden pressure considering c ritical depth.
Take effective unit, t' =- 1.73 tlm3 above water table. and 0.73 rJmJ below water table.
So/uJion
Q = 4NAp + N.,
6 A1
= 4 X 22 X 0 .785 X (0.3)2 + (16/6) 3.14 X 0.3
=62.22 + 50.24 = 112.41 = 112 I = 1120 kN
(ii) Considering critical depth for overburden
For medium sand, ~ID :: 20, z~ = 6 m, N,
Fig. 9. 12.
For driven steel pile, lAke K, = 1.5, ;.. =
0 -3 m: '-
3- 20 m :
Also,
Q.
~..
= 45,
20
0. 7~'
= 0.7;'
=0.74>'
28 = !9.50
32
=22.5
=LA,f. + A,q,
f., = K,yD1 1An 19.5 = 1.5 x 17.3 x 3 x can 19.50 = 27.6 kN/m2
= 39.0 t/m2
.
_LA,f. =
1f X
0.3[ 3 X
39)]
A9 q,
= "
3
( y' D1Nq)
4
2
1f 0 .3
:
{17.3
4
= 559 kN
3 + 7.3
J7)
45
Copyrighted material
Eamplt 9.2
Determine the safe load of a group of 9 driven c.ast-in-situ piles, 40 em in diameter, 15 m
long. installed in a cohesive deposit. as shown in Fig. 9.47. The cut off level is 1.5 m below
ground level and the spacing of piles 1.2 m.
\}
c,(l<Nht!')
50
%50kNhn'
25 kNim'
2.5
g
i
8
100
13
I) ......._
15 m
Stiff day
100 k
Solution
Individual pile actictJ
Qf = 3.1 4
0.4(0.9
c, (kN/m2)
50
25
100
0.9
1.0
50
I + 1.0
0.45
X
25
10.5 + 0.45
100
3.5)
= 584.2 kN
Qp = 0.785
(0.4i
Q. =584+ 113=697
Copyrighted material
,_,
1.5
,_,
roi<N.m'
2.5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
251<N.m'l
I
I
I
I
I
13.0
1.2m
1.2m
0.3m
1-"
I
I
I
1001<N.m'l
-.- --- -
16.5
1-r.0.3m
= 2(2.4 + 2.4)(50
I + 25
action.
10.5 + 100
3.5) + (2.4
2.4
100)
= 6360 + 5184
= 11.544 kN
Q.,1 =
;s;
00
Firm browni-Sh gtey silty day
c.. o kNII'nl
Cu
Cv. 80 kNim2
N = 40
Cut-off
6
= 20 kNfnY
18
22
Fig. 9.49 Subsoil profile
for
Example 9.3.
Copyrighted material
256
Owh =
L A,
L. AI/~+ APqP
= lrD (4
1.0
40 + 12
1.0
20 + 4
0 .55
80)
= 1rD(576)
= 1810 D
(Neglect skin friction in sand)
Taking critical depth, .,_ = 20 D = 20 x. 0.75 = 15 m
2
=7060>'
Pile dia.
(mm)
QJ(kN)
Q,(kN)
Q,n(kN)
Q,u(kN)
(FS = 2.5)
600
750
1000
1086
1357
1810
1524
2978
7060
2610
4330
8870
1050
1730
3550
(Not~: There is some uncenainty O\'cr the choice of aitical depth in piles that penetrate through cohesive soil
into sand. If the critical depch is not considered and fuJI overburden is taken. end bearing in sand will increase
appt<eiobly.l
Example 9.4
A typical column of the multistoreyed building in Example 9.3 is subjected to the following
loads at ground level.
Vertical load V (kN)
DL
5500
LL
760
Mu (kNm)
DL + LL
123.5
SL
657
M11 (kNm)
DL + LL
115.2
SL
SL
985
& se shear
H.(kN) H ,(kN)
SL
380
SL
Using 750 mm diameter bored cast~in-situ piles (safe capacity ns found in Example 9.3).
design a suitable pile group for the column. Also detennine the moment due to horizontal
load for which the section shoold be designed.
Solution
Safe bearing of 750 mm diamecer pile, 22 m long, with cuH>ff at 2 m below G.L. is 1700 kN.
Considering the nature of loading. a 4-pile group (as shown in Fig. 9.50) is chosen.
Pile cap = 3.3 x 3.3 = 10.9 m'
Weight of cap. pedestal. and soil upto G.L. " 10.9 x 20 = 218 kN
1
l,
= ' = (4 x 1.125)
'
1.125
= 4 __5 m'
Copyrighted material
DL + U Condition
i:V =
M,.
= 123.5 kNm
Myy
= 115.2
kNrn
1670 kN.
(Marginal overloading on one pile may be accepted.)
DL + U + SL Co11dition
H,
= 380 kN
4.5
)C
380
=
- = 95 kN
4
Using IS Code (IS 2911, Part I, Sec 4, 1984 wilh Amendment in 1987)
Stiffness Factor.
R =
~( Ek:e)
E, = 2 x llf t/m2
1, = (x/64) x (0.75)4 = 0.015 m'
K 2 = 48.8 from code
...L
R = 1.6
..
Copyrighted material
imaginary footing.
Solution
Two points A and 8 arc considered at the mid point of the relevant strata beneath the
imaginary footing. Water table is assumed to be at G.L.
At A.
At B,
62 =
Example 9.6
RCC bored piles, 1000 mm diameter x 20 m long are proposed to be used for a flyover
passing over a canal bed with predominantly river channel deposits, as depicted in Fig. 9.50.
OMC method of boring is adopted and steel liners would be u~d to a depth of at least 15 m
below G.L. Design the safe pile capacity.
N (BiowS/30 em)
0
0
10
--
20
30
40
-,:'off-- --
Cut
~N
= 20
10
Brownl$h
medium 10
sand
2'
20
30
Greyish brown
stiff clay
c., 100 k.Nim2
40
\
I\
Copyrighted material
Here, skin friction will develop between the liner and the soil.
Hence, take K,
Q..
Take
t.,
34
= 23
f = 36 -
3 = 33
= LA,!,+ A,q,
= lSD = IS m
/ , = 1.0 x 8 xI S x mn 23 = 51 kN/m2
N = 43
Q/ =
= 1600 kN
5950
2.5
51 Nim'
-1 o
- 20 ' - - - . . . J
Example 9.7
If !he pile in Example 9.6 is laken down to 28 m below cutoff, what will be safe capacity?
Solution
Q. = Q,+Q,
Q/ =
1r X
1.0
(5 1
15 + 51
10 + 0.5
100
3)
= 3270 kN
Qp = Jr/4(1 )2
100
= 700 kN
Q. = 3270 + 700
= 3970 kN
3970
= 1590 kN ., 1600 kN
2.5
Q. 11 = -
[Note that increasing the pile length increases frictional resistance but there i.s major
reduction end bearing also.)
Example 9.8
A foot bridge having !he main trestle consisting of steel columns (refer Fig. 9.51(a)) is to be
founded in the subsoil shown in Fig. 9.5l(b). Design a suitable pile group for the trestle
foundation.
Copyrighted material
140kN
N6
4
'
I
6.5
I
I
I
I
,3
,6
4m
Pile$
I
I
I
0.5
Bt~ish
16
22
N
4.0
-End of
5.0
borehole
= 25
....
(a)
(b)
IYPt tor
9.8.
SoiMtion
Pile copaciry
CutOff level
0.5lr(4 X 35 X 1.0 + 8
+ lr/4(0.5)2 (9 X 70)
= 3 (FS) =333 kN
~
879
T
293 kN
25
1.0 + 3
X
65
0.7 + 2
70
0.6)
630)
,. 300 kN
250 kN
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
~ factor,
St1uness
T --
.{El
K!
K
106
;r/64(0.5)
60
= ~ 102.2 = 2.52 m
Slorm Impact
140
Rigid cap
150
4 =n.skN
---- ~-"""'!'~------- +
c;,
= 35 ltN!m2
Pile 0.5 m dia
As pile deplh
35
= 4.0
35 x (0.5)2
..-
M,
C11 8 3
= 5, which
M. = 5
35
gives
(O.S)'
= 21.8 kNm
Berczantzev. V.G.. V. Khristoforov. and V. Golubkov (1961 ). Load Bearing Capacily and
Deformation of Piled Fou11dations, Proc. Slh Int. Conf. on SMFE, Vol. 2, pp. 11- 15.
Birmingham, P. and M. James (1989), An Innovative Approach to Load Testing of Higlr
Capacily Piles, Proceedings of the International Conference on Piling and Deep
Foundations, London, Balkema, Roterdam, 1989.
Bishop. A.W. (I 966). Sixth Rankine Lecture: The Suength of Soils as Engineering
Materials, Georec/mique, Vol. 16, pp. 89-1 30.
Bowles, J.E. (1968), Formdcaio" Jbialysis and Design, McGrnw-Hill [nc., New York.
Copyrighted material
Pile Foundations U3
Bowles, J.E. (1974), Analytical and Complllu Methods in Foundation Engineering.
McGraw-Hill, New York.
Broms, B.B. and J.O. Silbenn.an (1964), Skin Friction Resistance for PUes in Cohesionless
Soils, Sols-Soils, pp. 10-33.
Broms, B.B. ( 1966), Methods of Calculating the Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Piles-<>
sunurwry. Sols-Soiis, pp. 18-19: 21-32.
Broms. B.B. and L. Hill (1973), Pile Foundatioru for Kuwait Towus, Proc. 8th Int. Conf.
on SMFE. Moscow, Vol. 2-1, pp. 33-,;18.
Burland, J.B. (1973), Shaft Friction of Piles in Cia~ simple .fundamental approach,
Ground Engineering, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 30-42.
Cooke, R.W. and G. Price (1973), Strains and Displacements Around Friction Piles,
8th Int. Conf. on SMFE. Moscow, Vol. 2-1, pp. 53-l.
Proc
Das, B.M. (1998), Principles of Foundation Englnuring, PWS Publishing, California, USA.
Davisson, M.T. and H.L. Gill (1963), Laterally Loaded Piles in a Layered Soil System,
Jou.m al of tht Soil Muhanics and Foundtl.tion~ Division, American Society of Civil
Engineers, Vol. 89, No. SM3, pp. 63-94.
De Beer, E.E. (1970). Experimental Detennination of the Shape Factors and Bearing
Capacity Factors of Sand, Geotechnkple, Vol. 20. No. 4, pp. 387-411.
Aaate, K. (1972), Effects of Pile Driving in Clays, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 9.
No. I.
Hanna, T.H. and R.H.S. Tan (1973), The Behavior of Long Piles Under Compressive Loads
in Sand, Canadian Geotechnical Joumat Vol. 10, No. 3: pp. 311-340.
Janbu, N. (1953), An Energy Analysis of Pile Driving with the Use of Dimensionless
Parameters, Norwegian Qe()(echnical Institute, Oslo, Publication No. 3.
IS 2911 (1979)--Code of Practice for Design of Pile Foundations. Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
Kerisel, 1. (1961), Foundations Profondes en Milieu Sableux, Proc. 5th Int. Conf. oo SMFE,
Vol. 2: pp. 73-83.
Marsland, A. (1971), Shear Stwogth of Fissured Clay. StressStroin Behavior of Soils, T.G.
Foulis, pp. 59~8.
McClelland, B. (1974), Design of Deep Penetnltion Piles for Ocean Structures. Journal of the
Geotechnical Engineering Division, American Society of Civil En.gineers. Vol. 100,
No. GT7, pp. 709-747.
Meyerhof, G.G. (1959), Compaction of Sands and Bearing Capacity of Piles, ASCE, Journal
of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, SM6, pp. 1-29.
Meyerhof.G.G. and L.J. Murdock (1953), An lnvestigation of the Bearing Capacity of Some
Bored and Driven Piles in London Clay, Geottchniqut, Vol. 3: p. 267.
Meyerhof, G.G. ( 1976), Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Pile Foundations, Journal,
Geotechnical Engineering Division. ASCE, Vol. 88, SM4: pp. 32-67.
Copyrighted material
Nordlund, R.L. ( 1969). Bearing Capacity of Piles in Cohesionless Soil, Journal of Soil
Mechanics and Foundation, ASCE. Vol. S9, No. SM3, pp. 1-35.
Poulos, H.G. and E.H. Davis (1980), Pile Foundatior1.1 Analysis and Design, John Wiley and
Sons. New Yorlc.
Radhakrishnan, H.S . and 1.1. Adams (1973), Long-term Uplift Capacity of Augured Footings
in Fissured Clays, Canadian Geottchnical Journal, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 647-652.
Rees, L.C. and H. Matlock ( 1956), Non-dimensional Solutions for Laterally Loaded Pil.s
with Soil Modulus AJsumed Proportional to Depth, Sib Texa.< Conf. on SMFE, Special
Publication No. 29, University of Texas. '
Schultze, E. and G. Sherif (I 973), Prediction of Selllment from Evaluated Selllement
Observatwns for Sand, Proc. Sib Int. Conf. on SMFE, Moscow, Vol. I, p. 225.
Sltempton, A.W. (194S), The f 2 o Analysis of Stability and its Theoretical Basi.r, Proc. 2nd
Int. Conf. on SMFE. Rotterdam, Vol. 2.
Skempton, A.W. (195 1), The Bearing Capacity of Clays, Building Research Congress,
England.
Sltempton, A.W. (1959), Cast in-situ Bored Piles in London Clay, Geotechniqu, Vol. 9,
No. 4, pp. I 53-173.
Skempton, A.W. and P. La Rochelle (1955), The Bradwell Ship: A shon term failure: in
London Clay, Geotechnique, Vol. 15, No. 3.
Skempton, A.W. and R.D. Nonliey (1952), The Sensitivity of Clays, Geotechnique, Vol. 3.
No. I , pp. 40-5 I.
Smith, E.A.L. (1960), Pile Driving Analysis by the Wave Equation, Journal on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, Vol. 86, SM4: pp. 35-61.
Sliwinski, Z. and W.G.K. A eming ( 1974), Practical Consideratio11s Affecting the
Performance of Diaphragm Walls, Proc. Conference on diaphragm walls and anchors,
ICE. London, pp. 1-10.
Tenaghi, K. ( 1942), Discussion on the Progress Repon of rite Committee on the Beanirg
Value of Pile Foundations, Proc. ASCE, Vol. 68: pp. 311-323.
Terz.agbi, K. (1943). Theoretical Soil Mechanics, John Wiley and Sons Lid., p. 510.
Terz.agbi, K. (1955), Evaluation of Coefficient of Subgrade Reaction, Geotechnique, Vol. 5:
p. 297.
Terz.aghi, K. and R.B. Peck (1967), Soil Mechanics in Enginuring Practice, 2nd ed., John
Wiley and Sons, New York.
Thorburn, S. and R.S.L. Mac Vicar ( 1970), Dis.:ussion, Conf. on Behaviour of Piles, ICE,
London, p. 54.
Tomlinson, M.J. (1965), Foundation Design and Construction, 2nd ed., Pitman, London.
Tomlinson, MJ. (1977), Pile Design and Construction Practices, lst ed., Viewpoint
Publications, London.
Copyrighted material
Tomlinson, M.J. (1981). Pile Design and Constmction Pmctices, 4th ed.. E ond F N Spon,
London.
Touma. F.T. and L.C. Reese (.1974), Behaviour of Bored Piles in Sond. Joumal on
Geoteclmicnl Enginuring Division, ASCE. Vol. 100. No. GT7: pp. 749-761.
Vargas, M. ( 1948), Building S<ttlement Obsm.atlons in Sao Pnuw, Proc. 2nd lnt Conf. on
SMFE. Rouerdam, Vol. 4, p. 13.
Vesic. A.S. ( 1967), A Snrdy of Bearing Capacity of Deep Formdatio11s, Final Rcpon, Project
B-189, School of Civil Engineering. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
Vcsic. A.S. (1975), Principles of Pile Foundation Design, Duke U niversity. School of
Copyrighted material
Well Foundations
10.1 INTRODYCTION
The conventional foundations discussed in the previous chapters are applicable to low and
medium rise buildings. Depending on lhe subsoil condition at a given site. an optimum
foundation design is to be achieved for the g.ivcn structure. For multistorey buildings, say
upto 20 storeys high, pile fou ndations with or without basement are gcncralJy adopted. For
even heavier structural load- for bridge pier and abutments for example. -the vertical load
may go upto a few thousand tonnes and major horizontal fon:es due to wind, current. and so
on may apply. Conventional pile foundations are not suitable in such cases because of the
limited capacity of piles to resist lateral forces. Large size fou ndations. often quite deep. are
required for this type of loading. The behaviour of these foundations under large lateral
forces are determined by conditions which arc somewhat different from conventional
round.ations. Such foundations may undergo rigid body movemenl under lhe external forces
and the lateral earth pressure on the embedded ponion or the foundation. These foundations
are com.monJy known as caissons and well roundmions.
10.2
w~lls
CLASSIFICATION
or caissons are large size prismatic or cylindrical shells which are built deep into the
ground to suppon heavy loads. Depending on the melhod of installation the caissons may be
of three types, namely (i) ope-n caisson or weiJ, (ii) box caisson or noating caisson. and
(iii) pneumatic caisson. The types of caissons or well fou ndations are depicted in Fig. 10.1.
The top and bottom of open caissons are ke pt open and instaUed into the ground by
excavation of soil within the shaft so that it may sink into the ground either under its own
weight or by addition of surcharge lood. The bo:c caisson is a shell open at the top and
closed at tbe bottom, built first on the solid ground and then towed to the site where it is
sunk tO a prepared foundation base. The pneumatic caisso11 has a working chamber at the
bouom which is kept dry by maintaining a high air pressure to prevent water from entering
into the chamber. thus. facilitating sinking of the caisson.
Although cajssons are often used to s upport heavy structures including high rise
buildings. they constitute by far !he most common type of found~tipns for major bridges on
2611
Copyrighted material
to required
<lepth
m ---,..,.-.:==
---
=----J-
-------. .
---
................,... ..,,..............
{;~~~=-~
(a) Open caisson
..
~;:<:r.
''.'-.. f .:.
,....;. : ~
-ticns.
rivers with erodable bed. Mostly open caissons or well foundations are used in India. This is
because the well can be installed to sufficient depth below the maximum depth of scour, and
a single well is capable of supporting large axial and lateral loads.
(e) I>Jmb-bell -
00
(t) Double octagonal with
c:ircula.r dredge hotes
welt foundations.
Copyrighted material
268 +
Th~ory
(c) for plain and reinforced concrete single circular wells. the extcmal diameter of well
should not nonnally exceed 12 m, and
(d) for brick masonry well. the external diameter should not exceed 6 m.
8
e"'
Al>u!Jnent pier
Well cap
r--'-__.+-o ' V" !,WI,
300
lntermeclateffop plug
Staining
............ ......
. .. .. :r .. .
.......... .. .
'
, , . . . !.~ .. .
"
.... :.:.:
800
B<lllOmi*Jg
ot wei foundation.
800
37
200. 12 Pl.
All tolnl:$, welded
Details at
Fla. 10.
Copyrighted material
10.4.1 Steining
The well steim'ng is lhe main body of the well which transfers load 10 the subsoil. It also acts
as a coffer dam during sinking, and provides !he weight for sinking. In addition to the usual
design forces at service condition. the steining is likely to be subjected to certain additional
loading during instaJiation. The thickness and reinforcement of well steining are generally
detennined as per recommendations of IRC 7&-1983. The thickness of well steining should
not be less lhan SOO mm and should satisfy lhe following relatjons.hip
" = kd.fi.
where
(10.1)
10.4.3
Cutting Edge
The lower moSl portion of the well curb is the cutti11g edge. This should be strong enough to
facilitate sinking through the type of soil strata expecled to be encountered during sinking
and should be properly anchored to well curbs. Cutting edge should be fabricated from steel
angles and plates weighing not less than 40 kg/m length of the cuuing edge. Heavier section
(80 kglm) is required for hard and booldery soil Slfatl.
10.4.4
Bottom Plug
After the well is sunk to the required depth, the base of the well is plugged with concrete.
This is called bouom plug which transmits the load to the subsoil. The top of the
bouom plug should not be less than 300 mm above the top of well curb. A suitable sump
below the level of the culling edge should be made and cleaned thoroughly before
concreting. The concrete mix used in bouom plug should not be leaner than I :2:4. with
minimum cement content of 330 kglm3. and should be placed by tremie or skip boxes under
water.
Copyrighted material
10.4 .5
Dredge Hole
The well is sunk by excavating soil from within the well. The hole so formed is called
dredge hole which is later filled fully or partly by sand or excavated soil. The extent of
filling is decided by the function it is required to do. Filling is used to increase the stability
of 1he well against overturning. Where it is not possible lO attain a positive sump for bottom
plug (specially in sandy strata), complete filling of well is desirnble. In case of so!Vnormally
consolidated clay. the allowable bearing pressure can be considerably increased by keeping
the well emply.
10.4 .7
Well Cap
Wells are provided wilh a properly designed RCC well cap, with iiS bottom surface
preferably al LWL.
10.5
SINKING OF WELLS
Wells are sunk 10 the desired depth by excavating lhe soil from the dredge hole by means of
manual labour. mechanical winch and grab. Divers help and/or pneumatic sinking may be
adop1ed in difficult situations. As far as possible, the wells shall be sunk plumb without any
tilt and shift However, a tilt of I in 80 and a shifl of ISO mm is considered allowable and
the s.ame has to be considered in the design of well fou ndations.
In erodable soil, there is a minimum grip length of one third the maximum
anticipated depth of scour below high flood level (HFL),
10.6.1
Scour Depth
For natural streams in c.ohcsionlcss soil. the scour depth may be determined from Lacey's
formula. Accordingly.
Copyrighted material
the normal depth of scour, d (in metres), below the highest flood level is given by
d = 1.34
where
2)"3
(7
(10.2)
q = discharge (in m3/s) through width of the channel obtained by dividing the
design discharge by linear waterway between abutments/guidebanks and
f = Laceys sih fac.tor which is related to the mean diameter of soil grains forming
the bed. by the empirical formula, f = 1.76 J;. Here, m is the weighted mean
diameter in mm. The value off generally varies from 0.6 to I .50. The method
of determination of m is described in IRC S-1998.
For preliminary design, the normal depth of scour below HFL may be obtained from
d
= 0.473
l )tt3
(~
( 10.3)
= 1.27d(scour restrained)}
near abutment
If the river bed is not readily sus<:eptable to scouring effect of floods, the fomula for
scour depth (E<j. (10.2)) shall not apply. In such cases. the maximum depth of scour shall be
assessed from actual observation and experience.
8 + 0.3
q. = 0.14C.(N - 3) (
)
28
'
R.c,s.
(10.4)
Copyrighted material
where
Alternatively. safe bearing pressure may be obtained from the ultimate net bearing
capacity of footings as per IS: 6403-1971. A factor of safety, say 2.5, may be applied and
the weight of soil (removed by excavation) is added 10 get the gross bearing capacity.
For wells founded in overconsolidated clay and c lay shale, scour is much less and
effective depth or embedment is usually much more. So, skin friction may be considered
over a part of embedded length with due allowance for possible gap due to tilt. However, the
general practice is to ignore the skin friction and calculate allowable bearing pressure from
bearing capacity and seulement analysis by treating the well as a deep footing and using
relevant equations discussed in Chapters 6 and 7.
In case of rock. the allowable bearing pressure may be estimated from crushing scrength
of rock or from judgement based on core recovery and R & D.
10.8
Copyrighted material
\Vt:ll Foundmions
+ 273
The permissible strcsscs may be increased by 15% for (N + T) case. and by 50% for
(N + T + S) case. Also when wind or eanhquake foroes are considered. lhe allowable
bearing pressure may be increased by 25%.
With the knowledge or the magnirude, directjon, and points or application or all the
forces and for the worst combination of forces. the resultant venical force \V and resultant
horizontal rorces P across the pier and Q along the pier, are determined. The horizontal force
acting in the direction of the transverse axis of the pier, that is, perpendicular to the flow, is
more critical for stability. The forces must satisfy the following conditions of equilibrium:
( I 0.5)
i.e., total downward force = base reaction + friction on the sides of the well
(I 0.6)
i.e., net lateral earth pressure including friction at the base should be zero.
( 10.7)
i.e .. the algebraic sum of moments at base due to net lateral eanh pressure, friction on sides
ond base reaction should be zero.
10.9
LATERAL STABILITY
'
.:L
i AX
C .
rlgldb<Jikllead
Copyrighted material
q,,., :
....
;..;...;
T
H
0
D
1~.,-~
KpY'D
Fig. 10.6 Force and deflection diagrams of a well for rotation about base.
D D
D3
KA) H + D
(10.8)
(10.9)
If there is unscoured soil of thickness Z above the maximum scour level. then its effect on
active earth pressure is considered. As a result.
I
D 2 (D + Z)
q.., : 6y'(K,-KA) H +D
(10. 10)
Q =
Qmax
= B qmux.
F
(1 0.12)
If the applied horizontal force Q is grealer lhcn Q., then lhe moment al the bose, M 8 due 10
unbalaneed horizonlal force (Q - Q.) is given by
M 8 = (Q - Q.)(H + D)
( 10. 13}
Thus, 1he foundation pressure (maximum frrm or minimum fm..J at the base is given by
Copyrighted material
z:
W M
!=A
where
= net
( 10.14)
direct vertical load on the base taking into i.lCC-o unt buoyancy and skin
friction,
10.9.2
IRC Method
Correct evaJuation of passive relief is a very important fac tor in the design of a well
foundation. because it governs the depth to which the well is to be sunk. Views differ
regarding the assumptions and methods. to be adopted for working out its values. The main
points to be addressed while deciding for the method are:
(a) whether the rolation of the foundation takes place only at the base or at points
above or below the base,
(b) whether the skin friction on the sides can be considered in rhe calculation of well
resistance, and
(c) what fraction of applied moment is resisted by soil resistance on the sides and base
resistance.
Bombay method
This method is based on the foHowing.. assumptions:
(a) The point of ro01tion of the well is at base level.
(b) The effect of skin friction on the sides of the well should be ignored.
(c) Until the question or sharing of moment between sides and bi.lse is finally resolved,
only the relief from resultant passive resistance is to be considered in the design .
(d) For lateral resistance of well. only the difference between passive and active
pressure is considered.
(e) Coefficients of active pressure
and passive pressure Kp at any deplh below
scour level are to be considered in the following manner:
x...
K, =
-~--;==;=~
cos6 I +
(
(10. 15)
Copyrighted material
~= --r-~==~~~
(10.16)
sin(jl + o)sinjl)'
coso
rz
K, = N
2c
-'"F.
yZ
2C
..JN
(10 .17)
'~l .~t
:;-lt
Kp = -+~
where
~~~tO!
(10.18)
...
,.
9=
9.
limited to 22.5''),
'' '
..
, '
N,
tan2 ( 45 + jlf2),
y = su~merged unit weight of soil, 3J)d
Z = depth below design scour level.
The total soil re~istance is obtained as algebric sum of the areas of the rorcl: diagram due to
active and passive pressure.
,..
The factors, of safety fpr. detel1Jl\oing,f1>e net, permissib.Je soil (\'SiStanpe mobi)izeq below
maximum scour,Jevel ,are
.
.
Load combina~on '
(excluding seismic/wind)
.. . :'
For load combiJ!ation . ., ,
(including seismic/wind)
2
3
1.6 11m
2.4
Noncohesive soil
Cohesive soil
~~~c.frr;lfi
' I
IRC: 45-1972
'
The method is based
on;' model .and prototype
studies.
;.
.
,;
., It has been observed that,
sharing !'f the moment betwee~.sides liJld .~ase continuously changes "!i\h increasing
deformation of soil and
.
,
1
elastic 'theory gives $oii' prb.ssure at tlie sides a~d 1lhe base under' design load. To
detennine the actual faccor of safety, it would be nW.SSa' to calculate''ihe ultimate
soiJ resi-stance.'
' ": .. '
' " ~
...
,,,,;#
,,,,I
'J
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Stop 7
If any or all of the conditions in Steps 3, 4 and 6 do not satisfy. redesign the well
accordingly.
Step 8
Repeat the same steps for combination with wind/seismic separately.
Derivation of the theoretical relationships can be obtained from lRC: 45- 1972. The
pressure distribution and denection diagrams of a well used in the derivation rue presented in
f ig. 10.7.
Scour level
Iflii
t.---8 -->I
Plan
c ...... 3. ~
(x~~~
Deftecdonat-
"'l___LJT
"'
.i..
Pressure distribution
at base
Fig. 10.7 Pressure and deflection diagrams of a well for elastic case.
The applied loads are increased by multiplying with suitable load facton and the ultimate
resistance is reduced by appropriate strength facton. The two are then compared.
Step 1
Compute the applied load for different combinations of loading using appropriate load facton
as
(a) 1.1 W0 + 1.6WL
( b ) 1.1 W0 + W + l.4( WL + P, + P, )
Copyrighted material
where.
IV0
IV0
= dead load.
W8
P(' = wate-r current force,
P, = earth pressure.
P .,, = wind forces, and
P, -= seismic force.
Step 2.
Check for maximum average pressure at base and ensure that
w
"' !ts!L
A
2
(10.26)
where.
II' = lOlal downward load acting al !he base,
A = area of the base or well, and
q.11 = ultimale bearing capacily of !he soil below !be well base.
lnere.ase base area if the condition is not satisfied.
Stop 3
Calculate the res1sung moment at base. M,, along the plane of rotation (as already
menlioned, !he poinl of ro<ation is taken at 0.2D above !he base)
Mb
= a\8 tan\1
(10.27)
where,
8 = diamete.r of circular wells and width parallel to the direction of forces in case
of square or rectangular wells and
a = a constant depending on !be shape of well and depth to width ratio D/8.
DIB
0.5
1.0
1.5
0.41
0.45
o.so
2.0
0.56
2.5
0.64
The values are for square/rectangular well. For circular wells. the values of a are to be
multiplied by 0.6.
Step 4
Compute the ultimate moment of resistance on the side of well due to passive soil resistance.
M, and due to frictiona1 resistance on side. M1.
For rectangular wells,
M, = O.IOy'D'(Kp - K)L
(10.28)
(10.29)
Copyrighted material
Wll Foundation.s + 28 1
For circular wells,
(10.30)
StepS
Compute the total resisting moment,
M, = Mb + M, + M1
( 10.3 1)
I m
11,,,/,
,77
R'"'"-,-,
,,,,
\','''\\
,,,
1
1\ 1
11 ,,,,,,
l t 11
I ( \ \ \ \ .... ~=-::"'~') / I I I J I
, , , , , __ _ ,,I ' ' jf
\ \
''
\\
..
"'"
(a) Smal
777
'""
"'
~~_,
--
_..
_~_
de!>ttl of embedment
Fig. 10.8 Pattems of faiklre of soil supporting well.
ln either case, the soil fails over a circular/cylindrical path with centre of rotation
somewhere above the base. For wells with large depth of embedment, the plastic flow at the
side follows the same concept as that of a rigid bulkhead.
10.9 .4
Guidelines for caJcuJation of passive pressure on 3butment wells in any type of soil. and on
wells in cohesive soils are given in IRC: 78- 1983. The basic assumptions and procedure of
design n.rc in agreement with ..Bombay method" except that the effect of skin friction is
allowed to be considered in calculating resistance against moment and direct load.
The expressions of permissible resisting moments for pier and abutment wells in
cohesive soil are presented under this subsection.
Copyrighted material
ic__rD_N,~.,
ul
Fig. 10.9 Active and passive pressure diagram for pier weJI in cohesive soil.
= depth
2c[ii"; <: D
r
c = cohesion
r=
Permissible moment.
M, =
~ ( 2c.JN, ~
+ yDN,
~ ~) 8
( 10.32)
For d,<D
M, =
(10.33)
1
(a)
(b)
(e)
material
or,
( 10.34 )
For d, <:. D
then P. = 0, that is,
same as
in
case
I of pier well.
For d, < D. that is, (a) > (b) but < (b) + (c)
P exists below dl"
At base,
Po
(10.35)
Copyrighted material
m = 0.275 mm
Silt factor.
f = 1.76..{,;; = 0.923
q =
D.1sc harge mtenslty.
24 18
=
- 20.15 m3/s/m
12 0
x 12.92 = 4.30 m
= 68..25 -
4.30
=64.95 m
For better embedment in dense sand. provide grip length which is 1.5 times well diameter
= 6.75 m
Thus, founding level provided = 68.25 - 6.75 = 61.50 m
Allowable bearing pressure, q. can be calculated using Eq. (10.4) as
q. = 0.14
1.5(24- 3)(
2 x\~s3 r 0.5 X 45 X 2
45
= 56.5 11m2
565 kNim2
Example 10.2
The subsoil at the typical pier location of a major bridge consists of q1edium to coarse sand
(N,., = I I) upto a depth of 6 m from bed level (RL + 9.20 m). This is underlain by 9 m
thick layer of very stiff to hard sandy silty clay (N""' > 30), overlying highly weathered rock
(RQD ~ 0).
Using Laceys formula calculate the mnximum scour depth and determine the founding
level of the well Also. estimate the allowable net beolring pressure if the diameter of the well
is 6 m.
Copyrighted material
SoiMtion
= 1.34(
(~~~s~T'
= 11.70 m
Maximum scour deplh = 2
x 11.70 = 23.40 m
= 35
N = 32, N1 = 33,
' = 1.2. s 1 = 0 .6
d = d 1 =I+ 0.1
Or
q,11
(!}a+S
" I
(10 X 12 (32 - I)
+ (10 X 12)
3
+ { )"
1.2
I)
+ (0.5
10
33
0.6
0 .5)
Copyrighted material
Using IRC methods, cheek the adequacy of design of the pier well of a bridge
(Fig. JO. II(a)). Use the following data on loads and soil propenies:
i7
FH
HFL 69.83 m
~ r;::::::::;:li_JJ<..:L"'Wl"" 68.16 m
H,
10,822
.
......
..............
...
... ....
~:
~<.
Sand
na:
10.3.
Loading:
Vet1ical Load:
DL = 12,400 kN
U
..
= 1390 kN
13,790 kN
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
-----;;--~c;:o;:s-'=;=~==;-r
Kr =
cos.5(l _
cos6
0.703
= 7.30
2
0.94 (1 - 0.68)
= 7.30 -
Kp - K
0.265
= y'(Kp -
q=,
= 7.035
KA)cos8
3
I ( D' )
I
(12.678)
= 6m D + H = 6 x 6 1.8 x 12.678 + 11.925
= 839.3 kN/m2
Allowable horizontal fon:e,
'"''
1.6
f. . = w
"'"
13 790
= 564.6 kN/m2
24.42
N = 20,
c.
= 1.5
Rw
= 0.5
8 = 5.5
c.,
=2
Step I
=13,790 kN,
= 48,680 kNm,
= 1755 kN
Copyrighted material
Step 2
D8 = 5500
18 =
I,
+ 2 x 38 = 5576 mm
~ (5.576)' =
= LIY
0.9
12
p' = 13n
47.43 m4
5.5
K,
0 38
.I
= 1
I = 18 + ml, ( I + 2 f./a)
= 47.43 + I
840.574 ( I + 2
0.364
0.138)
= 972.45 m'
Step 3
r =
D(_l_) =
2
ml,
M
48,680
-;:-(I + jJjJ' )- fiW =
_
( I + 0.649 X 0.364) - 0.649
7 33
8210 - 8950 -740 kN < H
, + pW =
-M( l-JJJJ)
r
13,790
13,790
48,680
_
(I - 0.649 X 0.364) + 0.649
7 33
5072.3 + 8950.7
14,023 kN > H
Step 4
mM
I x 48,680
_
972 45
= 1.25 x
64.7
7.035 = 64.7
= 80.88' > 50
s
W - f./pMB
A
21
: 13,790 - 0.364
24.42
= 465.8 137.7
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
,.ll,
J:
\
f<- 4.500 m ...,
HFL 69.830m
Te
p,
~Max.lfllUm SOOU'
d 62.088 (1.27d,)
E
&1
I .s~
Foonding
lew!
F
45
~60m
~
I Ill
>I
FlO. 10.12 Elevation and eanh pressure few bridge in Example 10.3.
Given:
Total Vertical Load V = 11,4n.8 kN
Horizontal Force F11 = 3446.5 kN
Moment M
= 17.020 kNm
Bombay method
11,020
t=H 1 +D=-=
= 22.35 m
'F"
3446.5
D = 16.628 m
q,... =
v'
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
W~ll
Foundations + 293
IRC: 5-1998, Standard Specifications and Code at Practiu for Road Bridge, Section I,
General Features of Design, The Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi. 1998.
IRC: 45-1972.
Reco,urre~rdations
Scour L<v<l in the Dign of Well Foundation ofBridg, The Indian Roads Congress,
New Delhi, 1972.
IRC: 78-1983. Standard Specifications and Code of Practiu for Road Bridges, Section: VII,
Foundation and Substructure, 1st Revision, The Indian Roads Congress, New Delhi, 1994.
IS: 6403- 1971, Indian Standard Code of Practice for Determination of Allowable Bearing
PreSJure otr Shallow Found41ious, Indian Standard Institution, New Delhi, 1972.
Peck, R.B. and A.R.S.S. Bazuraf ( 1969), Discussion on Paper by D' Appolonia, el al.,
Journal Soil Mech. and Found. Div. ASCE, Vol. 95, SM. No. 3.
Teng, W.C. (1962), Foundation Design, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Terza8hi, K. (1943),
11~eoretical
Copyrighted material
Foundations on
Expansive Soils
11.1 INTRODUCTION
Some cohesive soils undergo swelling when they come into contac.t with water and shrink
when water is squeezed out. Foundations built on these soils undergo movement with
swelling and shrinkage of the soil. As a resul~ there is considerable cracking and other fonns
of distreos in the buildings.
Expansive soils are mostly found in the arid and semi-arid regions of the world. They
cover large areas of Africa, Australia, India, United States, South America, Myanmar and
some countries of Europe. In India, expansive soils cover nearly 2 percent of the land area
and are called black cotton soil because of their colour and conon growing potential. Large
areas of Dc<x:an plateau, Andhra Pradesh, Kamataka, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharastra have
deposits of expansive soil.
Expansive soiJs derive their swelling potential mainly from montmorillonite mineral
which is present in these soils. They are residual soils formed by the weathering of
basaltic rocks under alkaline environment. Extended periods of dry climate cause desiccation
of the soil but rains cause swelling near the ground surface. The depth of the swelling zone is
not much-being less than 5 m in most cases. However, lhe active zone over which lhere are
seasonal changes in moisture content. varies from l.S m to 4 m (O'NeiJI and Poormoayed,
1980).
11.2
The swelling characteristics of a soil depend largely on the type of clay mineral present in the
soil. Differential Thermal Analysis (DTA), X-ray diffraction, and electrOn microscopy are
common methods of detennining the proportion of different minerals present in a soil. Some
simple laboratory tests are often used to determine the swelling potential of natural soil.
11.2 .1
Free-swell Test
This test is performed by pouring 10 g of dry soil, pa<Sing 425 micron sieve, in a 100 cc
gradunted cylinder filled with water. The soil collects at the bottom of the cylinder and
2114
Copyrighted material
final
The pen:ent free swell of predominant clay minerals is given in Table 11.1. Kaolinite and
illite have percent free swell less than 100 and are generally regarded as non-swelling
minerals. MontmOrillonite, on the other hand, bas high sweiHng potential.
Table 11.1
Monunorillonite (Bentonite)
Kaolini1e
Utile
1201)...2000
80
-'0
Gibbs and Holtz (1956) suggested that soils having fru swell above 50% may be expected to
cause problem to light sttuctures.
11.2 .2
Two samples of oven-dried soil (10 g) passing 425 micron sieve are taken and poured into
100 cc graduated glass cyliode~ne filled with water and the other with kerosene.
Kerosene, being a non-polar liquid does n(l( cause any volume change in the soil. After 24
hour$, the volumes of soil in the two cylinder$ are measured aod the differential free swell.
DFS is obWned
DFS
Moderate
High
Very high
Lc:ss than 20
20-35
35-50
Ot<Okt than
so
Copyrighted material
!J.H
x 100
to
\ 1\\'
\
\ \
\ \\
l.:"{ 70
1\~0~
'
0.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
Natu"" - content (%)
f'G. 11.1 ReladooJhlp between hee swen., water content. and
(aftO< Vijaywrglya and Gha:Wii, 1973).
11.2 .4
l~ukl
limit
Swe>Ding Prenure
The swelling pressure indicates the external presswe required to prevent swelling of a soil
when the latter comes into contact with water. The test is done in the consolidation
apparatus. Water is added to the specimen and as it stans to swell. pressure is applied in
small incremeniS to prevent swelling. The test is continued till lhe sample just begins to
settle. This gives the swelling pressure (p,) of lhe sample (Sridharan et al. 1986). As a
general rule, a swelling pressure of 2()...30 kN/m2 is considered low. A highly swelling soil,
for example, bentonite may have swelling pressure as high as 1501)...2000 kN/m 2
Some empirical formulae have been suggested for estimating the swelling pressure of a
ind~x
2.7- 24(;/)
Copyrighted material
11.2 .5
Potential sweiJ is defined as the vertic.al sweiJ under a pressure equal to overburden pressure.
A number of cla.~ification systems for the swelling potential have been proposed (Seed et at.
1962: Sowers and Sowers, 1970: Chen, 1988; Vijayvergiya and Ghazzali 1973). These are
generally based on the Atterberg Umits of the soil. O' Neill and Poormoayed ( 1980)
summ.:irized the U.S. Army Waterways Experiment Station criterion based on plasticity index
and the potential swell. This classification of expansive soil is expressed in Table 11 .3.
Tab&t 11.3 Classification or e.xpansive soil
Uquid limit
Pot~nJial modi
Plas.ticity inda
S~vlling pot~ntitJI
<SO
<25
< 0.5
Low
~(,()
25-lS
> 3S
O.S-I .S
> I.S
Marginal
>00
Higl>
USBR (1960) gives similar criteria for clays based on colloid percent Oess than 0.001 mm)
and shrinkage limit of the soil, which arc shown in Table 11.4.
Table 11.4 Criteria for expanshe clays
Colloid
Plasticity lnda
Shrin!a1~
limit
C()ttlmf ('~!)
> 28
2~30
13--23
< iS
> 3S
2S-41
IS-28
> 10
<II
7- 12
IQ-16
> IS
Proboblr
uponsion (~)
> 30
2Q-30
IQ-20
< 10
Dtgru of
uponsit.M.eu
Very high
Hiah
Medium
Low
Copyrighted material
Roof sl&b
FlOOr stab
heaved
t t t
Expansion
to swelling.
11.4.1
A common method of building fou ndation in expansive soil is to provide under-reamed piles
below the foundation. Here. the structural load is transferred to the soil beneath the zone of
Outtuation of water content. The piles are taken to depths of 5- 6 m, that is. well beyond the
expansive zone. These piles are bored cast-in-situ piles with the lower end e nlarged to fonn
under-reamed bulbs with the help of special tools. Fig. 11 .3. The piles generally have shaft
Copyrighted material
caslng
(3)
aouom hinge
in under-teamed
~=Mles.
!L
'AT
:
/<t."-.
"
Sin~
1..,
'A.l_
/
under-ream
Double underream
Copyrighted material
A11
At'1
(1 1.1)'
= surface area
The safe capacity of the pile may be obtained by applying a factor of safety of 2S-3. The
uplift capacity of under-reamed piles are obtained from Eq. (11.1) but without considering
the end bearing component A,N,Cpl
The main fun clion of under-renmed piles is to transmit the vertical Joad into the soil
below the swelling zone. ln case the soil above the under-reamed section tends to s well, uplift
forces are creared on the foundation which the under-reamed bulbs would be able 10 counrer.
There is some doubl over 1he practicability of forming the under-reamed bulbs in granular soil.
Obviously. the under-reamed section of the pile should be able to stJ>nd on its inclined faces
during boring and till the concreting is done. For this. sufficient cohesion should be available.
Clayey soil provides this cohesion without much difficuhy. But the fonnation of bulb i n
granular soil is not free from uncertainties. Field experiments have shown that the sand tends to
disintegmte during the stand up time and no bulb is really formed.
It should also be noted that the under-reamed piles should penetrate well into the firm
gromld to give sufficient end bearing at lhe level of the under-retlms. Presence of soft clay
benenth the expansive soil would preclude the use of under-reamed piles. Indiscriminate use
of under-reamed piles simply because the soil at ground surface is expansive in narure., ofren
serves no useful purpose.
Copyrighted material
AI
sa<* fiU
Swelling can also be controlled by applying a pressure on the ground at least equal to the
swelling pressure of the soil. Attempts have been made to apply a surcharge on the footing
but this does not prevent the swelling between foundations. l.f surcharge loading is to be
applied, this should be done to cover the entire building area by a suitable non-swelling soil.
The depth of surcharge should, or course, be such that the surcharge pressure is at least equal
to the swelling pressure of the soil. Surcharge loading is depicted in Fig. 11.6.
area
Surcharge pressure
rD p,
Swelling pressure p,
CNS layer
Katti (1979) proposed the use of a cOheaivenonswelling (CNS) layer to reduce the effect of
swelling. A clay soil of adequate thickness having non-swelling clay minerals, is placed on
the subgradc and the foundations arc placed on this layer. The optimum thickness of the CNS
layer is to be detennined from large scale tests. The method has been used in canal lining
works, as shown in Fig.. 11.7 but its use in foundations is still limiled.
Ac:tlWt zone
Copyrighted material
Chemical Stabilization
Attempts have been made to control the swelling potential of expansive soil by lime-slurry or
limcflynsh injection. Such injection is done through pressure grouting technique on a close
grid around the foundation to cover the entire foundation on:n. Bu1 the method is expensive
and has not been widely used. However, lime slurry injection has been used to stabilize
foundations on expansive soil after occurrence of distress.
11.4.3
Tile foundation may be made sufficienlly rigid by providing interconnected beams and band
lintel to withstand the effects of differential movement on the structure. Stiffened mat
foundations (Lytton. 1972) have also been adopted to counter the effect of diffe.rential
ground movement. Premlatha (2002) carried out a study on the use of stiffened mat for low
rise structures in Chennai, based on evaluation of heave of the soil. A three dimensional soil
structure interactive analysis was done 10 suit the loading. climate. and environmental
c.onditions of Chennai. However. these methods are rather expensive and have not been
widely used for low to medium structures.
Design of building fou ndation in expansive soil needs careful evaluation of the swelling
potential of the soil in terms of the mineralogy. Attcrbcrg Limits. and the swelling pressure.
Mineralogy and Atterberg limits indicate the ne(.-essity or otherwise of special design. Only
swelling pressure gives a true understanding of the magnitude of the swelling potential. In
particular. light structures are more vulnerable to distress because the bearing pressure is
often less than the swelling pressure and the foundation is prone 10 uplift forces. For a
minimum depth of foundation of 2 m with the bottom of the trench filled with sand, a
broken stone is ofren used to minimize the effect of swelling RCC plinth beams. Band lintel
also helps 10 withstand the effect or swelling.
Under-reamed piles and s urcharge loading seem to be the most suitable methods of
countering the effect of s welling. In addition, good surface drainage and impervious paving
around the s ite help 10 prevent wa1er percolation in the soil.
Copyrighted material
Foundations
011
Expansiv~
Soils
+ 303
USBR (1960), &mit MaJ111al. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, Colorado. July. 1960.
Vijayvergiya V.N. and 0.1. Gha.uali ( 1973). Prediction of Swelling Potemial of Nawral
Clays. Proceedings 3rd lnrernarional Research and Engineering Conference on
Expansive Clays. pp. 227- 234.
Copyrighted material
Ground Improvement
Techniques
12.1 INTRODUCTION
Soils are deposited or fanned by nature under different environmental conditions. Man does
not have any control on the process of soil formation. As such the soil str:lla at a site arc co
be accepted as they are and any construction has to be adap!ed to suit the subsoil condition.
The existing soil at a given site may not be suitable for supporting lhe des~ facilities such
as buildings, bridges. dams. and so on because safe bearing capacity of a soil may not be
adequate to suppon the given load. Although pile foundations =y be adopted in some
situations, they often become too expensive for low to mediumrise buildings. In such cases~
the properties of the soil within lhe zone of influence have to be improved in order to make
them suitable to suppon the given load.
Ground improvement for the purpose of foundation construction essentially means
increasing the shear strength of the soil and reducing the compressibility to a desired extent.
A number of ground improvement techniques have been developed in the last fifty years.
Some of these techniques need specialized equipment to achieve the desired resuJt. In this
chapter. only the common ground improvement techniques t\thich use simple mechanical
means to improve soil properties for low to mec:Uumrise strucrures are considered. For tall
structures. pile foundatio ns with or without basement would generally give the most
economic foundations.
12.2
The mechanics of ground improvement depends largely on the type of soil-its grain-size
distribution, water content. structural arrangement of particles and so forth. lo general,
ground improvement is caJied for in soft cohesive soil with low undrained shear strength
(c. < 2.5 t/m2 ) and loose sand (N < 10 blows per 30 em). The mechanics of ground
improvement can be understood in terms of the structural arrangement of particles
constituting the soil deposit.
Copyrighted material
Grou11d
lmprol!em~nt
Tecll11iques + 305
filled with water. Figure 12.1(a) depicts the flocculated structure of cohesive soil. Such
structural arTangement with high water content is unstable and gives high compressibility.
Under the influence of increasing overburden pressure or extemaJ load. the soil consolidates
and the particles tend to re-orient themselves along horizontal planes (that is, perpendicular to
the line of action of the applied load). Such a dispersed structure is more stable and the
reduction of water content brings the particles closer tOgether to reduce compressibiJity. as
shown in Fig. 12.1(b). Thus, reduction of water content through application of external load
would cause improvement of engineering properties of cohesive soil.
, --....._-
--.---
--~-r~~
-\=~-=s~~~~~
----~--------~~~
-------------------.
-.
------------------------------
~=-:---=-~-=='J"--=---:
---------------------
Granular ooll
Panicles of granular soil such as sand and gravel, have three-dimensional structure. For the
purpose of understanding, they can be represented by spheres which in loose condition are
arranged one on top of the other as shown in Fig. 12.2(a). Granular soils in this condition
have low relative density. The shear strength is also low because of the tendency of the
panicles to roll over one anothu under the influence of shearing stresses. lf the same
panicles are rearranged as shown in Fig. 12.2(b), the void space decreases and the relative
Copyrighted material
soil can be improved by increasing its relative density by external means. Following ground
improvement techniques are used for granular soil:
Chemical injection and grouting are also adopted as methods of ground improvemcnL
In these cases, the chemicals penetrate into the voids and get set to strengthen the soil fabric.
Normally, these techniques require specialized equipment to achieve success in the field.
These methods are not discussed in this chapter.
SOft day
--------- - ..........
Fig. 12.4
Copyrighted material
308 +
111~ory
In the earlier days, sand drains, 300-500 mm diamerer, were insralled by filling with
sand the vertical holes made into the soil at predetermined spacing. Nowadays sand wicks and
prefabricned venical drains (PVD), e.g., band drains are mostly used ro have more efficienr
consolidarion under the preload. When a soil is preloaded by dead weighr, the horizonral
drainage path is reduced and the soil undergoes radial drainage. Each drain well has an
axisymmetric Zone of influence with a radius approximately l/2 times the well spacing. 1be
flow "!ithin the zone is a combination of radjaJ flow towards lhe sand drain and vertical flow
towards the free-draining boundary. The average degree of consolidation is rhen given by,
U=
where
I - (I - U)(l -
UiJ
(12. 1)
u.
Assuming unifonn vertical strain ar the surface, Barron (1948) gave the expression for degree
of consolidation due to radial drainage as,
u. =
2
where F.= (
n
2"
n -I
)log.n -
I - exp(-
T, =
c,:d,
dra1. n d tameter
'
= radial
(12.2)
1
(3n'~
).
4n
s;:)
d
an
time factOr.
The drains may be insralled in either square or triangular grid. Considering the influence area
of each drain to be circular. we have
(12.3)
where
ct. 1.13s
n d.Jd.,
Fig, 12.1
s
ct. t.05s
T, =c,tld]
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
fabric
Band dralno
Field control is essential for any preloading work. It is necessary to ensure that the
consolidation under preload is essenliaUy complete before the building is builL Settlement
and pore-pressure measurement give useful information in this regard. A simple
insuumenration scheme is shown in Fig. 12.10. In most routine jobs, settlement measurement
on vertical rods and pore-pressure measurement with a few standpipe piezometers, around the
periphery of the preload should be sufficient.
Copyrighted material
Dastidar et al. (1969) described preloading with sand wicks for four storey residential
buildings at Salt Lake, Kolkata. Salt Lake is a vast stretch of low lying marshy land in
the eastern side of Kolkata which originally served as a natural drainage outfall of the city.
The area was reclaimed by filling with dredged fine sand and silt from the river Hooghly in
the early sixties.
The reclaimed fill varies in thickness from 1.5-3.0 m. The subsoil. at a depth of about
12 m from the present GL is soft and organic in nature with shear strength seldom exceeding
1.5 tlm2, as depicted in Fig. 12.11. Below this layer, there is stiff clay with shear strength of
5-10 tlm2. This is underlain by medium/dense brown silty sand below a depth of 16 m.
- ""'
Silty
/Grey
flne
sand
Sand wicks
12
2nd stage
i.~:20
.,:
0
I~
tst
'
stage
30
..
"''
O
40
:so
60
70
Time tdays)
""
['......
l ........_
200
Fig. 12.11 Preload~ at San Lake, KOikata (Oastidar et al. 1969).
II is obvious that the soft clay wou.ld be liable to undergo excessive settlement even
under low to medium-rise buildings on shallow foundations. Prelooding is primarily aimed 111
consolidating the sof1 c lay and making it strong e nough to suppon the building. As an
experiment, 75 m.m diameter sand wicks were provided at l.S m square grid to accelerate the
consolidation. Loading was done upto SO kN/m2 in two stages. It was found that
consolidation under each stage of loading was completed in 5-6 weeks. The buildings were
founded on spread footings on the preloaded soil.
Pilot (1977) reponed the case history of preloading the Palavas embankment. Vane
shear test was done before and after preloading to determine the gain in shear strength or the
soil. The measurement showed increased undrained shear strength of the soil throughoot the
depth of sand dro.ins while in the area without sand dro.ins. the strength gain was limited to
the top 4 m of ahe soil where consolidation was only effective in the first 26 months. This is
presented in Fig. 12. 12.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
~sigo
Preloading for a single building with little wori<ing space in the surrounding may 1101
be always feasible from considetltions of time and cost. Although theoretically sound, the
C0$1 of preloading per unit area goes up on accounl of the high cost of uansportalioo
""JUited 10 mobilize the preload and then 10 dispMe of the preload. Typically, a single sllge
preloading job needs a time of al least 10-12 weeks before a site may be made ready for
con&trUCiioo. The following srages of work are involved in the process:
(a) insullalion of saod wicks,
(b) laying drainage blanke~
(c) mobilizing the preload,
(d) lime for consolidation, and
(e) removal of preload.
Preloadiog is bes< suiled when a l~~~&e numbet of medium-rise buildings are ""Julted to
be buill in a consuuction project. M ultiple use of the sand wiclting equipment and the
preload material reduce the unit coot.
(b) acting as vertical drains 10 allow subsoil consolidation to occur quickly under any
given loading.
Greater stiffness of stone colunms compared 10 that of the urrounding soil cauaes a
large portion of the vertical load to be transferred to the columns. The entire soil below a
foundation, therefore, acts as a reinforced soil with higher load carrying capacity than the
virgin ground. FUrther, pori-pressure dissipation by radial Oow accelerates the consolidalion
of the subsoil. Engelhardt et al. (1974) dernonstraled the beneficial effects of stone coiWilDS
by canying out load tests in soft claY with and without stone column reinforcement.
F~gure 12.14 is a graphical representation of the same.
0
-(kPI)
1!!0
200
2SO
-20
J:
Wllhoulcdumn
llll
Fig. 12. 14 Elledlvenns ol slono cclt.mns (Enge4h- e1 el.. 1974).
-.
Copyrighted material
vibroflo~
as shown in
Fig. 12.15, which is 2.0-3.0 m long with a diameter varying between 300 mm to 300 mm.
Extension tubes are attached to the vibrofiOI whenever greater depth of uutment is needed.
1be vibrofiot is a hollow steel tube containing an eccentric weight mounted at me bottom of a
vertical shaft; the energy is imparted by routional mocion through the shaft while the eccentric
wejghl impans vibration in a horizontal plane. Vibration frequencies are fixed at 30 lh or
t. Botlr1g .... -
2. Ccrrc>ac:tlon
3.-
'".l;r;:=
Ultillg poJiey
tMooofold Wallt hoMs
H)'draiAic llooea
f---F--.a
Copyrighted material
SO Hz to suit electric power cycles. The free fall amplitude varies between S- 10 mm. The
machine is suspended from a vibration damping connector by follower tubes through which
power lines and water pipes pass. These allow simultaneous release of water jets to remove the
soil around the vibroflot as the latter makes its way into the hole under venical pressure from
the top. When the vibroflot reaches the desired depth, tbe water jet at the lower end is cut off
and granular backfill is poured through the annular space between the ~ole and the vertical pipe
by head load or conveyor as the vibnuory poker is withdrawn. Well graded stone backfill of
size 1S mm to 2 mm is used and compaction is achieved by vibration of the poker as it is Hfted
up: Due to compaction, the stones are pushed sideways into the soft soil to produce a stone
column of diameter larger than the diameter of the borehole. Normally, 600-900 mm diameter.
stone column can be obtai~d for 300-SOO mm diameter vibroflot.
Ht..:>ll-- Bailer
wen graded baclrnll ..
75mmto2mm
..
Copyrighted material
"
10
20
o(
40 60
140 20Q
Rammed stone columns have been used extensively in lndia. They are found to be quite
suitable for all k.i nds of soil (Datye 1982). Nayak (1982) has suggested that the angle of
internal friction, ; may be as high as 45 for compacted granular fi ll in rammed stone
column. whereas for vibrofl.oted stone column 4/ ranges between 38-42. It is also to be
noted that in vibrofloted s tone column, the top about I m deep does not get properly
compacted for lack of ~nflnement near the surface, whereas in practice this portion of the
s tone column is required to take greater Joad intensity. ln case of rammed stone column,
proper compaction can be achieved even for this length because of lateral confinement of the
Copyrighted material
D-.-,er of 110M colamn: For a particular driving method, vibroDotation oc rammed stone
column, the diamecer of the finished stone column depends on the strength and consistency of
the soil, the energy of compaction In rammed column, and diameter of poker with fins of the
vibrollot. The softer the soil, greater is the diameter of the pile because compaction of the
aggregate pushes the stone into the surrounding soil. The diameter of pile installed by
vibroOot varies from 0.6 m in stiff clay to 1.1 m in very soft clay. Rao and Ranjan (1985)
reported that using the rammed ~e<hnique, the installed pile diasneter is about 20-25% more
. than the initial diameter of the borehole. Nayak (1982) has given a chart to correlate the
diameter of stone column and the undrained shear strength of soil, as depidod in Fig. 12.18.
The d.iameler obtained from Fig. 12.18 is the nominal diameter to be consiclered in deaign.
10
- --<gil>
20
oo-'l
- 40
30
1. I
1.2
1.3
f/
v/
..
...
v
v
150
1.4
O~lofot.-cdumn
, ... 12.11
~ "' .... -
dlomelor "'llono -
~ 11182~
Copyrighted material
GmNI
/~~tprowfMrtl
Techniqrus 31'
Dq>th of stone c:oiiUflll: The stone column is l..Wled below a foundation upto the deplh of
10ft ConJP1'0'5ible stnlta within the zone of lnnuence In the subsoil. In addition to carrying
verucal load, stone c:olumns function as dtalnqe peth to di"'ipale excess ~ WOJU p<eAWe
and hence, accelerate the tate of consolidotion. Thla n::quira the stone columns to be taken
down to the depdl of major COIJ'I'ra&ible WIIA which make aignificam contribution to the
settlement of the foundation.
This point can best be undetatoed by detenninina the contribution of ...:h layer of soil
towards the settlement of the foundation. Fo< example, in the subcoil condition at Haldia
(tefet Fig. 12.19). the deplh of &Oil contributina to~ of the total settlement worts out to
17 m for SO m diameter stOtage tanka. Acc:Ofdinaly. Stone column deptha of 17 m wue
odcpted for the&e fouodaUons. Howevu. in some lttllified depoaits. the nature of
anrilication men or leas delltnNnes the deplh of stone colwm. Fo< eumple. a 10 m thick
day depo&it followed by bard clay or dense unci would ~ stone column deplh of 10 m
irrespcc1ive of the size of foundalioa.
Dll"lllml
SOl
0
H5~an
IL-
Pl 22%
...
M~
Groyalty~---
~
0.(10()) tr/NH
N 3
btc:lwii30 em
IL-
PI. 24%
w 40%
Cu 30 kNirn'
M, 0.0001 tf'llt.H
N5~cm
IL-
PI.. 22%
N 8 btow8I30 an
"'"' 0J)002 m24cN
v -~--llllyday
- - NMy- " " -
N 20 I:IIOwii30 em
IL-
Pl 18%
24~
c $5kN.'rn'
" " 0.0001 rrrl-lfiM
N 40 blowii30 em
N
1~1
tor
eo m dill;
50 bkMs/30 em
IU UA m height-* .C Hlldla.
edtr"
320
Theory a1ul
Stratum
Practic~
ThlcluNtt
of Foundation Design
Ac:f, ' )(
~~ (m)
6(m)
M,
q.
(1cN.In')
(m'.1cN)
)1.
10...
..-(%)
1.0
96.6
3.0
0.030
4.0
3.0
91.4
3.0
0.063
14.2
6.0
87.7
7.0
0.368
65.0
rv
v
4.0
63.0
4.0
0.133
63.0
3.0
76.5
2.0
0.047
89.3
89.2
54.1
1.0
0.055
96.7
\Ill
8.0
4.0
0.5
o.ott
96.2
VII
11.0
41.5
0.3
0.014
100.0
V1
0.740
Fig. 12.1e(b) Table for Mtlemenl caladation fa' 50 m diameter x 11.4 m ~ tar1t at Halcla.
Spacing of stone columns: The design of stone column foundation primarily involves
determination of a suitable spacing of stone column fo.r a chosen diameter and length of the
latter. It depends on the required load bearing capacity of the foundation and the allowable
time for consolidation by radial drainage through stone columns. It can be worked out in
terms of the del!~"" of improvement required for providing a satisfactory foundation for the
design load. The settlement improvement ratio of the reinforced ground to untreated grouod
is a function of pile spacing as shown in Fig. 12.20 (Greenwood, 1970). Mitchell and Kattl
(1981) hnvc suggested typical pile spacing for rectangular and square grid depicted in
Fig. 12 .21.
0
~-
d
h
_.. ..
25
<>:!
;~
50
~
""<.<::;
:!'j!
~&
E~
;jl
.llo
Clay olroogll
40~
>....
~ ~ /20'<Wrri'
:s
75
.
100
2.00
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
Copyrighted material
0'\
0
. [~r(1
(diamolord)
0-------0
1
fl
seone CXlfUmn
(dlamolet d)
'>]""
< +- f)
, - 1 .oe[Jl'(il
ei)J"'
+
(fl - f)
(a) Square -
Analysis of granular pile foundations for triangular grid of piles show that s ignificant
reduction in settlement occutS only if the spacing of stone column is close (sld S 4) and the
piles are insulled to fuU depth of consolidating layer. However, too close a spacing (sld s 2)
is not feasible from construction point of view. Thus. a stone column spaci'ng {s/d) of 2.~
is adopted for mQSt practical problems. Also it has been recognized that closer sp:~Cing is
preferred under isolated footing than beneath large rafts (Greenwood. 1970).
--
--{
- - :
-~
--
--
.--
~-
,
~-
...
"'
,:..,Y.!!!JI
~
Copyrighted material
dimensions~
and
(v) streSs-str.lin characteristics and angle of internal friction, .-. of the column material.
The maximum vertical effective stress; on me column CJ.,/. is reached when the soil fails
radially. that is. the maximum radial stress it can develop. CJ,p is reached. It is generally
considered that the bulging in the stone column occurs over a depth of four to six times
diameter of stone column. An average depth of four times the diameter may be used for
obtaining the failure load.
1be relation between the vertic-al and radial stresses at failure is given by.
1 +sin;'
0
The value of o1
can
of I
sin''
"
a,
(12.6)
o,. as
(12.7)
aro - u + Kc.
o1 =
where
1 + sinf'
(12.8)
o,.
u is the
pore~pressure.
Measurements carried out by Hughes and Withers (1974) in soft clay using a selfboring
pressuremeter (Camkometer) yielded K values of about 4.0, whereas Menard had earlier used
a conventional pressuremeter to obtain values of about S.S. 1be fuUscale loading tests on
stone columns performed by Hughes et al. (1975) at Canvey Island confirmed the n:liability
of Eq. (12.8) as a design tool and pmposed a K value of 4.0.
Both limit analysis (Hughes and Withers, 1974) and field experience (Thorburn 191S)
suggest that the allowable vertical stress on a single stone column may be obtained from the
empirical expression
r1., =
2Sc,
(12.9)
where c, is the undrained shear stn:ngth of the clay in the region where the bulging of the
stone column occurs and F is the fac1or of safety (sometimes FS or Fs).
Typical design load of 200-400 leN per column is obtained for 900 mm diameter stone
columns in cohesive soil of undrained shear strength of 2S-SO lcN/m2 and a factor of safety
of 2.0.
It is interesting to study the deformed shape of stone column as observed after failure
by Hughes and Wi~rs (1974). Both field and laboratory investigations show geometric4lly
s imilar deformed shapes with bulging in the upper region, as visible in Fig. 12.23. 1be data
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
324
17It!Ory
The settlement of the treated soil mostly occurs during loading by lateral drainage into the stone
columns while, the senlement due to the underlying suata occurs over a period of time
subsequently.
Behaviour of the ground reinforced with stone columns is a complex phenomenon. It
depends on various factors, such as the insitu stress deformation and strength characteristics
of the soil and the stone flU. length and diameter of the stone column. and so on. All these
ractors are very much interactive and exact theoretical analysis is difficult. So design is
gencr.dly done. by empirical methods.
The settlement of a foundation on soft clay is caused primarily by consolidation of the
soil within the zone of influence. If the loaded area is large compared to the thickness of
compressible strata. as in the case of storage tank foundations. the immediate (e1astic~
settlement is sma11. The settlement of composite ground is ca1culated with the help of
modified expression using a settlement reduction ratio (Mitchell and KJ.tti, 1981). The final
settlement is obtained by adding the settlement of lower strata with the above setdement.
Thus. for a typical case of large area loading, shown in Fig. 12.25 (Som, 1995),
(12.10)
where
o = settlement of foundation
Pc1 = settlement of untreated soil within the depth of stone column treatment
Pcz = settlement of untreated soil below the stone columns, and
f3 = settlement reduction ratio for stone column treatment
Stone c:::dumn5
Hard sntum
6
PPC1 PC2
{J
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
6 centre = 255 mm
6R.
250mm
6 edge = 150 mm
300
Fig. 12.21 Sflone column foundalion for large ClarneW llorage tarU .t Kandla: ae4llement
during hydnlleol
Copyrighted material
Ground improvement by the methnd of drop hammer is usually achieved in the top
2.5--3 m of the soil. Deep compaction is not possible by this methnd. This is clear from the
pre and post compaction density tests reported by Tsytovich et al. ( 1974) at a site in Russia.
wruch are presented in Fig. 12.28. The method is, therefore. suitable for small foundations
only.
13
0
0.5
14
18
Before
I
I
1.0
2.5
17
\
\
16
15
1\
\
.
'
\)
I
I
I
.....
r
1\
I
I
After
c:ompacOicn
o
I
3
Fig. 12.21 Oonsloy """"" e10p411 In c:on"4)adlon by drop hammer (Tsytcwleh. 1 974~
Based on experiences in Russia. Tsytovich (1974) suggested the depth to which s igoificant
improvement can be achieved by drop hammer technique. Table 12.2 presents compaction by
drop hammer in a tabulated manner.
Copyrighted material
D~sign
(m)
1.0-I.S
2. 1
1.2.-1.4
1.6
1.6-2.2
2.7- 3.5
2.2- 3.1
helsh or~ m
Hammer weight used to perform dynamic consolidation in the field is many times more
than that used for heavy tamping. It may vary from 150-2000 kN. The shape of the contact
surface and the cross-sectional area of the hammer are chosen to suit the soil type and
reaction of the ground to the impact energy. Dynamic consolidation can also be done in
saturated cohesive soil provided the fonnation is varved and contains continuous sand
partings to faciliute pore-pressure dissipalioo. In homogeneous cohesive soil. dynamil:
consolidation may be done with pre-lnstaHed vertical sand drains to effect di-ainagc. as
depicted in Fig. 12.30.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
...foo
buildings
Unpleasant
/
I
10
100
1000
Sc:oloddlo..,.., ~EIO
Fig. lUI -
o (In m)J.
12.4 .3 Vlbrocompactton
This is method of deep eompoction of granular soils where a probe is inserted into the soil
and then vibrated. Compaction is brought about by vibration, as displayed in Fig. I 2.32. The
process is essentially similar to vibnoftotation as adopled for installation of stone columns in
Water auppty
CoNslonless sol
(a)
(b)
(C)
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
A trial ground improvement work has recently been done for the proposed construction of
a 120 m high temple obout 75 km from Kolka"'. The subsoil consists of a thin layer of firm
silty clay/clayey silt followed by a deep deposit of loose to medium silty fine sand to 25 m
below GL. Thereafter, a thin lyer of stiff clay is found and the same is followed by dense to
very dense sand. 1be soil condition at the temple site is shown in Fig. 12.36. In view of the
high foundation loading anticipated from the temple structure. the ' sandy soil immediately
beneath the top silty clay 12- 14 m below GL required improvement.
Depth (m)
o ----~
, -=
Anm
~7
~-~
--.-.-.~;~
~da
~~~d~.~
--~7.~~~------------N 10
s;~nd
with mlc:a
= 1~1S
12----------------------------- -----111
30--------------------------- ------V
Copy~ighted
material
Hidden page
Ground
10
lmprov~mem
Tuhnlqw~s 335
N (biOws/30 em)
20
3()
~ 1'----..
' .... ....
/
............... I\Pool
....
---
\ Pro
10
''
12
Pile
Spacing
mx2n
<
15
(I)
Cone 10
2\''
'~
X:'~
25
o-1.4 X 1.4
Pro
a ' + -2x2
1
1
1
10
nee (MI'o)
15
20
fl
'2.8
2.8
~
12
~
1
1
1
(b)
Example ll.J
A 22 m diameter x 15 m high steel storage tank is proposed to be built in a pon aru. The
subsoil condition is shown in Fig. 12.39. Preloading with sand wicks is proposed to be done.
Design a suitable preloading scheme and estimate the settlement of the tank during hydrotest.
Copyrighted material
c. 30 I<Him'
2m --------------------~--~----~I
N1
c11 = 15 kNfmZ
U =65, R.24, w= 50
CJ1 ~0. 18
7 m -------------------------------111 Medium fWY lilly sandf..ndy ailt
N= 15
CJ1 + ., 0.08
17m - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - N
Sol.au"'
(a) Net foundation pressun:. considering 45 disper>ion of water load (140 kN/m2)
through compacted sand pad.
222
= 140 x 2 + (I.S x 20) (sand pad)
q,
(22 + 3)
n
= ""
(3'-'
0__2;;.:;)-::+:--"'(1.:.5--=5)-"
7
= 19.3 kN/m2
q,,(n) = c.,N,
Hidden page
38
"
29.5
51
FS = 338/138 = 2.5
(c) Settlement during pr<:load: Stage I
P, =SO kN/m 1
6
Layer
H(m)
11
Ill
IV
10
15
=""L....
C, Hlo p, + llp
I + e.,
g Po
1
p, (kN/m'l llp (kN/m )
48
46
31
15
14
8
36
96
!56
236
c,
I + "<>
0.06
0.16
0.08
0.08
0.05
6 (m)
0.102
0.288
0.390
0.096
0.016
0.018
0.130
I 0.520 m
( 520 mm)
Consider 90% consolidation of strata I and II, 30% in stratum III, and 10% in stratum IV
aod
v.
0.9) + (0.3
0.096) + (0.1
0.034)
= 0.383 m = 383 mm
(d) Settlement during pr<:load: Stage II
P, =50 kN/m2
6=
L 1 C,+ e
If log P.
+ llp
Pr~
Copyrighted material
H(m)
s
10
s
II
Ill
IV
IS
48
56
82
127
171
250
46
31
15
14
c,
1 + e0
0.06
0.16
0.08
0.08
0.05
6 (m)
0.031
0.152
0.183
0.076
O.oJ5
0.109
O.oJ8
l: 0.292 m
(* 290 mm)
Effective overburden pressure p. alter stag~ 1 pre~ has been detumined for full coosolldation under
the preload. ln reality. for s.lnlta Ill, IV and V. p. values would be less due to lower degree of consolidation.]
[Nou:
Consider residual settelement of stage l preload occuning in stage II and settlement for
s~age ll preload as
I 0%
30%
I 0%
Stage II : 90%
30%
I 0%
Stage I :
of stratum I and ll
of stratum Ill
of str.uum Ill and IV
of stratum I and II
of Stratum ll
of stratum Ul and IV
+ (0.9
0.183) + .(0.3
0.76) + (0.1
0.033)
= 0.262 m - 260 mm
Total settlement during stage I and slage II preload at centre is
Layer
H(m)
I
II
Ill
IV
2
5
10
15
C,
I + ~o
H log Pe + Ap
Po
Po (kNtm') Ap (kN/m2)
104
128
158
186
266
37
35
20
17
II
c,
I + 'o
0.10
0.16
0.08
0.08
0.05
6 (m)
0.026
0.084
0.04
0.110
O.oJ
0.095
O.Q25
l: 0.205 m
(.,. 205 mm)
Copyrighted material
=8 m
II -
20.9
T90
c,
d;
0.7 X 1.262
= 15 days
O.o75
Example 12.2
A steel storllge tank, 24 m diameter x 18 m high, is to
Fig. 12.40. The formation level of the ground is to be raised by a 2 m sand fill prior to
construction. The soil is proposed to be treated by 0.5 m diameter stone column. Design
suitable foundation for the storage tank.
Solution
(a) The subsoil will be preconsolidaled under the load of 2 m sand fi ll with
preinstalled Slone columns accelemting the consolidation by sand drain effect. This
will increase the shear strength of the subsoil and also help in reducing
consolidation under tank load.
(b) The tank load (that is hydrotest load) will be dispersed through the sand padfsand
fill and the subsoil will be consolidated under the dispersed load during hydrotest.
The reinforcing action of the stone columns will help to increase the overall
bearing capacity of the soil and reduce settlement.
nil
for 6p = 40 kNtml is
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Sand pad
Sand fill
E
"'
2
.
For 18 m h1gh tank, q,
= 180 X224
30
+ 2.0
1 +sin;'
. .,, (a,.- u + K c,)
I - SID 'f"
= 4.26[(18
2 - 10) X 1.5 - 10 + 4
(GWT I m BGL. K = 4;
m)
~11
50)/2.5]/0.866
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Barron, R-A. ( 1948), Consolidation of Fine-grained Soils by Drain Wells, Trans. ASCE,
Vol. 113. pp. 71&--734.
Brown, R.E. (1978), Vibroflotation Compaction of Cohesionless Soils. Joumal of
G.orec/rnical DivL<ion, ASCE. Vol. 103, No. OT 12, pp. 1437- 51.
Dastidar. A.G., S. Gupta, and T.K. Ghosh (1969), Application of Sandwick in a Housing
Projtct, Proceedings 7th International Conference on SMFE, Mexico. 2:. pp. 59-64.
Dastida.r, A.G. (1985). Treatment of Weak Soils--An Indian Perspective, Ceoteclmicol
Engineering, Vol. l, pp. 17?,..._229.
Datye. K.R. (1982), Simpler Techniques for Ground Improvement, 4th lOS Annual Lecture,
Indian GeotechniCGI Jounu>l Jan., 12(1 ): pp. 1-82.
Datye and Nagaraju (1977). Design Approach and Field Control of Stone Columns,
Proceedings lOth ICSMFE, Stockholm. Vol. 3.
Dhar, P.R- (1976), Soil Densijication by Compaction Piles at a Refinery Site, Symposium on
foundations and Excavations in Weak Soil. Calcutta.
Engelhardt, K.. W.A. Flynn. and A.A. Bayak (1974), Vlbro-replacement Method to Strengthen
Cohesive Soils in ..situ. ASCE NatWnol Structural Engineering Meeting, Cincinnati,
p. 30.
Greenwood. D.A. ( 1970), Mechanical lmprovemm of Soil below Ground Surfau,
Proceedings Ground Engineering Conference. I.C.E., London. pp. 11- 22.
Hughes. J.M.O. and N.J. Withers (1974), Reinforcing of Soft Cohesive Soil with Stone
Column, Ground Enginuring. Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 4~9.
Hughes. JM.O., NJ. Withers, and D.A. Greenwood (1975). A Field Trial of the Reinforced
Effect of a Stone Column in Soil, Geoteclrnique. Vol. 25, pp. 34-44.
Kjellman. W. ( 1948), Accelerating Consolidation of Fine-grained Soils by means of
Cardboard Wicks. Proceedings 2nd International Conference on SMFE, Rotterdam. 2:
pp. 302-305.
Mitchell, l.K. and R-K. Katti (1981), Soil improvement: Stote-ofthe-ort Report, Proceedings
lOth International Conference on SMFE, Stockholm, p. 163.
Nayak. N.V. (1982). Sum~ Columns alfd MonilOrbrg Instruments, Proceedings Symposium on
soil and rock improvement: geotextiles, reinfoit:ed earth and modem piling techniques,
Asian InStitute of Technology, Bangkok, December 1982.
Nayak, N.V. (1983). Struclurts on Ground lmprow!d by Stont Columns, Proceedings
lntemalional Symposium on Soil Structure Interaction. Roorkee, India.
Pilot, G. (1977), Methods of Improving -the Engineering Properti.s of Soft Clay, State-of-thean Report. Symposium on soft clay, Bangkok.
Copyrighted material
Copyrighted material
Earthquake Response of
Soils and Foundations
13.1 INTRODUCTION
Earthquakes can cause extensive damage to foundations and structures built on them.
Earthquake motions are initiated in the soil and they are instantaneously transmitted to the
M = log(AIT) + /(IJ., h) + C, + C,
( 13.1)
where
II =amplitude in (0.001) mm.
T = period of seismic wave in seconds.
/(IJ.. h) = correction factor for epicentral distance (IJ.) and focal depth (h).
C_, = conection factor for seismological station, and
C, :a regional correction factor,
346
Copyrighted material
lkst:riplion
a....
8 and ltighcr
Majo<
7- 7.9
18
120
820
S1r0ng
~9
MoclenJ!t
Uglll
Minor
Very Mlnor
S-5.9
4-4.9
3-3.9
<3.0
6200 {estimated)
49.000 {estimolod)
Magnitude 2-3 about 1000 pet day
Magnitude 1-2 about 8000 pet day
(13.2)
This energy is comparable 10 that of nuclear explosions. For example, a nuclear explosion of
one mega ton releases energy of 5 x 10" J. An earthquake of magnitude 7.3 would also release
the energy equivalent of one mega Jon nuclear explosion.
13.2.3 Intensity
The magnitude of an earthquake as obtained by the Richter's seale give s measure of the amount
of energy released by the earthquake, not its damage potential. The intensity of an earthqu'il<e is
a measure of the effect of an earthquake at a given location. Severa) intensity scales have been
proposed, the most widely used being the MIJ!Iiticd Mercalli Intensity (MMI) ~ale, as given in
Table 13.2 (Newmann. 1954). The value assigned to, tlje MMI scale gives qualitative
description of the damages based on physical verification at site. The equivalent value of the
magnillJde by Richter's scale is given alongside the MMI in Table 13.2.
Tabltl3.l Modified Mu,caiJi intensity (MMO scale (abbreviated vcrsioo)
lnu:nsfry
Ewlluano.
I
II
lnsigniftCMt
Very light
IU
up.
IV
Moderate
Slightly strong
Strong
Very suong
v
VI
VII
Ma&ni/11/k
(Richtu SC4le)
1-1.9
2-2.9
3-3.9
4--4.9
~5.9
(Cont.)
Copyrighted material
348
TJr~ory
and
Practlc~
of Foundation
D~sign
Table 13.2 Modifted MerealJi intensity (MMI) scale (abbreviated version). Cont.
MagniJud~
(Richur scalt}
'VUI
lksuucti,.e
IX
Ruinous
X
XI
DisastrOUS
Disastrous in
extrtme .,
XII
C...S!roplllc
Total destruction
7-7.9
8-8.6
aw
w
I
I
Flg. 13.1
Copyrighted material
0.7
0.8
0.5
fi
5% Damping
SCTsile
o.
0.3
0.2
O.t
Rock and
..... SOil
3
Period (s)
F~
13..2 Acceleration response spectrum as recorded in Mallioo City earthquake, 1985 {Seed et al., 1987).
The response spectra shown in Fig. 13.2 illustrate the pronounced influence of local soil
conditions on the charac<eristics of the observed earthquake ground motions. Since Mexico
City was located approximately 400 km away from the epicentrc. the observed res~nsc at
rock and hard soil sites was fairly low (that is, the speclnll accelerations were less th~ O.Ig
for all periods). Damage was correspondingly negligible at these sites. At the Central Market
site (CAO). spectral accelerations were significantly amplified to 0.3-Q.35g at periods of
around 1.3 s and within the range 3.5-4.5 s. Since buildings at the CAO site did not
generally have fundamental periods within these ranges. damage was minor. The motion
recorded at the scr building site, however. indicated significant amplification of the
undertying bedrock motions with a maximum horiz.ontal ground acceleration (the spectral
accelemtion at a period of zero) over four times that of the rock and hard soil sites and with
a spectral acceleration at T = 2.0 s over seven time.c; that of the rock and hard soil sites.
Major damage including collapse, occurred to structures with fundamental periods ranging
from about 1 s to 2 s near the SCT building site and in areas with similar subsurface
conditions. At these locations. lhe fundamental period of lhe soU aJmost matched with that of
the overlying Sln.ICtures. creating a near resonance condition that amplified the shaking and
caused heavy damage.
The Uniform Building Code of USA (UBC. 1991) recommends the response spectrum,
shown in Fig. 13.3. to determine the peak ground acceleration for a given fu ndamental
period T for different soil conditions. For T > O.S s. ground acceleration for deep soil strata
is considerably higher than that for rock and hard soils. It is to be no<ed that the period of
ground motion at a particular site is important in determining the effect of earthquake motion
on the structure. lf the fundamental period of a building is close to that of the site. a
resonant condition is created. This amplifies the shaking and increases the potential to
damage.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
'
..
.
;
.. ..
463.5'
Ftg. 13.A
..
.'
...
Ground set3ement around well casing at Homer in AJaska earthquake 1964 (Grantz el al., 196A).
2.6 m at Ponagc in the same earthquake in Alaska. This caused widespread flooding in the
lltea during high tide periods and the town had to be relocated at a new location. Similar
subsidence was noticed in other earthquakes also and the data is given in Table 13.3.
Table 13.3 Ground subsidence due to urthquake
Eonh.quaU
Homtt, Alaska
Portage. Ala~;ka
V alidina. Chile
Niigata. Japan
Ytar
t%1
t964
1%0
1%1
Rock ~ubsld~nc'
(Tectom'cJ (m)
Ground ~ubslden
0.6
1.4
2.6
1.3
1.8
(m)
2.8
3.0
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
(O~ki.
1966).
Liquefactjon is caused in sand by ground vibration which tends to compact the sand and
dec-rease its volume. Jf drainage does nol occur, the tendency to decrease in volume resultS in
increased pore water pressure. lf the pore pressure builds up to an extent whic.h i.s equal tO
the overburden pressure. the effective stress becomes zero and the soil loses its strength
completely and gets into a liquefied state. Liquefaction may be initiated at the surface or at
some depth below the ground surf:Jce. Once liquefaction occurs a1 some depth. the excess
pore.pressure tends to dissipate by upward flow of water which. in turn. induces liquefaction
in <he upper layers of !he soil.
Hidden page
.!,t..~=A
(1(1
(10
1_......._,
A If water table
Is at dOp4h h
a - u0
wa..,
A 2a, if
table
Is at surface
1cr = 8(1
(a)
0.7
li
liQuefacliM
0.6
No-
o.s
o...
,:
-2
'
'"'
0.3
lquofadlon
0.2
0.1
10
20
30
o~
0
0
50
Appa~$~11 ...-
eo
10
density,
eo so
o, (%)
100
(b)
10
Low possitMiity
of llquo-
3.0
20
6.1
a. 30
9.1
"2:
High
<I()
ltQuefaciJon
"
a.
2:
possibility of
12.2
50
15.25
eo
18.3
Fig. 13.9 Relationship between lquelactlon potential and N valut: as a function o1 depth
(Kishlda, 1969).
Copyrighted material
356
T1~eory
0.6
...
.---..,.--"""""!l.r,---- , - -- -,------,
"
~
percent fines a 35
15
45
: I
o.sl - - - + ----l!!-+--+-----+-----1
''
'
..
'''
'
':'
'''
'
o.l----+- --+...-f--lft-----1----1
'
" '
''
I ''
...
I
I
' '
'
'
''
..
r-.conwnc
5%
No.
(Nolo.
Fig. 13.10 Uqoef.adion potential as
(13.3)
Copyrighted material
Fig. 13.11 Time history of shear stress during earthquake (Seed and ldriss. 1962).
where.
(...!...)
~.a=
g =
0'0 =
a~ =
=
r,
r=~
04
05
(r_
06
.
),
07
.
.
08
3
8
1/
~ 12
15
18
v
/'
1.0
09
21
Fig. 13.12 Stre:s.s reduction factor
tot
For exampl e~ let us consider a site where the ground water table is at the ground surface and
a= 0.2 g. At a depth or S m, the average cyclic stress ratio during earthquake works out as
0 .29 (refer Eq. (13.3)].
Copyrighted material
Foundatiot~
Desig11
The corrected N value at a depth of 5 m is 10 for clean sand with less than 5% fines.
From Fig. 13.9.
(_!_) = 0.11
qo
This gives.
(u:
- ~ > - ~)
(7~
Niigata. 1964
Mino-Owan. Jaq>ao. 1969
lallipan. Muico. 1959
Alaska. 1964
GI"Qirt-~iu
Mognitud' of
ttJffhqr.aU
7.5
7.4
6.9
D10 (mm)
O.Q?- 0.25
0.0$-0.25
O.Ot-O. tO
o.ot-o. t
D<pth of
liqO(faaion (m)
s
9
7
It appears dlat liquefaction generally occurs in fine to medium sand within a depth of
10 m from ground surface. With increasing overburden pressure the chances of liquefaction
us ually decrease.
13.6
Fine-grained soils such as sill and clay. have their engineering behaviour s ignificantly
affected by cyclic loading. The major influences of cyc-lic loading are:
reduction of undrained shear strength of days,
reduction of stiffness. and
de\elopment of excess pore-pressure.
Undrained ohear
atrencth
Van Ee.kelen and Potts (1989) proposed a correlation. based on theoretical and experimental
work. between the postcyclic and precyclic undrained shear strength. Accordingly.
.,.
( )
cw -= 1-u,
c..
o;.
(13.4)
where,
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
Acceleration disb1bu1ton
In ftrtt modi
Ooolgn-lotea
lndllood/dosi~J~Ia-1
s.
ck
ws.
Most building codes used for earthquakeresislllnt design require that buildings of a
given type be designed to withstand a Sllltic lateral force having a magnitude given by a
lateral force coefficient k times the weight of the building. The magnitude of the coefficient
usually varies with the fundamental period of the building, or the number of storeys in the
building. In general. the lateral force coefficient dec-r eases with increasing values of the
fundamental period or increasing numbers of storeys. Thus, buildings are not generally
designed to be equolly resislllnt to the same induced forces.
Figure 13.17 gives the liqucfac:tion potential of granuJar soil based on grain ~size distribution
as obtained from experiences of J"'SI earthquakes (Oshal<i. 1970). The grninsiu distribution
of the soil may be determined by slllndard t.,;ts.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
Hidden page
I0
Tla;
20
IS
0.18
0.4
0.2S
With factor of safety of 1.2, the allowable cyclic stress ratio would be O.!S, 0.208, and 0.33
for N values of 10, IS, and 20 rc:spcodvely.
Table 13.6 Calculation or cyclic stn:s.s ratio
lk!pth btlow
GL (mJ
N (blows/
30 em)
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
6
12
7
8
16
18
24
22
a.,(kN/m2)
a~(kNim2)
(CI./a'.J,
Il l
61
78
95
112
129
146
163
ISO
1.82
1.90
1.95
1.98
2.01
2.03
2.04
2.06
148
ISS
222
259
296
333
370
,,
0.97
0.94
0.9
0.86
0.80
0.76
0.10
0.65
(Tia;J,
0.230
0.232
0.23
0.221
0.209
0.200
0.186
0.175
Looking at Table 13.6. it is evident that liquefaction potential does not exist beyond a
depth of 14 m. Here, N value is greater than IS and (T/a~) is less than 0.208.
Above 14 m depth. T/!1~ should be greater than 0.2 to prevent liquefaction. This will
require an N value of 20. Hence. den.sification of the soH has to be done by vibrocompaction
within this depth.
Example 13.2
During an eanhquake, the maximum intensity of ground shaking at a site is 0. lg. The subsoil
consists of a 20 m deposit of sand (fines c<>ntent IS%) with SPT blow count of 10 blows/
30 em. Determine the tone of liquefaction (Take = 18 kN/m 3 and water table at ground
surface).
Sol..,ion
(a) Average shear stress in the soil
a(J
Copyrighted material
a_tg
a.,(kNim2)
a;(kNfml)
0.1
54
108
162
216
270
324
378
24
48
3
6
9
12
15
18
21
72
95
120
144
168
'fla~
'
0.98
0.143
0.96
0.94
0.85
0.74
0.64
0.60
0.140
0.137
0.124
0.108
0.094
0.088
T':
a.
= 0.15
with FS = 1.2
= 0 .15 = 0.124
(.!..)
a:, "' 1.2
The da1a are plotted in Fig. 13.22. It is seen that liquefaction potenlial exists in the top 12 m
of 1he deposil.
0.09
0.1
0.11
0. 12
0.13
------ -- . . -- -----/
15
18
112
0. 15
0.14
. ./.':
/
------
-----
21
Copyrighted material
DC
IS 1893 (1983). Code of Practice for O.sign of Earthquake Resistant Structures, Bureau of
Indian Slllndards, New Delhi.
Ishihara, K. and S. Yasuda (1980), Cyclic Strengths of Undisturbed Cohesive Soils of
Western Tokyo, lnr. Symp. on Soils under Cyclic and Transient Loading Swansea.
A.A. Balkema. pp. 57-66.
Kishida, H. ( 1969), Damage of Reinforced Concrete Buildings in Niigalll City with special
reference to Foundation Engineering. Soil and Foundatiotr Engin~~ring. 6, No. l ,
Tokyo. Japan.
MarsaJ, R.J. (1961), Behaviour of a Sandy Uniform Soil duritJg tltt Jalllpan EartlrquaU,
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Construction Problems
14. 1 INTRODUCTION
Foundation design is made on the basis of available knowledge about the structure to be built
and the subsoil condition available at the given site. The structural design is done in a way to
suit the facilities to be created for a given architectural layout. In general, the loads that arc
imposed on the soil can be evaluated fairly acc~ly. Foundation design requires evaluation
of the safe bearing capacity and settlement, both immediate and long term. These factors
require knowledge of the subsoil characteristics which are determined from an appropriate
site investigation. However, soil being deposited at a site by natural geological processes over
long periods of time, there are inherent variations which may not be fully reflected by even
an elaborate subsoil investigation. Hence, simplifying assumptions are made about boundary
conditions and average soil properties are to be assigned to the different strata for working
out the detailed design. Also, the land use pattern of the area surrounding the site determines
the vulnerability of existing buildings. Different degrees of precaution are to be taken to
implement a given design withoot causing any dist:ress to adjoining structures. The job of the
foundation engineer does no~ therefore, end at prllduclng a design only. It is equally
important to determine if any problems are 10 be anticipated during constriJction and work
out proper conatruction procedure and remedial measures in time.
The construction problems vary widely and are often site specific. However, some
general problems associated with foundation construction are discussed in !hi$ chapter.
I. stability of excavations.
2. dewatering. and
Copyrighted material
14.3
STABILITY OF EXCAVATION
81'11Ced cuts essentially consist of making vertical walls in the soil and suitJibly propping
them by steel struts as the excavation is done. When the final excavation level is reach~ the
foundation is cast and backfilling done to restore the original ground s urface as the struts are
progressively removed, as presented in Fig. 14.2.
Ground,._..
1st strut
2. 1 SMB 500
=--l
2nd strut
2. t SMB 600=--i
r-----------,
I - ----.. - - - - - . . 1
OIWall -
-->1
III
11
:1
1 1,
II
..
3td Strut
2.1SMB600
1I I
1I
t
~
____ , I I, ____ .,1l1 N
cBo"::'a.rt levet
~
Fig. 14.2 Bta<ed cut.
Copyrighted material
lAgend:
1. Dlap!Vagm wall
2. Exc8Yation a b c d
3. C..StbaiO slab
4. Put Inclined struts
5. E>o:IVollon up to ~ ...,u
6. cast balance base slab
7. Erect wal lhrough ' " " '
Strut 1- - '
clophracJn ..,.._
Slrut2 ~
Strut 3
1950
Fig. 1ol.4
Copyrighted material
14.3 . 1
The design of braced excavation involves two distincl yet intemlated features~ namely
'
(a) stability of the excavation, ground movement. control of water into the excavatjon,
effect on adjoining structures, and so on and
(b) design of structural elements, lhat is, diaphragm wall or sheet pile, struts or anchors
and so forth.
Although the overall s tabillry of braced cuts in soft ground does not depend to any
great extent on the number and spacing of struts or anchors~ lhey very much influence lbe
pattern of ground movement expected in a given situation. The depth of diaphragm walV
sheet pile determines both the slllbility of the system and the ground movement associated
with it. Depending on the subsoil stratification, one may get adequate Slllbllity against bottom
heave by having the diaphragm wall exteruled to a stiffer layer existing no more than a few
metres below the cur depth. However. this may not give adequate fixity to the diaphragm
waH to minimize ground settlement.
The essential featur"s of the design of braced cut in soft ground are discussed in the
subsequent subsections in details.
c.
(14.1)
where,
r-=
Copyrighted material
Construction Probhms
F=
y,D, + r.D, +
c N, +
L:C.<H + D, + n, )/ n,
s
-2.0m
,~.Om
'""
1
O.Om
Stratum I
Desk:caled brOwniSh grey
clayey silt
-3.8 m
~.5m
~.Om
Stratum II
Dar1< ""y lilly day wilh
d~WOOd
-9.5 m
-11.0m
level in
Slago IV -11.5 m
soage V
375
(14.2)
Sligo Ill
meuw
-13.2m
;-.
-13.5 m
Ser.tum Ill
Bluiolo ~ ..ly day
of WI f..
~ -17.5. .
Yri1h kankar
- 17.2m
Stntum IV
G.l..
c,.,
)I
!
H
c..
tI " !
- o f cui
IV
I
I
y,
I
\
' ' ,_
--
g'
'
'
o,
Struts are required to prevent failure of the diaphragm waiJ in flexure and to mmmuze
la~ral deflection or the wall. The diaphragm wall and the soruos make up a rigid structural
system which prevent excessive ground movement. Obviously. greater the number of struts,
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
IT""!i!AI.O
2.0
3.0
.o
Zone I
Sand and soft to hold cloy
Zono II
Very 80ft to soft clay:
lmiiOd dep4h of clay below
excavation
Zono Ill
Very ., clay:
elgnlftcant deplh below -
of excavation
14.4
DEWATERING
Dewatering is required for any deep excavation to facilitate consbUCtion of basements, power
houses, pumping stations. and so on. lbeoreticaiJy, any excavation below ground water table
would necessitate some kind of dewatering. However, low permissibility soils, for example,
clay and silty clay (K <
cmls) do not present much problem with seepage because the
discharge is generally small and elaborate dewatering is not required. For medium to high
degree of permeability (K > 10> cmls), suitable dewatering scbeme has to be worked out.
tcr
The basic purpose or dewatering is to control seepage into the excavation either by
pumping the water out of the excavation or by lowering the water table sufficiently below
the bouom of the cut till the underground works are over. The extent of dewatering depends
on the subsoil stratification, presence of water bearing stratum. aquifer parameters, and insitu permeabiliry.
14.4 . 1 Rate
of Seepage
The first requirement in a dewatering job is to estimate the rate of seepage into the
excavation for a certain degree of dewatering. For this. the excavation is considered as a
large circular we.ll from which water is pumped out to affect the desired ground water
lowering. For a fully or panially penetrating well, as shown in Fig. 14.10, the rate of
pumping is given by the well equation.
Copyrighted material
Construction Problems
0
379
p round surface
~I G<Ound surface
2rCU<VO
Orawdown
curve\
Initial water
{_~~
1m-
Impermeable Pata
, Jl JpJ.l t,
snta
----.1
(a)
Unconfined
aquifer
(b)
( 14.3)
where,
discharge from a fully penetrating well in an unconfined aquifer (m3/s),
discharge from a partially penetration well in an unconfined aquifer (m3/s),
coeffictent of permeability of soil (mls),
height of ground water above the top of aquifer before drawdown (m),
height of water in the well above the top of aquifer after d"'wdown (m), that
is, drawdown = H - h(m),
r = radius of well or equivalent well (m),
R = radius of influence (m), and
h, = penetrating of well below water Ulble (m).
Q=
Q, =
K=
H =
It =
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
,M.,~~~W ''-'rRislog
- _ ...
,,...'_"
water
level
(iv) Place graded gravel between casing and outer borehole casing over the dewatering
length.
(v) Fill the space above the screen by soil.
(vi) Water is 1hen surged ' by a boring tool to promOfe flow of wat.e r back and fonh
through the filler and fines collected at 1he bouom are bailed out
(vii) Insert submersible pump.
Copyrighted material
<
(b)
D15 (filter)
o., (soil) > 5
(~il ity
(Piping criterion)
criterion)
0,.5 (filter)
(c)
width or diameter
or hole
>1
wen polut
dewaterlu&
This consists of installation of a number of well points, usually I m long, around the
excavation. They are connected by vertical riser pipes to a header pipe on the ground which,
in tum. is connected to a pump. The ground water is drawn by the pump into the header
pipe through the well points and discharged there. The well points are installed at 1- 1.5 m
spacing, as shown in Fig. 14.15.
Collecting space
Original
water table
......... f'kl
Well"'*''
Well point
(a)
(b)
The filter wells or well poinrs usually consist of a 1 m long screen, 60-75 mm
diameter surrounding a central riser pipe. The well points are installed by pus hing or jening
them into the ground.
Capacity of a single well point with 16 m riser pipe = 10 lirreslmin. (approx.)
The spacing of well points depends on the permeability of soil and the rime available for
affecting rite drawdown. The spacings normally adopted for different soil types arc ns follows:
0.75-1.0 m
Fine to medium sand
Silty sand of low permeability
1.5 m
Copyrighted material
384 Titeory
011d
Well point dewatering is suitable in both fine and silty sands. In highly previous soil.
the spacing required to handJe the water may be too smaU and impractical. Well points are
not generally suitable for clays because of slow water seepage.
Well points can lower a water table to a maximum of 6 m below the header pipe. For
lowering water table to greater depth. multiple stage well point system may be adopted.
Under average conditions. any number of stages can be used, eac-h stage lowering the water
table by about 5 m. A typical set-up for a two stage system is shown in Fig. 14.16.
Multistage well point may be used for greater depth of dewatering but this requires additional
header pipe. additional pumps, and larger excavation width for the provision of berms.
Stage 1
Original grOI.Wld
-lill.. .. _.__.t.~t!!.~~.!!l.----
Ground level
Stage 2
.,
.,
..- -----
watet level
(a)
(b)
Copyrighied material
14.5.1
Cohesive Fill
Cohesive soil may be used for land filli ng in dry areas. Compaction is done in layers.
250-300 mm thick. with a number of roller passes to achieve the desired degree of
compaction. Prior to placement, the physkal properties of the soil. including grain-size.
consistency limits. water content and the like should be determined. Soils with high organic
content and high expansive pOtentinl should be avoided in filling work.
n,e compaction char.tc.teristics of cohesive soil are determined in the laboratory from
the standard or modified Proctor Compaction Test. Representative soils from the borrow area
are tested to obtain the optimum moisture content (OMC) and the maximum dry densily
(MDD).
Most compaction specifications provide for fie ld compaction at 90-95% of MDD as
determined from laboratory compaction tests. figure 14.17 gives the typical compaction
curve for clayey soiJ. Higher compaction in the modified proctor test gives higher MOD and
lower OMC than the standard proctor test. The curve of dry density versus moisture
condition for zero air voids is superimposed on the proctor tesl data for the purpose of field
contrOl. It is generally a good practice to have the field moisture content slightly on the wet
side of the OMC to ensure that all void space.' of the compacted soil are filled wilh water.
lt may be noted here that not all soils yield the same type of compaction curve a~
shown in Fig. 14.17. Lee and Suedkamp (1972) repOrted lhe test results of 35 samples and
suggested four types compact ion curves that are shown in Fig. 14.18. They also gave some
guidelines for predicting the nature of compaction curve based on the liquid limit of the soil
(Table 14.1 ).
T able 14.1 Type: of compaclton curve
30-70
<30
> 70
Type I
Copyrighted material
D~.sign
24
22
~"'-
.,
20
18
:t
16
14
,r
Zero-air-void
/"
I:-
~
~
....
....
Standard pmctor
12
.. Moclffied prodor
tO
15
20
5
Mobture a:wttent. w('4)
25
Fig. 14.11 Dry density versus moisture content tlla:llonshlp from Proctor tesl
'
''
Zero-air-void
CUM
Zero-alr-YOid
( \ ,,,curve
Type t: Bell-shaped 0<
Single peak
L__ _ ____,~Mols-
"""'""' (%)
(a)
peob
"""'*'' (%)
(b)
''
\
\\
\
'
Zero-air-void
Zero-air-YOid
curve
',
curve
'
'-----Mobcon"'"'
(d)
(%)
Fig. 14.18 Typical moisture density relationships ol c:oheslve soil (after Lee end Suedkamp, 1972~
Copyrighted material
14.5 . 2
Granular Fill
Granular soil, predominantly sand, happens to be the mos1 suitable material for land filling.
Well graded sand (D001D 10 > 4) gives good compaction when saturated and vibrated. These
give high bearing capacity and low settlement potential and sand appears to be best suited for
under water filling.
The compaction of granular soil is determined by the relative density, defined as
R =
0
t:mal( -
tmak
100%
(14.6)
emi"
where.
= maximum
emak
Ro
~(
(14.7}
where.
Copyrighted material
Hidden page
Hidden page
c-
(%)
H
Fig. 14.21
Time is the essence of underground construction. Fasrer the underground works are
compleled, lesser will be the problems of 5ettlemenL Deep excavation should never be kept
open for long periods of time as this invites additional settlement and damage to adjoining
stnlctures. Figure 14.22 shows the effect of Calcutta metro eoostruction on a building close
1s r---------~============~
nne (monl'ls)
16
20
2.
28
32
o~r-~T-~~~~~~
E
::l
19.8 m 0 C 8
6.5 m
120
J.eo
-~ ---------
" - - Diaphragm -
Ayg. ol A , 8, C, 0
200L---------------------------~
Fig. 14.22 Effect of time on building settlement a<tjacent to braced cut.
Copyrighted material
section and the construction took the best pan of three yean. The excavation was kept open
for 90 days at 8 m depth and thereafter for almost two years at 14 m depth. It may be
noticed that out of a total settlement of 172 mm, no less than 93 mm had occurred during
stoppages of construction. The data clearly show the effec.t of time on ground settlement
-.s
~
f
~
1!.
Pooolbly
unsafe for
buldlngs
100
Objection-
10
Unpleaunl
/
/
NoU<>eablo
10
100
1000
Fig. 1.23 Partide velocity versus di$tanoe <Jue to a single rnpact (after Mayne et al.. 1982).
v =
70 (
,
IOD-
( 14.8)
where.
E = energy per blow in KJ. and
D = distnnce between the source and the structure under consideration.
A maximum peak particle velocity of 50 mm/s is normally considered safe for conventional
buildings.
Copyrighted material
Lee and R.J. Suedkamp (1972), Charoct.ristics of ln<gular Shap<d Compaction Curv.s of
Soils. Highway Research Record No. 381, National Academy of Seeing. Washington
DC, pp. 1- 9.
Mayne, P.W., J.S. Jones and R.P. Fedosick (1982), Su/J-surface Improvement du< to Impact
Dmsification. ASCE Geotechnical Conference, Las Vagas, Prepriat, Session B 2.
Peck, R.B. (1969). Braced Excavation and Tunnelling. Stateof-the-art R<part. Proceedings
Sth International Conference on SMFE, Vol. 3. pp. 225- 290.
Soda. S. (2001), Offshore Artificial lslat~d Co~tstruction in Japan- Example of Offsltore
Airports. Proceedings 2nd Civil Engineering Conference in the Asian Region. Tokyo.
p. 77.
Som, N.N. (2000), Rectification of BuildU1g Tilt- An Unconventicnal Approach, Proceeding
Indian Oeotechnic;U Confereoce, Bombay. Vol. 2.
Som, N. and I.R.K. Raju (1989), Measuremenl of i~t-sltu lAteral Stress in Normal Calc.ulla
Soil, Proceedings 12th ln1emational Conference on SMFE. Vol. 3, pp. 1519-1522.
Som. N.N. and R.B. Sahu (1993). Investigation of Co/lapS< of an Apartmnt Building du< to
Differential FUiing. Proc. Third lnlemational Conference on Case Histories in
Geotechnical Engineering, Missoorie-Rolla, USA.
Copyrighted material
Appendix
11+1~
II~
1'..,-,
qlunit ..a
--~~~~-L--
; .. <r,l)
Table A.l
,j'g:
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2
4
(b)
Values of / 0
0
1.000
0.910
0.5
1.000
0.790
0.560
0.375
0.258
0.083
0.646
0.424
0.286
0.087
1.0
1.000
0.417
0.332
0.256
0.196
O.Q15
~.::.-lqtunit ....
I II
:z
-,- ~ (r, Z)
z
(11
e ql11
Copyrighted material
394
Appendi:r
Table A.2 Vahes or lv
dRa
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
o.s
1.0
I.S
0
0.09
0.25
0.27
0.29
0.28
0.26
0
0.02
0.08
0.15
0.18
0.20
0.22
1.00
1.00
o.so
0.96
0.82
0.67
0.90
0.73
0.61
0.51
0.40
0.30
0.49
0.38
0.45
0.41
0.30
0.25
o.ss
3
4
0.39
0.31
qfui'Wt area
--;
1
z
(Z, X)
a,
= ql.
~
0
o.s
I
0
0
0.13
0.16
0.13
o.s
o.s
0.41
0.28
0. 16
0.5
0.35
0.25
0
0.03
0.07
0.08
O.IS
Copyrighted material
Index
Aerial pbo<ognph" Y
Allowable lood on piles from SUIJc ..Wysis. 218
Allowable seulcmenl.
Boring. Y
auger boring, l l
percussion drilling. 36
rowy drilling. lli
trial pits. l! .
wash boring. H
Broce<! cuu. i l l
ll.Q
pneumatic. 266.
Capachy of pile group. 224
Causes of defect in piles, 246.
!L 11m
Illite, 2
Kaolinite. 2
MornmorHionite. 2.. 22.5.
Coerlicient or earth prtSSu re at rest.
CoerfiCicnt of consolidation. 2S
method, 115
1L
lM
Copyrighted material
396 + f11de.T
dredge hole. 26!1
intermediate/top plug. 210
steining. 269
well cap, 210.
well curb. 269
Concrete piles. 200
Consistency. 6.1
Consolidation. 63
coefficient of. 2i
degree of, 25
rtue of. U
ConJOii<bliOn settk-ment. lA2
Conventional nlfl. 61. 11S
Critie>J depth. 216
Cyclic shear strtss. ~
Oam~c
limits
visual effects. ll
Darcy's law. 12
Deep foundations:68
piers and caissons. 62
pile fou!Kbtion. 68
Ocgrtt of saturation, .1
Depth com::ction, lJ2
Depth
of boreholes. i2
of d'in..phngm wall. i l l
of fi dty. 2ll
or rootina. w
or penetrnlion. 376
[)esjgn criceria. 10.
Design (or equal settlement, U2
Design
of br>Ced cuts- 374
of. r:a1\ foundation. US
Desigo parameten. 6J
Dewatering. 318.
methods of. 380
deep \olltll pumpina;. 38 1
rickl oon110l, lM
sump pumping. 3SO
well point dewatering. 3.&l
Difflnntial free swell. l l i
Dimensioning foocina found3tion$.. 1.10.
wave equation. m
ill
cntJ'ID' releaoe. l!l'l.
intensity, ::M1
m~ni tude or. ~
Niisata. 352.
swelling, ~
Copyrighted material
111dcx
Fallu~< mechanism,
U!
__....piles. 332
coocro1 or fidd WO<t. 332
dynamic coruoidallon. m
,...,m-. m
aurdlata< loodinr,. 3W
..,ca.y. U&
,.n or mil. 61
shallow, 66
Frtt-sweU teSt. ~
Honeycombed suvcture, 1
I......,...,W.~ IS
l -. t l
Jtolll<d roo11nr.. ~ ~IoA
Llbonta<y 1<$1 ....... 60
Labanlo<y ...... 11
Locey' s silt ,....,, 2l1
l..lnd fil1ing. l&S
or. m
..... o r - tt
(iround
Wlltf table. lQ
~--lim
_....oowidulaodxam
SlrU<IIIrt
aquifuJ<. II
aquitanl. lJ
capillary zone. ll
r<eharac. lll
l. JIIS
aquif<f. IJl
Jn
lil8
bulthcad_.,..m
IRCmcobod. llS
Layout and nwnbcr or bord>olcs. 51
Llmitatlons or lheorttJcal analysis. 129.
398 Index
Limits of consistency. 5
Uqu<Foctioa. 352
Uquefaction potential, 3!"4
Uquidity indt:x. S
load carrying capacity of stone column. 323
Load venus settlement n:l:JCionship, U1
Load te:s:l on piles. lli
constant r..1e of penetrntion (CR.P) test, lli
testing of. l l i
timber. 200
Pistoa sampler. l8
Planning or exploration programme. S.l
Plasticity chart. 6
Plnsaicity index, S
Plme load test, W
Portpre$SUte,
J.4
codfidents. L6
Porosity, 4
Pre-consolidation pressure. 2&
Prtkwl.ing with vertical drains.. l06
Preservation or samples. 32.
Pressure bulb. 2.1
Pressurt-void r:uio relationships.. 22
Principle or effective stress, 13
Rale
of discharge, 380
or,..poge, ill
of settlement, W.
Reclaimed ground. 389
Reconnaissance study. l3
Relati\'C density. 8
Response $pe<OUlll, Y8
Responsibility or designer. ~
Rigidity of footings: contaCt pressure. 92.
Sampling. l2
from boreholes. ll
from trial piu, 31
Peat. 2
PC'dologjeal data. l:i
Ptnneability. 12
Pennissible seulement. :U
Pile behaviour under uial load. 20J
Pile cap:acity from in~situ soil tests. 2!ll
Pile driving analyzer. 2il
Pile group subjec...'tcd to vertical Jood and mome-nt.
227
Pile groups, 223
in cohesionless soil, 1lQ
in cohesi ve soli, m
Piles, ~
in cohesionless soil, 205
in cohesive soil, 2n!
Setdement analysis
methods of, Ll2.
SctOement
of pile groups. 22B.
Copyrighted material
Sotl
aeolion, l
es<uorin<, l
Jlacial l
bocwtrin<, I
marine, l
l'<$idual, 1
oectimencary. 1
Soil c:lassifiCOlioa. 2
Soil dq>osiu o( India. 2!1
Soil profile, 9.
Soil .... cq>orc. 15
roc-
Slt<SSadu<cor.........,loodinc. l&
Boossinesq analysis: point load. 2&
embonkm<"' cype loadinJ; 8l
lriangular load, I
t.miform line loed. 8S
uniform Jlrip lood. M
vertical SCMKs below uniform cin:ul.ar &o.d. ll
venicaJ acrcuc.s below uniform m:mn.a:ular load.
&J
Stresses du:rina loading and ~on in the
fidel. IJ6
Slt<SS-poch.
en,inoerina proptttic.s. ~
~~JyJctm. l
Unll wci&lot. t
Uo~oeciJW<II ...._ 2llS
Uplift oni11-n of poles. 231
W<lllhering. I
Well Fouoodalions. 266
Well liokiftc. 1&J
Wdvm- 6i
Copy
Hidden page
Hidden page