Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Materials and Methods
• Results and Discussions
• Concluding Remarks
• References
2
INTRODUCTION
Function of a foundation - To transfer the structural loads from a building
safely into the ground.
A foundation must satisfy-Location and depth criteria, Shear failure criteria and
Settlement Criteria.
Types of foundations:
Applications
Superstructure loads are heavy
Soil is weak
Differential settlements
Introduction
Pile Foundation
When the super structure loads are very heavy (or) soil is very
weak, then to distribute the loads into deeper soil layers and minimize
the settlements we choose Pile Foundation.
Piled – Raft Foundation
Piled-Raft Foundation is a geotechnical composite construction that combines the
bearing effect of both foundation elements -- raft and piles by taking into account
interactions between the foundation elements and the subsoil.
Less
compressible
strata
7
Structures built on Piled raft foundation
8
Kuala Lumpur City Centre (KLCC)
1. The diameter of pile is 1.3m. 4.7 m spacing a
depth of 33 m below a mat (raft) of dia. 53.7 m.
2. A depth of 10 to 20 m at the top is water-
bearing alluvium.
3. The depth of limestone varied from 80 to 180
m, tower load of 2680 MN.
4. The differential settlement of the structure is
12.7 mm across the base of the towers
Kuala Lumpur City Centre (KLCC)
Bahrain World Trade Centre MesseTurm Tower, Frankfurt
11
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PROPERTIES OF SAND
Property Value
Coarse fraction(%) 7.14
Medium fraction(%) 79.8
Fine fraction(%) 12.63
Co-efficient of uniformity(Cu) 2.5
Co-efficient of curvature(Cc) 1.06
IS Classification SP
Specific Gravity(G) 2.6
90
80
70
60
% finer
50
40
30
20
10
0
0.01 0.1 1 10
sieve size(mm.)
• Model Rafts – Mild steel plates of 10mm thick, Size – 180mm × 180mm.
• Test Tank – Circular steel tank of diameter 600mm and height 550mm.
• Dial gauges – 4 dial gauges of accuracy 0.01mm attached to the magnetic stands.
14
Configurations of Present Study
C&CO
C&CME
CO 15
CME
Tests Conducted
Pile raft
configuration H1/B L/D S/D No. of tests
Soil Layer1 H1
Pile
Length
(L)
H
Pile
Soil Layer2 Dia
(D)
Schematic view of layered soil experiment setup with piled raft model
17
Test Bed Preparation:
• Sand is filled by Rainfall method in both Layers
• Model piled raft is placed over the surface and the piles are pushed into the
bed such that raft comes in contact with the sand.
18
Load Test procedure
• Conducted in accordance with the procedure mentioned in IS 1888-1982.
• Four Dial gauges with an accuracy of 0.01mm were placed at the corners of the
raft with the help of magnetic stands and channels, to measure vertical
displacement.
• Proving ring is placed in between loading device and load transferring pipe to
know the applied load. The load is applied in equal intervals and for each load
increment vertical settlement is noted. The load is increased till the raft settlement
reaches 10% of raft width or till the failure of foundation.
• Settlements are recorded for the corresponding loads and the Load- Settlement
curves were drawn for all the tests.
19
Experimental Setup 20
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
• Load Deformation curves were plotted for all the tests conducted in the
present study and are analyzed in terms of improvement in the Load
carrying capacity and Settlement reduction.
21
Load Carrying Capacity
Typical Load – Deformation curves of Present Study
Raft only
Load(kg.)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0
4
Settlement(mm.)
6 Raft only
10
12
14
10
Pile 10cm
Deformation(mm.)
Pile 20cm
Pile 30cm
15
Pile 40cm
20
25
30
4
Settlement(mm.)
6
Raft only
R+5 Piles
10
12
14
Raft 720
Raft + 1, 0, 10(C) 791.32
Raft + 1, 0, 20(C) 884.52
Raft + 1, 0, 30(C) 928.2
Raft + 1, 0, 40(C) 1157.52
Raft + 1, 0, 45(C) 1288.56
Raft + 5, 75,10(C&CME) 1135.68
Raft + 5, 75, 20(C&CME) 1375.92
Raft + 5, 75, 30(C&CME) 1605.24
Raft + 5, 75, 40(C&CME) 1703.02
Raft + 4, 15, 10(CME) 1102.9
Raft + 4, 15, 20(CME) 1244.88
Raft + 4, 15, 30(CME) 1354.08
Raft + 4, 15, 40(CME) 1528.8
Raft + 5, 75,10(C&CO) 1124.76
Raft + 5, 75, 20(C&CO) 1294.03
Raft + 5, 75, 30(C&CO) 1419.6
Raft + 5, 75, 40(C&CO) 1681.68 25
Expected and Observed Load carrying capacities of Piled Raft system
Tests Dense over Loose
H1/B = 0.3
Observed Expected Difference
Load (kg) Ultimate Load* (kg)
(kg)
Raft 720.00
Raft + 1, 0, 10(C) 791.32 729.656 61.664
Raft + 1, 0, 20(C) 884.52 730.224 154.296
Raft + 1, 0, 30(C) 928.20 732.000 196.200
Raft + 1, 0, 40(C) 1157.52 734.200 423.320
Raft + 1, 0, 45(C) 1288.56
Raft + 5, 7.5,10(C&CME) 1135.68 768.28 367.400
Raft + 5, 7.5, 20(C&CME) 1375.92 771.12 604.800
Raft + 5, 7.5, 30(C&CME) 1605.24 780.00 825.240
Raft + 5, 7.5, 40(C&CME) 1703.02 791.00 897.000
Raft + 4, 15, 10(CME) 1102.90 758.624 344.276
Raft + 4, 15, 20(CME) 1244.88 760.896 483.984
Raft + 4, 15, 30(CME) 1354.08 768.00 586.080
Raft + 4, 15, 40(CME) 1528.80 776.80 752.000
Raft + 5, 7.5,10(C&CO) 1124.76 768.28 356.480
Raft + 5, 7.5, 20(C&CO) 1294.03 771.12 522.910
Raft + 5, 7.5, 30(C&CO) 1419.60 780.00 639.600
Raft + 5, 7.5, 40(C&CO) 1681.68 791.00 890.680
26
*Note: Expected Ultimate Load = Raft capacity + (No. of piles x individual Pile capacity)
Representation of forces contributing Load carrying capacity
27
Effect of Pile Length (L/D)
Load (kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
0
RAFT
6 R+1(10cm)_Center
Deformation ( mm.)
R+1(20cm)_Center
R+1(30cm)_Center
8
R+1(40cm)_Center
R+45_cm pile_center
10
12
14
16
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
0
R+5(30cm)_C&CME
6
Settlement(mm.)
R+5(20cm)_C&CME
R+5(10cm)_C&CME
8
R+5(40cm)_C&CME
10
12
14
16
Fig Effect of pile length on load carrying capacity of 5- Piled raft of S/D = 7.5
Effect of Pile Length (L/D)
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
0
6
R+4(40cm)_4_CME
Settlement(mm.)
R+4(30cm)_4_CME
8
R+4(20cm)_4_CME
R+4(10cm)_4_CME
10
12
14
16
18
Fig. Effect of pile length on load carrying capacity of 4- Piled raft of S/D = 7.5
Effect of Pile Length (L/D)
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
0
6
R+5(40cm)_C&CO
Settlement(mm.)
R+5(30cm)_C&CO
8
R+5(20cm)_C&CO
R+5(10cm)_C&CO
10
12
14
16
18
Fig. Effect of pile length on load carrying capacity of 5- Piled raft of S/D = 7.5
Effect of Pile Length (L/D)
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
0
6
Settlement(mm.)
R+4(40cm)_CO
8
R+4(10cm)_CO
10
12
14
16
18
Fig. Effect of pile length on load carrying capacity of 4- Piled raft of S/D = 15
Effect of Number of Piles (N)
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
0
4
R+1(10cm)
6 R+5(10cm)_C&CME
Settlement(mm.)
R+4(10cm)_CME
8 R+5(10cm)_C&CO
R+4(10cm)_CO
10
12
14
16
Fig. Effect of number of piles (N) on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with L/D = 10
33
Effect of Number of Piles (N)
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
0
6
R+1(20cm)
Settlement(mm.)
R+5(20cm)_C&CME
8
R+4(20cm)_CME
R+5(20cm)_C&CO
10
12
14
16
18
Fig Effect of number of piles (N) on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 20
Effect of Number of Piles (N)
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
0
6
R+1 (30cm)
Settlement(mm.)
R+5(30cm)_C&CME
8
R+4(30cm)_CME
R+5(30cm)_C&CO
10
12
14
16
18
Fig Effect of number of piles (N) on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 30
Effect of Number of Piles (N)
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
0
8 R+4(40cm)_4_CME
R+5(40cm)_C&CO
10 R+4(40cm)_CO
12
14
16
18
Fig. Effect of number of piles (N) on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 40
Effect of Pile raft configuration
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
0
6
Settlement(mm.)
R+5(10cm)_C&CME
R+5(10cm)_C&CO
8
10
12
14
16
Fig. Effect of pile raft configuration on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 10
Effect of Pile raft configuration
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
0
6
Settlement(mm.)
R+5(20cm)_C&CME
8
R+5(20cm)_C&CO
10
12
14
16
18
Fig. Effect of pile raft configuration on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 20
Effect of Pile raft configuration
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
0
6
Settlement(mm.)
R+5(30cm)_C&CME
R+5(30cm)_C&CO
8
10
12
14
16
Fig. Effect of pile raft configuration on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 30
Effect of Pile raft configuration
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
0
4
Settlement(mm.)
6 R+5(40cm)_C&CME
R+5(40cm)_C&CO
10
12
14
Fig. Effect of pile raft configuration on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 40
Effect of Pile raft configuration
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
0
6
Settlement(mm.)
R+4(10cm)_CME
R+4(10cm)_CO
8
10
12
14
16
Fig. Effect of pile raft configuration on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 10
Effect of Pile raft configuration
Load(Kg.)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
0
6
Settlement(mm.)
R+4(40cm)_CME
8
R+4(40cm)_CO
10
12
14
16
18
Fig. Effect of pile raft configuration on load carrying capacity of Piled raft with
L/D = 40
SETTLEMENT REDUCTION
• The main objective of addition of piles to the raft is to reduce the settlement.
• In the present study the reduction in settlement obtained for all the cases of piled
raft is presented in terms of settlement reduction ratio.
where,
43
Variation of Settlement and SRR at different loads @ H1/B = 0.3
@ 200 kg @ 400 kg @ 600 kg @ 800 kg
Model (ultimate load of raft)
0.7
0.8
Settlement Reduction Ratio
0.6
0.5 0.6
0.4 0.5
single 0.4
0.3
pile_(10cm/20cm/30cm/40c R+5 piles
m/45cm) 0.3 (10cm/20cm/30cm/40cm)
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Length of piles (L/D)
Length of piles (L/D)
Fig Variation of settlement reduction ratio with Length of piles (L/D) for N = 1
Fig Variation of settlement reduction ratio with Length of piles (L/D) for N = 5
45
Effect of Length of piles (L/D) on SRR
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.3 R+5 piles
0.3 R+4 piles
(10cm/20cm/30cm/40cm)
(10cm/20cm/30cm/40cm)
0.2 0.2
0.1 0.1
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Fig Variation of settlement reduction ratio with Length of piles (L/D) for N = 4
Fig Variation of settlement reduction ratio with Length of piles (L/D) for N = 5
46
Effect of Pile raft configuration
2.5
1.5
5(40cm)
5(30cm)
1
5(20cm)
5(10cm)
0.5
0
1.C&CME
1 2
PILE RAFT CONFIGURATION
2.C&CO
47
Effect of Pile raft configuration
1.2
0.8
0.6
4(40cm)
4(10cm)
0.4
0.2
1.C&CME
0
1 2
PILE RAFT CONFIGURATION
2.C&CO
CONCLUSIONS
• The load carrying capacity of all the configurations of piled raft system in
the present study has increased with respect to that of plain raft (without
piles) and this increment is mainly due to increase in confinement which in
turn increases the skin friction component of piles.
• The ultimate load carrying capacity of the piled raft system is observed to
be maximum when H1/B is 0.3 However the percentage increase in
comparison to the plain rafts is more when H1/B is 0.3.
49
• Maximum increase in the Ultimate Load carrying capacity is obtained
when 5(C&CME) piles of length (L/D) 40 are placed at a spacing (S/D) of
7.5 in both cases of H1/B.
50
• Maximum reduction in Settlement is obtained when 5 piles(C&CME) of length
(L/D) 40 are placed at spacing (S/D) of 7.5 for H1/B of 0.3. However,
magnitude of settlement reduction is more when 5(C&CME) number of pile
when compared to that when 1(C) number of pile.
• Settlement of piled raft foundation is significantly less than that of either raft
only or pile only at any given load, especially at high load levels. In other words
piles are very effective in reducing the settlements of a raft.
51
Scope for future study
52
REFERENCES
• Akinmusuru J.O. (1980), ‘Interaction of Piles and Cap in Piled Footings’. Journal of
the Geotechnical Engineering Division, Vol. 106, No. 11, November 1980, pp.
1263-1268.
• Balakumar V. and Ilamparuthi K. (2010), ‘Piled Raft Behavior Based on 1-G Model
Studies’. Indian Geotechnical Conference – 2010, GEOtrendz December 16–18,
2010 IGS Mumbai Chapter & IIT Bombay.
• Burland J.B., Broms B.B., De Mello V.F.B. (1977), ‘Behaviour of foundations and
structures’, proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and
Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, Vol. 2, pp.495-546.
• Cao, X.D., Wong, I.H., Chang, M.F. (2004), ‘Behavior of Model Rafts Resting on
Pile– Reinforced Sand’, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromental Engineering
130, pp. 129-138. 53
• Phung D.L. (1993), ‘Footings with Settlement-Reducing Piles in Non-Cohesive Soil’,
Ph.D Thesis, University of Technology, Göteborg, Sweden.
• Poulos H.G. (2001), ‘Piled Raft Foundations: Design and Applications’, Geotechnique
Vol. 51, No. 2, pp. 95-113.
• Singh A.K. and Singh A.N. (2011), ‘Experimental study of piled raft foundation’,
Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference December 15-17, 2011, Kochi (Paper
No D-378).
54
THANK YOU…
55