Pe
where
'S: consolidation settlement (m) ina cohesive soil layer
‘60: intial void ato at a layer whose depth is
6): void ratio at alayer whose depth is 2 apainst po + Aor
Hi: thickness (m) of the cohesive soil layer
Ce: index of compression of the cobesive sol layer
‘ho, increment of vertical stress (kin?) at a depth of z inthe soil layer,
‘caused by applied load
Re: consolidation yield tress (Nm?) at a depth of 2
Po: effective overburden load (kNim’) ata depth of
“The value po inthe equation above should be obtained by using Pa. C. 9.63.
12 ~~(C963)
po= th+y(@—hy
unit weight of earth (N/m)
175 wnitweight in water of earth Vin?)
22: depth (n fom a subgrade surface
1h: dep (tom the subgrade surface to subgrade water level,
‘40; may be obtained by the customary caleulation method (Eq. C. 9.64) which follows
‘an assumption that subgrade stess disperses linearly as shown in Fig-C. 9.6.1,
—_ @B0 . .
"Eyam saraas) eee
where
Bs shorter width (of load
longer wit (m) of load
angle of dispersion. Generally taken from 30° to 35°.
2 applied load (Nm)
mo
: caaeec,
PTET TITETTT TIT TITTY _*
Fig-C. 9.64 Distribution of Ground Stress Fig-C.962 elogp Curve
Generally, the value C, should be obtained by means of @ consolidation test. Ifn0 log
curve is prepared, Equation C. 9.6.5 may be utilized for cohesive sol layer whose
sensitivity ratio isnot high.
C= 0.009 (m,— 10) (€.9.65)
where wy : liquid limi (%)
183 In case ofa multi-layered consolidation deposit as shown in Fig-C. 9.63, volumes of
‘consolidation setlement in each layer should be summed up.
a Contin tye
4 EL, comtinonine 2
2 = ——
sl = ‘Consolidation yer |
'
4 & u
Bre comotition ye
Fig-C, 9.6.3 Malti-layered Consolidation Deposit
Consolidating time in a uniform saturated cohesive sol layer whose maximum drainage
stance (em) is D eat be estimated by using Eq, C. 9.6.6 below:
mt
cy
‘ ~ son (C.96.6)
2 consolidating time (s) taken to reach a specific degree of consolidation
Tm
Gy: eveffcient of consolidation (nis) obtained by consolidation test
“Ts time coefficient hich is determined by inital conditions on disibation
‘of subgrade stess increment As, causing consolidation and is in
‘carrespondence to degree of consolidation U (2) (see Table-C. 9.6.1)
1D: maximum drainage distance (m) in a saturated cohesive soil layer. If
double sided dreinage is done in consolidation layer whose height is H
m1, D=HD, (se FigC. 9.64)
188 Us degree of consolidation (%) as defined by Eq. C. 9.6.7
Uw BEE 100 or smnemnn(C, 9.6.7)
1: Void ratio before consolidation starts
1: Void ratio when consolidation is completed
©: void ratio at an arbiteary time
Table-C. 9.6. Time Coefficient
ve, T veo, T
0 0.008 oO 0287
20 0.031 0 0.403
30 oon 80 0.567
40 0.126 90 0348
50 0.97
Pome ayer
7
Perma hyer permeable layer
Fig-C. 9.64 Selecting Drainage Distance
Ifa deposit is composed of multi cohesive soil layer whose coofficont of consolidation
difers euch as Ovl, Cv2, and CvS as shown in Pig-C. 9.6.5, maximus drainage
layer
distance D' may be caleclated by using Kquation ©. 9.6.8 a8 to
{maginary layer thickness 2D' and a eoefficont of consolidation of Cv.
185 E, tC, .
[Eea ay, [Oe gered Dy [Eee mnnrnnnnn
epee Dee (C.9.68)
where
D ‘maximum érainage distance (m)
Dy,Dp “Dy: maximum éainage distance of exch layer (i)
Cy, Ca Cy: coefficient of consolidation ofeach layer (als)
ca any arbitrary coefficient of consolidation (m2/s) to be
chosen as representative of the layers
Permeable yer
Permeable yer
Fig-C.9.65 Deposit Composed of Consolidation Layers with Different Cv
9.7 Deep Foundations to be Constructed Deep in Grounds Subject to
Consolidation Sottlement
‘When constructing @ deep foundation in subgrade which ie sabjociod to
consolidation settlement, influences of land subsidence upon the foundation,
including negative friction fore, shall be reviewed.
Consolidation settlement oocurs in volt eubgrade, if offctive strobe is incronsed by
‘banking near a foundation or by pumping up subgrade water to lower a subgrade water
level. Consolidation has not been completed yet in many of relatively new reclaimed
lands, When constructing pile or caisson foundations in such eubgrades, influences of
land subsidence upon the foundations need tobe reviowod,
186 Is influences includo occurrence of nogative skin fiction force inthe foundation skin,
failure to expect horiontal resistance in some part of ground because design ground
surlaces change by land subsidence, and vertical sharing i reduced, For further details,
xefor to sections ofeach foundation,
9.8 Foundations Subjected to Recentric Loads
{Influences of lateral movement, if @ foundation constantly eubjected to eeeentsic
load may more laterally shall be reviewed,
When constructing in soft ground an abutment or other structures which are
constantly subjected to eccentric load, there are possibilities of lateral movement of &
foundation. The lateral movement may sometimes break expansion joints, doform an
abutment when its parapet wall comes in contact with a superstructure, or injure
bearing
Many causes are supposed to force an abutment & move laterally, including eo
quality: shapes and dimensions of beckiil interaction between an abutment body and
pile and caisson: and landfilling conditions, Hence, it is considerably dificult at
prevent to grasp lateral movement quantitatively when designing an abutment
However, foundations which cause and do not cats lateral movement can be largely
‘entifed by using a lateral movement‘identiffng index (1 index) which is ealculatod
by using Eq. C. 98.1, Ifthe J index is Tess than 1.2, a designer may judge that no
lateral movement wil occur, and if exceeding 12, it may occur
sant os
where
1 lateral movementidentifying index
corrective coofciont of soft ground thickness, 4) D/L
)corvestvecoefcient of foundation bedy resistance width,
convective coeficiont of abutment length, us= VAC <3.0)
‘unit weight of Sling material (kNim®)
hight of backfl (m)
average value of cohesion in the soft ground CxNim#)
‘of ground thicknees m)
abutment length
+
>
187 Be abutment with (md
1: total width of foundation bodes (nd
L? embedded depth of the foundation (rm)
Influences of lateral movement must be roviewed if there are poseiilties of its
owcurrence, Recommended countermeasures to be takon against possible Interal
movement include a method to inereaco resistence by improving soil layers or
enhancing rigidity of foundation structures or & method to reduoe loads of backfl
ogheormas
Arie weit i
f i
i 4@
i a 2 5
5 b 2
a = i
sand Layer | é
easing Layer aul Ginn) gate
‘mbedent Length of Foundation L
Fig-C.9.81 Foundation Subjected to Lateral Loads
9.9. Foundations of Skewed Abutments
"The stability checking for the foundations of skewed abutments shall generally
‘be done in the direction perpendicular to the rear surface and tho bridge axis
direction.
If the oblique angle 0 (eee Fig. C. 9.9.1) of tho bridgo is small, the stability of tho
sbutmont foundation is sometimes mote severe inthe direction perpendicular to the
abutment rear face than in the bridge axis direction. For an abutment foundation
having an oblique angle, it is dificult to uniformly stipulate the direction to be
considered in the design, It is good ta check in both directions, as deserbed in thie
188 article, unless the direction in which to design can be limited considering various
conditions. In genera, the abutment rear face is backfilled by ombanking in most
caoeo and the earth pressure acts in the direction perpendicular tothe abutment rear
face. Thevefove, i is cullciont in many eases to examine only in the direction
perpendicular tothe rer face,
For skow abutments, there are many cases in which the rear tgpographical conditions
sre uneven, Therefor, the earth pressure acting oa the abutiment ie not aifiem over
‘the width ofthe abutment. In addition, the direction of action of earth pressure deos
not coincide with tho bridge axis direction. or this reason, calculation of abutment
stability and stresos involv three-dimensional anslyss and is therefore complex,
For simplicity of ealeulation and for an adoquatoly safo design, the earth pressure p
scting on the rear wde ofthe abutment in Fig-C- 9.8.1 may be deemed to act wniformy
‘over the width of the abutment. Tn thi case, because the conter of gravity, O, of the
‘abutment docs not lic on the same vertical plane athe line of action ofthe resultant
XP of earth proscure, the vertical reaction and sliding force per unit ares at end A may’
be considered tobe larger then at end B. For ekew angles langer than 75 degrees, there
‘is no particular noed to consider the above. In the esoe where the skew angle is less
than 75 degrees and the abutment width is narrow or whore the resultant 2P of earth
preseures is ange, you will want to consider the shove and extend the footing nt portion
ACC to the hatched portion in Fig-C. 9.0.1 unless safety has boen fully ascztsined
‘through coleulation, If the foting for part AC in no extended, it must be proven that
‘the abutment will never rotete due to escontrcty of the line of action ofthe resultant
of the earth pressures
"The horizontal lod from the supertractare nocsssary for checking the stability of an
abutment foundation may be found according tothe commentary to 8.4.2.
159 Bibliography
»
Ba}
3
4
9
Pablie Works Research Institute, Ministry of Construction: Coefficient of Ground
Reaction and Its Correction by Using Loaded Width, Technical Memorandum of
PWRINo, 299, July 1967
Public Works Research Institue, Ministry of Construction: Study on Selection
Procedures for Structure Foundation Types, Technical Memorandum of PWRI No.
2528, January 1988
Public Works Research Institute, Ministry of Construction: Study on Lateral
Movement of Abutments, Technical Memorandum of PWRI No. 1804, December
1981
Yoshida, 1 and Yoshineka, R.: A Method to Estimate Modulus of Horizontal
Sulpgrade Reaction for a Pile, Soils and Foundations, Vol. 12, No.3, September
1972
Okahara, M., Nakatani, S. and Matsui, K: Study on Vertical and Horizontal
Bearing Characteristics of Pie, Proceedings of Structural Engineering, Vol. 374,
March 1991
190 CHAPTER 10 DESIGN OF SPREAD FOUNDATIONS
10.1 Fundamentals of Design
(D The verification of eproad foundations for under ordinary, storm, and
level 1 earthquake condition shall conform tothe following:
1) The vertical eubgrade reaction at the base ofa spread foundation shall not
exceed the allowable vertical beating capacity of the ground, as detsiled in
See. 10.8.1,
2) The resultant load acting on a spread foundation shall at within one sixth
of the base width from the center in the ordinary and storm conditions, and
lone third of the base width from the center in the level 1 earthquake
condition,
8) When horizontal loads are partially eupportod by the embedded portion of «
spread foundation, the horizontal reaction shall not exosed the allowable
horizontal Dearing capacity of the ground, as detailed in See. 10.3.2
4) ‘The shear reaction at the base ofa spread foundation shall not exceed the
allowable ehear resistance ofthe ground below the foundation, es dotailod in
See. 10.8.8,
9) The displacements of spread foundations shall not exceed the allowable
displacements detailed in See. 9.2.
© The stresses occurring in footings shall not exceed the allowable stresses
detailed in Chapter 4
© Spread foundations shall be verified for the love 2 earthquake condition to
avoid the cecurrence of yielding in footings.
"The gpreed foundations specified in ths chapter are principally the foundations that
directly transmit loads from superstructures to sturdy supporting ground and are
installed by constructing s footing on comparatively shallow, excavated ground.
Furthermore, this chapter can also apply to shallow rigid foundations, whase behavior
is similar to that of a spread foundation such as a caisson foundation of which the
‘fictive embedment depth is oqual to or lss than one half the wideb
191 =
Aes Sauces
—
‘estin Unt Oi Storm an at Brake Coden,
“enon of Lads inthe Onna Sard Lael Borgia Conon
er Bearing Cnet
erie he Lee? Era Conon
Fig.-C.10.1.1 Desiga Calculation Flowchart for Spread Foundations
192 () This Provision specifies the requirements forthe verification fo the ordinary, storm,
and level 1 earthquake conditions.
2) Stability against overturning momente shall be verified interme of the degree of
cozentrcity ofthe resultant loads, Ths verification process is designed to restrict
the plasticization of the gubgrade reaction from the supporting ground and
“ottlement ofthe foundation by limiting uplift when the foundation is subjected to
vertical foroes and overturning moments. In the ordinary condition, the location of
the rosultant loed is provided so that the entie base ia in contact with the
supporting ground and the distribution of th subgrade reaction is trapezoidal, The
purpose of this is to avoid uneven settoment of foundation due to eccentric loads
‘and uplift, The effects of eccentric leads on settlement and plasicnation ofthe
subgrade reaction in the level 1 earthquake conditions seismic situation are
comparably small in comparison with these in the ordinsry condition, booase the
seismic forces act in alternating directions with short time periods, The
verification forthe level 1 earthquake condition can be omitted in cases when the
stability against overturning is judged to be retained based on the characteristics
ofthe etructur, such as rgid-feame bridgea and arch bridges in the longitudinal
Airesion
Moreover, as the storm situation is considered as an extreme phenomenon
‘equivalent to the lev 1 earthquake condition, the stability veriGeation for
‘eccentric load in the storm situation can be dealt with same as in the level 1
‘certhquake condition.
| When a footing is constructed on sturdy ground with sulficient horizontal
resistance and the surrounding ground is backfilled with material of sufiient
sength, it may be assumed that the shear reaction ofthe ground acting on the
‘base and the horizontal reactions atthe front face ofthe footing jointly reset the
horizontal forces acting onthe footing.
5) Until the initiation of siding ofa foundation, the shear deformation generated in
‘the ground below a spread foundation due to the horizontal foees transmitted
‘rom the foundation ia the primary cause of horizontal displacements of spread
foundations. Such deformation is not signifieant when compared with those of
other types of foundations, and seldom exerts any adverse influence on the
193 superstructure, Furthermore, it i uot likely to cause problems in view of the
provention of the residusl deformation ofthe ground. Therefore, verification of
‘orisontal displacement can be omitted for spread foundations
‘The horizontal displacement of statically indeterminate structures, such as
rigid-feame and arch bridges should be calculated as they are affected by small
displacement ofthe foundation. The effets of eny horizontal digplacement on the
entire bridge eystem should be examined, and the structural details of the
sperstrictures and substructures should be determined
(@) When the stability of spread foundations is verified in accordance with the
provisions in () above, verification forthe level 2 earthquake condition ean be
‘omitted. The reasons for thie are that enorgy absorption due to uplift of the
foundation can be expected bacauce of allowances for the ground bearing frees due
to the sturdy supporting ground, and that the ground would aot eustain excessive
failures even ifthe spread foundation behaves as a nonlinear system. However, in
the level 2 earthquake condition, the structural members of « foting shall be
‘voified in accordance with the provisions of See. 106, asthe fores ating on feoting
sections during a level 2 oasthquake condition would be sigaiicantly largor then
those during @ level 1 selamic situation, because of uplift of the foundation. A
standard design calculation flowchart for spread foundations js ilustratod in
Fig-0.20.11
10.2 Load Shearing
(@) All vertical loads shall be tranamitted by the vertical ground reaction at
the base of the foundation.
(@ Aihorizontal loads shell bo transmitted by the choar reactions acting atthe
base of the foundation, However, when load shearing at hoth the base of the
foundation and the side face of the embedment to horizontal loads is
considered, their contsbutions aba be carefully examined.
(@) Although spread foundations axe normally embedded into relatively dense or hard
‘subool layers, friction reistance around foundations cannot be expected. Therefore,
194 ‘tho vertical ground reastions resist the vertical load
© As spread foundations are embedded into shallow sturdy supporting layers, the
‘osistance of horizontal loads by the embedded portions ia not permitted. ‘Thus,
shear reaction at tho foundation base principally transmits the horizontal Jad,
However, when steady supporting layers can be retsined near the ground surface,
‘the embedded portions may partially support the horizontal loads. Their
conteibutions for eupportng loads ex procentad in the Commentary in See. 10.5.
10.3 Allowable Bearing Capacity of Ground
108.1. Allowable Vertical Bearing Capacity of Ground below Base of Foundation
(WD) Allowable Vertical Bearing Capacity
‘The allowable vertical bearing capacity of grownd shall be determined in
‘onsidoration of the ultimate bearing capacity of the ground and settlement
‘of the foundation. The safety factors shown in Tuble-10.3.1 shall be ensured
when evaluating the allowable vertical bearing capacity based on the
ultimate bearing capacity ofthe ground.
‘Table 10.8.1 Safety Factor
Under ordinary | Under storm,
level Lenrthquake
‘condition
condition
3 2
Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Ground
1) Tho ultimate bearing capacity ofthe ground shal be estimated based on
the geotechnicsl investigations, The oseentricty and inclined load,
configuration and dimension of the foundations, embedment depth ete
shall be considered in the estimation of the ultimate bearing capacity of
the ground,
2) The ultimate bearing capacity considering the effcts of eccentricity and
inclination of loads (by the static formulas) and the scale effects on the
195, coofficients of bearing capacity can be obtained by Bq (10.9.0). This
equation may be regarded as satisfying 1) above.
anaforsnsveanselnanns} onan
where,
(Q, ultimate benting capacity considaring the effoete of eooentricity
‘and inclination of loads and the scale effect on bearing capacity
coefficients (kN)
© + cohesion of subsoila QeNim)
9! overburdon surcharge (kNim®), 9=72,
‘Ae + fective foundation area (mn?)
nora! unit weight of subsoil of the supporting ground and
‘ombedingground (kiNim, respectively. The underwater unit
‘weight must be taken when subsoile are lower than the
groundwater level
By + effetive foundation width considering eccentricity of lod (in),
BnB-2ey
B + foundation width (m)
‘ey + ccconteicity of rosultant force (rm)
Dy + effective embedment depth of foundation fm)
2,6 foundation shape factors
se! increase factor for embedment efocts
Noo Nyc My! coefficients of bearing capacity considering the inclination of
loads
‘modification factors for the scale effect on coefficionts of bearing
* * capacity
8) When the ultimate bearing capacity ofthe ground considering the effects
of occentrcity and inclination of loads and the soale effects on zhe
‘coeflcients of bearing capacity is evaluated using the plate bearing test,
it shall be caleslated by Bq(10.3.1) with cohesion cand shear resistance
angle ¢.
(), (1) The ulkimate bearing capacity is determined in terms of the dimensions ofthe
196 footing, and the cccontricty and inclination of the los, The ealeulation of the
ultimate beating capacity without considering the effects of the eccentricity and
‘ncination of loads overestimates the value. Consequently, the effects of eccantcic
‘and inclined loads are incorporated into the ealelation,
‘The equation forthe estimation ofbearing capacity in the previous version of Part IV
Substructures (1996.12) was based on a simple rigid;plastic theory, and was
established as an analytical solution by assuming thatthe shear resistance angle 4
uniform along the failure plane. However, as failures actually progtess in a
step-by-step manner, the angle ¢ is nonuniform along the fallure plane even atthe
‘ultimate stato. It has beon laifed from experiments thatthe coefficients of beating
capacity decrease with an incroase in the dimensions of the foundation base,
‘Therefore, to take this phenomenon into ascount, modification factors forthe scale
lic on the coeficients of bearing capacity axe introduced to the ultimate bearing
capacity formula in this version of Pact IV Subetructares.
In ganoral, the settlements of foundations incrase with loading anes. Although this
phenomenon is reflected in the design hy introdusing the modifietion factors forthe
scale effect on the ultimate bearing capacity, the ultimate bearing eapecity is not
Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen
