Raft Foundation

Raft foundations are a type of foundation with high integrity in which four founda-
tion piers are connected together using a large foundation slab to form a massive
structure and the foundation piers are connected through beams.

From: UHV Transmission Technology, 2018

Related terms:

Subgrade, Bearing Capacity, Chimneys, Excavation, Pile Foundations, Reinforced

Concrete

View all Topics

Civil engineering and building works

British Electricity International, in Station Planning and Design (Third Edition), 1991

4.3 Raft foundations

Raft foundations are essentially large plan area foundations built either solidly or
in cellular form. They may be employed for lightly loaded structures on soft natural
ground or on other ground where weak zones exist. In this case the raft is designed to
span across such zones with tolerable bearing pressures and acceptable settlements.

Possible applications are discussed in BS8004. Of particular interest is the case where
heavier structures are supported in ground conditions which are such that there is
unlikely to be significant differential settlements. Isolated footings, under these
conditions may occupy such a large proportion of the available area that they may
profitably be united to form a raft, usually of reinforced concrete.

The raft comprises a layer of reinforced concrete covering the whole area of the
building, or even of several buildings. It may be strengthened by increased thickness
of concrete in areas of heavy loading, such as under columns, or by a system of main
and secondary beams.

Simple solid raft foundations may be easily and quickly constructed, provided that
a suitable stratum exists fairly close to the finished site level — say within 3 m. In
cases where the depth of excavation to firm ground exceeds the structural depth of
the raft foundation, the excess depth over the raft can be filled with weak concrete or
compacted broken stone. Figure 3.8 shows a raft foundation strengthened by main
and secondary beams, and with filling placed over to carry the floor at the appropriate
level.

Fig. 3.8. Raft foundations

> Read full chapter

Fixed Offshore Platform Design

Ph.D., P.E.I. Karsan Demir, in Handbook of Offshore Engineering, 2005

Mats
Figure 6.65 shows a plan view of a mat foundation. The basic purpose of the mat is
to more uniformly distribute the concentrated loads from the legs into the soil of
the seabed and to reduce the pressure loads on the soil. The mat is also required
to resist lateral loads and it achieves this by a combination of cohesion or friction
between the bottom of the mat and the soil and lateral passive soil pressure acting
on the vertical surface of the mat that has penetrated into the soil. A scour skirt may
be added to the mat to increase its lateral soil resistance.
Figure 6.65. Jack-up platform foundation mat

The foundation mat provides a moment connection to the base of each leg that
serves to reduce the bending moment in the leg at the hull level. This helps reduce
the overall weight of each leg. Since the legs are fixed to the mat, the legs stay in
the same position relative to the hull. This allows use of a jacking system that is
simpler than one on an independent leg unit. Another purpose of the foundation
mat is to provide buoyancy during the afloat condition. Thus, the depth of the mat
is determined by two basic considerations (1) structural integrity and (2) adequate
buoyancy to float the entire lightweight of the unit. Whitley carries details on the
factors to be considered in the design of a mat foundation.

> Read full chapter

CALCULATION OF THIN PLATES

ON STATISTICAL NON—UNIFORM
FOUNDATIONS
Yi Huang, ... Guansheng Yin, in Computational Mechanics in Structural Engineer-
ing, 1999

INTRODUCTION
Thin plates on elastic foundations are widely employed in engineering. Many ap-
plications, such as raft foundation, road pavement, airport runway, etc. can be
calculated by reducing them to thin plates on an elastic foundation; that is the
typical problem of structure-medium (soil) interaction. Concerning the calculation
of plate on an elastic foundation, the certainty analysis method has been used, i. e.
the physical parameters, geometrical dimensions of plate and foundation properties
are considered as determinate factors, and actual variabilities of them are considered
through so-called “safety factor”. Actually, each kind of parameter has a relatively
large variability because the foundation (soil) is highly dispersed, so it should be
considered as a statistical nonhomogeneous medium, that is a key to reliability
calculation of structure — medium interation. On the other hand, there are also
variabilities in varying degrees for material properties and geometrical dimension
of plates. This leads to uncertainty of the actual parameters that is difficult to
represent by the classical “safety factor”. Due to the lack of quantitative analysis of
variability effect of all kinds of parameters on the deformation and strength of thin
plates, unreasonable errors are caused in the design of foundation plate structures.
Therefore, in order to reasonably design the foundation plates, it is very important
to study the effects of all kinds of uncertain parameters on the deformation and
internal force of the thin plates. So it is inevitable to introduce reliability calculation
of structure — soil interaction.

Recently, the fast development of reliability theory provides a powerful method to

study the variable effects of the parameters on the structural internal force and
deformation, and the reliability theory has been used in structural design. But up till
the present moment there are not many papers dealing with reliability calculation of
structure—soil interaction at home and abroad. In this paper, the reliability theory
of plate—soil interaction is discussed. Based on reliability theory, the reliability
calculation of thin plates on elastic foundation is studied by considering the founda-
tion as a statistical nonhomogeneous medium. The calculation procedure is further
demonstrated by examples of a plate with four free edges and a plate with four
simply supported edges. In fact, this paper presents reliability calculation method
of structure-medium (soil) interaction.

> Read full chapter

Applications of the Multiphase Ap-

proach Part 2: Load-Bearing Capaci-
ty and Stability Analysis of Reinforced
Structures
Patrick de Buhan, ... Ghazi Hassen, in Elastic, Plastic and Yield Design of Reinforced
Structures, 2017

Thus, section 6.1 deals with the evaluation of the elastoplastic settlement of a

vertically loaded piled raft foundation with a special emphasis on two types of
soil–pile interactions, called “pile shaft” and “pile tip” interactions, respectively. As
was already pointed out in the previous chapter, those interaction constitutive laws
between phases should be related to the “load–transfer” curves usually introduced
in the state-of-the-art design of pile foundation systems [ASH 10]. The multiphase
elastoplastic boundary value problem of reinforced structures, incorporating these
two kinds of interactions through specific constitutive laws, is first formulated in
general terms, then implemented in a finite element computer code. The different
simulations performed from using such a novel computational tool appear to pro-
duce reliable predictions concerning the load–settlement curves on the one hand,
and the axial force distributions in the piles on the other.

> Read full chapter

Improvement of Soft Soil Formations

by Drilled Displacement Columns
M.D. Larisch, ... T. Muttuvel, in Ground Improvement Case Histories, 2015

21.2.5 Load-transfer platform

The DDC concept implies that the columns are not structural elements, which is
fundamentally different to the classic piled raft foundation concept. A load-transfer
layer between the DDCs and the structure itself provides load transfer. It is assumed
that the column heads punch into the load-transfer layer. Different failure modes are
possible (Fig. 21.5). The load-transfer layer typically is comprised of the following:

Figure 21.5. Punching effect at rigid inclusion head. Prandtl failure diagram (left),
shear cone type failure mode (right).

(Source: After ASIRI (2011)).

• Single layers of well-compacted granular material

• Layers of existing soil that are suitable for load transfer

• Layers of soil treated with hydraulic binders

• Layers of soil reinforced by horizontal geosynthetics or geotextile

The load-transfer platform is responsible for distributing the structural loads par-
tially into the column heads and partially into the soil between the DDCs, allowing
the structure to be founded on top of the load-transfer platform like a shallow
foundation.

For the load-transfer platform, a typical minimum thickness of 400–1200 mm is

required to allow for appropriate load transfer between DDCs and soil. This is
essential in the optimal design of the supported structure, particularly when aiming
to reduce bending moments in the slab or base plate. For granular material layers, it
is important to obtain a high level of compactness, which results in a high modulus
of deformation. For load-transfer layers treated with hydraulic binders (lime or
cement-lime mortar), sufficient flexibility needs to be retained to avoid cracking.

The load-transfer platform shown in Fig. 21.5 spans over the heads of the DDCs to
ensure optimal load-transfer. It is also possible to install the DDCs to the top of
the load-transfer platform and use friction between the fill and the DDC to transfer
loads. Case Study A (Section 21.6.1) provides an example of the latter approach.

> Read full chapter

Considerations in Vertical Extension of

Reinforced Concrete Structures
M. Kyakula, ... E.A. Opus, in Proceedings from the International Conference on
Advances in Engineering and Technology, 2006

8.0 EFFECTING MODIFICATIONS IN FOUNDATION

The most commonly type of foundation used in the Uganda are pad and strip foot-
ings, with only a few cases of raft foundations and rarely pile foundation. Therefore
the considerations in this paper will be confined to pad footings. Modifications
carried out on the pad footings these include;

Interconnecting the existing ground floor columns by a ground beams. This min-
imizes differential settlements. If the ground beams are not placed just above
the level of the column bases, they will alter the effective length of the column.
And if not attached to all columns, the relative stiffness of the columns will be
altered. Connecting the column to a ground beam will involve hacking away the
concrete, exposing the column reinforcement and attaching/welding the ground
beam reinforcement to it.

Alternatively additional footings to carry the load from the extension and part of
the load from the existing structure may be introduced. Or the foundation may be
enlarged; this will involve hacking away the edges of the existing footing, welding
reinforcement to the existing reinforcement and casting concrete around so as to
increase its width, length and sometimes depth. Other innervations like draining
away water by use of French drains or other suitable methods if the water table is
close to the new depth of foundation. In a few cases piling may be considered, this
will involve underpinning

> Read full chapter

Applications of the Multiphase Ap-

proach Part 1: Static and Dynamic Stif-
fness of Piled Raft Foundations
Patrick de Buhan, ... Ghazi Hassen, in Elastic, Plastic and Yield Design of Reinforced
Structures, 2017

5.2.1 Impedance matrix of a pile group foundation

As a direct extension of the previously considered static or quasi-static combined
loading, the general problem of a piled raft foundation subject to dynamic combined
loading is considered in the following terms. Referring to Figure 5.4, the footing
is given a rigid body motion characterized by harmonic vertical and horizontal
displacements of point O of the form:

Figure 5.4. Piled raft footing under harmonic combined loading

[5.18]
along with the following harmonic rotation (overturning motion) about the Oz-axis:

[5.19]

where ! denotes the angular frequency of the solicitation and ( V0, V0, 0) denote the
displacements and (infinitesimal) rotation amplitudes.

The steady-state response of the structure may be expressed in terms of the corre-
sponding vertical and horizontal resultant forces and overturning moment about
the Oz-axis, which may be put into the following matrix form (notations of [TAH 09]
have been adopted in this chapter):

[5.20]

where the diagonal terms of the matrix (ZVV, ZHH and ZRR) are the vertical, horizontal
and rocking impedances of the foundation, respectively, the other non-diagonal
components representing the different possible coupling terms.

While the calculation of the vertical impedance ZVV of the pile group foundation will
be performed later on, the present section is focused on evaluating its horizontal as
well as rocking impedances, which may be put in the following form:

[5.21]

In the latter equations, KH ( ) (respectively, KR ( )) is the norm of the foundation

horizontal (respectively, rocking) dynamic stiffness and H( ) (respectively, R( )) the
out-of-phase angle between the prescribed horizontal displacement (respectively,
rotation) and the response in terms of horizontal resultant (respectively, overturning
moment).

> Read full chapter

Case studies of tall buildings with dy-

namic modification devices
Alberto Lago, ... Antony Wood, in Damping Technologies for Tall Buildings, 2019

8.2.4.3 Structural system

The main characteristics of the building structural system are the following:

• 3.66-m thick RC mat foundation

• 0.25-m thick mild-RC flat slabs spanning 8.53–9.14 m below grade

• 0.20-m thick post-tensioned concrete flat slabs spanning 8.53–9.14 m above
grade
• Ductile RC core wall system (approximately 17.07 m×10.67 m, roughly 10:1
and 15:1 aspect ratios) with supplementary outrigger bracing (reducing aspect
ratio from 15:1 to about 8:1) located at levels 28–32 and 51–55 (Fig. 8.182)Fig-
ure 8.182. One Rincon Hill: south tower lateral system.
• 0.76 m×1.68 m columns supporting BRB outriggers (Fig. 8.183)Figure 8.183.
One Rincon Hill: south tower BRB installation.
• 2×87,064 L capacity TLD tanks located on level 62

8.2.4.3.1 Building fundamental periods

The building fundamental periods were both estimated (through numerical analysis,
Fig. 8.184) and measured. For the first three modes the values are the following:

Figure 8.184. One Rincon Hill: fundamental frequencies and mode shapes.

• Estimated: 5.37 seconds (first mode), 4.66 seconds (second mode), and 2.04-

 seconds (third mode)
• Measured: 3.86 seconds (first mode), 1.38 seconds (second mode), and 0.90-
 seconds (third mode)

8.2.4.3.2 Damping strategy utilized

After exploring several options, a tuned liquid sloshing damper (TLSD) was chosen
(Fig. 8.187).

8.2.4.3.3 Additional damping provided by the damping system

The supplemental system provides an additional 1.5% damping.

8.2.4.3.4 Building cost versus damping cost

Cost of damper as a ratio of total construction cost was approximately 1%.

8.2.4.3.5 Building code

The governing building code for this building is the 2001 CBC with the City and
County of San Francisco Supplements (CBC, 2001). PBSD was utilized to comply
with the alternate design provisions of the building code. Design for the wind was
based on wind tunnel study results and since occupant comfort is not addressed in
the governing building codes, an acceptable acceleration target of 18 mg at a 10-year
recurrence interval was set based on published literature on the subject.

8.2.4.3.6 Peer-reviewed project

As a requirement for PBSD, a peer review of the seismic design was performed by
a three-person panel consisting of academics and professionals, chaired by Ronald
O. Hamburger. The damping system for occupant comfort was not part of the peer
review.

> Read full chapter

Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling Engineer-

ing and Equipment
Huacan Fang, Menglan Duan, in Offshore Operation Facilities, 2014

2.1.1.1 The Types of Fixed Drilling Platform

A fixed drilling platform is an offshore structure (for the purpose of offshore oil
and gas drilling) fixed in position on the seafloor using a pile foundation, mat
foundation, or other methods that produce supporting pressure. A fixed drilling
platform is generally divided into two types: rigid fixed drilling platforms and flexible
drilling platforms.

1. Rigid drilling platformsA rigid drilling platform is a permanent fixed drilling

platform that doesn’t shift under the influence of marine environment loads.
It can be divided into two types: pile foundation platforms and gravity plat-
forms.a.Pile foundation platformsThis type consists of a pile inserted into
the seafloor that undertakes the vertical loads and resists horizontal loads.
The most widely used platform is a jacket platform; the monopod and the
tripod tower-type platform are also widely used.b.Gravity platformsThis type
is directly and steadily located on the seafloor on the basis of its own gravity,
rather than a pile. The most widely used platform is a concrete gravity platform,2.
beyond that the steel gravity platform and mixed gravity platform are widely
used.
Flexible drilling platformsA flexible drilling platform is a deep water drilling
platform that can sway a certain angle around the fulcrum within a permissive
range under the influence of marine environment loads. In order to meet deep
water needs, this type of platform usually uses a slender steel jacket as a pile
that inserts into the seafloor through tubes; cement is injected between the
pile and tubes, creating one assembly of the pile and tubes that is attached
to the steel jacket structure. Some flexible drilling platforms may use guy
line or add camels to generate a restoring force. This type can be divided
into string tower-type flexible platforms, camel tower-type flexible platforms,
and others.At present among these types, the most widely used fixed drilling
platform is the pile foundation platform. Following are details about this
platform.

> Read full chapter

Ground Improvement for Mitigat-

ing Liquefaction-Induced Geotechnical
Hazards
Dharma Wijewickreme, Upul D. Atukorala, in Ground Improvement Case Histories,
2015

1.6.3 Cement silo

The cement silo was constructed immediately south of the B-silos and the new
clinker silo (refer to Fig. 1.20). The silo was constructed on a relatively stiff circular
raft foundation 25 m in diameter, to withstand a design average maximum bearing
pressure of 300 kPa under static loading conditions. The underside of the raft foun-
dation was located at a depth of about 3 m below the ground surface. The expected
extreme bearing pressures under seismic loading at the edge of the foundation are
expected to be in the order of 325 kPa.

The soil conditions at the cement silo are similar to those at the clinker silo, except
that the sand deposit was found to be not quite as compact at depth. As a result, a soil
zone extending to a depth of about 20 m below the ground surface was estimated
to be potentially liquefiable under design seismic loading. Unlike at the clinker silo,
partial excavation of the weak upper silty soils and support of the raft on a densified
subgrade was not considered feasible for the cement silo foundation due to the close
proximity of adjacent existing facilities as well as the need to resist potential uplift
loads. For this reason, it was decided that the cement silo raft would be supported
on piles.

Two alternative options were considered: (1) install piles into the compact to dense
alluvial soils at depths below 21 m; (2) install relatively short piles 10–12 m, with
densification of the loose subsoils below the pile tip levels to a depth of 21 m prior
to pile driving (see Fig. 1.22, Zone A). In both options, the piles would be installed
at a relatively close spacing so that the looser soils between the piles would be com-
pacted, and an annular zone of ground treatment around the foundation footprint
would be undertaken to mitigate effects of liquefaction. These two approaches were
evaluated from a cost point of view, and the second option was identified as the
more cost-effective and preferred design.

Figure 1.22. Foundation system: cement silo—Section Z-Z (see Fig. 1.20 for section
location).

It was determined that the critical lateral loading for the cement silo would occur
under earthquake shaking conditions. The response of the silo foundation under
lateral loading was analyzed accounting for both soil-pile and pile-group interaction
effects to provide necessary input for final structural design.

The construction contract specified the densification of the lower Zone A, as shown
in Fig. 1.22, be achieved with suitable provisions to facilitate subsequent installation
of expanded-base piles through the upper Zone B (i.e., Zone A to be densified
without excessively densifying Zone B). A total of 123 expanded-base piles with
shaft diameter of 508 mm and with a design compression capacity of 1070 kN/pile
were specified. The annular zone of soil within 10 m outside the footprint of the
 foundation extending to a depth of 21 m below the existing ground surface was
densified using vibro-replacement (see Fig. 1.22, Zone C).

After installing 33 expanded-base piles, the contractor determined that the con-
struction progress was slower than anticipated; this appeared to be a result of not
carefully limiting the densification of the upper Zone B during the densification of
the lower Zone A prior to the pile installation process. Because of this difficulty, the
contractor proposed the installation of 508-mm-diameter (open-ended) steel piles
instead of the specified expanded-base piles. This alternative steel pile option was
accepted (by the design team and the owner) subject to the contractor achieving
the required vertical capacity and lateral fixity as per original design. As a result, the
remaining 90 pile locations for the cement silo foundation were completed using
steel pipe piles; pile driving analyzer (PDA) testing was conducted on selected piles
to confirm the axial capacities achieved.

> Read full chapter

ScienceDirect is Elsevier’s leading information solution for researchers.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V. Terms and conditions apply.