COMPUTER ANALYSIS/DESIGN OF LARGE M A T

FOUNDATIONS 3
Discussion by J. A. Hooper3

Of special interest in this useful and informative paper is the way in

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

which the authors have faced the problem of translating computer anal-
ysis into practical design. For here lies one of the major difficulties in
present day engineering: h o w best to bridge the chasm be tw e en the
countless theoretical papers which appear in equally countless special-
ized journals describing the latest scientific techniques, a n d the degree
of analysis necessary for the engineer to produce, a n d be responsible
for, safe and economic design.
Notwithstanding these remarks, there is one significant aspect of the
authors' analysis which is questionable and merits discussion. In the
introduction to their paper, the authors give several good reasons for
performing a computer analysis in which the mat or raft foundation is
modeled by plate-bending finite elements. This representation is a con-
siderable improvement over those in which the raft is assumed to be a
rigid block or a b e a m grillage. But it is rather disappointing that there
is no corresponding improvement in the modeling of the soil mass, be-
cause the authors have used Winkler springs for this purpose. The struc-
ture is thus deemed to be supported by a dense inviscid liquid; an ar-
rangement which surely has more in common with certain maritime
structures than with land based construction.
Although the Winkler spring approach has advantages in terms of ex-
pediency, experience h a s s h o w n that its performance a n d reliability are
strongly problem-dependent. For example, results are often poor in the
edge region of foundations, especially where there are peripheral walls
or columns, because of the absence of interactive coupling t h r o u g h the
soil in this area. Furthermore, the analysis gives n o information what-
soever on soil displacements within the soil mass, including surface set-
tlements outside the foundation plan-area; these can often be of vital
concern with respect to possible settlement damage to adjacent struc-
tures.
In a similar vein, there appear to be fundamental difficulties in deriv-
ing values for the spring constants. The stated m e t h o d of tributary areas
is perfectly satisfactory in itself, b u t actual values of spring stiffness are
based directly on the so-called modulus of subgrade reaction. It is the
obscure a n d ill-defined m a n n e r in which this m o d u l u s is to be deter-
mined that constitutes the most disturbing aspect of the Winkler spring
approach. This is exemplified by the authors' reference to the various
parameters on which the subgrade modulus d e p e n d s . Indeed, the writer
has yet to see anywhere a convincing rationale a n d systematic procedure
for deriving values of subgrade modulus in t h e general case.
A practical remedy to this discomfiture m a y be achieved by repre-
senting the soil as a layered continuum, thereby permitting more real-
istic modeling of the soil strata and allowing a full soil-structure inter-
a
May, 1984, by Steven C. Ball and James S.-Notch (Paper 18799).
3
Ove Amp Partnership, 13 Fitzroy Street, London W1P 6BQ, U.K.
2511

J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:2511-2512.

 action to be carried out. Moreover, the determination of soil stiffness
profiles becomes more logical in principle and simpler in practice be-
cause the basic deformation moduli can be directly related to the strata
sequence and standard soil properties obtained during the site investi-
gation. This is not to imply that the solid continuum model can faithfully
reproduce in detail the complex deformation properties of natural soils,
in the same way that plate-bending finite elements are not intended to
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by New York University on 05/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

precisely model the complex behavior of reinforced concrete, but it does

provide a sound and reliable framework within which to produce cal-
culations for use in structural design. Undoubtedly the continuum ap-
proach has many practical advantages over that based on Winkler springs,
albeit at the expense of specialized programming and additional com-
putational effort, and has been used successfully for several years in the
structural design of a wide range of foundations (1,2).
Would the authors give details of how they derived their moduli of
subgrade reaction, and also express a view as to how they regard the
efficacy of the Winkler spring approach to raft analysis? On reflection,
might not the authors consider adopting the soil continuum method in
future work?

APPENDIX.—REFERENCES

1. Hooper, J. A., "Analysis and Design of a Large Raft Foundation in Baghdad,"

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol. 74, Pt. 1, Nov., 1983, pp.
837-869.
2. Hooper, J. A., "Raft Analysis and Design—Some Practical Examples," The
Structural Engineer, Vol. 62A, No. 8, Aug., 1984, pp. 233-244.

Discussion by V. S. Kelkar*

I
The authors have lucidly explained the use of theoretical analysis pro- j
grams for practical design applications. \
We have been using finite element plate bending program for analysis i
and design of a large number of flat plate floors in multistoried buildings j
as well as raft foundations (as slabs on elastic foundation) using methods
similar to those described by the authors.
The authors have stated that the flat plate program does not give shear s
stresses. The writer feels that this problem can be easily Solved by mod-
ifying the program as follows. j
After inverting the stiffness matrix, the resulting displacements are •
usually multiplied by the "stress" matrix which gives the moments Mx, i
My, and M^ at each node. To obtain shears, we should multiply the
displacements by the element stiffness matrix (which is originally used
to assemble the stiffness matrix of the entire structure). This will give '
vertical force and two moments at the nodes of each element. The vari-
ation of these vertical forces gives the variation of shear forces along the ,
nodes. These values can be used in design. J
"Consultant, Dr. Kelkar Consultants Pvt. Ltd., 602 Jolly Bhavan One, 10, New
Marine Lines, Bombay-400 020, India.
2512

J. Struct. Eng. 1985.111:2511-2512.