ENCE4610 FoundationAnalysisandDesign

Combined Footings and Mat Foundations

A mat is continuous in two directions capable of supporting multiple columns, wall or floor loads. It has dimensions from 20 to 80 ft or more for houses and hundreds of feet for large structures such as multistory hospitals and some warehouses Ribbed mats, consisting of stiffening beams placed below a flat slab are useful in unstable soils such as expansive, collapsible or soft materials where differential movements can be significant (exceeding 0.5 inch).

MatFoundations

Topics for Mat Foundations

o Floating Foundations o Coefficient of Subgrade Reaction o Loads and Moments on Combined Footings o Design of Mats

This image cannot currently be display ed.

ConditionsforMat Foundations
Structural loads require large area to spread the load Soil is erratic and prone to differential settlements Structural loads are erratic Unevenly distributed lateral loads Uplift loads are larger than spread footings can accommodate; weight of the mat is a factor here Mat foundations are easier to waterproof
This image cannot currently be display ed.

Example: Chase Tower, Houston, TX Mat foundation is 3 metres thick and bottomed at 19.2 m below street level

FloatingFoundations
Type of mat foundation that relies partially or entirely on the weight of the soil/water combination it displaces to support the structure above it A truly "floating" foundation exists where the weight of the soil removed is greater than or equal to the weight of the building that replaces it Although foundations can be made to float entirely, it many not be advisable due to heave or settlement due to changes in ground conditions

Very useful for structures with hollow subterranean structures In this course, we will analyse floating foundations using the buoyancy method of analysis, i.e., comparing the weight of the structure to the weight of the soil displaced
o We can do this either on a weight or pressure (weight/area) basis

FloatingFoundations BasicsofBuoyancyMethod
This image cannot currently be display ed. This image cannot currently be display ed.

Buoyancy Method

FloatingFoundation Example
This image cannot currently be display ed.

Given
o Foundation as Shown o Sum of column and wall loads = 805 MN

Find
o Average bearing pressure of foundation o Increase in stress due to addition of foundation o Whether foundation will float

Compute weight of bottom of mat

FloatingFoundation Example

Compute weight of soil displaced by foundation Compute displacement on pressure basis (same as total stress on base of foundation) Compute change in pressure on foundation
ps = 578.55/3500 = 0.165 MPa = 165.3 kPa Ws = (19)(50)(70)(8.7) = 578.55 MN

Wf = (23.6)(50)(70)(1.8) = 148.68 MN

Compute total structure load on foundation

W = 148.68 + 805 = 953.68 MN

Compute area of foundation

A = (50)(70) = 3500 m2

Compute pressure of structure on foundation

p = 953.68/3500 = 0.272 MPa = 272.5 kPa

This image cannot currently be display ed.

p = 272.5-165.3 = 107.2 kPa Foundation will float so long as bearing capacity or settlement analysis determines that 107.2 kPa is an acceptable additional stress

CoefficientofSubgrade Reaction
Nonrigid methods must take into account that both the soil and the foundation have deformation characteristics.
These deformation characteristics can be either linear or non-linear (especially in the case of the soils)

Definition of Coefficient of Subgrade Reaction

The deformation characteristics of the soil are quantified in the coefficient of subgrade reaction, or subgrade modulus, which is similar to the modulus of elasticity for unidirectional deformation

ks = coefficient of subgrade reaction, units of force/length3 (the units are the same as the unit weight, but not the significance!) q = bearing pressure = settlement

q ks =

CoefficientofSubgrade Reaction

Note non-linear behaviour

DeterminingtheCoefficient ofSubgradeReaction
Methods used to determine coefficient
Use settlement techniques such as Terzaghi's consolidation theory, Schmertmann's or Houghs method, etc., and express the results in a ks value

Methods used to determine coefficient

Plate load tests
Test results must be adjusted between the shape of the loading plate and the actual shape of the foundation Adjustment must also be made for the size of the plate vs. the size of the foundation, and the influence of size on the depth of soil stress (see following slide) Attempts to make accurate adjustments have not been very successful to date Relationships developed are too limited in their application possibilities

If using a pseudo-coupled value, use values of ks in the centre of the mat which are half those along the perimeter This methodology has the potential of eliminating the problems described earlier while at the same time yielding values of ks which then can be used in a structural analysis of the mat with some degree of confidence

Derived relationships between ks and Es

DifficultiesinDeterminingthe CoefficientofSubgrade Reaction

The position of the mat
To model the soil accurately, ks needs to be larger near the edges of the mat and smaller near the centre

Time
With compressible (and especially cohesive compressible soils) mat settlement is a process which may take several years May be necessary to consider both short and long term cases

Width of the loaded area; wide mat will settle more than a narrow one because more soil is mobilised by a wide mat Depth of the loaded area below the ground surface
Change in stress in the soil due to q is a smaller percentage of the initial stress at greater depths Shape of the loaded area: stresses beneath long, narrow loaded area is different from those below square loaded areas

Non-linear nature of soil deformation makes unique value of ks non-existent

ExampleofUsingCoefficientof SubgradeReaction
Given
Structure to be supported on a 30 m wide by 50 m long mat foundation Mat founded on medium sand Average bearing pressure is 120 kPa

Solution
For medium sand, k1 = 45 MN/m3 For sand, ks1 = k1 = 45 MN/m3 Use the following equation to determine ks:

Find
Settlement, using coefficient of subgrade reaction and assuming the following: Foundation is rigid relative to soil

B + 0.30 k s = k sl 2B
Substitute and solve for deflection: q

Substituting B = 30 m, ks = 11.5 MN/m3

q 120 kPa = = = 10 . 4 mm 3 k s 11500 kN / m

ks =

ProblemswiththeCoefficientof SubgradeReaction
Non-uniformity of the strata below the foundation Scaling the subgrade reaction to the actual size of the foundation With flexible foundations (and that includes mats and pavements) the coefficient of subgrade reaction is influenced by flexibility of foundation All of these factors make the solution of the example problem very preliminary

CoefficientofSubgrade Reaction
Application of coefficient of subgrade reaction to larger mats
Portions of the mat that experience more settlement produce more compression in the springs Sum of these springs must equal the applied structural loads plus the weight of the mat

P + W f u D = qdA = k s dA

StructuralDesignofCombined FootingsandMats
Structural design requires two analyses
Strength Evaluate these requirements using factored loads and LRFD design methods Mat must have sufficient thickness T and reinforcement to safety resist these loads T should be large enough so that no shear reinforcement is required Serviceability Evaluate using unfactored loads for excessive deformation at places of concentrated loads, such as columns, soil non-uniformities, mat non-uniformities, etc. This is the equivalent of a differential settlement analysis Mat must be made thicker if this is a problem Example: Murthy, Ex. 14.4

NonrigidMethods
Winkler Methods Coupled Method Pseudo-Coupled Method Multiple-Parameter Method Finite Element Method

Nonrigid methods consider the deformation of the mat and their influence of bearing pressure distribution. These methods produce more accurate values of mat deformations and stresses These methods are more difficult to implement than rigid methods because of soil-structure interaction

WinklerMethods
The earliest use of these "springs" to represent the interaction between soil and foundation was done by Winkler in 1867; the model is thus referred to as the Winkler method The one-dimensional representation of this is a "beam on elastic foundation," thus sometimes it is called the "beam on elastic foundation" method Mat foundations represent a two-dimensional application of the Winkler method

LimitationsofWinkler Method
Soil springs do not act independently. Bearing pressure on one part of the mat influences both the "spring" under it and those surrounding it (due to lateral earth pressure) No single value of ks truly represents the interaction between the soil and the mat The independent spring problem is in reality the largest problem with the Winkler model
Load-settlement curves are not really linear; we must make a linear approximation to use the Winkler model Winkler model assumes that a uniformly loaded mat underlain by a perfectly uniform soil will uniformly settle into the soil.
Actual data show that such a matsoil interaction will deflect in the centre more than the edges This is one reason why we use other methods (such as Schmertmann's or Houghs) to determine settlement

CoupledMethod
Ideally the coupled method, which uses additional springs as shown below, is more accurate than the Winkler method The problem with the coupled method comes in selecting the values of ks for the coupling springs

MultipleParameter Method
This method replaces the independently-acting linear springs of the Winkler method with springs and other mechanical elements
The additional elements define the coupling effects

Method bypasses the guesswork involved in distributing the ks values in the pseudo-coupled method; should be more accurate Method has not been implemented into software packages and thus is not routinely used on design projects

Finite element method is used for structural analysis Mat is modelled in a similar way to other plate structures with springs connected at the nodes of the elements Mat is loaded with column loads, applied line loads, applied area loads, and mat weight Usually superstructure stiffness is not considered (conservative)

FiniteElementMethod

Models the entire soilmat system in a threedimensional way In theory, should be the most accurate method

Can be done but is rarely performed in practice

OtherConsiderationsin MatFoundations
Total settlement
"Bed of springs" solution should not be used to compute total settlement; this should be done using other methods

Bearing capacity
Mat foundations generally do not have bearing capacity problems With undrained silts and clays, bearing capacity needs to be watched Methods for spread footings can be used with mat foundations, including presumptive bearing capacities

Questions