FOUNDATION DESIGN

Proportioning elements for: Transfer of seismic forces Strength and stiffness Shallow and deep foundations Elastic and plastic analysis

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-1

The subtitles are effectively a table of contents although the topics are not really treated in that specific order. This unit is primarily aimed at the structural engineering of foundations, not at the geotechnical engineering. This presentation relates to example computations Chapter 4 in the FEMA 451, NEHRP Recommended Provisions: Design Examples.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 1

Load Path and Transfer to Soil

Soil Pressure
Pile supporting structure Force on a pile EQ on unloaded pile
Inertial force

deflected shape

soil pressure

deflected shape

soil pressure

deflected shape

soil pressure

Unmoving soil

EQ Motion
Foundation Design 14-2

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

First model: soil pressures in unmoving soil caused by force at top of deep pile; most of stress resisted at top of pile; only small stresses below about twice the characteristic length of pile. Second model: unloaded pile subject to earthquake ground motion; small stresses induced by upper levels of soil lagging behind deep motion. Note opposing directions of push. Third model: both types of force act on pile. The lag of structure induces inertial forces at top of pile similar to static force in first model; net force shape similar to static situation.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 2

Load Path and Transfer to Soil Soil-to-foundation Force Transfer

Passive earth pressure

Shallow

Friction

EQ motion

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-3

As building lags behind ground motion, induced inertial forces must be transferred between footing and soil. Design may consider that inertial forces are transferred as passive earth pressure on face of footing, friction on bottom of footing, or both.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 3

Load Path and Transfer to Soil Soil-to-foundation Force Transfer

Deep

Motion

Soil pressure

Bending moment

EQ Motion

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-4

Same single story structure but now on deep pile foundation. One leg shows pile displacements; the other shows resulting earth pressures; the third diagram shows bending moment in pile. One reference that has long been used for laterally loaded piles is the Navy Design Manual 7.2, Foundations and Earth Structures. However, it and most other older methods are based upon assumptions of linear behavior in soil. Over the past two decades considerable progress has been made in developing design tools rooted in the strongly nonlinear behavior of soil. LPLILE is one widely used example that allows the user to specify soil parameters that model resistance of soil to lateral movement of piles.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 4

Load Path and Transfer to Soil

Vertical Pressures - Shallow
Overturning moment

EQ motion
Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Foundation Design 14-5

As aspect ratio of building height to width increases, overturning moment becomes significant; induced vertical forces must be transferred in addition to horizontal pressures. (Similar vertical forces in footing result from column moments not specifically related to overturning.) Slide shows overturning moment being resisted below basement of medium sized building; horizontal pressures are transferred at the basement walls.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 5

Load Path and Transfer to Soil

Vertical Pressures - Deep

Overturning moment

EQ Motion

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-6

This example of tall building with shear wall continuing through deep basement shows that the horizontal and vertical forces can be resisted by different portions of foundation structure. Basement wall resists horizontal forces near ground surface; vertical forces resisted by piles at base of wall.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 6

Reinforced Concrete Footings: Basic Design Criteria (concentrically loaded)

Outside face of concrete column or line midway between face of steel column and edge of steel base plate (typical) (a) Critical section for flexure extent of footing (typical) (b) Critical section for one-way shear

(c) Critical section for two-way shear d/2 (all sides)

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Foundation Design 14-7

Reinforced concrete footings are proportioned according the the provisions of ACI 318, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete. It is often opined that foundations should not yield due to the high cost of foundation repair. However, nonlinear soil behavior is common in strong ground shaking, and it is traditional to design foundations for the reduced forces computed with the response modification factor, R, used for the superstructure. Neither the NEHRP Recommended Provisions nor earlier model building codes required the use of amplified forces for foundation design.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 7

P M (a) Loading

Footing Subject to Compression and Moment: Uplift Nonlinear

(b) Elastic, no uplift (c) Elastic, at uplift (d) Elastic, after uplift

(e) Some plastification

(f) Plastic limit

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-8

FEMA 356 has a good discussion of the plastic behavior of soil beneath eccentrically loaded footings. Just as for analysis of structural members, plastic analysis of a footing is simple by hand but not so with a computer. Both uplift and nonlinear behavior introduce complications in conventional analysis. Many commercially available software packages for structural analysis now handle the uplift case; a smaller set can also handle nonlinear behavior.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 8

1'-2" 5 Bays @ 25'-0" = 125'-0"

7 Bays @ 25'-0" = 175'-0"

1'-2"

Example 7-story Building:

Shallow foundations designed for perimeter frame and core bracing.
Foundation Design 14-9

N
1'-2"

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 9

Shallow Footing Examples

Soil parameters: Medium dense sand (SPT) N = 20 Density = 120 pcf Friction angle = 33o Gravity load allowables 4000 psf, B < 20 ft 2000 psf, B > 40 ft Bearing capacity (EQ) 2000B concentric sq. 3000B eccentric = 0.6

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-10

The gravity load allowables are set to control settlements. The values between 20 and 40 feet should be interpolated. The bearing capacity is the classic value from theoretical soil mechanics (normal gravity loads are checked. Refer to FEMA 356 for suggestions on resistance factors. The subject of strength design in soils is in its infancy, and many geotechnical professionals are not yet comfortable with strength design concepts.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 10

Footings proportioned for gravity loads alone

Corner: 6'x6'x1'-2" thick Interior: 11'x11'x2'-2" thick Perimeter: 8'x8'x1'-6" thick

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-11

The size of the square footing is controlled by the allowable bearing pressure at total loads, and the thickness is controlled by two-way shear at the critical section (punching shear). The point of this information is primarily for later comparison with footings designed for seismic loads.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 11

7 at 25'-0"

Design of Footings for Perimeter Moment Frame

N

5 at 25'-0"

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-12

The only portion of the steel frame that resists lateral forces is at the perimeter, thus, the only footings that will be affected by the seismic load are at the perimeter.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 12

7-Story Frame, Deformed

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-13

The image is taken from the RAM Frame analysis used to design the steel moment resisting frame for seismic loads.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 13

Combining Loads
Maximum downward load:
1.2D + 0.5L + E Minimum downward load: 0.9D + E Definition of seismic load effect E: E = 1QE1 + 0.3 2QE2+/- 0.2 SDSD x = 1.08 y = 1.11 and SDS = 1.0

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-14

Load combinations for strength-based design, which is the fundamental method for earthquake resistant design. Greek rho is the redundancy factor. Q is the effect of horizontal seismic motions. The 0.2SDSD is an approximation for the effect of vertical earthquake motions. For the footings, the horizontal motions produce vertical and horizontal forces, as well as bending moments, at the base of each column. Dead and Live loads are taken to produce only vertical forces in this example.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 14

Reactions
Grid A-5 Dead 203.8 k P Mxx Myy P 103.5 k Mxx Myy Live 43.8 k Ex -3.8 k 53.6 k-ft -243.1 k-ft -51.8 k 47.7 k-ft -246.9 k-ft Ey 21.3 k -1011.5 k-ft 8.1 k-ft -281.0 k -891.0 k-ft 13.4 k-ft

A-6

22.3 k

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-15

Grid A-6 is at the lower left corner of the plan, and A-5 is adjacent. (Go back three slides to show the location on the plan.) Recall that the seismic reactions can be positive or negative; what is given here is for motion in the positive x and y directions. Carefully note that subscripts x and y on the load effect E refer to the global north-south and east-west, respectively, but the subscripts x and y on the moments at the column bases refer to the local strong and weak axes, respectively, which is just the opposite as the global directions, unfortunately. The most significant point of this slide is that seismic uplift at A-6 exceeds the dead load by a considerable margin. It is possible to place a footing with sufficient size to resist the uplift and the overturning moment, but it is much more economical to combine one footing for the two locations. These reactions include the effects of horizontal torsion on the system. Also recall that the footing must resist horizontal forces.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 15

Reduction of Overturning Moment

NEHRP Recommended Provisions allow
base overturning moment to be reduced by 25% at the soil-foundation interface. For a moment frame, the column vertical loads are the resultants of base overturning moment, whereas column moments are resultants of story shear. Thus, use 75% of seismic vertical reactions.

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-16

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 16

Additive Load w/ Largest Eccentricity

At A5: P = 1.4(203.8) + 0.5(43.8) +
0.75(0.32(-3.8) + 1.11(21.3)) = 324 k Mxx = 0.32(53.6) + 1.11(-1011.5) = -1106 k-ft At A6: P = 1.4(103.5) + 0.5(22.3) + 0.75(0.32(-51.8) + 1.11(-281)) = -90.3 k Mxx = 0.32(47.7) + 1.11(-891) = -974 k-ft Sum Mxx = 12.5(-90.3-324) -1106 -974 = -7258

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-17

None of these loads include the weight of the footing. P is positive in compression. M is positive by the local right hand rule. 1.4 on dead load includes the vertical seismic acceleration, which is 0.2D here where SDS is 1.0. The 0.75 factor is the reduction on base overturning moment. Some authors might interpret that it also applies to the column base moments. This is not the maximum downward load; it is the maximum ratio of moment to axial load for the additive combos.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 17

Counteracting Load with Largest e

At A-5: P = 0.7(203.8) + 0.75(0.32(-3.8) +
1.11(21.3)) = 159.5 k Mxx = 0.32(53.6) + 1.11 (-1011.5) = -1106 k-ft At A-6: P = 0.7(103.5) + 0.75(0.32(-51.8) + 1.11(-281)) = -173.9 k Mxx = 0.32(47.7) + 1.11(-891) = -974 k-ft Sum Mxx = 6240 k-ft

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-18

Note that the net vertical load is upward without the weight of the footing. It so happens that this combo also gives the maximum eccentricity, when combined with the weight of footing and soil.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 18

Elastic Response
Objective is to set L
and W to satisfy equilibrium and avoid overloading soil. Successive trials usually necessary.
P L M

R e

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-19

Slide is drawn for the case with substantial moment, such that uplift will occur at the heel. Note that eccentricity e changes as W changes. For our footing, L will exceed 25 feet by some margin, given that the two columns are 25 feet apart.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 19

Additive Combination
Given P = 234 k, M =7258 k-ft Try 5 foot around, thus L = 35 ft, B = 10 ft Minimum W = M/(L/2) P = 181 k = 517 psf Try 2 foot soil cover & 3 foot thick footing W = 245 k; for additive combo use 1.2W Qmax = (P + 1.2W)/(3(L/2 e)B/2) = 9.4 ksf Qn = 0.6(3)Bmin = 10.1 ksf, OK by Elastic

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-20

Initial approximation of W is simply to keep the resultant of earth pressure within the footing. It must be somewhat larger in order to control the bearing pressures. Note that the load factor on W does not include the amplifier for vertical seismic acceleration; this is the authors interpretation of the NEHRP Recommended Provisions. The minimum B used to find the nominal bearing capacity is found by comparing the width of the footing and the half length of the loaded area. The half length is used because the soil pressure is not uniform.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 20

Plastic Response
Same objective as for
elastic response. Smaller footings can be shown OK thus:
L P M

R e

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-21

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 21

Counteracting Case
Given P = -14.4 k; M = 6240 Check prior trial; W = 245 k (use 0.9W) e = 6240/(220.5 14.4) = 30.3 > 35/2 NG New trial: L = 40 ft, 5 ft thick W = 400 k; e = 18.0 ft; plastic Qmax= 8.6 ksf Qn = 0.6(3)4 = 7.2 ksf, close Solution is to add 5 k, then e = 17.8 ft and Qmax = Qn = 7.9 ksf

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-22

Note how much larger the footing must be for the counteracting case. Also, it would have been even larger if the elastic solution were used in lieu of the plastic solution.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 22

Additional Checks
Moments and shears for reinforcement
should be checked for the overturning case. Plastic soil stress gives upper bound on moments and shears in concrete. Horizontal equilibrium: Hmax< (P+W) in this case friction exceeds demand; passive could also be used.

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-23

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 23

Results for all SRS Footings

Middle: 5'x30'x4'-0" Corner: 10'x40'x5'-0" w/ top of footing 2'-0" below grade

Side: 8'x32'x4'-0"

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-24

Given the combined footing strategy, footing sizes are more strongly influenced by the uplift on columns at the ends of frames than by the moments transmitted by the columns. Note that a complete perimeter grade beam would be a very feasible solution for this project, especially in cold climates where a continuous perimeter wall for frost control is necessary. A 4 ft by 4 ft continuous grade beam would be sufficient.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 24

Design of Footings for Core-braced 7story Building

25 foot square bays at center of building

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Foundation Design 14-25

The screen capture is from the RAM Frame analysis of the structure, and the small plan is based on the same grids used for the 7 story moment frame. The braced frames appear to be 8 stories high, because there is a small penthouse over the core.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 25

Solution for Central Mat

Very high uplifts at individual columns; mat is only practical shallow foundation.
Mat: 45'x95'x7'-0" with top of mat 3'-6" below grade

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-26

The fundamental method is the same as used in the previous example: Determine the total applied vertical and horizontal loads and the moments. The complicating factor here is that the bending is significant about two axes simultaneously. Elastic solutions can be found from software that has the capacity for compression-only springs; RISA 3D was used in this case. Plastic solutions typically need to be done by hand but spreadsheets are a great asset for the successive trial nature of the solution.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 26

Bearing Pressure Solution

12.2 ksf
~

(a) Plastic solution

12 4

16 (b) 8 Elastic solution 0 pressures (ksf)

Plastic solution is satisfactory; elastic is not; see linked file for more detail.

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-27

Slide shows the results from hand analysis for plastic distribution and for RISA 3D elastic solution. See Chapter 4 of FEMA 451 for more detail on the solution as well as the design of the footing cross section for moment and shear.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 27

Pile/Pier Foundations
Pile cap Passive resistance (see Figure 4.2-5)

Pile

p-y springs (see Figure 4.2-4)

View of cap with column above and piles below.

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-28

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 28

Pile/Pier Foundations
Pile Stiffness: Short (rigid) Intermediate Long Cap influence Group action Soil Stiffness Linear springs nomographs e.g. NAVFAC DM7.2 Nonlinear springs LPILE or similar analysis

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-29

Most pile analysis for lateral loads is performed assuming linear response in the pile itself, although it is now common to consider nonlinear soil response. Some by-hand plastic techniques do make use of the classic pile stiffness idealizations.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 29

Sample p-y Curves

100,000 10,000 Soil resistance, p (lb/in.) 1,000 100 Site Class C, depth = 30 ft 10 1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Pile deflection, y (in.) 0.8 0.9 1.0 Site Class C, depth = 10 ft Site Class E, depth = 30 ft Site Class E, depth = 10 ft

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-30

Note the logarithmic scale on the vertical axis.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 30

Passive Pressure
1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 /H 0.05 0.06

P/Pult

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-31

This passive pressure mobilization is useful for inclusion of the pile cap. It is from FEMA 356.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 31

Group Effect
1.0 s=4D Group effect factor 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 1 2 3 4 Group size (piles per side) 5 s=2D s = 1.5 D s=3D

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-32

Group effect factors computed from PoLam, et al, Modeling of Pile Footings and Drilled Shafts for Seismic Design, MCEER-98-0018.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 32

Pile Shear: Two Soil

Stiffnesses
0 5 10 Depth (ft) 15 20 25 30 -5 0 5 10 Shear, V (kip) 15 Site Class C Site Class E

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-33

Note that the shear forces in the pile (as well as deformations and bending moments) carries to greater depths in soft soils than in firm soils. Pile (or pier) foundations are often used in stiff soils to control settlement of heavy structures or heave of expansive soils.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 33

0 5 10 Depth (ft) 15 20 25 30 -1000 Site Class C Site Class E -500 0 Moment, M (in.-kips) 500

Pile Moment vs Depth

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-34

See Chapter 4 of FEMA 451.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 34

4" pile embedment (6) #5

6'-4"

Pile Reinforcement
Site Class C Larger amounts where moments and shears are high Minimum amounts must extend beyond theoretical cutoff points Half spiral for 3D

#4 spiral at 3.75 inch pitch

Section A
(6) #5

23'-0"

#4 spiral at 7.5 inch pitch

Section B
(4) #5

21'-0"

#4 spiral at 11 inch pitch

Section C

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-35

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 35

Pile Design
4" pile embedment (8) #7

#5 spiral at 3.5 inch pitch

Section A
20'-0"

(6) #7

#5 spiral at 3.5 inch pitch

Section B
32'-0"

Site Class E Substantially more reinforcement Full spiral for 7D Confinement at boundary of soft and firm soils (7D up and 3D down)

12'-4"

(4) #7

#4 spiral at 11 inch pitch

Section C
Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Foundation Design 14-36

The drawing shows one of the piles with detail of reinforcement. See Chapter 4 of FEMA 451.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 36

Other Topics for Pile Foundations

Foundation Ties: F = PG(SDS/10) Pile Caps: high shears, rules of thumb; look
for 3D strut and tie methods in future Liquefaction: another topic Kinematic interaction of soil layers

Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples

Foundation Design 14-37

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 37

Tie Between Pile Caps

2" clear at sides (2) #6 top bars #4 ties at 7" o.c. 3" clear at top and bottom (3) #6 bottom bars

Designed for axial force (+/-) Pile cap axial load times SDS/10 Often times use grade beams or thickened slabs one grade
Instructional Materials Complementing FEMA 451, Design Examples Foundation Design 14-38

Required in the higher Seismic Design Categories for softer soils. It is designed for pure axial force. Fundamental objective is to prevent relative lateral displacement between column bases. It fixes the column bases for translation, but it is not intended to restrain rotation at the column bases.

FEMA 451B Topic 14 Notes

Foundation Design 14 - 38