More Related Content
Similar to Interference of adjoining rectangular footings on reinforced sand
Similar to Interference of adjoining rectangular footings on reinforced sand (20)
Interference of adjoining rectangular footings on reinforced sand
- 1. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME
TECHNOLOGY (IJCIET)
ISSN 0976 – 6308 (Print)
ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online)
Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), pp. 447-454
IJCIET
© IAEME: www.iaeme.com/ijciet.asp
Journal Impact Factor (2012): 3.1861 (Calculated by GISI)
www.jifactor.com
© IAEME
INTERFERENCE OF ADJOINING RECTANGULAR FOOTINGS ON
REINFORCED SAND
Dr. S. S. Pusadkar1, Sachin S. Saraf2
1
(Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Government College of Engineering,
Amravati-444 604, India, pusadkar.sunil@gcoea.ac.in)
2
(M. Tech (Civil-Geotech) Scholar, Government College of Engineering,
Amravati-444 604, India, sachinces2007@rediffmail.com)
ABSTRACT
The influence of two adjoining rectangular footings on bearing capacity and
settlement resting on reinforced sand is discussed in the paper. The parameters include sizes
and spacing’s of the footing. The model tests were conducted for simulating the various
conditions of footing and showing the effect on the bearing capacity and settlement. It has
been observed that providing continuous geogrid reinforcement layer in the foundation soil
under the closely spaced rectangular footings improved the bearing capacity.
Keywords: Bearing capacity, Geogrid, Interference effect, Rectangular footing.
1. INTRODUCTION
Many townships are developed and lot many are proposed with higher construction
density. As a common practice several storied buildings are constructed in a series keeping
very small spacing between adjacent corner footings. Due to heavy loads and the non
availability of good construction sites, engineers are often required to place footings at close
spacing’s. Therefore, the footings in the field generally interfere with each other to some
extent and are rarely isolated. The general scenario is to design the footings as an isolated
footing. The interfering as well as spacing effect is not considered while designing the
footings. The technique of reinforcing the soil below shallow foundations with geosynthetic
reinforcement is one of the fastest growing techniques in the field of geotechnical
engineering. Therefore in the preset study, the influence of two adjoining rectangular footing
resting on reinforced sand on bearing capacity and settlement was carried out. The effect was
studied for various sizes and spacing’s of the footing on reinforced sand.
447
- 2. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
The study on ultimate bearing capacity of two interfering strip footings using the
method of stress characteristics shows that the efficiency factor ξγ decreases continuously
with an increase in spacing [1]. The ultimate bearing capacity of number of strip footings
using the lower bound limit analysis in combination with finite elements shows that the
failure load for a footing in the group becomes always greater than that of a single isolated
footing [2]. The effects of multiple-footing configurations in sand on bearing capacity using
field plate load tests and finite element analyses shows that the load responses of multiple
footings are similar to those of the single footing at distances greater than three times the
footing width [3]. The interference of surface model footings resting on sand shows that the
interference between footings was observed to cause an increase in bearing capacity and
decrease in settlement with reduction in spacing [4]. The interference effect on the ultimate
bearing capacity of two closely spaced strip footings placed on the surface of dry sand by
using small scale model tests shows that an interference of footings leads to a significant
increase in their bearing capacity [5]. The numerical examination of bearing capacity ratio for
rough square footings located at the surface of a homogeneous sandy soil reinforced with a
geogrid was shows the bearing capacity of interfering footing increases with the use of
geogrid layers depending on the distance between two footings [6]. The effect of spacing
between the footings, size of reinforcement and continuous and discontinuous reinforcement
layers on bearing capacity and tilt of closely spaced footings was investigated by performing
total 74 tests. It shows considerable improvement in bearing capacity, settlement, and tilt of
adjacent strip footings by providing continuous reinforcement layers in the foundation soil
under the closely spaced strip footings [7]. The interference effect of two nearby strip
footings on reinforced sand shows that the bearing capacity of single footing on the
reinforced soil decreases with increase in D/B [8]. The literatures, shows work on the
interfering effects of different sizes footings on unreinforced and reinforced sand. However,
the interfering effect of rectangular footing on bearing capacity and settlement is not
available for reinforced sand. This revels that the influence of two adjoining footings on
bearing capacity and settlement for various sizes and spacing of the footings on reinforced
sand is need of the future. In order to evaluate the effects of two adjacent footings on
reinforced sand, laboratory experiments to simulate the various conditions of footing was
performed. In each case, different sizes and spacing of footing were applied for the purposes
of comparison among all of the results for development of knowledge base in this regards.
3. MATERIAL
The material used for the study is as follows.
3.1 Foundation Material
For the model tests, cohesionless dry sand was used as the foundation material. The
study was carried out on Kanhan Sand as foundation material. This sand is available in
Nagpur region of Vidharabha, Maharashtra. The test sand has angular shape, uniform yellow
colour with small proportion of flint stone of black colour. The particle size of sand decided
for the test was passing through IS sieving 2 mm and retaining on 450 micron IS sieve. The
properties of sand used are as shown in Table 1.
448
- 3. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME
July
Table 1 Properties of the Sand Used
1:
Properties Value
Specific Gravity 2.67
Bulk Density (KN/m3) 14.91
Angle of Internal Friction 28°
Coefficient of Uniformity Cu 2.29
Coefficient of Curvature Cc 1.09
Effective Size D10 0.51
3.2 Model Footing
Rectangular model footings of dimensions 3cm x 6cm, 4cm x 8cm and 5cm x 10cm
were fabricated by using cast iron material as shown in Fi 1. Every footing has a little
t Fig.
groove at the center to facilitate the application of load. The footings were provided with the
two flanges on two sides of footings to measure the settlement of footing under the action of
measure
load with the help of dial gauges.
Figure 1: Model Footing
3.3 Geogrid
Commercially available continuous biaxial geogrid was used for reinforcing the
sand bed. The size of biaxial geogrid reinforcement used was five times the size of the
footing as shown in Fig. 2. The biaxial geogrid reinforcement was placed at the location of
the desired layer of reinforcement i.e. D/2 or B/2 from bottom of footing. The top surface of
the sand will be leveled and the biaxial geogrid reinforcement will be placed.
eled
449
- 4. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME
July
Figure 2: Biaxial Geogrid
4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The experimental setup used for studying the performance of adjacent footing on
reinforced sand is shown in Fig. 3. The assembly for the model plate load test setup consist of
inforced
a tank of size 0.5m x 0.5m x 0.6m. A loading frame for applying the load to the models is
assembled over the tank. The load was applied with manually controlled hydraulic jack and
measured with the help of proving ring. Dial gauges were placed on each flanges of each
Dial
footing to measure the settlement.
HYDRAULIC
JACK PROVING
RING
LOAD
CELL
MAGNETIC
DIAL STAND
GAUG
TEST
TANK
Figure 3: Experimental Setup
5. TEST PROCEDURE
The sand was poured in the tank by rainfall technique keeping the height of fall as 35
cm to maintain the constant relative density throughout the bed. The sand was poured up to
the location of the desired layer of reinforcement, then the top surface of th sand made
the
leveled and the biaxial geogrid reinforcement was placed at depth 0.5D below footing. Again,
the sand was filled over this geogrid reinforcement layer in the tank. A manually controlled
hydraulic jack with activated loading piston, installed between the sliding beam and strong
between
450
- 5. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME
reaction beam as shown in Fig. 3 was used to provide the required load on the footings. Both
the footings will be simultaneously loaded vertically. The vertical displacement of each test
footing was measured by taking the average of two dial gauges readings. By gradually
increasing the load, a series of tests was carried out so as to monitor the complete load-
deformation plots till the ultimate failure occurs. Each test was carefully controlled by
observing the displacement of each footing through dial gauge reading.
6. TEST RESULTS
Load settlements for each testing were plotted. The curves, in general, show a linear
variation in the initial portion and become non-linear thereafter. Fig. 4 shows average load
settlement curve for isolated rectangular footings.
Load(kN)
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
0
1
Settlement(mm)
2
3
3cmx6cm
4
5 4cmx8cm
6 5cmx10cm
7
Figure 4: Load settlement curve for isolated footings.
Load settlement curve for adjoining rectangular footings placed reinforced sand bed at
different spacing to width ratio (S/B) are shown in Fig. 5 - 7.
Load(kN)
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12
0
1
2
Settlement(mm)
S/B=1
3
S/B=2
4
5 S/B=3
6
7
8
9
Figure 5: Load Settlement curve for 3cm x 6cm rectangular footing.
451
- 6. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME
0 0.1 Load(kN) 0.2 0.3
0
1
Settlement(mm)
2
S/B=1
3
S/B=2
4
S/B=3
5
6
7
8
Figure 6: Load Settlement curve for 4cm x 8cm rectangular footing.
Load(kN)
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
0
1
2
Settlement(mm)
3 S/B=1
4 S/B=2
5 S/B=3
6
7
8
Figure 7: Load Settlement curve for 5cm x 10cm rectangular footing.
The ultimate bearing capacity was obtained by using tangent intersection method.
Tables 2 show the bearing capacity of corresponding model footing.
Table 2: Ultimate bearing capacity of footing for Different S/D Ratio.
Ultimate bearing capacity(KN/m2)
S/B Ratio
3cm x 6cm 4cm x 8cm 5cm x 10cm
1.0 51.11 71.87 90.80
2.0 42.77 66.56 81.75
3.0 36.66 60.62 76.20
Isolated 33.88 51.00 70.80
452
- 7. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME
7. DISCUSSIONS AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULT
The bearing capacity of adjoining footing resting on reinforced sand was studied. The
biaxial geogrid was kept at 0.5D below the footing. The adjoining footing was spaced to
study the interference effect on reinforced sand. Fig. 5-7 shows that with increase in S/B the
bearing capacity decreases and the settlement was observed to be increase. The ultimate
bearing capacity was observed to be more than that for isolated footing. The increase in the
ultimate bearing capacity may be due to existing footing acts as a surcharge for the adjacent
footing and at wider spacing no interference takes place and each footing acts as an
individual (isolated) footing.
7.1 Efficiency Factor (ξγ)
The efficiency factor (ξγ) is the ratio of average pressure on an interfering footing of a
given size associated with either an ultimate shear failure or a given magnitude of settlement
to the average pressure on an isolated footing of a given size associated again with either an
ultimate shear failure or the same magnitude of settlement. Table 3 shows the efficiency
factor for different S/B ratio for 3cm x 6cm, 4cm x 8cm and 5cm x 10cm dimension
rectangular footings.
Table 3: Efficiency Factors for Different S/B Ratio
Efficiency Factors (ξγ)
S/B Ratio
3cm x 6cm 4cm x 8cm 5cm x 10cm
1.0 1.50 1.40 1.28
2.0 1.26 1.30 1.15
3.0 1.08 1.18 1.07
From Table 3, it can be seen that, the efficiency factor decreases with increase in S/B
ratio. This indicates that the bearing capacity is greatly influenced by spacing between them.
As the spacing decreases, the bearing capacity is observed to be increased.
8. CONCLUSIONS
From the present study following conclusions are drawn
• Bearing capacity of rectangular footings increases as the size of footing increases.
• Bearing capacity of interfering footing is more than that of isolated footing.
• Bearing capacity of interfering footing increases as spacing between them decreases.
• The settlement was observed to be increase as spacing is decreased.
• The efficiency factor decreases with increase in S/D ratio.
453
- 8. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), ISSN 0976 – 6308
(Print), ISSN 0976 – 6316(Online) Volume 3, Issue 2, July- December (2012), © IAEME
REFERENCES
[1] J. Kumar and P. Ghosh (2007), “Ultimate bearing capacity of two interfering rough strip
footings”, Int J Geomech ASCE 7(1), 53–62.
[2] Kumar and P. Bhattacharya (2010), “Bearing capacity of interfering multiple strip
footings by using lower bound finite elements limit analysis”, Computers and
Geotechnics 37, 731–736.
[3] J. Lee and J. Eun (2009), “Estimation of bearing capacity for multiple footings in sand”,
Computers and Geotechnics 36, 1000–1008.
[4] I. N. Khan ,K. C. Bohra ,M. L. Ohri and Alam Singh (2006), “A Study on Interference of
surface Model Footing Resting on Sand”, The Institution of Engineers, Malaysia, Vol. 67,
March 2006, 15-23.
[5] J. Kumar and M.K. Bhoi (2009), “Interference of two closely spaced strip footings on
sand using model tests”, J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 2008, 134(4), 595–604.
[6] M. Ghazavi and A. A. Lavasan (2008), “Interference Effect of Shallow Foundation
Constructed on Sand Reinforced with Geosynthetics”, Science Direct Geotextiles and
Geomembranes 26(2008), 404-415.
[7] A. Kumar and S. Saran (2003), “Closely Spaced Footings on Geogrid-Reinforced Sand”,
J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 1090-0241(2003), 129:7(660).
[8] P. Ghosh and P. Kumar (2009), “Interference Effect of Two nearby Strip Footing on
Reinforced Sand”, Contemporary Engineering Science, Vol. 2, 2009, No.12, 577-592.
[9] Ravin M. Tailor, M. D. Desai and N. C. Shah, “Performance Observations For Geotextile
Reinforced Flexible Pavement On Swelling Subgrade: A Case Of Surat, India”
International Journal of Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume3, Issue2,
2012, pp. 347 - 352, Published by IAEME
[10] P.A. Ganeshwaran, Suji and S. Deepashri, “Evaluation Of Mechanical Properties Of Self
Compacting Concrete With Manufactured Sand And Fly Ash” International Journal of
Civil Engineering & Technology (IJCIET), Volume3, Issue2, 2012, pp. 60 - 69, Published
by IAEME
454