International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR) Volume 1, Issue 1, July 2012 Parametric Study on Foundation of Regular High-Rise R.C Building under Seismic Load Thu Zar Aung, Dr. Kay Thwe Tun Abstract- This paper sets out the Parametric Study on Foundation of Regular High-Rise R.C Building Under Seismic Load.The proposed building is situated in Mandalay area. At first, the general requirements about foundation are described. Seismic Load is considered for the proposed building. Dynamic analysis is used to obtain the analysis results of proposed building in Zone 4.From structural and economical point of view, the most suitable design of superstructure is first chosen. Next, structural analysis is done by using Extended Three-dimensional Analysis of Building System (ETABS) software. Load consideration is based on UBC-97 Design of structural elements are calculated by using the provision of American Concrete Institute (ACI 318-02) code. Design results are checked for P-Δ effect, sliding, storey drift, overturning and torsion irregularity. And then, the required soil parameters are taken from soil report on Mandalay area. The allowable bearing capacity of soil is calculated by using General equation, Hansen’s method, Tomlinson method and SPT method. The raft foundation is calculated by using SAFE software and piled raft foundation is calculated by using STAAD-Pro software. In this study a parametric study on raft thickness are considered. Raft thickness use 4 ft and 5 ft in a parametric study. It has been found that the maximum bending moment, maximum shear, soil pressure in raft increasing with increase raft thickness. In design of raft foundation, the thickness of raft foundation is 4 ft. In design of pile foundation, the required pile diameter is 2.5 ft and pile length is 40 ft, 50 ft, 60 ft respectively. There are 3 groups of pile with different length which depends on their critical column loads. A foundation, the lowest part of a structure, is in direct contact with ground and located below the ground level. It transmits all the loads from super-structure to the supporting soil. So, foundation design for an earthquake resistance is one of the most important parts to be considered in the structural analysis and design. In general, foundation may be divided into two major categories. They are shallow foundation and deep foundation. Wall footings, combined footings, spread footing and mat foundation are generally referred to as shallow foundations. And then, pile, piers, caissons and drilled shaft foundations are classified as deep foundation. In multistoried buildings situated in high-seismic-risk area, a concentration of the total lateral force resistance in only one or two structural walls is likely to introduce very large forces to the foundation structure, so that special enlarged foundations may be required. II. EFFECT OF EARTHQUAKE ON BUILDING The primary effect of an earthquake is shaking of a building or infrastructure. Buildings as a whole and all their components and contents are badly shaken in all possible directions during serve earthquakes by the ground motion (shown in Figure 1). The shaking loosens the joints of different components of building that lead to subsequent damage or collapse. Keywords —- Bearing capacity, Mat foundation, Piled-Raft Foundation. I. INTRODUCTION Figure 1. Building movements due to ground shaking Nowadays, high-rise buildings are the symbols of a modernized living standard because of the population growth. The various types of tall buildings are needed in Mandalay. Among them, earthquake disasters are not limited to structural damage and injury/death of people under collapsed structures. Earthquake produces large magnitude forces of short duration and the magnitude of earthquake cannot be forecasted. Myanmar indeed is earthquake-prone as it lies in one of the two main earthquake belts of the world. Myanmar has had frequent earthquakes and all earthquakes in Myanmar are of shallow focus types which can cause great damages and causalities. So, regions in moderate seismic risk level can be affected by the magnitude of high seismic risk level. Manuscript received Oct 15, 2011. Thu Zar Aung , Department of civil engineering, Mandalay techonology University, (e-mail: loveangellay111@gamil.com). Mandalay, Myanmar, Phone/Mobile No.,+950943048465 The general philosophy of building damage under earthquake is that: 1. For minor earthquakes –there should be no damage. 2. For moderate earthquakes – there may be minor, repairable, structural damage and some non‐structural damage. 3. For major earthquakes – there may be major, unrepairable, structural and non‐structural damage but without collapse of the building. III. PILED-RAFT FOUNDATION In the construction of high-rise buildings, bridges and marine structures, deep foundation especially pile foundations, piled-raft foundations are generally used to transfer the heavy loadings to the soil. During the last few 1 All Rights Reserved © 2014 IJSETR International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR) Volume 1, Issue 1, July 2012 years, there has been an increasing recognition that use of piles to reduce raft settlements and differential settlements can lead to considerable economy without compromising the safety and performance of the foundation. The used of piled-raft foundation is an effective way of minimizing both total and differential settlements, of improving the bearing capacity of a shallow foundation, and of reducing in an economic way the internal stress levels and bending moments within a raft. The piled-raft foundation is shown in fig.2. Figure 4. Three-dimensional view of the proposed building Figure. 2 Piled-raft foundation IV. PREPARATION FOR ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Information of structure and material properties is prescribed as follows. Dead load, live load, wind load and earthquake loads are considered in proposed building. A. Proposed Building The proposed building is twenty-storeyed reinforced concrete building with basement. The overall height of the building is 221 ft.The ground floor level and basement height is 12 ft and other typical storey height is 10 ft. The height of roof floor is 7 ft. The building is rectangular shape and its maximum length is 140 ft and 76 ft wide. The typical beam plan and 3D view of the proposed building from ETABS software are shown in Figures 3 and 4. Figure 3. Typical beam plan B. Design Codes Design codes applied for superstructure are based on ACI-318-02 and loading considerations are based on UBC-97. (1) Material Properties: The material properties used for the proposed structure are as follows: Weight per unit volume of concrete = 150 pcf Modulus of elasticity = 3.122x106 psi Poisson’s ratio = 0.2 Coefficient of thermal expansion = 5.5x10-6 in/in per degree F Reinforcing yield stress, fy = 50000 psi Shear reinforcement yield stress, fys = 50000 psi Concrete strength, fc' = 3000 psi C. Loading Considerations The applied loads are dead loads, live loads, earthquake load and wind load. (1) Gravity Loads: Data for dead loads which are used in structural analysis are as follows; Unit weight of concrete = 150 pcf 4½ inches thick wall weight = 55 pcf 9 inches thick wall weight = 100 pcf Weight of elevator = 2 ton Weight of slab = 25 psf Data for live loads which are used in structural analysis are as follows: Live load on slab = 40 psf Live load on lift = 100 psf Live load on stairs = 100 psf Live load on roof = 20 psf Weight of water = 62.4 psf (2) Lateral Loads: Data for wind loads which are used in structural analysis are as follows; Exposure Type =C Basic wind velocity = 80 mph Force Method = Normal Force Method Effective Height = 221 ft Importance factor, Iw = 1.0 Pressure coefficient, Cq = 0.8 for windward = 0.5 for leeward 2 All Rights Reserved © 2014 IJSETR International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR) Volume 1, Issue 1, July 2012 Data for earthquake load are as follows: Seismic zone = 4 (Mandalay) Soil profile type = SD Seismic zone factor = 0.4g Seismic source type =A Importance factor, I =1 Response modification factor, R = 8.5 Structure = Dual system Seismic Response Coefficient, Ca = 0.44 Seismic Response Coefficient, Cv = 0.64 Near Source Factor, Na = 1.0 Near Source Factor, Nv = 1.0 capacity of soil is 1.623 ton/ft . The required bearing capacity 1.9ton/ft is greater than the minimum allowable bearing pressure of raft foundation. Therefore, shallow foundation is not suitable for the proposed building. So, piled raft foundation should be used for this structure. A. Preparation for Analysis and Design of Substructure Data for the analysis and design of raft foundation are as follows: Modulus of elasticity = 3.122x10 6 psi Poisson’s ratio = 0.2 Weight per unit volume of concrete = 150 pcf Thickness of raft = 4 ft Top cover for both X and Y = 4 inches Bottom cover for both X and Y = 4 inches Allowable bearing capacity = 1.623 ton/ft Projection beyond main building = 5ft Shear reinforcement yield stress,fys = 50000 psi Concrete strength, fc' = 3000 psi 2 2 V. DESIGN RESULTS OF PROPOSED BUILDING 2 The design results of beam and column for proposed building are described. A. Design Results of Beams The beams used in these buildings are 10"×14",10"×18",12"×16", 12"×18", 12"×20", 12"×22", 14"×22",14"×24", 16"×24 and 18"×24". It should be manually check whether the ratio of longitudinal steel area to gross concrete cross sectional area be within the ranges from the minimum steel ratio to the maximum steel ratio. VII. PARAMETRIC STUDY The parametric study of thickness is carried out by varying the raft thickness of 4ft and 5ft. B. Design Results of Columns The columns used in these building are 14"x14", 16"x16", 18"x18", 20"x20", 22"x22", 24"x24", 26"x26, 28"x28", 30"x30" and 32"x32". It should be manually checked whether the ratio of longitudinal steel area to gross concrete cross sectional area be within the ranges from 0.01 to 0.06 to acquire the seismic design specifications. C. Stability Checking of the Superstructure The designed superstructure is checked for overturning, sliding, storey drift, torsion irregularity and P-Δ effect. These results are described in the following tables. Figure: 5(a) Effect of raft thickness on maximum settlement TABLE I RESULTS OF STABILITY CHECK FOR MODEL Type Direction Value Limit Remark X 0.24024 2.4 Satisfied Y 0.23832 2.4 Satisfied Overturning X 8.105 1.5 Satisfied moment Y 4.4497 1.5 Satisfied X 3.85 1.5 Satisfied Y 3.82 1.5 Satisfied X 1.03769 1.2 Satisfied Y 1.058728 1.2 Satisfied X 0.002002 0.00235 Satisfied Y 0.001986 0.00235 Satisfied Story drift Sliding Torsion P-Δ Figure: 5(b) Effect of raft thickness on maximum bending moment VI .SELECTION OF PILED RAFT FOUNDATION The required soil parameters are taken from soil reports of Mandalay area. The allowable bearing capacity is the ultimate bearing capacity divided by a factor of safety. The range of factor of safety (F.S) is between 2 and 3. The factor of safety (F.S) is taken as 2.5 for this study. The allowable bearing Figure: 5(c) Effect of raft thickness on maximum shear 3 All Rights Reserved © 2014 IJSETR International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR) Volume 1, Issue 1, July 2012 The required reinforcing steel distribution results for raft foundation in X-strips and Y-strips are shown in Tables 1 and 2. TABLE II REINFORCING STEEL DISTRIBUTION RESULTS IN X-STRIPS X-strip Figure: 5(d) Effect of raft thickness on soil pressure VIII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS A. Effect of Raft Thickness In this study, the maximum moment, maximum shear and soil pressure in the raft increases with increasing raft thickness. From the results presented herein, increasing the raft thickness is very beneficial in resting the punching shear from column loadings. Maximum punching shear ratio in raft thickness of 4 ft is 0.929 and raft thickness of 5 ft is 0.633. The resulted punching shear ratios are within allowable limit. Then, max: settlement is not greatly affected by raft thickness because max: settlement in raft thickness 4 ft is 0.0618times less than the raft thickness 5 ft. Moreover, raft thickness 4 ft is more economical than raft thickness 5 ft. Therefore, raft thickness 4 ft is chosen for design of piled raft foundation. CSX9 MSX8 CSX8 MSX7 CSX7 MSX6 CSX6 MSX5 CSX5 MSX4 CSX4 MSX3 CSX3 MSX2 CSX2 MSX1 CSX1 Raft foundation for proposed building is analyzed and designed by using SAFE software. The required thickness for raft foundation is 4 ft and No.8 bar is used. The punching shear capacity ratio is shown in Figure 6. The resulted punching shear ratio is less than 1, so which is satisfied for this structure. Figure 6. Punching shear capacity ratio from SAFE software Top Bar Bottom Bar 9#8 5#8 6#8 7#8 7#8 5#8 6#8 9#8 9#8 9#8 6#8 5#8 5#8 5#8 5#8 5#8 9#8 18 # 8 8#8 10# 8 8# 8 4#8 3#8 5#8 23 # 8 5#8 7#8 3#8 4#8 11# 8 8#8 10 # 8 8#8 18 # 8 TABLE III REINFORCING STEEL DISTRIBUTION RESULTS IN Y-STRIPS Y-strip B. Design Result of Raft Foundation Strip Width (in) 78 36 48 60 48 36 66 96 96 96 66 36 48 60 48 36 78 Strip Width (in) Top Bar Bottom Bar CSY1 108 10 # 8 12 # 8 MSY1 96 9#8 8#8 CSY2 90 9#8 11 # 8 MSY2 84 8#8 5#8 CSY3 96 9#8 13 # 8 MSY3 108 10 # 8 10 # 8 CSY4 90 9#8 9#8 MSY4 72 7#8 5#8 CSY5 66 6#8 7#8 MSY5 60 6#8 6#8 CSY6 60 6#8 7#8 MSY6 60 6#8 4#8 CSY7 66 6#8 7#8 MSY7 72 7#8 4#8 CSY8 90 9#8 9#8 MSY8 108 10 # 8 10 # 8 CSY9 96 9#8 13 # 8 MSY9 84 8#8 8#8 CSY10 90 9#8 13 # 8 4 All Rights Reserved © 2014 IJSETR International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR) Volume 1, Issue 1, July 2012 MSY10 96 CSY11 VII. 9#8 5#8 108 10 # 8 12 # 8 DESIGN RESULT OF PILE FOUNDATION The required diameter of the drilled shaft can be calculated by the following equations (Braja M.Das 1999). DS = 2.257 Qw fc' (1) Figure -7 Steel Arrangement of Drilled Shaft for Group I In the design of piled raft foundation, 40 ft, 50 ft and 60 ft long and 2.5 ft diameter drilled shaft is considered for the proposed building. Design results of drilled shaft foundation are shown in Table 6 and 7. TABLE VI Qp A p Cu N c L L1 DESIGN RESULT OF DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATION (2) Qs Cu PL (3) * Steel Area (in2) Group name L 0 Q u Q p Qs (4) The diameter of pile is calculated by using above equation, the value of Qw (critical unfactored column load) is shown in table 4.The required number of pile is 42. And four groups of 40 ft long pile with different diameter for this substructure is shown in Table5. Node Point Control Node Point II 427 148.631 III 458, 563,466, 588,134,681, 133,491, 460, 679, 131, 557, 555, 692 692 190.616 (Qall) Satisfied II 9#8 148.631 158.65 Satisfied III 9#8 190.616 201.92 Satisfied TABLE VII DESIGN RESULT OF DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATION name 675, 213, 374, 484,331, 339, 760,579,361,592,728,512,437, 215, 606,427 Remark 144.61 129.057 212 Allowable 129.057 Group 321,477,371,508,712, 306, 421, 318, 527, 130,212 Applied (Qw) 9#8 Critical Unfactored Column Load (kips) I Axial compression Load (kips) I TABLE .IV CRITICAL COLUMN UNFACTORED LOADS FOR GROUPS Group (b) Plan (a) Section Pullout loading (kips) I II III Allowable Tensile Tensile Strength Remark Load (Pall) 91.754 117.01 149.5 (Ps) 355.5 355.5 355.5 Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied IX.SETTLEMENT CHECKING FOR DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATION DESIGN TABLE V DIAMETER OF PILED FOUNDATION Group Diameter (in) Length of pile 1 2 3 2.5 2.5 2.5 40 50 60 To calculate the settlement checking for drilled shaft which is placed under the raft foundation, the following two methods namely, semi-empirical method and empirical method are used. (a) Semi-empirical Method 2.5' diameter 3/8" ɸ spiral Q wp ξQ ws L 2.5 ' diameter 9#8 S1 = S2 = S3 = 9#8 L =40' 3" cover S ApEp C p Q wp Dq p (5) (6) C s Q ws Lq p (7) = S1 + S2 + S3 (8) (b) Empirical Method, 5 All Rights Reserved © 2014 IJSETR International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR) Volume 1, Issue 1, July 2012 The total settlement can be calculated by using the following Equation, St Q L B ua 100 A p E p (9) 2 TABLE VIII SETTLEMENT CHECKING FOR DRILLED SHAFT FOUNDATION Settlement (in) Allowable Group Semi-em name prical Method the soil is calculated by using General equation, Hansen’s method and Tomlinson method. The sum of critical unfactored column loads from superstructure is 58477.914 kips. The required bearing pressure is 1.9ton/ft and the allowable bearing pressure is 1.623 ton/ft . Therefore, shallow foundation is not suitable for the proposed building. So, piled raft foundation is selected to support the proposed building. Raft foundation is analyzed by using SAFE software. In a parametric study the maximum bending moment, maximum shear, soil pressure in raft increasing with increase raft thickness. Maximum settlement is not greatly affected on raft thickness.The reinforcement spacing and strips spacing of raft foundation is automatically divided by SAFE software. In raft foundation, the thickness of the raft foundation is 4 ft and No.8 bar is used. In design of pile foundation, drilled shaft with free head condition is used. The required pile diameter is 2.5ft and pile lengths are 40ft, 50ft and 60ft respectively. There are 3groups of pile with different diameter which depends on their critical column loads. For pile foundation, settlement checking is considered by using semi-empirical method and empirical method. Minimum reinforcement, 1% of gross cross-sectional area of the pile is used for the design of drilled shaft foundation. Emprical Settlement Method (in) Remark I 0.342 0.328 1 Satisfied II 0.533 0.34 1 Satisfied III 0.367 0.362 1 Satisfied 2 REFERENCES U NyiHlaNge, “Reinforced Concrete Design.”2010. S.K. Ghosh and David A. Fanella. 2003. “Seismic and Wind Design of Concrete Buildings.” [3] Das, Braja M. "Principles of Foundation Engineering", Fourth Edition. U.S.A. PWS Publishing Company, 1999. [4] J.A.Hemsley. "Design Applications of Raft Foundation ", 1998. [5] Bowles, Joseph E. Edition. New York: McGraw Hill Co, 1996. Edition. New York: McGraw Hill Co, 1996. [6] M.J.Tomlinson. "Pile Design and Construction Practice", Fourth edition, 1994. [1] [2] Figure 7. Base pressure diagram from STAAD.Pro . Figure 8. Arrangement of Piles under the Raft X.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS In this study, twenty storeyed reinforced concrete building with basement is selected. The structure is analyzed and designed in seismic Zone 4. Wind and earthquake loads are based on UBC 97, and structural elements are designed in accordance with ACI-318-02. The lateral loads and gravity loads are considered and the designed superstructure is checked for sliding resistance, overturning effect, storey drift, torsion irregularity and P-Δ effect. The required soil parameters are obtained from the soil report on Mandalay area. The allowable bearing capacity of 6 All Rights Reserved © 2014 IJSETR