Mat Foundations Introduction Under normal conditions, square and rectangular footings such as those described in Chapters 3 and 4 are economical for supporting columns and walls, However, under certain circumstances, it may be desirable to construct a footing that supports a line of two or more columns. These footings are referred to as combined footings. When more than one line of columns is supported by a concrete slab, it is called a mat foundation. Combined footings can be classified generally under the following categories: a, Rectangular combined footing b. Trapezoidal combined footing c. Strap footing Mat foundations are generally used with soil that has a low bearing capacity. A brief overview of the principles of combined footings is given in Section 6.2, followed by a more detailed discussion on mat foundations. Combined Footings Rectangular Combined Footing In several instances, the load to be carried by a column and the soil bearing capacity are such that the standard spread footing design will require extension of the column founda- tion beyond the property line. In such a case, two or more columns can be supported on a single rectangular foundation, as shown in Figure 6.1. If the net allowable soil pressure is known, the size of the foundation (B XL) can be determined in the following manner: a, Determine the area of the foundation + @, F(t) A= (6.1) where Q), Q, = column loads : peat) = Nt allowable soil bearing capacity 291292 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations Ly Section Be qoexan/unit length L vrorery —| Be rn [ Figure 6.1 Rectangular combined footing b. Determine the location of the resultant of the column loads. From Figure 6.1, (6. c. For a uniform distribution of soil pressure under the foundation, the resultant of the column loads should pass through the centroid of the foundation. Thus, L=2(L, +X) ( where L = length of the foundation. . Once the length L is determined, the value of L can be obtained as follows: L,=L-L,-1L; 6 Note that the magnitude of 2 will be known and depends on the location of the property line. ce. The width of the foundation is then A gi L Trapezoidal Combined Footing Trapezoidal combined footing (see Figure 6.2) is sometimes used as an isolated foundation of columns carrying large loads where space is tight. The size of the foun that will uniformly distribute pressure on the soil can be obtained in the following mi a. If the net allowable soil pressure is known, determine the area of the foundation: Qi + @: estat)6.2 Combined Footings 293 By * daaianunit length By * docwauy/unit length Section Figure 6.2 Trapezoidal combined footing From Figure 6.2, _B +B @ 2 L (6.6) b, Determine the location of the resultant for the column loads: Ls O+0 c. From the property of a trapezoid, B, + 2B,\L +L, a . iets Gee © With known values of A, L, X, and L,, Note that, for a trapezoid, solve Eqs. (6.6) and (6.7}to obtain B, and B; L Ls B, Goats) = a - 4 = se (1 + ou9s8(, + 047) (6.10) For FS = 3, the net allowable soil bearing capacity becomes Foioe 0.195B aT Goats) = “ag = 1re,(1 on \C +04 (6.11) The net allowable bearing capacity for mats constructed over granular soil deposits can be adequately determined from the standard penetration resistance numbers. From Eq, (5.64), for shallow foundations, > No (B+03\?. (5S. Aan(iN/m) = Se ( B03) r(%) (Ba, (8.649) where Ne = standard penetration resistance width (m) Fy = 1 + 0.33(D,/B) < 1.33 5, = settlement, (mm) When the width B is large, the preceding equation can be approximated as Na Se ea KN/?) = Op #(&) _ No DV If S(mm) = gual t+ 020( 2) [ ‘S.(mm) 23 (6.12) = 16.63Ne298 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations In English units, Eq. (6.12) may be expressed as o2sni 1 + 033( 72) |s.inn @ S 0.33N gf5.(in.)] any (Kip /fU Generally, shallow foundations are designed for a maximum settlement of 25 (1 in.) and a differential settlement of about 19 mm (0.75 in.). However, the width of the raft foundations are larger than those of the isolated s footings. As shown in Table 5.3, the depth of significant stress increase in the soil below foundation depends on the width of the foundation, Hence, for a raft foundation, the of the zone of influence is likely to be much larger than that of a spread footing. Thus, loose soil pockets under a raft may be more evenly distributed, resulting in a smaller ferential settlement. Accordingly, the customary assumption is that, for a maximum settlement of 50 mm ( ), the differential settlement would be 19 mm (0.75 in.). Usi this logic and conservatively assuming that F, = 1, we can respectively approxi Eqs. (6.12) and (6.13) as Gaa(at) = oes KN/m*) ~ 25Non 61 and ota) = Fea Kip/fU?) = 0.5Noo 6k The net allowable pressure applied on foundation (sec Figure 6.7) may be expressed Q 4-47 li where Q = dead weight of the structure and the live load A = area of the raft Inall ses, q should be less than or equal to allowable dpe: Unit weight = Figure 6.7 Definition of net pressure on soil caused by a mat foundation6.5 Differential Settlement of Mats 299 Example 6.1 a SE rele UU Nea Determine the net ultimate bearing capacity of a mat foundation measuring 15m X 10 mona saturated clay with c, = 95 KN/m?, 6 = 0, and Dy = 2m. Solution From Eq. (6.10), van e+ (8828) Ps vac] = (s14y(09]1 + (mae VT + (2) = $95.9 kN/m? . Example 6.2 ‘What will be the net allowable bearing capacity of a mat foundation with dimensions of 15m x 10m constructed over a sand deposit? Here, Dy = 2m, the allowable settlement is 25 mm, and the average penetration number Nyy = 10. Solution From Eq. (6.12), — Neo PN Se sun ~ af a2e(2) (2) « som) i 10 0.33 x 21/25 Guten, = af cae 2) = 133.25 kN/m? . Differential Settlement of Mats In 1988, the American Conerete Institute Committee 336 suggested a method for calcula ing the differential settlement of mat foundations. According to this method, the rigidity factor K, is calculated as E'l, K, EB (6.16) n J, = moment of inertia of the structure per unit length at right angles to B The term EJ, can be expressed as ah Bh Bet Sh+ SS (6.17)300 GME Field Settlement Observations for Mat Foundations Compensated Foundation Chapter 6: Mat Foundations where E'Iy = flexural rigidity of the superstructure and foundation per unit length at right angles to B YE'I}, = flexural rigidity of the framed members at right angles to B ¥(E'alt/12) = flexural rigidity of the shear walls hear wall thickness shear wall height lexibility of the foundation E'ly Based on the value of K,, the ratio (5) of the differential settlement to the total settle can be estimated in the following manner: 1. If K, > 0.5, it can be treated as a rigid mat, and 6 = 0. 2. IK, = 0.5, then 5 ~ 0.1. 3. If K, = 0. then 5 = 0.35 for square mats (B/L = 1) and 5 = 0.5 for long foun: dations (B/L = 0). Several field settlement observations for mat foundations are currently available in the erature. In this section, we compare the observed settlements for some mat foundatit constructed over granular soil deposits with those obtained from Eqs. (6.12) and (6.13 Meyerhof (1965) compiled the observed maximum settlements for mat fou constructed on sand and gravel, as listed in Table 6,1. In Eq. (6.12), if the depth f 1 + 0.33(D,/B). is assumed to be approximately unity, then docs) SA{mm) ~ Gs No From the values of quan and Nw given in Columns 6 and 5, respectively, of Table the magnitudes of S, were calculated and are given in Column 8. ‘Column 9 of Table 6 1 gives the ratios of calculated to measured values of S,. ratios vary from about 0.79 to 3.39. Thus, calculating the net allowable bearing cm With the use of Eq. (6.12) or (6.13) will yield safe and conservative values. Figure 6.7 and Eq, (6.15) indicate that the net pressure inerease in the soil under & mat dation can be reduced by increasing the depth D, of the mat. This approach is generally 10 as the compensated foundation design ind is extremely useful when structures are tobe on very soft clays. In this design, a deeper basement is made below the higher portion of superstructure, so that the net pressure increase in soil at any depth is relatively uniform, Figure 6.8.) From Eq, (6.15) and Figure 6.7, the net average applied pressure on soil is a= 2-1,301 ore we or «9 ueuuiay “2u0I09 9rol tL zror 8 or) 07 (zs) Auewuan “Hoplessna ze0r wore se'st Aum L Lo (soo) 3) st (ro Auewan “Hopressng ere vor ssw assy, 9 I (so (sr) 07 (ep wesg “omg ovs cu 86t7 96E (8F61) seaIA reese s scl wen cp (ors) w (sr) S Tsre POLE otse worl (1961) seBaeA, vpurdsy “TaD, r ol (990) Dd (r9) 6 (oe) [e1g “ojneg ong, 1919 gcse roe +16 (sr61) seBm, vSueredy € soo (son 8 (so) 961) SBR, leg “omned ons 99t role veer O87 BPEL) BALLS pue soy lizeag op osueg, z loz avy (wo (sp) sl ) rewig ojntg ovs OE resi 86e GTR (SPOT) EALIS pue sort wostPs -L 1 (6) (a) 7} (9) (3) (») () (2) w “sg pensesqo (uy wus (uy ws oy gy) w souasajay eamanng, “on, % pareinojeo —«WOwepIes —“JuaWaOs aBeimy og eseg wnwpeu = wnwyxew peyeinoqeg pensosqo (AOSV woyy uoIssiuused302 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations Figure 6.8 Compensated foundation For no inerease in the net pressure on soil below a mat foundation, q should be zero. @ p,-2 Ay (61 This relation for D; is usually referred to as the depth of a fully compensated foundatic The factor of safety against bearing capacity failure for partially compensated fe dations (i.e., Dy < Q/ Ay) may be given as — Aoexiuy _—_Avextu) Fs = q 2_iy A yy (6. where qpequ) = net ultimate bearing capacity. For saturated clays, the factor of safety against bearing capacity failure can thus obtained by substituting Eq. (6.10) into Eq, (6.20): L re ee ee ee (6.21) Q 477 ssa (1 + ousse)(, +04 Example 6.3 ‘The mat shown in Figure 6.7 has dimensions of 60 ft 100 ft. The total dead and load on the mat is 25 X 10° kip. The mat is placed over a saturated clay having a un weight of 120 Ib/ft? and c, = 2800 Ib/ft*. Given that Dy = 5 ft, determine the of safety against bearing capacity failure.6.7 Compensated Foundation 303 Solution From Eq. (6.21), the factor of safety s.te(1 + 01982) +0. pe a eee f Q acu We are given that c, = 2800 Ib/ft’, Dy = 5 ft, B= 60ft, L = 100ft, and y = 120 Ib/ft’. Hence, (314230) 1 * Oeseny + 0.4 All 60. 25 x 10°Ib (er 100 ) — (120) (5) = 4.66 Example 6.4 Consider a mat foundation 30 m X 40 m in plan, as shown in Figure 6.9. The total dead load and live load on the raft is 200 x 10° KN. Estimate the consolidation settlement at the center of the foundation. Solution From Eq. (1.61) CH |. (5+ Ao ese eee Secp) = 7, = (G.67)(15.72) + (13.33) (19.1 — 9.81) + Sass = 9.81) ~ 208 kN/m? H.=6m C, = 0.28 ¢, = 09 For Q = 200 X 10° KN, the net load per unit area is 200 x 10° ' = Spc ao (15-72) 2) = 135.2 kN In orderto calculate Aor, we refer to Section 5.5. The loaded area can be divided into four areas, each measuring 15 m x 20 m. Now using Eq. (5.19), we can calculate the average stress increase in the clay layer below the comer of each rectangular area, or Hata) ~ HA, - Hy 1.67 + 13.33 + 6) funy ~ (1.67 + 13.33)/, a Sonam) = 44 6304 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations to 30m x 40m Sand y= 15.72 kN/m* 1.67 m Groundwater table 13.33m oan -onsolidated clay 18.55 kN/m? Figure 6.9 Consolidation settlement under a mat foundation B 15 m= Ter + 133346 OT Tp 20 m= 3 7 0 From Fig. $7, for m; = 0.71 and n; = 0.95, the value of Ii is 0.21. Again, for Jun pte gk Pere 15) L_2 ata 2a13 eee ens From Figure 5.7, La) = 0.225,80 [oes 15) (0.225 | 6 Aotyuiyny = 135.2! 23.32 KN/m? So, the stress increase below the center of the 30m x 40m area is (4) (23.32) = 93.28 KN/m?, Thus _ (0.28) (6) i (= + 93.2 Pt 09. 208 WEGME Structural Design of Mat Foundations ‘The structural design of mat foundations can be carried out by two conventional meth the conventional rigid method and the approximate flexible method. Finite-diffei and finite-element methods can also be used, but this section covers only the basic cepts of the first two design methods.6.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 305 Conventional Rigid Method The conventional rigid method of mat foundation design can be explained step by step with reference to Figure 6.10: Step 1. Figure 6.10a shows mat dimensions of LX B and column loads of Q,, Qs, Q,, ....Calculate the total column load as Q=A+OQ+Q+-- (6.22) Step 2. Determine the pressure on the soil, g, below the mat at points A,B,C, D, ... by using the equation (6.23) where A= BL 1, = (1/12) BL* = moment of inertia about the x-axis 1, = (1/12)LB* = moment of inertia about the y-axis M, = moment of the column loads about the x-axis = Qe, M, = moment of the column loads about the y-axis = Qe, The load eccentricities, ¢, and ¢,, in the x and y directions can be deter- mined by using (x’, y’) coordinates: ¥} + Qox + Qyxh +00 (6.24) Q and ae) eat (6.25) Similarly, Quyi + Quys + Qsys +++ (626) Q and rik =F 5 (6.27) Step 3. Compare the values of the soil pressures determined in Step 2 with the net allowable soil pressure to determine whether ¢ = qunsey: Step 4. Divide the mat into several strips in the x and y directions. (See Figure 6.10). Let the width of any strip be By.}-—_— s 4 ) Edge of mat L dn an an, ay Fage of —>| [air Edge of —>} [a2 mat mat R= LAL ©) Figure 6.10 Conventional rigid mat foundation design 306Step 5. Step 6. 6.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 307 Draw the shear, V; and the moment, M, diagrams for each individual strip (in the x and y directions). For example, the average soil pressure of the bot- tom strip in the x direction of Figure 6.10a is pista us 2 where q, and gy = soil pressures at points / and as determined from Step 2. ‘The total soil reaction is equal to q,B,B. Now obtain the total column load on the strip as Q, + Q, + Q; + Qs. The sum of the column loads on the strip will not equal q,,B,B, because the shear between the adjacent strips has not been taken into account, For this reason, the soil reaction and the column loads need to be adjusted, or GuxB\B + (Qi + Qr + Os + Os) (6.28) Average load = (6.29) Now, the modified average soil reaction becomes average load avi modified) = aul daBB (6.30) and the column load modification factor is - average load yaa Q. + Q:+ Q,+ O, So the modified column loads are FQ), FQs, FQs, and FQ,. This mod- ified loading on the strip under consideration is shown in Figure 6.10b. The shear and the moment diagram for this strip can now be drawn, and the pro- cedure is repeated in the x and y directions for all strips. Determine the effective depth d of the mat by checking for diagonal tension shear near various columns. According 0 ACI Code 318-95 (Section 11.12.2.1¢, American Concrete Institute, 1995), for the critical section, U = bdlb(0.34)VF) (6.32a) where U = factored column load (MN), or (column load) x (load factor) = reduction factor = 0.85 f= compressive strength of concrete at 28 days (MN/m?) The units of b, and d in Eq, (6.32a) are in meters. In English units, Eq. (6.32a) may be expressed as U = bd 4gVT.) (6.32b) where U is in Ib, b, and d are in in., and fis in Ib/in?, The expression for b, in terms of d, which depends on the location of the column with respect to the plan of the mat, can be obtained from Figure 6.10c308 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations Step 7. From the moment diagrams of all strips in one direction (x or y), obtain ‘maximum positive and negative moments per unit width (i.e. M’ = M/! Step 8. Determine the areas of steel per unit width for positive and negative rei forcement in the x and y directions. We have M, = (M') (load factor) = oas(a a 4) 6. and Asi ~ 0.85 tb 6. where A, = area of steel per unit width fy = yield stress of reinforcement in tension M, = factored moment = 09 = reduction factor Examples 6.5 and 6.6 illustrate the use of the conventional rigid method of mat fou design, Approximate Flexible Method In the conventional rigid method of design, the mat is assumed to be infinitely rigid. Al the soil pressure is distributed in a straight line, and the centroid of the soil pressure is ci cident with the line of action of the resultant column loads. (See Figure 6.1 1a.) In approximate flexible method of design, the soil is assumed to be equivalent to an infini number of clastic springs, as shown in Figure 6.11b. This assumption is someti referred to as the Winkler foundation. The elastic constant of these assumed springs referred to as the coefficient of subgrade reaction, k. To understand the fundamental concepts behind flexible foundation design, sider a beam of width B, having infinite length, as shown in Figure 6.1 1c. The beam subjected to a single concentrated load Q. From the fundamentals of mechanics materials, az M = Eplp dx (6. where M = moment at any section Ey = modulus of elasticity of foundation material Tp = moment of inertia of the cross section of the beam = (75) B,h* (see Figure 6.11 However, 4M — shear force = V dx and dv —~ = q = soil reaction io6.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 309 xe a OQ, t 1 Resultant of { soil pressure (a) eo Qs (by Point load <3, [_t Section aA-A Aes gfees © Figure 6.11 (a) Principles of design by conventional rigid method: (b) principles of approximate flexible method; (c) derivation of Eq. (6.39) for beams on elastic foundation Hence, @M dx Combining Eqs. (6.35) and (6.36) yields q (6.36) (6.37) However, the s310 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations where z = deflection k= kB, k = coefficient of subgrade reaction (KN/m' or Ib/in*) So, dz Eyl < = -2kB, 63 Solving Eq. (6.38) yields z =e “(A' cos Bx + A" sin Bx) (6. where A’ and A” are constants and | Bk 4E ply q The unit of the term , as defined by the preceding equation, is (length) ~' parameter is very important in determining whether a mat foundation should be desi by the conventional rigid method or the approximate flexible method. According to American Concrete Institute Committee 336 (1988), mats should be designed by the ¢ ventional rigid method if the spacing of columns in a strip is less than 1.75/B. If the ing of columns is larger than 1.75/B, the approximate flexible method may be used. ‘To perform the analysis for the structural design of a flexible mat, one must the principles involved in evaluating the coefficient of subgrade reaction, k. Before ceeding with the discussion of the approximate flexible design method, let us discuss coefficient in more detail. Ifa foundation of width B (see Figure 6.12) is subjected to a load per unit area of g will undergo a settlement A. The coefficient of subgrade modulus can be defined as 4 k = (64 ‘The unit of k is KN/m* (or Ib/in*). The value of the coefficient of subgrade reaction is) ‘a constant for a given soil, but rather depends on several factors, such as the length L width B of the foundation and also the depth of embedment of the foundation. A compi hensive study by Terzaghi (1955) of the parameters affecting the coefficient of subgrade action indicated that the value of the coefficient decreases with the width of the foundat 8 | ‘ Figure 6.12 Definition of « cient of subgrade reaction, k6.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 311 In the field, load tests can be carried out by means of square plates measuring 0.3 m X 0.3 m (1 ft X 1 ft), and values of & can be calculated. The value of k can be related to large foundations measuring BX B in the following ways: Foundations on Sandy Soils For foundations on sandy soils, 2 k= to(2 #2) (6.42) where ky and k = coefficients of subgrade reaction of foundations measuring 0.3 m X 0.3 m and B(m) x B(m), respectively (unit is KN/m’) In English units, Eq. (6.42) may be expressed as 2 x= (254) (6.43) where k, and k = coefficients of subgrade reaction of foundations measuring | ft 1 ft and B(ft) B (ft), respectively (unit is Ib/in*). Foundations on Clays For foundations on clays, (KN/m) = ke (KN/m?) [se] (6.t4a) The definitions of k and ky ; in Eq. (6.44a) are the same as in Eq. (6.42). In English units, k(Ib/in*) = k, (Ib/in’) [52] (6.44b) ‘The definitions of & and ky are the same as in Eq. (6.43). For rectangular foundations having dimensions of B x L (for similar soil and q), B hexa( + 052) fe 1S (6.45)312 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations where k = coefficient of subgrade modulus of the rectangular foundation (LX B) K pen) = coefficient of subgrade modulus of a square foundation having dimension of BX B Equation (6.45) indicates that the value of k for a very long foundation with a width B approximately 0.67K 1): ‘The modulus of elasticity of granular soils increases with depth. Because the ment of a foundation depends on the modulus of elasticity, the value of k increases wit the depth of the foundation. Table 6.2 provides typical ranges of values for the coefficient of subgrade ko 3(k;), for sandy and clayey soils. For long beams, Vesic (1961) proposed an equation for estimating subgrade react namely, EB E, = Bk = 0.65 ele or eet (6. Egle BO ~ 42) ‘ modulus of elasticity of soil foundation width Ey = modulus of elasticity of foundation material J = moment of inertia of the cross section of the foundation 14, = Poisson’s ratio of soil Table 6.2 Typical Subgrade Reaction Values, kos(K:) Kalla) MN/m? Ibfin? 8-25 30-90 25-125 90-450 Dense 125-375 450-1350 Saturated sand: Loose 10-15 35-55 Medium 35-40 Dense 130-150 Clay: Stiff 10-25 40-90 Very stiff 25-50 90-185, Hard >50 >1856.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 313 For most practical purposes, Eq. (6.46) can be approximated as us (6.47) BOL 45) Now that we have discussed the coefficient of subgrade reaction, we will proceed with the discussion of the approximate flexible method of designing mat foundations, Thi method, as proposed by the American Conerete Institute Committee 336 (1988), described step by step. The use of the design procedure, which is based primarily on the theory of plates, allows the effects (i.e., moment, shear, and deflection) of a concentrated column load in the area surrounding it to be evaluated. If the zones of influence of two or more columns overlap, superposition can be employed to obtain the net moment, shear, and deflection at any point. The method is as follows: Step 1. Assume a thickness h for the mat, according to Step 6 of the conventional rigid method. (Note: h is the rotal thickness of the mat.) Step 2. Determine the flexural ridigity R of the mat as given by the formula Eek? PRU — aa) (6.48) where Ey = modulus of elasticity of foundation material Mp = Poisson’s ratio of foundation material Step 3. Determine the radius of effective stiffness—that is, \ ¢ (6.49) where k = coefficient of subgrade reaction. The zone of influence of any column load will be on the order of 3 to 4 1 Step 4. Determine the moment (in polar coordinates at a point) caused by a column, load (see Figure 6.13a). The formulas to use are Q (= nr) Aa | Ae eecree Ze M, = radial moment = ~ (6.50) and 1 —-pp)Ap M, = tangential moment = -4 jtpA, + Heda: (51) Lv314 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations @ 0 04 03 02 01 0 OL Ay An Ay As () Figure 6.13 Approximate flexible method of mat design where r = radial distance from the column load Q = column load ‘A,, Az = funetions of r/L’ The variations of A, and A, with r/L’ are shown in Figure 6.13b. details see Hetenyi, 1946.) In the Cartesian coordinate system (see Figure 6.13), M, = M, sin?a + M, cos?a@ (65% and M, = M, cos*a + M, sin?w (6. Step 5. For the unit width of the mat, determine the shear force V caused by a coh load: V==A; 3 The variation of As with r/L’ is shown in Figure 6.13b. Step 6. If the edge of the mat is located in the zone of influence of a column, mine the moment and shear along the edge. (Assume that the mat is conti uous.) Moment and shear opposite in sign to those determined are appli at the edges to satisfy the known conditions. Step 7. The deflection at any point is given by iD * é= oA (653 The variation of A, is presented in Figure 6.13b.6.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 315 Example 6.5 The plan of a mat foundation is shown in Figure 6.14. Calculate the soil pressure at points A, B, C, D, E, and F. (Note: All column sections are planned to be 0.5 m X 0.5 m.) 7 F D Pl Re 025m 0.25 m Figure 6.14 Plan of a mat foundation Solution ge Met Mey Eq. (6.23. = * Pee A = (16.5)(21.5) = 354.75 m? pao ae a I = GyBL? = 75 (165) (21.5) = 13,665 m 1 La tLe = FE15)(165)! = 8,050 m! Q = 350 + (2)(400) + 450 + (2)(500) + (2)(1200) + (4)(1500) = 11,000 kN My= Qe; e =x316 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations Qixi + Ooxs + srs + +++ ae + Osxs + (8: ean + 1500 + 1500 + 500) + (16.25) (350 + 1200 + 1200 + 450) | = 7.814m + (0.25) (400 + 1500 + 1500 + 400) = 7.814 — 8.25 = —0.435 m = —0.44m 1 ,000) 2 af = Hence, the icctia line of action is located to the left of the center of the mat. So M, 11,000)(0.44) = 4840 kN-m. Similarly M,=Qey; ey = Quiyi + Qays + ays +o vin Q Sil ean + 500 + 350) + (7.25) (1500 + 1500 + 1200) 11,000| + (14.25) (1500 + 1500 + 1200) + (21.25) (400 + 500 + 450) = 10.85 m @ = y' — 5 = 1085 ~ 10.75 = 0.1m ‘The location of the line of action of the resultant column loads is shown in Figure 6.1 M, = (11,000)(0.1) = 1100 kN-m, So ‘11,000 4840x 1100y _ a oa A 4 = 35a75 * g050 7 T3:66s 7 3:0 * 26x + 08y( KN/m’) 0.25m jpg pd 500 kN 0.25m, eS a ee ee 025m 0.25 m6.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 317 Therefore, 1.0 ~ (0.6)(8.25) + (0.08)(10.75) 0 ~ (0.6)(8.25) — (0.08)(10.75) 1.0 + (0.6)(0) — (0.08)(10.75) = 30.14 KN/m? Example 6.6 Divide the mat shown in Figure 6.14 into three strips, such as AGHF (B, = 4.25 m), GIJH (B, = 8 m), and ICDJ (B, — 4.25 m). Use the result of Example 6.5, aud deter- mine the reinforcement requirements in the y direction. Here, f.’ = 20.7 MN/m?, f, = 413.7 MN/m’, and the load factor is 1.7. Solution Determination of Shear and Moment Diagrams for Strips: Strip AGHF: 81 + 35.09 Average soil pressure = gy, = qu 4) + at) = jee se = 35.95 kN/m?* ‘Total soil reaction = q,,B,L = (35.95)(4.25)(21.50) = 3285 kN load due to soil reaction + column loads Average load = ———~ “$a __ 3285 + 3800 = 3542.5 kN So, modified average soil pressure, 3542.5 avis) = Aas F355 ‘The column loads can be modified in a similar manner by multiplying factor ( > ) = 38.768 kN/m? 3542.5 Fay = 09322 Figure 6.16 shows the loading on the strip and corresponding shear and moment diagrams. Note that the column loads shown in this figure have been multiplied by F = 0.9322. Also the load per unit length of the beam is equal t0 By4uyimaiiay = (4.2538.768) = 164.76 kN/m. Strip GIJH: In a similar manner, (a8) + Fa 86 + 30.1 a= = Ge NAGI 5 opin? (31)(8)(21.5) = 5332 kN Total column load = 4000 kN318 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations 372.89KN 1398.36KN—139836KN 372.89 KN 164.76 kNim 821.65 s 376.7 aya Shear (unit: KN) 3817 576.70 821.65 112757 1727.57 5.15 ZS Moment (unit: kN-m) Figure 6.16 Load, shear, and moment diagrams for strip AGHF 5332 + 4000 Average load = = 4666 kN = coe 2 sx{mesiied) = ain (4) = 27.12 KN/m’ 4666 F => = 1,165 1.166: ‘The load, shear, and moment diagrams are shown in Figure 6.17. Strip ICDJ: Figure 6.18 shows the load, shear, and moment diagrams for this strip. Determination of the Thickness of the Mat For this problem, the critical section for diagonal tension shear will be at the col carrying 1500 KN of load at the edge of the mat [Figure 6.19]. So n= (05+) +(05+$)+ @s +a) = 15 +24 U = (bd) (H) (034)VF.] U = (1.7)(1500) = 2550 KN = 2.55 MN 255 = (15+ 2d) (d){(0.85) (0.34) V20.7 | (1.5 + 2d)(d) = 1.94; d = 0.68 m6.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 319 S8325KN 1749.75KN1749.75KN $83.25 kN 0.25 0.25 m met +7 m— le —7 m Tm—+ 8 e 217 kN ‘Shear (unit: KN) 750.58, 990.17 1020.89 1620.89 ens 6.78 2. Moment (unit: KN-m) 637.94 637.94 Figure 6.17 Load, shear, and moment diagrams for strip GH 3924KN 1046.44 KN 1046.44KN 305.2 KN 0.25 m| 0.25 m Tw. Tm: 7m: a S D 129.8 kNim 548.65 41081 635.63 664.56 360.15 4.06 4.06 ‘Moment (unit: kN-m) 54) 1196.19 : Figure 6.18 Load, shear, and moment diagrams for strip ICDJ320 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations 1500 kN Column load Edge of mat vst | 05 +al2 Figure 6.19 Critical perimeter column Assuming a minimum cover of 76 mm over the steel reinforcement and also ass ing that the steel bars to be used are 25 mm in diameter, the total thickness of slab is h = 0.68 + 0.076 + 0.025 = 0.781 m ~ 0.8 m ‘The thickness of this mat will satisfy the wide beam shear condition across the strips under consideration. Determination of Reinforcement From the moment diagram shown in Figures 6.16, 6.17, and 6.18, it can be seen the maximum positive moment is located in strip AGHF, and its magnitude is 1727.57 _ 1721.57 M B, 4.25 = 406.5 KN-m/m Similarly, the maximum negative moment is located in strip ICD and its magnitude: 1196.19 _ 1196.19 GS ee ORS kN B 357 281-5 KNem/m = (M') (load factor) = $4, f(d = 4), For the positive moment, M, = (406.5)(1.7) = (#)(A,) (413.7 X I a (00s - A) = 0.9. Also, from Eq. (6.34), Ajfy __(A)(413.7) 0.85 f.b (0.85) (20.7) (1) 691.05 = (09y(0.082s«) (413.700) (0.68 - From Eq. (6.33): M, = 23.51A,; or A, = 0.0425a a 2 or a ~ 0.0645 So, A, = (0.0425)(0.0645) = 0.00274 m?/m = 2740 mm*/m.6.8 Structural Design of Mat Foundations 321 Use 25-mm diameter bars at 175 mm center-to-center: [a provided = on ( 2) = 2805.7 man/m] Similarly, for negative reinforcement, M, = (281.5) (1.7) = (6)(A)(413.7 x 1000)(0.68 a $= 0.9, A, = 0.0425a So 478,55 = (0.9) (0.0425a) (413.7 x 1000) — 68 - Sora 0.045 So, A, = (0.045)(0.0425) — 0.001913 m’/m = 1913 mm*/m, Use 25-mm diameter bars at 255 mm center-to-center: [A, provided = 1925 mm?] Because negative moment occurs at midbay of strip !CDJ, reinforcement should be pro- vided. This moment is 68.22 kN-m/m Hence, M, = (68.22)(1.7) = (0.9)(0.0425a)(413.7 x 1000) (008 = 2) ora ~ 0.0108 A, = (0.0108)(0.0425) = 0.000459 m?/m = 459 mm?/m Provide 16-mm diameter bars at 400 mm center-to-center: IA, provided = 502 mm?)} For general arrangement of the reinforcement see Figure 6.20. Figure 6.20 General arrange- ment of reinforcement .322 Chapter 6: Mat Foundations 6.1 Determine the net ultimate bearing capacity of mat foundations with the following characteristics: Gy, = 120KN/m’, @ = 0, B = 8m, L = 18m, Dy = 3m 6.2. Following are the results of a standard penetration test in the field (sandy soil): Depth (m) Field value of Neo 15 9 3.0 12 43 ul 6.0 7 15 13 9.0 ul 10.5 13 Estimate the net allowable bearing capacity of a mat foundation 6.5 m X Sm in plan. Here, D, = 1.5 mand allowable settlement = 50 mm. Assume that the unit weight of soil, y = 16.5 kN/m’, 6.3 Repeat Problem 6.2 for an allowable settlement of 30 mm. 6.4 A mat foundation on a saturated clay soil has dimensions of 20 m X 20 m. Given! dead and live load = 48 MN, c, = 30 KN/m, and Yay = 18.5 KN/m’, a. Find the depth, Dy, of the mat for a fully compensated foundation. 1b. What will be the depth of the mat (D,) for a factor of safety of 2 against capacity failure? 6.5 Repeat Problem 6.4 part b for c, = 20 kN/m?. 6.6 A mat foundation is shown in Figure P6.6. The design con: are [= 12m, B= 10m, D, = 2.2m,Q = 30MN, x; x; = 5.2 m, and preconsolidation pressure a, ~ 105 KN/m?. Calculate the con dation settlement under the center of the mat. 6.7 For the mat foundation in Problem 6.6, estimate the consolidation settlement u the comer of the mat 6.8 From the plate load test (plate dimensions 1 ft X 1 ft) in the field, the coefficient subgrade reaction of a sandy soil is determined to be 55 Ib/in’. What will be the value of the coefficient of subgrade reaction on the same soil for a foundation wit dimensions of 25 ft x 25 ft? 69 Refer to Problem 6.18. If the full sized foundation had dimensions of 70 ft * 30) ‘what will be the value of the coefficient of subgrade reaction? 6.10 The subgrade reaction of a sandy soil obtained from the plate load test (pla dimensions 1 m X 0.7 m) is 18 MN/m®, What will be the value of k on the same soil for a foundation measuring 5m X 3.5m?References 323 y= 16.0 Nim? x Groundwater ble i Sand Yoo = 18.0 KI? AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE (1995). ACI Standard Building Code Requirements for Rein- forced Concrete, ACI 318-95, Farmington Hills, ML AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE COMMITTEE 336 (1988). “Suggested Design Procedures for Combined Footings and Mats,” Journal of the American Concrete Institute, Vol. 63, No. 10, pp. 1041-1077, HETENY!, M. (1946). Beams of Elastic Foundations, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, ML MeyerHor, G. G. (1965). “Shallow Foundations,” Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 91, No. SM2, pp. 21-31 Ruos, L., and Siva, F. P, (1948), “Foundations in Downtown Sio Paulo (Brazil),” Proceedings, Second International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Rotterdam, Vol. 4, p. 69. SCHULTZE, E. (1962). “Probleme bei der Auswertung von Setzungsmessungen,” Proceedings, Baugrundtagung, Essen, Germany, p. 343. TERZAGHI, K. (1955). “Evaluation of the Coefficient of Subgrade Reactions.” Geotechnique, Institute of Engineers, London, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 197-226. ‘VaRGAS, M. (1948). “Building Settlement Observations in Sao Paulo,” Proceedings Second Inter- national Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Rotterdam, Vol. 4, p13. VARGAS, M. (1961). “Foundations of Tall Buildings on Sand in Sao Paulo (Brazil). Proceedings, Fifth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Paris, Vol. |, p. 841 Vesic, A. S. (1961). “Bending of Beams Resting on Isotropic Solid.” Journal of the Engineering ‘Mechanics Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 87, No. EM2, pp. 35-53.