You are on page 1of 30

ACI 351.


Foundations for Static Equipment

Reported by ACI Committee 351
Erick N. Larson* James P. Lee*
Chairman Chairman, Subcommittee 351.3

Hamid Abdoveis* C. Raymond Hays* John A. Richards*

William Babcock A. Harry Karabinis. Robert W. Ross*
J. Randolph Becker* John C. King Philip A. Smith
William L Bounds* Joseph P. Morawski* Robert C VaIlance*
Marvin A. Cones Navin Pandya* Alfonzo L Wilson
Dale H. Curtis’ Ira W. Pearce* Matthew W. Wrona’
Shraddhakar Harsh* Mark Porat*

’ Members of Subcommittee 351.3 which prepared Ihis report.

The Committee also wishes to extend its appreciation and acknowledgement of two &sociate Members who eontriiuted to this sport: D. Keith McLean and Alan

The commirree has developed a discussion document represenring he slate- Chapter 2-Foundation types, p. 351.21-2
ofhe-nrr of sraric equipment foundntion engineering and conswuction. It
2.1-General considerations
presents the wwious design criteria, and metlwds and procedures of ady-
sis. design, and consfruction currenrly being applied to staric equipment 2.2-Apical foundations
foundations by industry practitioners. Be purpose of he report is IO pre-
sent the various meh&. II is not intended to be a recommended pracrice. Chapter 3-Design criteria, p. 351.21-4
but r&tier n document which encourages discusion and compnrison of 3.1-Loading
3.2-Design strength/stresses
Keywords: anchorage (structural): anchor bolts; concrete; equipment; forms: 3.3-Stiffness/deflections
forlnwork (conslmction); foundation loading; foundations; grout; bouting: 3.4-Stability
pedestals; pile loads; reinforcement; soil pressure; subsurface preparation;
lolerances (mechanics).
Chapter 4-Design methods, p. 351.2R-19
4.1-Available methods
CONTENTS 4.2-Anchor bolts and shear devices
4.3-Bearing stress
Chapter l-Introduction, p. 351.2R-2 4.4-Pedestals
1.I-Background 4SC9il pressures
1.2-Purpose 4.6Pile loads
1.3-Scope 4.7-Foundation design procedures

Chapter 5-Construction considerations, p. 351.2R-24

5.1-Subsurface preparation and improvement
5.2-Foundation placement tolerances
5.3-Forms and shores
ACI Committee Reports, Guides, Standard Practices, and Commentaries 5.4-Sequence of construction and construction joints
are intended for guidance in planning, designing, executing, and inspecting
construction. This document is intended for the use of individuals who
5.5-Equipment installation and setting
are competent to evaluate the significance and limitations of its con- 5.6Grouting
tent and recommendations and who will accept responsibility for the
application of the material it contains. The American Concrete Institute AC1 3X213-94 became effective Feb. 1, 1994.
disclaims any and all responsibility for the stated principles. The Institute Copyright 0 1994. American Coocrete Institute.
shall not be liable for any loss or damage arjsing therefrom.
AII rights reserved including rights of reproduction and use in any form or by
Reference to this document shall not be made in contract documents. If
items found in this document are desired by the Architect/Engineer to be any mans, ineluding the making of copia by any photo procear. or by any elec-
a part of the contract documents, they shall be restated in mandatory lan- tronic or mechanial devia, printed. written, or on1 or recording for sound or
guage for incorporation by the Architect/Engineer. visual reproduction or for use in any knowledge or retriwal system or device,
unless permission in writing is obtained from the copyright proprietors.


5.7-Materials “static equipment” as used herein refers to industrial

5.GQuality control equipment that does not contain moving parts or whose
operational characteristics are essentially static in nature.
Chapter 6-References, p. 351.21-28 Outlined and discussed herein are the various aspects of
6.1-Recommended references the analysis, design, and construction of foundations for
6.2-Cited references equipment such as vertical vessels, stacks, horizontal ves-
sels, heat exchangers, spherical vessels, machine tools,
Glossary, p. 351.2R-30 and electrical equipment such as transformers.
Excluded from this report are foundations for
Metric (SI) conversion factors, p. 351.2R-30 machinery such as turbine generators, pumps, blowers,
compressors, and presses, which have operational charac-
teristics that are essentially dynamic in nature. Also
CHAPTER l-INTRODUCTION excluded are foundations for vessels and tanks whose
bases rest directly on soil, for example, clarifiers,
l.l-Background concrete silos, and American Petroleum Institute (API)
Foundations for static equipment are used throughout tanks. Foundations for buildings and other structures that
the world in industrial processing and manufacturing fa- contain static equipment are also excluded.
cilities. Many engineers with varying backgrounds are The geotechnical engineering aspects of the analysis
engaged in the analysis, design, and construction of these and design of static equipment foundations discussed
foundations. Quite often they perform their work with herein are limited to general considerations. The report
very little guidance from building codes, national stan- is essentially concerned with the structural analysis,
dards, owner’s specifications, or other published infor- design and construction of static equipment foundations.
mation. Because of this lack of consensus standards, most
engineers rely on engineering judgment and experience.
However, some engineering firms and individuals have CHAPTER 2-FOUNDATION TYPES
developed their own standards and specifications as a
result of research and development activities, field 2.1-General considerations
studies, or many years of successful engineering or The type and configuration of a foundation for equip-
construction practice. Firms with such standards usually ment may be dependent on the following factors:
feel that their information is somewhat unique and,
therefore, are quite reluctant to distribute it outside their 1. Equipment base configuration such as legs, saddles,
organization, let alone publish it. Thus, without open solid base, grillage, or multiple supports locations.
distribution, review, and discussion, these standards 2. Anticipated loads such as the equipment static
represent only isolated practices. Only by sharing openly weight, and loads developed during erection, operation,
and discussing this information can a truly meaningful and maintenance.
consensus on engineering and construction requirements 3. Operational and process requirements such as ac-
for static equipment foundations be developed. For this cessibility, settlement constraints, temperature effects,
reason, the committee has developed a discussion docu- and drainage.
ment representing the state-of-the-art of static equipment 4. Erection and maintenance requirements such as
foundation engineering and construction. limitations or constraints imposed by construction or
As used in this document, state-of-the-art refers to maintenance equipment, procedures, or techniques.
state-of-the-practice and encompasses the various engi- 5. Site conditions such as soil characteristics, topo-
neering and construction methodology in current use. graphy, seismicity, climate, and other environmental
l.t-Purpose 6. Economic factors such as capital cost, useful or
The Committee presents, usually without preference, anticipated life, and replacement or repair costs.
various design criteria, and methods and procedures of 7. Regulatory or building code provisions such as tied
analysis, design, and construction currently being applied pile caps in seismic zones.
to static equipment foundations by industry practitioners. 8. Construction considerations.
The purpose of this report is to present these various 9. Environmental requirements such as secondary con-
methods and thus elicit critical discussion from the indus- tainment or special concrete coat+? requirements.
try. This report is not intended to be a recommended
practice, but rather a document that will encourage 2.2-Typical foundations
discussion and comparison of ideas. 2.2.1 Vertical vessel and stack foundations - For tall
vertical vessels and stacks, the size of the foundation
1.3-Scope required to resist gravity loads and lateral wind or seis-
This report is limited in scope to the engineering and mic forces is usually much larger than the support base
construction of static equipment foundations. The term of the vessel. Accordingly, the vessel is often anchored to

a pedestal with dimensions sufficient to accommodate the

anchor bolts and base ring. Operational, maintenance, or
other requirements may dictate a larger pedestal. The
pedestal may then be supported on a larger spread
footing, mat, or pile cap.
For relatively short vertical vessels and guyed stacks
with large bases, light vertical loads, and small over-
turning moments, the foundation may consist solely of a
soil-supported pedestal.
Individual pedestals may be circular, square, hexa-
gonal or octagonal. If the vessel has a circular base, a
circular, square, or octagonal pedestal is generally pro-
vided. Circular pedestals may create construction diffi-
culties in forming unless standard prefabricated forms are
available. Square pedestals facilitate ease in forming, but
may contain much more material than is required by
analysis. Octagonal pedestals are a compromise between
square and circular; hence, this type of pedestal is widely FOOTING PLAN
used in supporting vertical vessels and stacks with circular
bases (see Fig. 2.2.1). ANCHOR BOLTS TIP-

2.2.2 Horizontal vessel and heat exchanger foundations

- Horizontal equipment such as heat exchangers and re-
actors of various types are typically supported on pedes-
tals that rest on spread footings, strap footings, pile caps,
or drilled piers. Elevation requirements of piping often
dictate that these vessels be several feet above grade.
Consequently, the pedestal is the logical means of sup-
The configuration of pedestals varies with the type of
saddles on the vessels, and with the magnitude and direc-
tion of forces to be resisted. Slide plates are also used to
reduce the magnitude of thermal horizontal forces be-
tween equipment pedestals. The most common pedestal Fig. 2.2.l-Octagonal pedestal and footing for vertical
is a prismatic wall type. However, T-shaped (buttressed) vessel
pedestals may be required if the horizontal forces are
very high (see Fig. 2.2.2). trol centers. Support structures consist of buses, line
2.2.3 Spherical vessel foundations - Large spherical traps, switches, and lightning arrestors.
vessels are sometimes constructed with a skirt and base Foundations for electrical equipment, such as trans-
ring, but more often have leg-supports. For leg-supported formers, power circuit breakers, and other more massive
spherical vessels, foundations typically consist of pedes- energized equipment, are typically designed for (1) dead
tals under the legs resting on individual spread footings, loads, (2) seismic loads, (3) erection loads (i.e., jacking),
a continuous mat, or an octagonal, hexagonal or circular and (4) operating loads. These foundations are typically
annular ring. Concerns about differential settlement be- slabs on grade, or slabs on piles. Anchorage is provided
twcen legs and large lateral earthquake loads usually by anchor bolts or by welding the equipment base to em-
dictate a continuous foundation system. To economize on bedded plates.
foundation materials, an annular ring-type foundation is Foundations of support structures for stiff electrical
often utilized (see Fig. 2.2.3). buses, switch stands, line traps, and lightning arrestors
2.2.4 Machine toolfoundations - Machine tool equip- are designed to accommodate operating loads, wind
ment is typically supported on at-grade mat foundations. loads, short circuit loads, and seismic loads. These loads
These may be soil-bearing or pile-supported depending are usually smaller than those of transmission line sup-
upon the bearing capacity of the soil and the settlement port structures; therefore, the supporting foundations
limitations for the machinery (see Fig. 2.2.4). Where a commonly used are drilled piers. If soil bearing condi-
machine tool produces impact type loads, it is generally tions are unfavorable, however, spread footings or pile
isolated from the neighboring mat to minimize transmis- supported footings are generally used.
sion of vibration to other equipment. Support structures for overhead electrical conductors,
2.2.5 Electrical equipment md support stnrctrrre foun.da- such as transmission towers, poles, dead-end structures,
/ions - Electrical equipment typically consists of trans- and flexible bus supports, are designed for tension loads
formers, power circuit breakers, switchgear, motor con- from the conductors along with ice and wind loads.



\ I I /’ ’







Fig. 2.2.3-Octagonal footing and pedestals for vertical


Fig. 2.2.2-Footings with slrap for horizontal vessel

Drilled piers are commonly used to support such struc- loadings defined by local building codes, or by AC1 318.
tures. Spread footings or pile supported footings are also However, many engineers have difficulty in classifying the
used when required by soil conditions. large number of different loadings into the standard
“dead” and “live” categories. There is, therefore, a need
to define additional categories of loadings and load
combinations with appropriate load factors.
CHAPTER 3-DESIGN CRITERIA 3.1.1 LOA Dead loads - Dead loads invariably consist
Criteria used for the design of static equipment foun- of the weight of the equipment, platforms, piping, fire-
dations vary considerably among engineering practition- proofing, cladding, ducting, and other permanent attach-
ers. There may be several reasons for this variability. ments. Some engineers also designate the operating con-
Most heavy equipment foundations are designed by or tents (liquid, granular material, etc.), of the equipment as
for large organizations, which may include utilities and dead loads. However, such a combination is inconvenient
government agencies. Many of these organizations, with when considering the possible combinations of loads that
their in-house expertise, have developed their own engi- may act concurrently, and when assigning load factors.
neering practices, including design criteria. Many organi- Equipment may often be empty, and still be subject to
zations, after investing considerable resources in devel- various other loads. Thus, a distinction between dead and
opment, consider such information proprietary. They find operating loads is generally maintained.
no incentive to share their experience and research with Live loaa!s - Live loads consist of the
others. For these reasons, there is limited published in- gravity load produced by personnel, movable equipment,
formation on the criteria used for the design of the types tools, and other items that may be placed on the main
of static equipment foundations covered by this report. piece of equipment, but are not permanently attached to
it. Live loads also commonly include the lifted loads of
3.1-Foundation loading small jib cranes, davits, or booms that are attached to the
Most practitioners first attempt to use the common main piece of equipment, or directly to the foundation.
FOUNDATIONS FOR STATIC EQUIPMENT 251.2&5 Wd load9 - When designing outdoor

,..- __-_.- ._-. ___.-. _-_.-._ -__-..-..-..- -.., equipment foundations to be constructed in an area
under the jurisdiction of a local building code, most
engineers wilI use the relevant provisions in that code for
determining wind loads on equipment. Most codes, such
as the older editions of the Uniform Building Code (UESG
79) specify wind pressures according to geographic area,
height above grade, and equipment geometry. Dynamic
characteristics of the structure or equipment are not
recognized, nor are any types of structures or equipment
specifically excluded from consideration. The procedures
used are simple even though, as most engineers believe,
they are somewhat crude in their representation of the
actual effect of wind.
Some practitioners, particularly when designing equip-
ment foundations outside the jurisdiction of local build-
FOOTING PLAN ing codes, use the more recent and purportedly more
rational wind load provisions contained in ASCE Stan-
dard 7 (formerly ANSI A58.1). However, these provisions
have the reputation of being significantly more complex
than those in most building codes.
The ASCE 7 wind pressure relationships can, in gen-
eral, be represented by the following two equations:

42 = O.O0256K,(~* (3-l)

PZ = q,GC P-2)
Fig. 2.2.ACombined footing for horizontal vessel
Where the various parameters are defined as follows:
Live loads, as described above, normally will not occur qr = velocity pressure at height z
during operation of the equipment. Typically, such loads V = basic wind speed (mph)
will be present only during maintenance and shutdown Z = importance factor
periods. Most practitioners do not consider operating 4 = height and exposure coefficient
loads, such as the weight of the contents during normal PZ = design pressure at height z (psf)
operation, to be live loads. G = gust factor Operating loads - Operating loads include C = pressure or drag coefficient
the weight of the equipment contents during normal op-
erating conditions. These are contents that are not per- ‘Ihe reputation of complexity and unwieldiness of the
manently attached to the equipment. Such contents may ASCE 7 wind provisions is unjustified when designing
include liquids, granular or suspended solids, catalyst rigid equipment, such as short stubby vertical vessels,
material, or other temporarily supported products or horizontal tanks, heat exchangers, machine tools, and
materials being processed by the equipment. The oper- electrical equipment. For these rigid types of equipment,
ating load may include the effects of contents movement the ASCE 7 wind provisions require only a selection of
or transfer, such as fluid surge loads in some types of a basic wind speed, an “importance factor,” which adjusts
process equipment. However, these latter loads are some- the basic wind speed for mean recurrence interval, and
times treated separately and require different load determination of a “velocity pressure.” This latter quantity
factors. is a function of both “exposure” (topography) and height
Operating loads also commonly include forces caused above grade. Design wind pressures are then determined
by thermal expansion (or contraction) of the equipment by multiplying the velocity pressure by a “gust factor” and
itself, or of its connecting piping. An example of the first a pressure (or drag) coefficient. The gust factor adjusts
type would be a horizontal vessel or heat exchanger with the mean velocity pressure to a peak value for the given
two saddles, each supported on a separate foundation. exposure and height. The pressure or drag coefficients
Temperature change of the equipment can produce hori- reflect the geometry and tributary exposed area of the
zontal thrusts at the tops of the supporting piers. Tem- item being investigated, and its orientation relative to the
perature change of connecting piping can produce up to wind flow.
six component reactions at the connecting flanges (three When designing tall flexible towers, vertical vessels
forces and three moments). For large piping, such forces and stacks, or their foundations, the engineer is faced
may significantly affect the foundation design. with a problem when using the ASCE 7 wind load provi-

sions. This problem occurs in the introductory paragraph high inherent strength for resisting seismic loads.
to the ASCE 7 wind load provisions, which excludes from Whether for operating, manufacturing, or shipping con-
consideration “structures with. . . structural characterislics siderations, mechanical equipment such as pumps, engine
which would make them susceptible to wind-excited osciila- and motor generators, chillers, dryers, air handlers, and
tions.” Tall flexible process towers, stacks, and chimneys most fans fall into this category, as does most electrical
are indeed susceptible to wind-excited oscillations. Both equipment. Note that while these observations are speci-
the discussion in Chapter 4 of AC1 307 as well as the fically for the structural performance of anchored equip-
material presented in Chapter 5 of ASME/ANSI STS-l- ment, they often are true for their operational perform-
1986 (steel stacks) are recommended references for these ance as well - unless electrical relays are tripped or
solutions. instrumentation controls are set to automatically shut Se&& loads - Determining lateral force down equipment. Where operational considerations are
requirements for equipment is a challenge for practicing more of a concern, as is the case for telecommunication
engineers. The reason stems primarily from the building and computer equipment, engineers often specify much
codes commonly used to make such determinations. more stringent criteria than would be required by any
Since the primary focus of building codes is upon “build- building code.
ing type” structures, the applicability to equipment and Operational criteria for equipment are beyond the
nonbuilding type structures is less than clear, particularly scope of this document, but the practice of a west coast
when most of the codes use nomenclature applicable to telecommunications company in UBC Seismic Zone 4
structures rather than equipment. may be instructive. It requires shake table testing of
These difficulties have been widely recognized, and telecommunications and computer equipment to an input
steps have been taken to make the equipment require- acceleration of lg (where g = gravitational acceleration)
ment sections of codes more “user-friendly” for the in both the horizontal and vertical directions. Such
practicing engineer. Most notably, the 1991 edition of the testing is used by numerous equipment manufacturers
Uniform Building Code (UBC), widely used in the seis- and often governs the anchorage requirements for the
mic zones of the western United States, adopts the equipment.
refinements and improvements from recommendations of Past earthquake experience has also demonstrated
the Structural Engineers Association of California that static equipment that is properly supported and
(SEAOC). SEAOC’s Subcommittee on Nonbuilding adequately anchored against normal sliding and over-
Structures, a part of the Seismology Committee, con- turning moment (such as small heat exchangers, chillers,
tinues its efforts to develop “stand-alone” requirements pumps, and small shop-fabricated boilers and condensers)
that expand the scope and refine the treatment for may not require an explicit design for seismic forces.
seismic loads on equipment. Nevertheless, seismic loads are still commonly included
These efforts and widespread refinements made by in engineering design criteria.
SEAOC for structures have made the Uniform Building The UBC requires special seismic provisions for an-
Code the “state-of-the-art” code for lateral load choring “life-safety” equipment supported in a structure
requirements, even in many jurisdictions that have not in the form of a multiplier called the “importance factor”
specifically adopted the UBC. Other codes or standards (r). Facilities such as hospitals, fire stations, police
that specify lateral force requirements on buildings or stations, emergency communication facilities, and facil-
structures include ASCE 7 (formerly ANSI A58.1), The ities housing sufficient quantities of toxic or explosive
BOCA National Building Ctie, and the Standard Buifd- substances that could pose a danger to the general public
ing Code (SBC). The Federal Emergency Management if released are considered “Essential Facilities” or
Agency’s (FEMA) National Earthquake Hazards Reduc- “Hazardous Facilities.” Theses facilities require a multi-
tion Program (NEHRP) Stnndrrrd (1991) should also be plier of 1.25 with no reduction if the equipment is self-
consulted for seismic force requirements for equipment. supported at or below grade. For cases not described UBC lateral force requirements for equip- above, Z is to be taken as 1.0.
ment - The UBC makes no distinction between “static” Equipment supported by structures - The
and “dynamic” equipment for seismic loads. Rather, UBC requires a higher degree of strength for anchoring
whether the equipment is “rigid” or “nonrigid” determines equipment to structures than is required for the design of
the values for the variables used in the formulae for the structures themselves. This is because equipment sup-
calculating lateral forces. Therefore, lateral force ported above ground level typically: (1) has higher abso-
requirements for equipment do not depend upon equip- lute accelerations than at ground level, (2) can be sub-
ment type, but upon rigidity. Equipment with a funda- jected to amplified responses, (3) has little redundancy or
mental frequency greater than or equal to 16.7 Hertz, or energy absorption properties, and (4) is more susceptible
a period less than or equal to 0.06 second, is considered to attachment failures, thereby becoming a higher risk
“rigid.” component.
The performauce of many types of vendor-manufac- Rigid equipment not directly supported at or below
tured, floor-mounted equipment (both rigid and non- grade would typically be identified by the code as “non-
rigid) in past earthquakes has demonstrated a typically structural components supported by structures.” This in-

eludes most pumps, motors, and skid-mounted compo- rigid self-supporting structures and equipment other than
nents. For these, the minimum lateral force requirements buildings. This would include such equipment as rigid
are determined by the formula: vessels and bins.

v = 0.5ZIW
FP =z ZP CP WP [UBC Formula (36-l)] P-3)
[UBC Formula (38-l)]

If the self-supporting structure is nonrigid (that is,f <
FP = lateral seismic force 16.7 Hertz), as for tall slender vessels, most tanks on
z = seismic zone factor for effective peak ground grade, and some elevated tanks and bins, the dynamic
acceleration (ranges from 0.075 to 0.40, de- properties must be considered and the UBC prescribes
pending upon geographic location) using the lateral force formula for “other nonbuilding
Ip = importance factor for components structures” with some modifications:
cp = horizontal force factor for the specific com-
ponent (0.75 in most cases, but 2.0 for stacks y2!$ (3-6)
supported on or projecting as an unbraced Rlv
cantilever above the roof more than one-half [UBC Formula (34-l)]
the equipment’s total height)
wp = weight of the component where:

If an importance factor equal to 1.0 is required, the 1.25 S

c = Amplification coefficient (neednot ex-
minimum lateral force requirement for Seismic Zone 4 P
is 0.3W,. Only if the rigid equipment consisted of un- teed 2.75)
braced cantilevers extending above the roof more than I = importance factor (either 1.0 for standard and
one-half the equipment’s total height would the re- special occupancy structures, or 1.25 for es-
quirement be greater - O.SW, (see Table For sential and hazardous facilities) [See UBC
nonrigid or flexibly supported equipment the minimum Table 23-L]
lateral force is determined by the same formula. The R, = numerical coefficient for nonbuilding type
force factor FP, however, must consider both the dy- structures (either 3, 4, or 5, depending upon
namic properties of the component and the structure that type) [See UBC Table 23-Q]
supports it. In no case should this be less than cP for S = site coefficient for soil characteristics (ranges
rigid equipment, though it need not exceed 2.0. In lieu of between 1.0 and 2.0, depending on site soil
a detailed analysis to determine the period for nonrigid conditions) [See UBC Table 23-J]
equipment, the value for CP for rigid equipment can be T = fundamental period of vibration in seconds
doubled, resulting in a CP of 1.5. This simplification is v = total design lateral force or shear at the base
generally used by practicing engineers. Thus, unless an w = total seismic dead load (typically the opera-
importance factor greater than 1.0 is required, the min- ting weight of equipment)
imum lateral force requirement for Seismic Zone 4 z = seismic zone factor for effective peak ground
would be 0.6u(, for most nonrigid equipment. Only if the acceleration (ranges from 0.075 to 0.40, de-
nonrigid equtpment consists of unbraced cantilevers pending upon geographic location) [See UBC
extending above the roof more than one-half the equip- Table 23-I]
ment’s total height would the requirement be greater -
O.SW, (see Table The modifications or limitations include the following: Equipment supported at or below grade -
If the rigid or nonrigid equipment is supported at or 1) The ratio C/R, shall not be less than 0.5.
below ground level, the UBC allows two-thirds of the 2) The vertical distribution of the seismic forces may
value of C,, to be used: be determined either by static force or dynamic response
methods, as long as the results are not less than those
FP = Z1,(0.67)CPWP (3-4) obtained with the static force method. (Note: Dynamic
[Adapted from UBC Formula (36-l)] response methods are seldom used for equipment).
3) Where an approved national standard covers a par-
as long as the lateral force is not less than that obtained ticular type of nonbuilding structure, the standard may be
for nonbuilding structural systems as given in UBC Sec- used.
tion 2338 (b). These forces are described in the next sec- Although they would seldom apply to equipment, cer-
tion. tain other restrictions as described in UBC 2338(b) for Self-supporting structures other than build- Seismic Zones 3 and 4 apply for Occupancy Categories
ings - Formula (38-l) as given in UBC-91 2338 (b), ap- III and IV (Occupancy Categories in UBC Table No. 23-
plies to all rigid nonbuilding structural systems and all K)., The structure must be less than 50 feet in height. and

Equipment or Minimum values (importance factor = 1.0) Comments

non-building structures UBC formula Typical examples
Zone 1 Zone 2A Zone 28 Zone 3’ Zone 4l

Supported by structures and Fp = ZIpCpWp Pumps, motors, skid o.06wp O.llW, O.lSW, 0.23w, 03w,
w, c 0.2sw I mounted equipment,
cRigid (T 5 0.06 set) W-1) small heat ex-
where Cp = 0.75 changers
Nonrigid (T > 0.06 set)
where Cp = 2 x 0.75 Fp = ZIpCpWp Leg-mounted vessels O.llW, ozw, o.3wp o.45wp 0.6 Wp Minimum values increase 1.33 times
& equipment, stacks, for unbraced cantilevers, stacks, or

I (36-l) or slender process

trussed tars where Cp = 2.0

Supported at or below grade: F,.ZgC,lV, Pumps, motors, skid o.o4w, 0.08 wp O.lW, o.15wp 0.2w, Lateral force cannot be less than
Rigid (T 5 0.06 set) mounted equipment, that from Formula (38-l) in Section
(from 36-l)
where C, = 0.75 heat exchangers 2338 @I
Nonrigid (f > 0.06 set) t-
where Cp‘= 2 x 0.75 ’ F,-ZI$,W, Leg-mounted vessels o.o8w, o.15wp 0.2w, o.3wp o.4wp Lateral force cannot be less than
I & equipment, stacks, that from Formula (38-l) in Section

I (from 36-l) or slender process

2338 (b)

Self-supporting structures v = 0.5 ZIW Rigid vessels and 0.04w 0.08w O.lW O.lSW 0.2w Based on forces distributed by UBC
other than buildings: (38-l) bins Formula (34-6)
Rigid (T 5 0.06 set)
Nonrigid (T > 0.06 set)
(or where Wp = 0.2SW) Tall slender vessels, 0.07w 0.14w 0.18W 0.28w 0.37w See Note 2 In Seismic Zones 3 and
(where C = 2.75
y-ZICW tanks on grade, and 4 the code prohibits or restricts
and R, = 3)
3 some elevated tanks numerous concrete structural syb
(34-l) and bins teu or imposes height limitations
on others (see UBC Table 23-O)

1) See UBC Section 2334 fj) for vertical force requimn nts in Seiimic Zonea 3 and 4, and 2335 and 2336 for all zones.
2) Fom~ula (34-l) may govern Over (38-l) where Wp > 35W because of vertical distribution of forcea.

a R&v= 4.0 must be used for design. Additionally, the “piggyback” exchangers, the bundle pull is assumed to act
UBC prohibits or restricts numerous concrete structural on only one exchanger at a time.
systems in the higher seismic zones [UBC 2334 (c)3]. Fluid surge foaa!v - Many types of process
Using Formula (3-6) and an importance factor of 1.0, vessels (reactors, catalyst regenerators, etc.) are subject
the minimum design lateral force or shear at the base for to “surge” forces. Although the analogy may be less than
nonrigid nonbuilding structures would be 0.37W (see perfect, it is often convenient to describe fluid surge as
Table a “coffee-pot” effect. The essential mechanism may be Vertical seismic loA - No vertical similar to the boiling of a contained fluid, with the
earthquake component is required by the UBC for equip- violent formation and sudden collapse of unstable gas
ment supported by structures [UBC 2334 ($1. For bubbles, currents of merging fluids with fluctuating
equipment with horizontal cantilever components in density, and sloshing of a liquid surface also contriiuting
Seismic Zones 3 and 4, however, the UBC specifies a net to the surge forces. These violent forces act erratically,
upward force of 0.2Wp for that component. being randomly distributed in both time and space within
If the dynamic lateral force procedure is used, the the liquid phase. Obviously, fluid surge is a dynamic load.
vertical component is two-thirds of the horizontal accel- However, because of the difficulty in defining either the
eration. However, since the dynamic force procedure has magnitude or the dynamic characteristics of these forces,
little or no application to most equipment, many engi- they are almost always treated statically for foundation
neers designing structures in Seismic Zones 3 and 4 con- design.
servatively use a vertical component of three-quarters or Surge forces are usually represented as horizontal
two-thirds of the horizontal component of the static lat- static forces located at the centroid of the contained
eral force procedure, combining it simultaneously with liquid. The magnitude of this design force is taken as a
the horizontal component. fraction of the liquid below a normal operating liquid
The UBC also cautions about uplift effects caused by level. The fraction of liquid weight that is used will vary
seismic loads. Only 85 percent of the dead load should from 0.1 to 0.5 depending on the type of vessel, on the
be considered in resisting such uplift. [UBC 2337 (a)]. violence of its contained chemical process, and on the Test loads - Most process equipment, such degree of conservatism desired by the owner-operator in
as pressure vessels, must be hydrotested when in place on resisting such loads. For most vessels supported directly
its foundation. Even when such a test is not initially on foundations at grade, surge forces are small and are
required, there is a good possibility that sometime during usually neglected.
the life of a vessel it will be altered or repaired, and a Erection loads - Frequently, construction
hydrotest may then be required to meet the requirements procedures and the erection and setting of equipment
of Section VIII of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel cause load conditions on a foundation that will act at no
Code. Therefore, most engineers consider it necessary other time during the life of the equipment. For example,
that all vessels, their skirts or other supports, and their before a piece of equipment is grouted into position on
foundations be designed to withstand test loads. For the its foundation, local bearing stresses under stacks of
foundation, this consists of the weight of water required shims or erection wedges should be checked. Another
to fill the vessel. more specific example is the case of a vertical vessel or Maintenance and repair lo& - For most stack that may be erected on its foundation prior to the
heat exchangers, maintenance procedures require that installation of heavy internals or refractory lining. Once
periodically an exchanger’s tube bundles be unbolted, installed, these internals are categorized as part of a
pulled from the exchanger shell, and cleaned. The magni- vessel’s permanent dead load. However, many practi-
tude of the required pulling force, and the fraction that tioners feel it necessary to examine the situation that
is transmitted to the exchanger foundation, can vary over could exist for the interim weeks or even months prior to
a wide range, depending on several factors. These factors installation of this considerable internal weight. Design
include: (1) the service of the exchanger, including the of a tall vertical vessel foundation may well be governed
type of product, the temperatures, and the corrosiveness by overall stability against overturning, if it is required
of the participating fluids, (2) the frequency of the that the temporarily light structure be capable of
maintenance procedure, and (3) the pulling or jacking withstanding full design wind.
procedure actually used. Buoyancy loads - The buoyant effect of a
Since the forces transmitted to a foundation from high ground water table (water table above bottom of
pulling an exchanger bundle are so uncertain and var- foundation) is sometimes considered as a separate load.
iable, the design forces used are often based on past That is, some engineers treat it as an upward-acting force
experience and rule-of-thumb. Common criteria are to that may (or may not) act concurrently with other loads
design for a longitudinal force that is a fraction of the under all load conditions. Perhaps just as frequently, the
tube bundle weight, ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 times the buoyant effects are treated by considering them as a dif-
bundle weight. This force is assumed to act at the cen- ferent “condition” in which the gravity weight of sub-
terline of an exchanger, and is taken in combination only merged concrete and soil are changed to reflect their
with the exchanger dead (empty) load. For stacked or submerged or buoyant densities (see Section 3.1.2.).

Without addressing the philosophical difference be- ditions are often considered during the life of equipment
tween these two perceptions, the effect is the same. The and its foundations.
buoyant effect of a high water table may govern not only Erection condition - The erection condition
the stability (as outlined in Section 3.5), but may also exists while the equipment or its foundation are still
contribute to the critical design forces (moments and being constructed, and the equipment is being set,
shears) used in the design of the foundation. aligned, anchored or grouted into position.
When it is probable that the elevation of the water Empty condition -The empty condition will
table will fluctuate, most engineers will consider both exist after erection is complete, but prior to charging the
“dry” (neglecting water table), and “wet” (including the equipment with contents or placing it into service. Also,
buoyancy effects of a high water table) conditions when the empty condition will exist at any subsequent time
designing foundations. when operating fluid or other contents are removed, or Miwellaneous loA - Other types of loads the equipment is removed from service or both. lhis con-
are sometimes defined as separate loadings, and some- dition usually does not include the direct effect of main-
times grouped under one of the categories described tenance operations.
above. Some are fairly specialized in that they are nor- 3.133 Operating condition - The operating condi-
mally applied only to certain types of structures or tion exists at any time when the equipment is in service,
equipment. They include the following: or is charged with operating fluid or contents and is
1) Thermal loads-Thermal loads are sometimes con- about to be placed into service, or is just in the process
sidered as a separate load category, but were described of being “turned off” and removed from service. In the
earlier in the section on operating loads. operating condition, the equipment may be subject to
2) Impact loads-Impact loads, such as those due to gravity, thermal, surge, and impact loads, and environ-
cranes, hoists, and davits, are sometimes classified mental forces such as wind and earthquake.
separately. Just as often they are classified (as described Test condition - The test condition exists
above) under live loads or, depending on the type of when equipment is being tested, either to verify its struc-
equipment, as operating loads. tural integrity, or to verify that it will perform adequately
3) Blast loads-Explosion and the resulting blast rep- in service. Although the time period actually required for
resent extreme upset or accident conditions. Normally, an equipment test is a few days, the test “condition” may
blast pressures are only applied to the design of control last for several weeks. Thus, it is often assumed that
buildings. Seldom is such a load considered in the design during the test condition, an equipment foundation will
of equipment or foundations, except possibly to set loca- be subjected not only to gravity loads (that is, dead load
tions so that there is adequate distance between critical plus the weight of test fluids), but also wind or earth-
equipment and a potential source of such an explosion. quake. Usually, these loads are taken at reduced inten-
4) Snow or ice loads-Snow or ice loads may affect sity. Typical intensities vary from one-quarter to one-half
the design of access or operating platforms attached to of the wind or earthquake load.
equipment, including their support members. Seldom do Maintenance condition - The maintenance
they affect the design of equipment foundations except condition exists at any time that the equipment is being
for electric power distribution structures. Often, snow drained, cleaned, recharged, repaired, realigned or the
load is considered as a live load. components are being removed or replaced. Loads may
5) Electrical loads-Impact loads caused by the result from maintenance equipment, davits or hoists,
sudden movements within circuit breakers and load break jacking (such as when exchanger bundles are pulled), im-
disconnects may be greater than the dead weight of the pact (such as from the recharging or replacing of catalyst
equipment. Furthermore, the direction of the load will or filter beds), as well as from gravity. The gravity load
vary, depending upon whether the breaker is opening or is usually assumed to be the dead (empty) load.
closing. In alternating current devices, short circuit loads The duration of a maintenance condition is usually
are usually internal to the equipment and will have little quite short, such as a few days. Therefore, environmen-
or no effect on the foundations. However, in the case of tal loads, such as wind and earthquake, are rarely
direct current transmission lines, in which the earth acts assumed to act during the maintenance condition.
as the reference, a short circuit between the aerial con- Upset condition - An upset load condition
ductors and the earth may result in very significant loads exists at any time that an accident, malfunction, operator
being applied to the supporting structures. error, rupture, or breakage causes equipment or its foun-
3.1.2 Loaning conditions - Different steps in the con- dation to be subjected to abnormal or extreme loads.
struction of equipment, or different phases of its opera- Often it is assumed that equipment subjected to severe
tion/maintenance cycle, can be thought of as representing upset loads may have to be shut down and repaired.
distinct environments, or different “conditions” for such Thus, it is not uncommon for ultimate strength to be
equipment. During each of these conditions, there can be used as the acceptance criteria for upset loads.
one or perhaps several combinations of loads that can, 3.13 Load combinations - Codes usually specify
with reasonable probability, act concurrently on the which of the more common loadings should be assumed
equipment and its foundation. The following loading con- to act concurrently for building design. Industrial


Load case Condition Load combinations Range of load factors*
1 Erection Dead load + erection I 1.1-1.5
2 Erection Dead load + erection + ‘/i wind 1.2-1.3
3 Empty Deadload+wind 131.5
4 Emvtv Dead load + seismic 1.4-1.6

5 Operating Dead load + operating load +

I live load + thermal expansion + I 1.6-1.7
surge + piping forces I
6 Operating Dead load + operating load +
live load + thermal expansion + 131.5
surge + piping forces + wind

7 Operating Dead load + operating load +

live load + thermal expansion + 1.4-1.6
surge + piping forces + seismic

8 Test Dead load + hydrotest 1.1-1.5

9 Test Dead load + hydrotest + M wind 1.2-1.3

10 Maintenance Dead load + bundle pull (heat 1.4-1.6

I I exchannerl I
11 Maintenance Dead load + maintenance/service 1.4-1.6
12 Uoset Gravitv + malfunction loads 1.0

l Load factors mayvary. See Sections 3.13 and 3.1.4.

equipment, primarily because of the many possible vari- or residential buildings. They conclude that these differ-
ations in operating loads, can have a far greater number ences warrant departures from a literal application of
of possible load combinations. Often several different common building code load factors. Differences include
load combinations are possible within a given load con- the relative magnitudes of the different loads, and differ-
dition. Judgment, not codes, must be used to decide ences in their durations. These considerations, taken to-
which loads and corresponding load factors can reason- gether, lead many engineers to select load factors that,
ably be expected to act concurrently. Table 3.1.3a gives although they may look similar to those in AC1 318, do
a list of twelve representative load combinations. With contain important departures.
some variations among different practitioners, these com- The factored loads are applied as follows: (1) Factor
binations are the ones most commonly used to design the loads at the top of the pedestal, (2) factor the service
industrial equipment and machinery foundations. moments and shears in the footing, and (3) factor the
3.1.4 Loud factors - Soil pressures and resistance to differences between multiple analyses. These different
overturning are calculated by most practitioners using a approaches are further explained in Sections 4.1 and 4.7.
series of load combinations similar to those listed in If different load factors are to be used on the individual
Table 3.1.3a with the individual combined loads at the contributing loads in a combination, and if compression
“working” or in “service” level (unfactored loads). over the full width of the footing is not required, then
When it comes to analysis of a foundation, however, these different approaches will give different results. This
it is not always clear which load factors apply to the results from the fact that when the resultant load is out-
many loads and load combinations, particularly those that side the kern, the maximum soil pressure is not a linear
include “nonstandard” loads peculiar to industrial equip- function of the loads. Therefore, to avoid this possible
ment. Most engineers, since they do not have a recog- confusion, some engineers apply a single composite load
nized or legal criteria to cite, feel obliged to conform to factor to all the loads in the entire load combination,
the building code. They group the many loads unique to rather than a different factor to each individual load.
equipment under the common building code categories Table 3.1.3a provides the range of load factors that is
of “dead” and “live,” and directly apply the code’s pre- commonly applied to the listed load combinations. These
scribed load factors. may be single factors used for the entire combination or,
Other engineers contend that there are significant dif- where different factors are used for the various con-
ferences between loads applicable to equipment founda- tributing loads, they may be the average ratio of total
tions, and those applicable to the design of commercial factored load to total service load.

3.2-Design strength/stresses are a significant fraction of the pad dimensions (say more
In the design of foundations, forces and stresses in the than one-third), or both, then the most critical diagonal
various elements must be calculated and compared with tension stresses occur at approximately a distance d from
acceptance criteria. Some types of acceptance criteria are the support pedestal. The quantity d is the effective
expressed in terms of allowable stress to which a calcu- depth of the concrete foundation pad, measured from the
lated service load stress is to be compared. Other criteria extreme compression fiber to the centroid of the tension
are expressed in terms of a design strength to which cal- steel area. In this case, the stress state is termed “wide
culated loads are to be compared. For many of the ele- beam shear,” or simply “beam shear.” As previously indi-
ments of equipment foundations, there is neither a cated, the present trend is toward the use of strength
published standard nor a clear consensus as to which design and the use of factored loads (moments) in pro-
type of criteria is appropriate. portioning concrete elements. The normally used stress
Allowable soil pressures, anchor bolt stresses (tension, criteria prescribed by AC1 318 are as follows:
shear, bond), concrete bearing stress, and the required
development length of pedestal reinforcement that lap V V,lwJ(v!iy~ +
splices to anchor bolts are some of those for which var-
iations in practice are common. SDM l’,, 2.0 0.85
In addition to the variations between the practices ADM V,,, 1.1 -
used by different engineers, a second major variance is
that different acceptance criteria are often used for where
adjacent or interacting elements. This leads to interface
problems, and inconsistencies in the logic of the design VW = total working shear on the section through
of the various elements. At the very least, the existence the foundation pad
of different types of acceptance criteria for various v, = 4 x V, is the factored total shear
elements presents a tedious bookkeeping problem. v, = nominal limiting or allowable shear
The strength design procedure for proportioning con- strength
crete elements is referred to as Strength Design Method b = section width located at a distance d from
(SDM). The working stress procedure is now called the the supporting face.
“Alternate” Design Method (ADM) in the current AC1
318, and appears in Appendix A therein. Although most engineers use the AC1 318 criteria
The following sections describe the individual ele- described in the previous paragraphs without modifica-
ments and the state of practice in defining acceptance tion, some practitioners choose to use Ferguson and
criteria for use in their design. Rajagopalan.’ These authors point out that the coJe
3.2.1 Concrete criteria for ultimate beam shear stress are significantly Bending - The flexural (bending) capacity nonconservative for low percentages of reinforcement,
of concrete elements in a foundation for static equipment with reductions in shear capacity approaching 50 percent
is usually determined using design criteria contained in for foundations with minimum steel. The authors recom-
AC1 318. These criteria from AC1 318 appear in the fol- mend a reduced value for beam shear resistance for flex-
lowing table: ural sections where the tensile reinforcement ratio is less
than 0.012. The following equation for determining the
M fdf,' 4 design nominal shear stress vc is suggested.
SDM M,, 0.85 0.9
ADM M,,, 0.45 - v, = (0.8 + 100 p@r < 2g P-7)

where: where:
= extreme fiber stress in compression due to
bending vc = VJbd
4 = factored moment P = ratio of nonprestressed tension reinforcement
Mw = moment
Most foundations have reinforcement ratios less than
The factor 4 is the strength reduction factor, to take 1 percent. Many equipment foundations have reinforce-
into account the probability that an element may be un- ment ratios less than 0.5 percent. Thus, some engineers
able to perform at nominal strength due to inaccuracies use values for design beam shear stress reduced from
and adverse variations in material strength and workman- AC1 318 criteria in accordance with the recommenda-
ship during construction. tions of Ferguson and Rajagopalan.’ Flexural shear - Concrete shearing stresses 33.13 Punching shear (two-way shear) - When a
are of two general types. Where the foundation member foundation pad or pile cap is square, or nearly so, or the
is long relative to its width, or the pedestal dimensions pedestal dimensions are small relative to the main foun-

dation member (pad or pile cap), or both, then a shear-

ing stress state different from the one described in Sec-
tion usually becomes critical. This alternative SDM M,, 5.0 t$ 0.65
shearing failure mode occurs when a small pedestal tends ADM M, 1.6 -
to punch through its supporting foundation pad. The
diagonal tension stress for this shearing stress state is where ft = extreme fiber stress in tension.
aptly termed “punching shear.” The critical section, b,, Foundations are often subjected to overturning mo-
for this potential failure mode is taken at a distance d/2 ments large enough to produce uplift over a portion of
from the supporting face. For heavily loaded piles in a their base. Since soil cannot resist uplift by tension, this
cluster, consideration for possible misalignment during results in a zone of zero pressure, with the resulting
pile driving should be included in the calculation. triangular pressure prism shown in Fii. 4.7.3. In the
The normally used stress criteria from AC1 318 are as absence of upward soil pressure, a negative bending mo-
follows: ment can be produced in the cantilevered portion of the
footing which must be resisted by tensile forces in the top
of the pad. This negative moment is limited to the full
gravity weight of the uplifted part of the footing, plus any
SDM I’, (2 + 4@c) < 4.0 0.85 overburden or surcharge components, regardless of the
magnitude of the applied overturning moment.
or V, -5 + 2 < 4.0 The tensile capacity of concrete should not be utilized
bo in a seismic zone, or when a footing is supported by piles
ADM VW (1 + 2//3c) < 2.0 - (UBC). However, there are differences of opinion and
practice concerning treatment of overturning forces
causing a negative moment in a spread footing in a non-
where: seismic zone.
When the magnitude of this reversed or negative
= total working shear force at the critical sec- moment is small, some engineers use the allowable con-
tion crete tensile stresses given by AC1 318.1 for unreinforced
= total factored shear force at the critical sec- footings to check the adequacy of the footing. Others
tion consider the fact that a reinforced section subjected to
= allowable or limiting shear strength at the positive moment develops cracks through as much as 80
critical section percent of its thickness. Relying on such a cracked sec-
= ratio of longer to shorter pedestal dimen- tion for reversed bending (negative moment) is con-
sion. PC = 1.0 for round or octagonal pedes- sidered unsafe by many practitioners. Some engineers use
tals top reinforcement if there is any calculated tension in the
= 40, but reduced to 30 if the pedestal is off- top “fibers” of the footing. Others, although aware of the
centered uncertainty in the section’s capacity, are reluctant to
provide a top mat of reinforcing steel to resist what is
Although AC1 318 allows some refinements of these often a very nominal stress level, They may arbitrarily use
relationships when shear reinforcement is added, such the tensile capacity of the untracked concrete section,
reinforcement is rarely used in equipment foundations. but use onIy a fraction of the tensile stresses permitted
The discussions of shear in concrete foundations in by AC1 318.1 for unreinforced footings. The values used
this and the previous section are directed toward indi- range from 20 to 50 percent of the nominal code values.
vidual footings. AC1 318 is unclear as to the appropriate Although there is reason to question the validity of this
shear stress criteria for mat foundations. However, most latter practice, there are no reported failures of footings
practitioners use the punching shear provisions when designed with such an approach.
checking shear in such foundations. The above discussion of concrete tensile strength is Tension -AC1 318.1 permits plain concrete often rendered academic by the use of minimum slab re-
(unreinforced) spread footings. AC1 318.1 for plain con- inforcement in the top of a footing, provided ostensibly
crete limits the use of plain concrete to foundations that as temperature and shrinkage steel. There is no code
are continuously supported by soil or where arch action requirement that, in the absence of calculated stresses,
assures compression under all conditions of loading. such reinforcement be inserted in the top of a founda-
However, unreinforced concrete spread footings are sel- tion. However, some practitioners consider it good prac-
dom used for equipment foundations, except for very tice to always have a top mat of steel.
small, minor equipment such as for residential air con- Bearing - The allowable bearing stresses
ditioner support pads. In the rare cases where unrein- on concrete contained in the current AC1 318 reflect
forced foundations are used, the maximum concrete recent studies showing that a triaxial state of stress is
tensile stresses permitted by AC1 318.1 are as follows: produced in the concrete in the zone beneath the base

(bearing) plate. ‘Ihis effect is considerably more pro- 3.2.2 Reinforcement

nounced if the equipment or column base plate is cen- 332.1 Vertical reinforcement - The vertical reiu-
trally located so that the loaded xone is surrounded on forcement in foundation pedestals is, for most types of
all sides by concrete. equipment, designed as an integral part of the total con-
The allowable and design bearing stresses permitted crete section, that is, by treating the pedestal and its
by AC1 318 are as given in the following table: reinforcement as a beam-column. For this approach, AC1
318 design criteria are usually employed. For pedestals
f 4 with a height-to-lateral dimension ratio of 3 or greater,
the required reinforcement should be not less than
SDM c# (O.ssf,‘) 0.7 minimum reinforement applicable to columns. However,
ADM 0.3f,‘* - for equipment such as tall vertical vessels, the purpose of
the vertical pedestal bars is to lap the anchor bolt
where f = bearing stress. anchorage zone (see Fig., and to transfer the
anchor bolt tensile forces from a pedestal into the
When A, > A,, the design bearing strength may be footing or pile cap. In this situation, practice for defining
multiplied by tlCA2IAI) < 2.0. the appropriate acceptance criteria for designing the
vertical bars varies widely. Some engineers design the
where: pedestal bars using the total concrete section as de-
scribed above. Some use a practice similar to that used
A, = area in bearing on concrete in designing anchor bolts. They proportion the vertical
A, = area of the largest frustum of a right pyramid or bars either to resist the calculated anchor bolt tensile
cone contained wholly in the foundation when forces, or to match the design capacity of the anchor
the upper base is area A, and the side slopes bolts, ignoring the concrete.
are 1 vertical to 2 horizontal. Still other practitioners replace the yield strength of
the equipment anchor bolts with an equivalent or greater
When designing base plates and annular base rings for yield strength in the lapping vertical reinforcement, again
concrete bearing, many engineers use the strength design ignoring the concrete section. This latter practice is used
concepts as defined in AC1 318. However, particularly for primarily in seismically active areas, the rationale being
equipment foundations such as verticalvessels and stacks, that initial yielding should take place in the more vistble
many engineers choose working stress criterion instead. anchor bolt before the reinforcement to which the pri-
There are two reasons for this departure from the nor- mary anchorage forces must be transferred.‘*”
mally accepted AC1 approach. First, anchor bolt design Horizontal reinforcement - For small pedes-
is commonly based on a working stress criterion. The tals, or where the governing loads are primarily compres-
determination of required bearing area is an interrelated sion, the horizontal reinforcement in pedestals is com-
function of the anchor bolt area provided. Therefore, a monly sized in accordance with AC1 318 criteria for col-
desire for consistency leads many engineers to use an umn ties. However, there are a number of circumstances
allowable working stress for bearing. where other types of criteria are used.
The second reason is that design of equipment base One example occurs in the case of pedestals with a
plates and base rings is performed by equipment de- large area, such as for vertical vessels and stacks. In this
signers. Equipment designers are usually mechanical case, the vertical reinforcement is usually designed to
engineers with little or no experience in concrete design resist tension. The horizontal reinforcement in the pedes-
or in the strength design concepts of AC1 318. ‘Ihe need tal faces may be essentially nominal - perhaps just to
to simplify communication of design criteria, points keep the vertical bars in place during the concrete place-
toward the selection of working stress criteria for ment. Sometimes, a minimum reinforcementcriterion for
concrete bearing. bars in faces of mass concrete such as suggested in AC1
When working stress criteria are selected for the 207.2R is used. Larger size reinforcement and/or lesser
design of equipment base plates, the allowable stresses spacing than defined by such minimum criterion may be
specified in the ABC-ASD specification, Chapter J9, are provided for confinement of the anchor bolts and to pre-
usually used. This is because equipment manufacturer’s clude spalling at the pedestal face.239
engineers are usually familiar with this specification. In addition to the main horizontal reinforcement
One question that arises in the design of vertical provided in the face of vertical vessel pedestals, many
vessels and stacks that are supported on annular base practitioners consider it good practice to provide a group
rings is that the bearing area is not centrally located in of two to four tie-bars near the top of the pedestal,
the pedestal. Rather, the most heavily loaded area is closely spaced at 3 to 4 in. (see Fig. 2.2.4). This closely
immediately adjacent to the edge of the concrete pedes-
tal. This fact leads many engineers to neglect the area
ratio increases in the allowable stress. l A one-third increase is permitted for wind and seismic loads.

spaced top set of peripheral reinforcement is to assist in face.

resisting cracking due to edge bearing on the pedestal or l Expansive anchors transfer tension load to the con-
to thermal expansion, as well as to provide confinement crete by friction between the anchor and the con-
for resistance to shear. This practice reduces cracking of crete. The friction force results from a compressive
the concrete near the top of the pedestal due to transfer reaction generated in opposition to the movement
of shear forces through the anchor bolts into the con- of an expansion mechanism at the embedded end
crete. of the anchor.
Sometimes, horizontal reinforcement is provided in Normally, adhesive anchors have higher allowable load
the tops of pedestals. For example, reinforcement may values than mechanical anchors. The selection of a retro-
occasionally be required by stress calculations for rela- fit anchor would depend on its use and type of exposure
tively large, thin, or shallow pedestals (which are essen- such as temperature, moisture, viiration, and pos&le
tially as large as the pad), where the load is applied at chemical spills. The manufacturer should provide the re-
the edge or periphery of the pedestal. In this situation, quired information to suit specific needs.
the pedestal could tend to dish upwards, and there would A cast-in-place anchor is cast into the fresh concrete.
be a calculated tension at the top of the pedestal. The tensile load is transferred to the concrete either
A few practitioners provide horizontal reinforcement through bearing on the head of the embedded anchor, or
in the top of pedestals for equipment as a matter of good through bond strength between the anchor and the con-
practice, particularly where the equipment operates at crete. ‘Ihe results of the latest research recommend using
elevated temperatures. Reinforcement congestion, how- headed anchors rather than the “J” or “L” bolts, which
ever, can lead to construction problems. Engineers depend upon bond.
should review the final design to assure that it is a 333.1 Allowable stresses - Allowable stresses for
buildable design. retrofit anchors are based on the results of tests con-
Design of horizontal reinforcement in footings (or pile ducted by the manufacturer of the particular anchor. Al-
caps) uses AC1 318 criteria for flexural reinforcement. though some manufactured expansion anchors are cap-
The only questions that arise concern minimum amounts able of developing the capacity of their bolt stock, most
of reinforcement, as outlined in Section 4.7.5. are designed using allowable loads much lower than
3.2.3 Anchorage - Anchorage of a piece of equipment would be determined by the strength of the bolt metal.
to its foundation is often the most critical aspect of a Commonly, safety factors of four to five relative to pull-
foundation design. This is particularly true for vertical out are used to determine an allowable load for retrofit
vessel and stack foundations, or for any other equipment type anchor bolts.
foundation where consideration of lateral loads dom- Cast-in-place anchor bolts are usually designed to
inates the design. AC1 355.1R summarizes the most develop applied tensile forces, up to and including the
widely used types of anchors and provides an overview of capacity of the bolt, with appropriate safety factors. The
anchor performance and failure modes. amount of embedment is dependent on concrete
Anchors can be either cast-in-place or retrofit. strength, edge distance, and bolt spacing. The design
Retrofit anchors are installed after the concrete has practices that are used to insure adequate anchorage are
hardened, and can be either undercut, adhesive, grouted, descriid in Section Most commonly, cast-in-
or expansion. place anchor bolts are sized using the allowable stresses
An undercut anchor transfers tensile load to the specified by the AISGASD specification. In the AISC-
concrete by bearing of an expansive device against ASD specification, both the allowable stress and, in the
a bell-shaped enlargement of the hole at the base past, the effective area vary with the specific material.
of the anchor. For example, anchor bolts fabricated from ASTM A 307
An adhesive anchor consists of a threaded rod in- material commonly have been designed using the AISC
stalled in a hole with a diameter of about ‘h6 to % specified allowable stress of 20 ksi together with the
in. larger than the diameter of the rod. The hole is corroded “tensile-stress” area of the threaded bolt
filled with a structural adhesive such as epoxy, vinyl stock.54 The corroded tensile-stress area A, is usually
ester, or polyester. Adhesive anchors transfer ten- defined as follows:
sile load to the concrete by bond of the epoxy to
the concrete along the embedded length of the
anchor. A, = 0.7854 (D - ?)2
A grouted anchor consists of a headed anchor in-
stalled in a hole with a diameter about 1% in. where:
larger than the diameter of the anchor. The hole
is filled with a non-shrink grout, usually containing D = nominal bolt diameter in in.
portland cement, sand, and various chemicals to n = number of threads per in. (the reciprocal of the
reduce shrinkage. Grouted anchors transfer tensile thread pitch)
load to the concrete by bearing on the anchor
head, and by bond along the grout/concrete inter- A corrosion allowance may be required and it should

be added to the required bolt area. It will vary with both are appropriate for nominal embedment lengths in unre-
location (seacoast versus inland, etc.) and the possibility inforced concrete sections.
of spills of acids or other chemicals. Such values com- In the absence of more definitive criteria, some en-
monly range from VISto 45 in. gineers have extrapolated UBC values. They hr e calcu-
The AISC design specification permits stresses to be lated bolt capacities using a variety of approaches. These
calculated on the nominal body or shank area of bolts have included using an allowable bond stress on the bolt
and threaded parts (AISC-ASD Specification, Section shank (AC1 318), or a code allowable bearing stress on
1.5.2). However, designers of equipment foundations pre- the anchorage head (usually a plate or washer or both).
fer greater conservatism in anchor bolt design than that Configurations used have included either hooks (“L” or
used in the design of other foundation components. For “J” type hooks), or a plate or washer at the anchor head.
example, when designing anchor bolts, many engineers do The lack of accepted definitive criteria for the design
not take advantage of the one-third increase in allowable of cast-in-place anchorages has been largely a result of
stress that is normally permitted under temporary loads the absence of reliable test data. However, since 1964,
such as wind and earthquake. Similarly, many engineers, there has been a major increase in the amount of basic
perhaps acknowledging the possibility of dynamic load- research in the area of anchorage to con-
ings, use the bolt tensile area rather than the larger crete .1.W6*79~10~13 Based on this relatively new data
shank area, when calculating the effective bolt tensile several guides or suggested practices have been published
capacity.2*4 (AC1 349, PC1 Design Handbook, and References 4 and
AC1 349 uses strength design where the service loads 10). The Center for Transportation Research, The Uni-
for the anchors are factored. A strength reduction factor versity of Texas at Austin, has published the following re-
for the steel and concrete is consistent with AISC-LRFD, search reports: Research Repoti 1126-1, Research Report
and AC1 318. 1126-2, Research Report 1126-3 and Research Report 1126-
Occasionally, higher strength bolt materials are used 4F.
in the design of anchor bolts for equipment foundations. In spite of the new data and newly suggested criteria,
However, the high material cost of high-strength bolts industry practice has changed slowly. First, many ques-
and the greater complications of attaching them to the tions remain unanswered. Thus, a diversity of practices
equipment being anchored makes their use the exception. and opinions exist. Second, perhaps because full consen-
For example, if high-strength anchor bolt material is sus has not yet been achieved on the appropriate criteria,
used, a special design of the equipment’s bolt anchor lugs model codes such as the UBC still have not updated
might have to be performed. Any special design which re- their provisions. The lack of full consensus can also be
quires a change to an equipment manufacturer’s standard explained by reviewing the series of tests referenced
base detail, may cost more in “extras” than any nominal above.
savings afforded by a more efficient bolt pattern. A The behavior of anchors depends on a number of vari-
ductile anchor is an anchor sufficiently embedded so that ables, including the following:
failure will occur by yielding and fracture of the steel l Loading (axial load, moment, shear)
when loaded in direct tension. Higher strength bolts l Size of the steel attachment
would require more embedment in concrete to reach l Size, number, location, and type of anchors
their capacity. Because there is insufficient test data on 0 Coefficient of friction between the base plate and
the ductility of high strength anchors, AC1 349 re- the concrete
commends a yield strength4 greater than 120,000 psi not l Tension/shear interaction for a single anchor
be used. l Distribution of shear among the anchors
Also, particularly for tall vertical vessels and stacks, l Distribution of tension among the anchors
the lesser ductility of high-strength anchor bolts often l Flexibility of the base plate
rules against their use in seismic areas. This is because l Concrete strength
the common assumption that ductile behavior is desirable l Base plate configuration (embedded, flush, or on
in large earthquakes, leads to the conclusion that the raised grout pad, important for anchorages subject
primary source of energy absorption will be in yielding of to shear forces)
the vessel’s anchor bolts.‘*” l Reinforcement in the foundation or pier Anchorage criteria - In the past, there have l Embedment length
been wide variations in the criteria used for the design of 0 Edge distance and anchor spacing
the embedded portion of cast-in-place anchorages which Smooth bolts with hooks (‘7” or “L” type bolts) have
attach equipment to their foundations. Prior to 1975, been fairly well discredited by the recent research. As a
many practitioners used the relatively low allowable loads consequence, their use has declined substantially in re-
on anchor bolts (both tension and shear) contained in cent years. The preferred configuration is now either a
the Unifotm Building Code. Tbe allowables contained in headed bolt or a threaded rod with a bearing plate or a
the UBC cover only headed bolts 1% in. in diameter and nut, or both.
smaller. These allowables were originally based on mini- A report from the University of Texas (Research Re-
mal test data on bolts Y in. in diameter and smaller, and port 1126-4F) states that headed anchors should have

dimensions equivalent to a standard bolt head or stan-

dard nut. Standard dimensions for bolt heads are given
in ANSI B18.2.1. Standard dimensions for nuts are given
in ANSI B18.2.2. Bearing at the anchor head does not
require evaluation.
AC1 349 uses the following two methods of shear
l Bearing-In connections where the baseplates are
mounted flush or above the concrete surface, the
dominant mechanism of shear transfer is bearing I
on the anchor. Since the holes in the baseplate are
usually oversized according to AISC recommenda- Figure
tions, there is a question of how the plate goes into
bearing against the anchor and how many anchors some engineers, particularly those who design a post-ten-
will actually transfer the load (see Fig. sioned type bolt, will specify a grease or mastic type fiier
Some engineers assume only half of the anchors for the sleeve.
actually transfer the shear load. Others only use no When a bolt is fully embedded in concrete, a bond
more than two bolts for shear transfer. breaker to increase ductility of the bolt can be achieved
l Shear friction-Shear transfer is similar to the by wrapping the upper portion of the bolt with duct tape
mechanism described in 11.7 of AC1 318. A friction or insulation.
force is generated by a clamping force that acts as Some engineers specify double nuts for anchors under
a fractured shear plane in the concrete. tension to prevent backoff.
Though AC1 349 provides comprehensive procedures 3.2.4 Soif - The procedures for determining allowable
for anchor bolt design, there remains a considerable dif- soil pressures or pile capacities are beyond the scope of
ference of opinion and practice in the provision for full this report. These allowable pressures and capacities are
ductile embedment for anchor bolts. AC1 318 contains usually established by a geotechnical consultant using
one paragraph concerning ductility ( that most standard procedures (not unique to equipment founda-
engineers consider too vague. AC1 349 specifies that bolt tions). However, it is worth noting that besides settle-
embedment be provided for the bolt’s tensile and shear ment considerations, allowable vertical soil pressures or
capacities, regardless of actual loads. This would assure pile loads are also limited by dividing a nominal capacity
a ductile connection. Some practitioners consider AC1 by a safety factor that ranges from 2 to 5, depending pri-
349 to be too conservative and provide anchorage based marily on the soil type and the type of loading (tempor-
on actual strength. Others, using UBC criteria, design ary or sustained).
anchorages based on factored loads. If the bolt embed- Criteria for the lateral resistance of soil will vary with
ment is designed for the applied loads, the anchor should the type of foundation as well as the type of soil. For
not be considered a ductile connection. most shallow spread footings that are excavated, formed,
The required embedment for a headed bolt (or bolt placed, and backfilled, passive soil pressures are neglec-
with a nut) is calculated assuming a frustum of a 45deg ted. Resistance to lateral loads is usually presumed to be
pullout cone emanating from the anchor head to the free a result of bottom friction alone. This is mainly because
concrete surface. A uniform nominal (tensile) stress of of uncertainty regarding the quality of the backfill mater-
4&r (with& in psi) acting on the projected area of this ial and the control of its placement. However, some geo-
come on the concrete surface is recommended as a de- technical engineers will include the lateral resistance of
sign capacity under factored load. Interference or overlap passive pressures to a certain degree, consistent with
with concrete edges or cones from adjacent bolts is de- allowable lateral movement, if a certain depth of backfill
ducted from this effective stress area. A criterion is finish grade is ignored in its calculation.
provided for computing the edge distances required for Lateral resistance of pile foundations is often deter-
resisting both tensile and/or shear forces. mined using the lateral resistance of the piles only. In
One other aspect of anchorage that merits mention is these instances, the resistance contrrbuted by passive soil
that of sleeving of anchor bolts. Here again, practice pressure acting on the sides of the pile cap is ignored.
varies and some practitioners do not use sleeves in the However, if the lateral displacements of the pile foun-
foundations for static equipment. Others insist on their dations become “large” (flexible piles), passive soil resis-
necessity, but use a variety of types and configurations. tance may be included in the design. Alternatively, if
The primary purpose of sleeving an anchor bolt is to there is adequate space available, battered piles may be
ease the alignment of the bolt with the home in the base- used to resist lateral loads.
plate of the equipment. Sleeves may be constructed of Drilled caissons are often designed using horizontal
pipe, sheet metal, high-density polyethylene or a hole soil pressures to resist horizontal shears at the top of the
formed using Styrofoam. After installation of the equip- foundation, as well as overturning moments. The “allow-
ment, the sleeves are usually filled with grout. However, able” lateral pressure is usually deduced from a permitted

lateral displacement at the top of the foundation. The heater supported on a combined mat, the stability ratio
procedure may range from directly assuming a soil pres- may be simplified to the following formula:
sure profile to a complex caisson-soil interaction analysis.
Stability ratio = -PDP = %
3.3-Stiffness/deflections M
Criteria for stiffness or allowable deflections for
foundations supporting static equipment vary widely where:
depending on the particular application. For many P = vertical load due to weight of concrete and
applications, there are no special requirements other equipment
than engineering judgment. For others, deflections may M= overturning moment applied to footing
need to be tightly controlled. D = edge to edge distance of footing in direction of
Differential settlement or lateral movement between overturning moment
adjacent pieces of equipment that are connected by e = M/P
piping, ducting, chutes, conveyor belts, etc., may have to
be controlled to avoid overstressing the piping or mis- Alternative equations in use are based on a required
aligning the belts or chutes. Some types of vessels may be footing area in compression with the soil. A stability ratio
serviced by piping that is glass or ceramic lined. Toler- of 1.5 equates to half the footing area in compression.
able displacements for such fragile items may be as low For isolated foundations supporting a piece of equip-
as a few hundredths of an inch. Some equipment may re- ment such as a heater, on separate spread footings, a
quire precise alignment for its proper operation. How- portion of the overturning moment can be resisted by
ever, as a rough order of magnitude, long-term settle- vertical forces at each footing. This is a situation of
ments of l/z in., or short-term lateral movements (such as combined uplift and overturning stability. The stability
under wind load) of % in. are usually suitable for most ratio is then determined by computing separately the
noncritical static equipment. footing edge moments due to dead weight and wind or
For some applications, flextbility rather than stiffness seismic.
(or rigidity) is the desired result. Foundations that sup- Generally, a foundation will most probably fail in
port equipment connected to high-temperature piping, or other modes before overturning. Some practitioners in-
that support opposite ends of a horizontal vessel or heat clude soil failure considerations in accordance with pub-
exchanger subject to thermal growth will have substantial- lished design recommendations of AC1 336.2R and AC1
ly reduced forces if they possess even a modest flexibility. 336.3R. Most practitioners, however, use the simpler
methods descriid above as a general indication of the
3.4-Stability factor of safety against overturning.
In addition to soil bearing and settlement, stability Although the concept of a stability ratio is quite
must also be checked to determine a minimum founda- straightforward, there is a wide range of minimum re-
tion size. Stability checks must be made, as applicable, quired values. Some of the more conservative practi-
for sliding, overturning, and uplift. tioners require that the full base of a foundation remain
Sliding stability may be of concern for foundations on in compression, and thus imply a stability ratio of 3.0 to
relatively weak soils supporting equipment subjected to 3.75, depending on the footing geometry. Some engineers
large lateral forces. Such situations may include dead- require that the stability ratio be not less than 2.0, but
men, retaining walls, or exchangers subject to bundle many permit a stability ratio of 1.5. A ratio of 1.5 is the
pull. Sliding stability is usually checked by verifying that lowest value that is commonly accepted and is the mini-
lateral forces are less than allowable base friction or ad- mum specified by UBC, SBC, and BOCA for wind loads.
hesion, plus passive pressure. None of these building codes specifies a minimum stabil-
Overturning stability criteria will frequently control in ity ratio for seismic loads.
the design of foundations with high allowable soil pres- For pile foundations, the concept of a stability ratio is
sures, or in the design of foundations for tall equipment straightforward where the piles are not designed to resist
subjected to high wind or seismic loads. The size of foun- uplift. The center of moments is taken at the most lee-
dations for tall vessels and stacks are commonly con- ward pile. However, when the piles have a tension capa-
trolled by overturning. A stability ratio is used to city, the concept becomes ambiguous and is seldom used.
characterize a foundation’s resistance to overturning. It For drilled pier foundations, the procedure for using
is defined as the resisting moment divided by the over- the stability ratio is unclear and many different practices
turning moment. Moments are computed at the bottom prevail. For example, since a drilled pier can mobilize
edge of a spread footing. The resisting moment includes lateral passive soil pressure to resist overturning, a
the permanent weight of the equipment, foundation, and stability ratio might be defined by either of the following
soil overburden. Working level, or service loads, are used two formulas:
in the computation.
For foundations supporting an entire piece of equip- PD/2 + MI
SR, =
ment, such as a vertical vessel on a spread footing or a M

SR, + MpDpM (3-11)


Where Mp is the resistance to overturning provided by

the lateral passive soil pressure, and the center of mo-
ments is again at the toe of the drilled pier base. The
first of the above definitions of stability ratio would be
more meaningful for a drilled pier (particularly a straight
shaft) whose diameter is relatively small compared to its ‘L’ BOLT ‘J’ BOLT ‘P’ BOLT ‘N’ BOLT ‘PH’ BOLT
depth, and that relies predominantly on the lateral soil
pressure (pole action) for its resistance to overturning.
However, the second definition might be appropriate for
a large diameter shallow drilled pier whose major resis-
tance to overturning is the size of the bell. B



for static equipment are generally

designed by either the Strength Design Method or the ‘PN’ BOLT ‘S’ BOLT I

Alternate Design Method (formerly termed the “Working

Stress” method as defined by AC1 318). While practi- Fig. anchor bolt types (other anchor bolt
tioners in general have adopted the Strength Design types may be available that are not shown)
Method, there are still many engineers who use the
Alternate Design Method. Such usage persists, largely Type “s” open-sleeve bolts may be post-tensioned to
due to the familiarity gained through many years of use. assure residual bolt stress if desired.
A third design method that has yet to achieve formal Design of anchor bolts is a multi-step procedure. The
recognition or endorsement by an American code-writing tensile forces in the assumed bolt pattern are computed.
body is Limit Design. Limit Design in reinforced con- Thereafter, the bolt area and embedment are deter-
crete parallels Plastic Design in structural steel. Its most mined, followed by considerations for edge distance and
significant feature is its reduction of complex analysis spacing.
problems to relatively simple yield line problems. This Generally, a bolt force formula is used to compute the
method is sometimes utilized in the design of complex maximum bolt force, F. Such a formula (below) is easy to
foundations which present complicated elastic analysis apply, and it is always conservative:
problems. T’he Limit Design Method is not covered in
this chapter. F = (WIN) [(4e/d) - I] or F = (4MINd) - W/N (4-l)

4.2-Anchor bolts and shear devices where:

Forces produced by wind, seismic, thermal, and other w= weight of equipment
sources must be transferred through the static equipment N = number of bolts
into the supporting foundation. Typical anchorages con- = eccentricity of vertical load @f/IV)
sist of anchor bolts to transfer tensile forces or a com- Ii4 = moment applied to anchorage
bination of tensile and shearing forces. When required, d = diameter of bolt circle
shear lugs may be used to transfer shear forces.
4.2.1 Tension - Anchor bolts are provided primarily For high-profile static equipment (height/diameter >
to transfer tensile forces. They consist of several different 7), typically tall vessels and stacks, the proper determina-
types and generally fall into one of the categories shown tion of anchor bolt forces is a primary requirement of the
in Fig. Types ‘I,” and “J”, which are cast-in-place foundation design. For such equipment, a more exact
bolts, rely on bond to develop the capacities of the bolts. method is often used. For less critical installations the
Types “I”‘, “N”, VI”, “PN”, “PI-I”, and “s”, which are also anchor bolts are assumed to comprise an annular ring of
cast-in-place bolts, rely on the pullout strength of the steel in a hollow concrete column section (see Fig.
concrete. Types “SD” and “DI” are, respectively, self- The neutral axis of the section shifts to where
drilling and drop-in bolts relying on expansive forces to there is a condition of equilibrium between the steel and
transfer the tension to the concrete or to the mechanical concrete. This procedure often results in a considerably
anchorage. reduced bolt requirement as compared to that computed
The various bolt types are generally carbon steel or using the force formula, but it requires more time and
low alloy materials and may be provided with sleeves. effort to apply.

Having determined the force(s) in the anchor bolts,

N.A. one must determine the required area, select the type of
bolt, and compute the required embedment. The area
may be determined following the criteria given in Section
3.23. For the bolt type selected, the embedment is com-
puted to satisfy pullout requirements or to transfer the
tensile forces to vertical reinforcement from bolts cast in
pedestals. When vertical dowels are used to transfer ten-
sile forces to foundations, care should be exercised to
assure that sufficient development length as shown in
Fig. 4.2.1~ is provided. Chapter 12 of AC1 318 should be
used in determining development length for vertical bars
in pedestals.
Embedment lengths for “L” and “J” type anchor bolts
have been traditionally determined using bond stress
provisions for plain bars taken from Chapter 18 of AC1
31863. Edge distance and bolt spacing are most impor-
tant in the design of anchor bolts that rely primarily upon
the pullout strength of concrete (types “P”, “N”, “H”,
“PN”, “PI-I”, and “S”, Fig.
4.2.2 Shear - Shear forces may be transferred by a
variety of mechanisms: friction resulting from the
clamping action provided as a result of tightening the
bolt(s), shear lugs, or direct bearing of the anchorage
against the concrete.
Table 26-E of the Uniform Building Code (UBC-91)
can be used to design anchor bolts for shear. The
tabulated values apply to headed anchor bolts (type “N”
and “II”) cast in plain concrete.
Designs that rely on the anchor bolts to transfer shear
through bearing on the sides of a baseplate or through
shear plates welded to the bottom of the baseplate
should be approached with caution. The likelihood that
all bolts in a large group or pattern will participate
equally in the transfer of the shear load in bearing is
unrealistic. Given the normal practice of using oversized
holes in the baseplate and the small misalignments that
occur between bolts, only a fraction of the bolts will bear
simultaneously against the baseplate and hence be cap-
Fig. 4.2.1~Hollow column section anchor bolt design able of transferring shear load (see Fig.
4.23 Tensionlshear interaction - When bolt tension
and shear forces are present in an anchorage, the inter-
T!!gkE action of the two should be considered. Frequently, inter-
action relationships are used such as those specified by
the AISGASD Section 53.6 (AISC-1989) for structural
bolts. Recently, Cannon et. a1.,4 have recommended that
the areas of steel required for shear and tension be
additive. Current thinking of AC1 349 recommends two
methods for shear and tension on the anchor. For an-
chors that transfer shear by bearing, a linear tension-
shear interaction is conservative. An elliptical tension-
shear interaction is acceptable, but is more difficult to
apply. Where shear friction is used, the required strength
of the anchor is a sum of the tensile strength required for
direct tension and the tensile strength required for shear
4.3-Bearing stress
Figure 4.2. lc Portions of the foundation in contact with the equip-

ment base plates or mounting rings must be designed to For partial contact:
comply with permisstble bearing stresses given in

Qz *w (4-3)
3B(42 - 4
In the design of equipment foundations, the piece of
equipment may be located one or more feet above grade where:
for various functional and operational reasons. The foun-
dation pad may be founded several feet below grade. = MIW
One or more pedestals may be necessary to support the Ii = width of footing
equipment and transfer the design loads to the founda- L = length
By definition, a pedestal is a short column. They 4.53 LX&d piem - Drilled piers consist of straight
should be designed for the critical combination of vertical shafts with or without belled ends. Drilled piers are gen-
load and moment. Octagonal pedestals are usually de- erally used in cohesive soils where the sides of the hole
signed as circular columns of equivalent area. can be maintained. In sand, a casing is provided that can
Vertical reinforcement is provided to resist the tensile be withdrawn as concrete is placed. Care should be taken
stresses in the pedestal. The controlling loading condition during removal to insure that the concrete will not be
for reinforcement is often produced by the maximum mo- disturbed, pulled apart, or pinched off by earth move-
ment with minimum vertical loading. The reinforcement ments (AC1 336.3R, Section 4.3.3). Bells can only be
is designed by one of four methods: (1) supplying vertical drilled in cohesive soils with sufficient strength to prevent
reinforcement with a design capacity equal to or greater their collapse into the base during drilling. Design
than that provided by the anchor bolts, (2) designing the recommendations for drilled piers are provided in AC1
pedestal as a column with the vertical reinforcement in 336.3R.
tension and concrete in compression, (3) applying the Base pressure and pier capacity - Vertical
combined stress formula to the reinforcement area alone, soil pressures for a long pier are resisted as skin friction
or (4) designing the pedestal as a flexural member, neg- on the surface of the shaft. Depending on whether or not
lecting axial compression. the base of the pier rests on rock, the contrtbution of
bearing pressures against the base (point-bearing) to the
4.5-Soil pressure overall capacity of such piers may or may not be signifi-
4.5.1 Spread footings - Spread footings may be di- cant. Uplift resistance of long piers is usually a function
vided into two general categories: those subject to full of the skin friction and pier dead load.
bearing pressure where the resultant vertical force is For a short pier, the vertical force is carried largely by
within the kern of the base; and those subject to partial the base. If lateral loads and moments are small, the
pressure where the resultant force lies outside the kern. pier’s capacity is approximately equal to the base area
For full contact pressure, the gross properties of the base times the bearing capacity of the soil at the base. If
area may be used to determine the soil pressure distribu- lateral loads and moments are significant, the pier is
tion. The applicable form of the combined stress formula assumed to resist the applied loads as depicted in Fig.
for this condition is: 4.5.2. For a straight shaft pier, the vertical pressure on
the base is assumed to be distributed over the leeward
Q = (WA) + (MJSJ + (MyIS,, (4-2) half of the base. For a belled pier, the base pressure is

where: V V

= soil pressure at the corners of the footing n H

Q + +
W = resultant vertical load
A = base area of footing
M,, My = moments about the x and y centroidal axes
5, sy = section moduli of the base about x and y
centroidal axes

Use of this formula assumes a rigid footing with linear

distribution of strain/stress in the supporting subgrade.
For the partial contact case, the combined stress
formula is not applicable, as it would require develop-
ment of tensile resistance between the soil and the
footing. If the overturning stability criteria are met, then a. STRAlCHT SHAFT
the mathematical assumptions of the following formula
are met. Fig. 4.5.2-Presure distribution on drilled piers

computed using the combined stress formula, assuming Generally, the piles are assumed to be very stiff
that the soil over the windward half of the bell would vertically, and the pile cap is assumed to be flexurally
cause the bell to interact with the soil in the manner of rigid.
a pile foundation with uplift capacity. Bell and shaft When connectors are not used, the combined stress
diameters are selected to keep vertical soil pressures formula may be applied to determine vertical pile loads.
within allowable values. If the piles are subject to uplift, the pile loads are
Uplift capacity of belled piers is usually taken as the assumed to vary linearly, with the resultant pile force
weight of soil above the bell. One practice is to assume coinciding with the location of the applied force at its
a cone with an angle of 45 to 65 deg with the horizontal. eccentricity from the neutral axis.
An alternative, more conservative approach considers Lateral loads can be assumed to be equally distributed
only the cylinder of soil above the bell. in the pile group with resultant pile shears generally con- Lateralpressures - Lateral soil pressures on sidered to be independent of the vertical forces. Other
a long pier, due to lateral loads or moments at the top of methods such Saul’s Procedure,‘* could be used for
the pier, are determined by the consideration of load dis- analy-sis of groups of piles. For static equipment with
placement characteristics of the soil and the elastic pro- large surface area subject to wind or with mass
perties of the pier. The pier is treated as a beam on non- distribution resulting in high seismic forces, lateral loads
linear soil springs. Allowable lateral pressures are based may control the number of piles required. Passive earth
on limiting the lateral displacement of the pier at the resistance on the pile cap is sometimes relied on to
ground surface, typical values being y4 to % in. reduce the shear in the piles.
In the case of short piers (those with a shaft length to There are several sophisticated procedures for deter-
diameter ratio less than lo), the pier is considered rigid, mining loads in pile groups. Typically, these are used
with the lateral pressures varying in the manner necessary where a combination of vertical piles and batter piles, or
to satisfy statics (see Fig. 4.5.2a). Where weathered soils all batter piles, are selected. usually the simplistic pro-
exist at grade, the top two or three feet of soil are often cedure of setting the batter based on the minimum verti-
ignored in determining the resistance to lateral loads. cal load-maximum shear loading condition is used. Lateral deflection -Lateral deflections may Allowable loads on piles are determined in accordance
be determined by treating the pier as a beam on nonlin- with the principles of soil mechanics. For large jobs
ear soil springs. In order to do so, a coefficient of hori- where a pile testing program is warranted, selection of
zontal subgrade reaction is selected based on soil consis- the most efficient pile type and the maximum permissrble
tency and published dat*or on an actual field test. capacity may be made. Allowable vertical capacity thus Settlement - Drilled piers are generally determined may be subject to reduction for group action.
founded on rock, on high bearing capacity granular soils, Allowable horizontal capacity is based on limiting lateral
or on stiff, incompressible clays. For these types of soils, deflection under shear load, and it is not generally
and where due regard for settlement has been accounted considered to be diminished by group action.
for in the allowable bearing capacities, no appreciable
vertical settlements will occur. Consequently, settlement 4.7-Foundation design procedures
is usually not computed for these soils. However, when 4.7.1 Factored loads - Foundation base area or the
piers are located in or underlain by weaker clays, a set- number of piles or piers is determined from service (un-
tlement analysis is required, in this case, standard con- factored) loads. Use of the Strength Design Method for
solidation theory may be applied. the structural design of reinforced concrete foundation
4.53 Rafi or mat foundations - Bearing pressures elements requires the application of factored loads.
under raft or mat foundations are dependent on several Owing to the difficulty of tracking the contribution of
factors. These factors include the type and compressibil- each type of loading (dead, live, wind, etc.), application
ity of the soil, and the relative rigidity of the mat as of a single load factor is often used in the design of
compared to the soil. equipment foundations designed using the Strength De-
Procedures for design of such foundations are pre- sign Method. Typically, a composite load factor equal to
sented in AC1 336.2R. A simplifying assumption, which 1.6 is used.
is conservative from the point of view of flexural design, 4.7.2 Positive moments andflearal shears - Founda-
considers the mat to be rigid and assumes a linear distri- tions for static equipment generally consist of isolated
bution of the soil subgrade reaction. footings, mats, or pile caps below grade with one or more
Where equipment layout or mat geometry is complex, pedestals projecting above grade. For square or rectangu-
some engineers use a finite element analysis in which the lar foundations, critical sections for moment and shear
soil is represented as a series of elastic springs. are as descriid in Chapter 15 of AC1 318 (see Fig.
4.7.2a). An exception to the AC1 procedure occurs with
4.6-Pile loads deep/thick pile caps with high capacity piling (refer to
When upper soil strata are too weak to support spread CRSI Handbook).
footings, then mat foundations or piles of the end- Reinforcing design for octagonal foundations can be
bearing or friction type are used to support the loads. cumbersome given the mat shape and the reinforcement




Fig. 4.7.2a-Critical sections L INSCRIBED OR

a. b.


Fig. 4.7.2c-Octagonal bases - moment section options

Fig. 4.7.2b-Octagonal base options

configuration (Fig. 2.2.1). Therefore, octagonal geomet-

ries are often converted to equivalent circular shapes as
shown in Fig. 4.7.2b. An equivalent circular shape makes Fig. 4.7.2d-Beam shear options

it easier to handle controlling load combinations which
are not oriented on major octagonal axes. The design f’W~“L SECTION
moment for an octagonal foundations generally deter-
mined in one of two ways (see Fig. 4.7.2~). In method
“a,” the moment at the face of the equivalent square
pedestal is based on the area of the footing lying outside OVERBURDEN
the critical section and extending the full width of the
footing. In method “b,” known as the “one foot strip”
method, a strip of unit width is subjected to the maxi-
mum soil pressure distribution; this method provides the
most conservative results. Reinforcing steel for the entire
footing is based on the requirements of this strip. Of the
two methods described above, the full width section
requires the least reinforcement.
Beam shear for an octagonal foundation is generally Fig. 4.7.3-Negative moment
determined as shown in Fig. 4.7.2d. In method “a,” the
shear is computed on the area of the base octagon, 4.73 Negative moments - For a spread footing with
bonded by the critical section at a distance d from the the resultant outside the kern, the footing is only partially
equivalent square pedestal, and 90 deg radial lines drawn subjected to positive soil pressure on the windward side.
from the center of the base extending through the cor- The design negative moment is determined by summing
ners of the equivalent square. Alternatively, in method the negative moment components produced by footing
“b” the shear is computed on the area of the base octa- weight, overburden, surcharge loading, and any positive
gon (or circle) lying outside the critical section and component from base pressure. As illustrated in Fig.
encompassing the full width of the footing at the critical 4.7.3, the positive moment component is often conserva-
section. tively neglected.
For a rigid mat foundation supporting multiple pedes- In the case of a pile foundation where pile tension
tals, the magnitude of positive and negative moments capacities are developed, the negative moments should
may be determined by elastic one-way or two-way slab not be ignored.
theory. If the mat is designed as a flexible system, a Location and width of critical sections for negative
computer analysis treating the mat as a beam or plate on moments are identical to those for positive moment.
an elastic foundation is used (refer to AC1 336.2R). Likewise, the computational procedure for octagonal or
I 351.2R-24

gonal footings designed using the procedure of Fig.
PUNCHING SHEAR 4.7.2c, method “a.” For octagonal foundations, the flex-
t ural reinforcement is placed in mats as shown in Fig.
2.2.1. Where hexagonal foundations are used, similar
configurations are typically provided.
4.7.6 Pedestalreinforcement-Large equipment pedes-
tals generally encompass a greater area than that re-
quired by the loads involved; therefore, only a small
amount of reinforcement is required. Some engineers use
HEAVIER LOADED the % percent minimum from Sections 10.8.4 and 1.9.1 of
HALF AC1 318. Others question this practice on the basis that
pedestal areas associated with static equipment are gen-
erally much larger than those associated with building
columns to which the AC1 318 provisions are primarily


Foundations for static equipment are similar in config-

uration and construction to foundations for structures. In
addition, foundations must meet any specific require-
ments of the equipment manufacturer for maintaining
precise grade and alignment, as well as for transferring
the loads from the equipment to the supporting struc-
Fig. 4.7.4-Punching shear with eccentric loading tures or soil. For more massive equipment foundations,
this may require rigid foundations supported by fiim soils
circular foundations is the same as that for positive or rock.
moment. Foundation mats may be supported directly by soil or
4.7.4 Punching shear (two-way) - The critical section rock, or piles or drilled piers may be used to extend the
for punching shear is as described in Section 11.12 of foundation to fiim soil or rock. The selection of the most
AC1 318. An alternative procedure involves computing appropriate type of foundation depends upon the geo-
the shear on the heavier loaded half of the critical technical conditions of the site. The extent of the
section as shown in Fig. 4.7.4. subsurface investigation and resulting subsurface prepara-
For piers subjected to large moments in addition to tion, if any, is determined by the engineer and geotech-
vertical forces, the punching surface departs from a nical consultant.
simple truncated cone or pyramid. The report AC1 426R
should be consulted in such cases. 5.1--Subsurface preparation and improvement
4.7.5 Flerural reinforcement - Minimum reinforce- 5.1.1 General -The site is prepared in a manner con-
ment requirements of AC1 318 have been variously inter- sistent with the design, and with particular attention to
preted where foundation design is concerned. Some engi- the engineering properties of soils. Compaction or con-
neers specify a minimum reinforcement of 200/f,, unless solidation of soft soils is commonly used to increase
one-third more reinforcement than required by analysis bearing capacity and reduce the potential for foundation
is provided. Others specify a minimum temperature or settlement. In many cases unsuitable soils are removed
shrinkage reinforcement. Section 10.5.3 of AC1 318R and replaced by sound material that is compacted to
recommends a minimum shrinkage and temperature rein- meet the design requirements. Where unsuitable founda-
forcement for mats and other slabs that provide vertical tion soils are encountered, and in situ improvement or
support. Assuming the category of “mats and other slabs” replacement of the soils is not practical, piles or drilled
to include foundations, the provision of temperature and piers may be used to extend the foundations to suitable
shrinkage reinforcement would appear to meet the code’s bearing soil or rock.
intent. On the other hand, the 200/fy provision applies 5.13 Specify subsurfacepreparation and improvements
specifically to beams that have been oversized for archi- - Specific subsurface preparation and related treatment
tectural or other reasons. Consequently, most engineers may be required if the geotechnical investigation or exca-
do not consider the 200/f, provision applicable to foun- vation during construction indicates that the existing soil
dation design. characteristics will not achieve the required foundation
Code specified criteria should be followed to provide performance. Conditions requiring special preparation
adequate anchorage on each side of the critical section. and treatment are:
Particular attention should be given in the case of octa- l Nonuniform conditions that could result in differ-

ential settlement or tilting of the foundation a pressure head in the case of large holes.
l Soil conditions found to be different than those j) Unconsolidated clay-Clays may be preloaded and
assumed for the design related settlements monitored. (Early identification is
l Unstable slopes important to gain lead time and avoid slippage in the
0 Loose sands construction schedule.) Alternatively, piling or drilled
l Soft compressible soils such as unconsolidated clays piers may be used to carry foundation loads to fii
and highly organic soils (e.g., peat) bearing strata.
0 Slip planes or faults k) Cold climates-Foundations are not placed on fine
l High water table or other saturated conditions grained soils subject to the phenomenon of frost heave.
Proper drainage should be provided by placing a free
‘Ihe most common site specific subsurface prepara- draining sand or gravel layer under the foundation to
tions and treatment for the above conditions are: mitigate the posst’bility of frost heave where such hazard
a) Unstable slopes of excavation-Unstable slopes exists. As an alternate, the bottom of the footing is
may be stabilized by flattening the slope, benching, de- placed below the frost line.
watering, shoring, freezing, injection with chemical
grouts, or supporting with dense slurries. 5.2-Foundation placement tolerances (AC1 117)
b) Stratification-Excavations with slopes parallel to Foundation placement tolerances depend largely on
the direction of stratification are avoided by flattening the type of equipment being supported. They are speci-
the slope or by providing adequate shoring. fied by the engineer on the drawings or in the specifica-
c) Wet excavation-During construction, ground water tions. It is good practice to use templates during conrete
is normally lowered below the bottom level of the exca- placement to support anchor bolts and other embed-
vation. One method commonly used to achieve this is by ments that must be precisely positioned.
using deep well pumps or well points. Another method
is to create an impervious barrier around the excavation 5.3-Forms and shores
with cofferdams or caissons, chemical grout injection, 53.1 Forms and shoring for construction of concrete
sheet piles, or slurry trenches. A sump pit is typically foundations should follow the recommendations of AC1
provided to collect ground water intrusion. 347R.
The selection of an appropriate method depends on 5.33 Shoring must support the concrete loads, impact
the characteristics of the subsurface soils encountered, loads, and temporary construction loads. Transverse lon-
costs, and the preferences of the constructor. gitudinal bracing may be required to sustain lateral
d) Small surface pockets of loose sand-Loose sand forces.
pockets are normally compacted to the degree of speci- Wind loads should be taken into account. It is not
fied compaction. Alternatively, if the predominant soil is usually necessary to consider seismic loads due to the
hard, the loose sand may be removed and replaced with limited time shoring will be in place. The design of the
lean concrete. formwork should be prepared by a registered professional
e) Large deposits of loose sands-The loose sands engineer and submitted to the design engineer for review.
may be stabilized by vibrofloatation or dynamic consoli- 5.3.3 For large equipment foundations, temporary
dation, whichever offers an economic advantage. formwork systems are generally used. Less frequently,
f) Presence of organic material or unconsolidated soft permanent systems may be used for special applications.
clays-All organic materials and soft clays are normally The selection of a temporary support system is normally
removed and replaced with suitable, well-compacted fill made by the constructor. It is influenced by the erection
that provides the characteristics desired for the proper sequence of the building (if the equipment is enclosed),
performance of the foundation. Alternatively, piling or the equipment installation procedure, and access require-
drilled piers may be used to carry foundation loads to ments at the time of placement of the foundation. Some
sound bearing strata. of the permanent systems may affect the design and cost
g) Fissured rock-The extent of fissures is evaluated of the foundation. Therefore, the design engineer may
to determine if remedial treatment is needed. Pressure wish to consult with building contractors prior to deciding
grouting is a suitable remedy for some types of fissures. on a permanent formwork system.
In the case of seismic faults, thorough geotechnical and Some of the temporary systems used are:
geological evaluation is required to ascertain the poten-
tial hazard. Where significant hazards are found to exist, 0 Standard construction shoring consisting of tem-
relocation of the entire facility to avoid the hazard is a porary shore legs supported by the foundation mat
suitable remedy. and supporting the soffit forms of a foundation
h) Irregularly weathered rock-The weathered seams deck.
are cleaned and replaced with lean concrete. Alterna- l Shoring consisting of structural steel beams suppor-
tively, the foundation may be lowered to sound rock. ted on brackets attached to the foundation col-
i) Solution cavities in limestone deposits-The voids umns. The forms rest on top of the beams. Jacking
are pumped full of grout, if small, or lean concrete under devices are used to lower the beams and forms for

removal after the concrete reaches sufficient stud into the final position.
strength. Other types of wedges often utilized by millwrights
include various shaped temporary steel wedges. Tempor-
Permanent support systems include: ary wedges are usually tolerance adjustment tools placed
prior to grouting, and they are removed after the setting-
0 Structural steel beams or trusses supported by up of the grout material. Permanent wedge assemblies
foundation columns and carrying the permanent allow future adjustments on ungrouted equipment bases.
deck forms. The beams or trusses are part of the Required bolt diameters are usually given on the
deck design and will also carty operating loads. manufacturer’s drawings. Bolt lengths, threaded lengths,
‘Ihe deck forms (steel decking) usually aresup- bolt projections, material, stress levels, and the method
ported on the bottom flanges of the beams or of tightening should be clearly shown on the design draw-
trusses. Since the steel members are embedded in ings. When the manufacturer requires a specific preload
the foundation deck, the design engineer has to be for a bolt, the following equation can be used to select
careful to avoid interferences with the reinforcing the bolt torque:
bars and with other embedments (anchor bolts,
plates, pipesleeves, and conduits).
l Precast concrete deck forms supported by the
foundation columns. where:
l Plate steel forms used in the steel industry.
T = tightening torque, in.-lb
The engineer should review the constructor’s proposed = initial load @reload) lb
construction procedure to assure that the design is not = friction factor
compromised. = nominal bold diameter, in.

5.4--Sequence of construction and construction joints The following values of ~1are typical:
Many equipment foundations are too large for the
concrete to be placed in one continuous operation. Con- Steel fasteners (as manufactured) 0.20
struction joints are used to subdivide large foundations Hot dipped galvanized steel 0.14
into smaller units that can be placed in one continuous Lightly oiled steel 0.15
operation. Plated (cadmium, chromium, etc.) 0.15
Subdivision of large structures by construction joints Graphite with mineral oil 0.10
also affords a means for reducing stresses due to con-
crete shrinkage. To gain maximum benefit, alternate seg- Special coatings may require manufacturer’s data.
ments should be placed and allowed to cure and shrink When preload values are not given, a suggested mini-
as long as the construction schedule permits before the mum preload value of 15 percent of the yield strength of
intervening segments are placed. the anchor is often used.
The structural integrity of the foundation requires that Bolt tightening is specified as being accomplished with
joints be constructed with care in accordance with ac- either a post-tensioning jacking procedure, tum-of-the-
cepted practices for construction joints in major concrete nut method, or with a calibrated wrench. Post-tensioning
structures. Project specifications normally require that jacking is usually used on the deeper anchorages with the
the constructor obtain the approval of the engineer for non-bonded shanks. When the shank length is embedded
construction joint locations and details. in concrete, the turn-of-the-nut method or sequential cal-
tbrated wrench tightening is specified. Impact wrenches
!U-Equipment installation and setting are not allowed for tightening of a bolt component when
55.1 Shims, wed&s, and b&s -The design engineer*s part of the anchorage is embedded in concrete because
choice of the interface system is influenced by the manu- of the extremely high torques and tensile forces delivered
facturer’s recommendations and requirements, the foun- by such tools.
dation construction procedures, the setting and adjust- 55.2 Embedments - Embedments in the concrete in-
ment of the equipment, and the final tolerances required. clude the anchor bolt assemblies previously descriid,
Shims, which are usually carbon steel or brass stock in shear lugs, and shear transferring devices.
various thicknesses, have both economical and high load Since shear is one of the combined loads transferred
bearing qualities. to the concrete foundation, steel lugs may be integral
Wedges are usually the double-wedge type and are of- parts of the base of the equipment. Such lugs are grouted
fered by several mounting equipment manufacturers. The into shear key grooves previously cast into the concrete
double wedge mount often has one or more threaded base.
studs for (1) precise vertical adjustment, and (2) for
locking the sliding wedge into the required position. A 5.6-Grouting
lock nut may also be used for locking the main horizontal 5.6.1 Typ of grout - There are two basic types of

grout: cement-based grouts and epoxy-based grouts. Ce- l Part of the cement is replaced with fly ash or
ment-based grouts are more commonly used because of non-fly ash pozzolan.
their availability, ease of use, strong physical properties l The placing temperature of fresh concrete is low-
and lower cost. Epoxy grouts are generally used because ered by chilling the aggregate and/or using chipped
of their high resistance to chemicals, to shock, and to vii ice for mixing water.
ratory loads. There are four types of cement-based l The largest practical size aggregate is used to allow
grouts: (1) gas generating; (2) air release; (3) oxidizing further reduction in the amount of cement.
aggregate, and (4) expansive cement. In evaluating which l Moderate heat cement (Type II) is used.
cement grout should be used, one should take into ac- l A water reducing agent is used to allow further re-
count the placeability of the grout as well as its physical duction of the cement factor.
properties. The physical properties that are evaluated l Low slump and effective viiration are used.
are: volume change, compressive strength, working time, l Concrete placement by pumps, which requires con-
consistency, and setting time. In evaluating the properties crete mixes having high amounts of cement and
of an epoxy grout, one should look at placeability as well small aggregate sixes, is avoided.
as the physical properties of volume change, compressive l Sixes of placements for large foundations are re-
strength, creep, working time, consistency, and setting duced.
time. The effects of temperature induced volume changes
on the epoxy concrete interface should be considered. In The coefficient of thermal expansion of the hardened
addition, any specific requirements of the application concrete can be controlled by the choice of aggregates
should be addressed. because it depends primarily on the coefficient of ther-
5.6.2 Applications - In specifying grout systems, the mal expansion of the aggregate. When excessive thermal
designer should consider the different characteristics of expansion may be a problem, the coefficient of expansion
each type of grout along with field limitations, and match of available aggregates is measured to determine their
these with the specific requirements of the job. In parti- suitability for the application. (In many regions of the
cular, the designer should review the design of the equip- country there may be very limited choices in the types
ment base, the accesstbility of the grouting location, the and sources of aggregates.)
clearances provided for the grout, and the design of the Expansion of concrete from alkali-aggregate reaction
anchor bolts. Most of the grouts on the market are pre- can be minimized by using a low alkali cement, by re-
mixed, prepackaged materials, and contain manufac- placing a portion of the cement with a fly ash or non-fly
turer’s instructions on surface preparation, formwork, ash pozzolan meeting the requirements of ASTM C 618,
mixing, placing, and curing procedures. and by selecting low reactivity aggregates. The potential
A detailed discussion on the application of grouts can reactivity of aggregates can be evaluated with the pro-
be found in AC1 351.1R. cedures and tests described in ASTM C 295, ASTM
C 227, ASTM C 289, and ASTM C 586. The evaluation
5.7-Materials (AC1 211.1) methods of the potential reactivity of aggregates are
Large equipment foundations require special attention covered by ASTM C 33 and AC1 225R.
to the design and control of the concrete mix (see AC1 The cement content should be low enough to help
207.1R and AC1 207.4R). meet heat of hydration requirements, and yet high
Many foundation members are massive enough for the enough to meet strength, creep, and shrinkage require-
heat of hydration of the cement to generate a large ther- ments. (It may not be posstble to solve completely the
mal differential between the inside and the outside and heat problem by reducing the heat of hydration. Cooling,
this may cause unacceptable surface cracking unless steps small placements, pozzolan, etc., may also be needed.)
are taken to reduce the rate of release of this heat. Also,
creep, differential thermal expansion, and shrinkage may S.&-Quality control
cause distortion of the foundation and consequent unac- Foundations for equipment should be parts of an
ceptable changes in equipment alignment. Design of the integrated system and are designed as such. Thus, the de-
concrete mix to minimize creep and shrinkage, and to re- sign requirements should be implemented during con-
duce the thermal expansion of the hardened concrete is struction by the imposition of an appropriate quality
therefore important. Finally, expansive reaction of the control program. The quality control program should
concrete aggregate with alkalies in the cement can be include requirements for control of material quality, the
avoided by proper choice of cement and aggregate. engineer’s approval of critical construction procedures,
To minimize the rate of release of the heat of hy- and on-site verification of compliance with design
dration, and to control shrinkage and creep, the following drawings and project specifications by qualified field
steps are normally followed: engineers respon&le to the engineer and/or owner.
Requirements for foundations should be provided to
0 The lowest content of cementitious material consis- the constructor and field engineer through the design
tent with attaining the required strength and dura- drawings and project specifications. The field engineer
bility used. should maintain close liaison with the design engineer on

any revisions to the design requirements when field con- AISGLRFD Manual of Steel Construction - Load
ditions differ from those assumed. and Resistance
The quality control program and inspection and verifi-
cation activities should be thoroughly documented. The American National Standatds Institute (ANSI)
program should be consistent with those commonly im-
plemented for construction projects of similar impor- ANSI A58.1 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings
tance. and Other Structures (revised and re-
designated as AXE 7)
cHAPTER6-REFERENcEs ANSI B18.2.1 Square and Hex Bolts and Screws
(Inch Series)
6.1-Recommended references ANSI B18.2.2 Square and Hex Nuts (Inch Series)
The documents of the various standards producing ANSI ST!%1 Steel Stacks
organizations referred to in this document are listed
below with their serial designation. American Society of Civil Engineers

American Concrete Institute (ACI) ASCE 7 Minimum Design Loads for Buildings
and Other Structures (formerly ANSI
116R Cement and Concrete Terminology A58.1)
117 Standard Tolerances for Concrete
Construction and Materials American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
207.1R Mass Concrete for Dams and Other
Massive Structures ASME STS-1 Steel Stacks
207.4R Cooling and Insulating Systems for ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
Mass Concrete
211.1 Standard Practice for Selecting Pro- ASlM
portions for Normal, Heavyweight,
and Mass Concrete ASTM A 307 Standard Specification for Carbon
22SR Guide to the Selection and Use of Steel Bolts and Studs
Hydraulic Cements ASlMc33 Standard Specification for Concrete
307 Standard Practice for the Design and Aggregates
Construction of Cast-in-Place Rein- ASTM C 227 Standard Test Method for Potential
forced Concrete Chimneys Alkali Reactivity of Cement-Aggre-
318/318R Building Code Requirements for gate Combinations (Mortar-Bar
Reinforced Concrete and Commen- Method)
taIy ASTM C 289 Standard Tests Method for Potential
318.1/318.1R Building Code Requirements for Reactivity of Aggregates (Chemical
Structural Plain Concrete and Com- Method)
mentary ASTM C 295 Standard Guide for Petrographic
336.2R Suggested Design Procedures for Examination of Aggregates for Con-
Combined Footings and Mats crete
336.3R Suggested Design and Construction ASTMC586 Standard Test Method for Potential
Procedures for Pier Foundations Alkali Reactivity of Carbonate Rocks
347R Recommended Practice for Concrete for Concrete Aggregates (Rock Cylin-
Formwork der Method)
349/349R Code Requirements for Nuclear ASTM c 618 Standard Specification for Fly Ash
Safety Related Concrete Structures and Raw or Calcined Natural Poxzo-
and Commentary lan for Use as a Mineral Admixture
351.1R Grouting for Support of Equipment in Portland Cement Concrete
and Machinery
355.1R State-of-the-Art Report on Anchor-
age to Concrete Building C@cialv and Code Adminktrators International,
426R Shear Strength of Reinforced Con- Inc. (BOCA)
crete Members
The BOCA National Building Code
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)
Center for Transpotiation Research (University of Texas)
AISC-ASD Manual of Steel Construction -
Allowable Stress Design Research Report 1126-l Load-Deflection Behavior

of Cast-in-Place and Retro- American Society of Civil Engineers

fit Concrete Anchors Sub- 345 East 47th Street
jected to Static, Fatigue and New York, NY 100172398
Impact Loads, Coliins,
Klingner, Polyzois, Feb. American Society of Mechanical Engineers
1989. 345 East 47th Street
Research Report 1126-2 Adhesive Anchors: Behav- New York, NY 10017
ior and Spacing Require-
ments; Doerr, Klingner, ASTM
Mar. 1989. 100 Barr Harbor Dr.
Research Report 1126-3 Behavior and Design of West Conshohocken, Pa. 19428-2959
Ductile Multiple-Anchor
Steel to Concrete Connec- Building Officials and Code Administrators International,
tions; Cook, Klingner, Mar. Inc. (BOCA)
1989. 4051 West Flossmoor Road
Research Report 1126-4F Design Guide for Steel-to- Country Club Hills, IL 604785795
Concrete Connections;
Cook, Doerr, Klingner, Center for Transportation Research (University of Texas)
Mar. 1989. 3208 Red River, Suite 200
Austin, TX 78705-2650
Concrete Steel Reinforcing Institute (CRSI)
Concrete Steel Reinforcing Institute
CRSI Handbook 933 North Plum Grove Road
Schaumburg, IL 60173-4758
International Conference of Building OJiciarS
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Uniform Building Code (UBC) Earthquake Programs
500 “c” Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20472
FEM4, National Earthquake Hazard3 Reduction Program
(NEHRP) International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO)
5360 South Workman Mill Road
Standard (1991) Whittier, CA 90601

Precast/Prestressed Concrete Institute

Precast-Prestressed Concrete Institute (PCI) 175 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604
PC1 Design Handbook
Southern Building Congress International, Inc. (SBCCI)
900 Montclair Road
Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc. Birmingham, AL 35213

Standard Building Code (SBC) 6.2-Cited references

1. Bailey, J.W. and Burdette, E.G., “Edge Effects on
The above publications may be obtained from the fol- Anchorage to Concrete,” Research Series No. 31, Univer-
lowing organizations: sity of Tennessee, Knoxville, Aug. 1977.
2. Breen, J.E., “Development Length for Anchor
American Concrete Institute Bolts,” Center for Highway Research, Final Report, Uni-
P.O. Box 9094 versity of Texas at Austin, Apr. 1964.
Farmington Hills, Mich. 48333-9094 3. Breen, J.E., “Development Length of Anchor Bolts,
Highway Research Record No. 147, 1966.
American Institute of Steel Construction 4. Cannon, R.W., Godfrey, D.A., and Moreadith, F.L.,
400 North Michigan Avenue “Guide to Anchor Bolts and Other Steel Embedments,
Chicago, IL 60611 Concrete International, V. 3, No. 7, July 1981, pp. 28-41.
(Also available as a reprint, m-81, from American
American National Standards Institute Concrete Institute, Detroit)
11 West 42nd Street 5. Ferguson, P.M. and Rajagopalan, K.S., “Exploratory
New York, NY 10036 Shear Tests Emphasizing Percentage of Longitudinal

Steel,” AC1 JOURNAL, Prucee&gr V. 65, No. 8, Aug. Base Ring-A device used to provide a common sur-
1968, pp. 634-638. face between the foundation and the equipment for
6. Frank, K.H., “Fatigue of Anchor Bolts,” Center for aligning, leveling, and distrtbutiug vertical loads as for
Highway Research, Report 172-2F, University of Texas at vessels or process columns.
Austin, July 1978. Belling-Excavating process used to provide additional
7. Hasselwaader, G.B.; Jima, J.O.; Breea, J.E.; and Lo, bearing surface at tip of concrete drilled piers.
K., “Strength and Behavior of Anchor bolts Embedded Bundle load-bad required to break the bond be-
Near Edges of Concrete Piers,” Center for Highway Re- tween a tube bundle and exchanger shell.
search, Report 29-2F, University of Texas at Austin, May Davit-A device used to support/swing the covers off
1973. openings of vessels, tanks, etc.
8. Housaer, G.W., “Limit Designs of Structures on Hydrotest-Filling of equipment (tanks, vessels, etc.)
Resist Earthquakes,” Proceedin@ of the World Conference with water to check for leaks and structural integrity.
on Earthquake Engineering, Berkeley, June 1956. Operating loads--loads applied to the equipment or
9. Lee, D.W. and Breea, J.E., “Factors Affecting Au- structure due to nature of operation, liquid loads, iuter-
char Bolt Development,” Center for Highway Research, nal loads, or pressure, etc.
Report 8E-lF, University of Texas at Austin, Aug. 1966. Pad--Slab-type foundation support for equipment.
10. McMakiu, P.J., Slutter, R.G., and Fisher, J.W., Shaft--Vertical portion of concrete drilled pier.
“Headed Steel Anchors Under Combined Loading,” En- Sleeve-A device used around anchor bolts to allow
gineering Journal, AISC, Second Quarter, 1973. movement of the bolt after casting of concrete.
11. Scholl, R.E; Cxamecki, R.M.; Kirchner, CA.; Stack-Cylindrical shaped vertical vent.
Shah, H.C, and Gerie, J.M., “Seismic Analysis of Oil
Refinery Structures, Part II - Evaluation of Seismic
Design Criteria,” Technical Report No. 32, John A. Blume
Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University, METRIC (SI) CONVERSION FACTORS
Stanford, Sept. 1978.
12. Saul, W.E., “Static and Dynamic Analysis of Pile
Foundation,” Journal of the Structural Llivision, AXE, V. 1 in. = 25.4 millimeters
44, No. ST5, May 1968. 1 in.* = 645.2 a-an*
13. Swirsky, R.A.; Dusel, J.P.; Cruxier, W.F.; Stokier, 1 pound = 4.448 Newton
J.R.; and Nordliu, E.F., “Lateral Resistance of Anchor 1 psi = 0.006895 MPa
Bolts Installed iu Concrete,” Final Report, California 1 kip = 4.448 kN
Department of Transportation, Sacramento, May 1977. 1 ksi = 6.895 MPa


Terms used in this report generally follow ACZ Gfosary This repori was submitted to letter ballot of the committee and npprvd in
accordance with AC1 balloting procedures.
of Terms, AC1 116R. The following terms and their defm-
itioas, however, are unique to this report and are iu
addition to those given iu AC1 116R.