COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN

OF
TRANSMISSION LINE TOWER FOUNDATIONS

A DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the award of the degree
of .
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY.
In
CIVIL ENGINEERING
(With Spedialikatiohin. Ctimputer Aided Design)

By
RAKESH RANJAii

• DEPARTMENT OF. CIVIL ENGINEERING

INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ROORKEE
ROC:0MM 247 667 (INDIA)
JUNE, 2006 -
 CANDIDATE'S DECLARATION

I hereby certify that the work presented in this dissertation entitled "COMPUTER AIDED
DESIGN OF TRANSMISSION LINE TOWER FOUNDATIONS" in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the award of the degree of MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY in Civil
Engineering, with specialization in Computer Aided Design, submitted to the Department
of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee is an authentic record
of my own work carried out for a period from July, 2005 to June, 2006 under the supervision
of Dr. G. Ramasamy, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Roorkee, Roorkee.

The matter embodied in this dissertation has not been submitted by me for the award of any
other degree.

gkeol PO A'

Date: 22June, 2006 (RAKESH RANJAN)

Place: Roorkee

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the above statement made by the candidate is correct to the best of my
knowledge.

(Dr. G. Ramasamy)
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee,
Roorkee -247667, India.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I feel privileged in extending my earnest obligation, deep sense of gratitude, appreciation

and honor to Dr. G. Ramasamy, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian
Institute of Technology, Roorkee whose benevolent guidance, apt suggestions, unstinted
help and constructive criticism have inspired me in successful completion of making of
this dissertation report. Special thanks are due to Dr. Swami Saran, Emeritus Fellow,
Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, for his help in
design of well foundation.

I express my appreciation and thanks to all the faculty members of the department of
Civil Engineering, IIT Roorkee for free exchange of ideas and discussions which proved
helpful.

Special Thanks are also due to Utpal Kumar Nath, Arup Bhattacharjee, Subhash Chandra
and Ranjeet Kumar fellow student for their constant help to complete this dissertation
report.

I wish to acknowledge the affection and moral support of my family members, for being
so understanding and helpful during this period.

Finally, I am thankful and grateful to God the Almighty for ushering His blessings on all
of us.

/ectkea 170,, '404 .

(Rakesh Ranjan)

ii
 ABSTRACT

The transmissions line towers are used to connect the grid from power plant and one
power grid to another grid. So they may often pass through very steep ground,
mountainous ranges, marshy land, and rivers and even to that area where bearing capacity
of soil is very low. Foundations of most of the structures are designed for compressive
loads and some of them may in addition be subjected to lateral loads. Because of wind
load and pull due to broken wire condition, uplift loads are created which are very
significant and may be even critical. Further these types of foundations may be subjected
to uplift and tilting force simultaneously.
Isolated footing, piles and well foundations are the types of foundations generally
adopted as foundation of transmission line towers depending on the magnitude and types
of uplift or lateral forces expected in the given situation.
In this dissertation software has been developed to analyze and design the
different types of foundation used for transmission line tower .The developed software
provide flexibility to the user to select the different type of foundations on the basic i2f
soil types, loads etc. The selected foundation has been :-...;:aiyseci and designed by software
and finally design components will be represented graphically.
 CONTENTS

Page No.
Certificate
Acknowledgement II
Abstract III
List of Tables
VI
List of Figures
VII
Notations
IX
1 Introduction 1
2 Transmission Line Tower Foundation. 3
2.1. Types of Foundation 3
2.2. Types of Loads 3
2.3.1. Pad and Chimney Foundation 3
2.3.2. Combined Raft Foundation 5
2.3.3 Pile Foundation 5
2.3.4 Well Foundation. 7
3 Design of Pad and Chimney Foundation 8
3.1. Analysis of Foundation 8
3.2. Design of Foundation 15
3.2.1 Design of Chimney 15
3.2.2 Design of Pad 16
4 Design of Pile Foundation 20
4.0 General 20
4.1. Analysis and. Design of Pile Foundation for Normal Condition 20
4.2.4.1.1 Analysis of Pile Foundation for Normal Condition 20
4.1.2 Design of Pile Foundation for Normal Condition 20
4.2. Analysis and Design of Pile Foundation for Scour Condition 27
4.2.1. Analysis of Pile Foundation for Scour Condition 27

iv
 Page No.
4.2.2. Structural Design of Pile Foundation for Scour Condition 32
4.3. Analysis and Design of Under-Reamed Pile 32
5 Well Foundation 37
5.0 General 37
5.1. Elements of well foundation for Transmission Line Tower 37
5.2. Determination of maximum depth of scour 39
5.3. Allowable bearing Pressure 40
5.4. Load Calculation 40
5.5.Analysis of Well Foundation 43
5.5.1.Elastic Theory Approach 43
5.5.2.Ultimate Resistance Approach 45
5.6. Structural Design 47
6 Flow Chart of the Package 52
7 Summary and Conclusion 54
8 References 55
9 Annexure 1: Design Problem for Pad and Chimney Foundation 57
10 Annexure 2: Design Example of Pile Foundation for Transmission Line 65

Tower

11 Annexure 3 :Design example of well foundation for transmission line 79

Tower
 LISTS OF TABLES

Table No. Title Page No.

3.1 Relation of H/B and Angle of Internal Friction of Soil 10

4.1 Relationship Between SPT value and a 21
4.2 Relationship Between SPT value and Undrained Compressive 21
Strength
4.3 Value of Coffecient of Modulus Variation ih in kN/m3 24
4.4 The Value of Subgrade Modulus K1 in KN/m3 25
4.5 Increase over Discharge for Foundation 29
4.6 Factor for Determining Maximum Depth of Scour 29
4.7 Safe load for vertical, Bored cast-in-situ Underremmed pile in 36
sandy and clayey soil
5.1 Increase over discharge for foundation 39
5.2 Multiplying factor for different river condition 40
5.3 Value of K for different shape of pier 42
5.4 Value of Q 46
A.1.1 Design Footing for Transmission Line Tower 57
A.1.2 Load for Normal Condition and Broken Wire Condition 57
A.2.1 Details of the Proposed Towers 65
A.2.2 Increase over Design Discharge for Foundation 66
A.3.1 Details of the Proposed Towers 79
A.3.2 Increase over Design Discharge for Foundation 81
A.3.3 Load Calculation for Elastic Theory 85
A.3.4 Load Calculation for Ultimate Resistance 89
A.3.5 Load Calculation for Staining 96

vi
 LISTS OF FIGURES

Figure No. Title Page No.

1.1 A typical Transmission line tower 1

2.1.1 Undercut Pad and Chimney Foundation 4
2.1.2 Pad and Chimney Foundation 4
2.2 Reinforced pad and chimney foundation 5
2.3 A typical Picture of pile foundation 6
3.1 Resistance against Uplift by Weight of Frustum of Earth plus 9
Weight of Concrete in cohesive soil
3.2 Resistance against Uplift by Weight of Frustum of Earth plus 9
Weight of Concrete in cohesion-less soil
3.3 Failure of Soil above a Strip Footing Under Uplift Load 11
3.4 H 12
(For Cohesive Soil)
Cu b'
Ultimate Lateral Resistance,

3.5 H 13
Ultimate Lateral Resistance, (For Non-Cohesive Soil)
yK pb3

3.6 Stability Study for Overturning 14

3.7 Pressure Distribution below Footing 16
3.8 Plan and Sectional Elevation of Reinforced Footing 19
4.1 Determination of Depth Fixity 25
4.2 Reduction Factor 26
4.3 A typical Reinforced Under-Reamed Pile 35
5.1 Cross-Sectional Dimension of Well Foundation 37
A.1.1 Reinforcement detail of foundation and pedestal 64
A.2.1 Pile Soil Situation 67
A.2.2 Pressure Distribution on Foundation Due to Flowing Water 71
A.2.3 Ll versus Depth of Fixity 72

vii
Figure No. Title Page No.

A.2.4 Reinforcement Detail of Pile Foundation of Tower Type "A" 77

A.3.1 River Course and Crossing of Tower- Ganga near Bijnor 80

A.3.2 Plan of Proposed Foundation 83

A.3.3 Front View of the foundation 84

A.3.4 Figure for Ultimate Resistance Approach 88

A.3.5 Cross Section of Cantilever Beam 92

A.3.6 Reinforcement Detail of Cantilever Beam 94

A.3.7 Reinforcement Detail of Well Cap 95

A.3.8 Reinforcement Detail of Well Staining 100

A.3.9 Reinforcement Detail of Cutting Edge 102

A3.10 Reinforcement Detail of Well Foundation 103

viii
 NOTATIONS

Pu =Ultimate Compressive load (in kN)

Uu =Ultimate Uplift load( in kN)
Hu = Ultimate Horizontal thrust ( kN)
Po= Safe bearing capacity of soil (in kN/m2)
P1=Net uplift pressure
0 = Inclination of leg of footing with vertical
a = angle that frustum of cone makes with vertical
L= width of footing,
H = height up to which failure surface reach from foundation level
C= cohesion along vertical plane through footing. edge.
Ku=Normal uplift coefficient of earth pressure on vertical plane through footing edge.
cu=un-drained cohesion
b= width of pedestal
D=Overall depth of cross-section of shaft, and
Po' Intensity of pressure at the face of pedestal
P"= Average Pressure intensity
As = Surface area of pile shaft below GL.
fs = average unit skin friction = Ko tan 8
K= coefficient of horizontal pressure
av= effective vertical stress at mid depth of pile below GL
8= angle of wall friction =2/34
RF=reduction factor= 0.6 for cohesion less soil
Qu= ultimate bearing capacity of pile (in kN/ sq m),
Ne= bearing capacity factor, usually taken as 9
cp= average cohesion of soil at pile tip kN/sq m,
c= average cohesion throughout the length of pile
AP cross Sectional area at pile toe in m2
PD= effective overburden pressure at pile toe in kM/m2

ix
Pb=perimeter of block in m
E=Young's modulus of the pile material in MN/m2
I=moment of inertia of pile cross-section in m4, and
Tlb= coefficient of modulus variation in MN/m3
Q= discharge in cumecs,
f = silt factor
m= mean size of particle in mm
p = intensity of pressure due to flowing water in kN/m2
V =the velocity of current at the point considered
N = Corrected standard penetration resistance value
Df =Depth of foundation below scour level
IB= moment of inertia of base of the well about the axis normal to the direction of
horizontal force passing through its C.G
o =maximum base pressure of well.

62 = minimum base pressure of well.

 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Transmission line towers are exclusively tall structure i.e. the height of the tower being more than

the width. The purpose of transmission line tower is to support conductor carrying electric power

and one or two ground wires at suitable distance from ground level and at some appropriate distance

from each other. These transmissions line towers are used to connect the grid from power plant and

one power grid to another grid. So they often pass through very steep ground, mountainous ranges,

marshy land, and rivers and even to that area where bearing capacity of soil is very low. These

towers are spaced frames, almost exclusively built with steel section.

Fig.1.1 A typical Transmission line tower

1
Transmission line tower consists of four legs. Normally, foundations of most of the structures are

designed for compressive loads and some of them may in addition be subjected to lateral loads. But

the loads, coming on transmission line towers, like wind load and pull due to broken wire condition

cause uplift loads which are very significant and may be even critical. These types of foundations

may be subjected to uplift and tilting force simultaneously. Design of transmission line tower

foundation to support large compressive load does not create a problem but the design of suitable

foundation to withstand uplift loads has in the past been primarily a matter of experience and

judgment on the part of engineer.

Isolated footing, piles and well foundations are the types of foundations generally adopted as

foundation of transmission line towers depending on the magnitude and types of uplift or lateral

forces expected in the given situation. Accordingly, the present work deals with design of these

foundations as applicable to transmission line towers.

2
 CHAPTER 2

TRANSMISSION LINE TOWER FOUNDATION

2. 1. TYPES OF FOUNDATION

The following types of foundations can be considered for transmission line tower foundation:

1. Isolated Pad and Chimney footing under each leg of tower.

2. Combined raft foundation (with or without beam)

3. Pile foundation:

a. Under reamed Pile

b. Pile foundation

4. well or caisson foundation

If there is probability of scour then one should go for designing either pile foundation or well

foundation.

2.2. TYPES OF LOADS

The loads acting on the foundation are:

1.Compressive load

2. Uplift load

3. Horizontal load

2.3.1 Pad and Chimney Foundation

Pad and chimney foundation are applied to the normal ground where is no scouring except

for weak ground.

Major types of pad and chimney foundation are:

1. Pad and chimney foundation which is excavated perpendicularly

3
2. Undercut Pad and chimney foundation which is excavated perpendicularly, and base

part is excavated enlarge.

GL

Fig.2.1.1 Undercut Pad and Chimney Fig.2.1.2 Pad and Chimney
Foundation Foundation

The foundation is composed of chimney part and pad part. Both of them are cast- in —situ

reinforced concrete members. The size and depth of these members are based either on the

bearing capacity of soil or from consideration of uplift resistance required. The stub angle is

taken inside and effectively anchored at bottom pad by cleat angle. In this type of footing,

chimney is comparatively slender; the lateral load acting at top of the chimney will create

bending moment. Therefore the chimney should be checked for direct load as well as

bending stress.

4
 Fig 2.2 Reinforced pad and chimney foundation

2.3.2 Combined Raft foundation

Raft foundation is provided where the area cover by the isolated footing is more than 50% of

plan area. The loads are transmitted through pedestal to the raft. The uplift and compressive

loads govern the dimension and the depth of footing. In raft foundation the leg of tower

attached to individual pedestal and these pedestals attached to a common raft. The raft

foundation is not suitable when there is possibility of scouring.

2.3.3. Pile Foundation

Pile foundation is a deep foundation; provide a suitable foundation for transmission line tower.

As in the case of transmission line tower foundation the main governing force is uplift force

and pile foundation both plain and under-reamed gives quite satisfactory resistance to uplift. As

transmission line tower passes even through those areas where there is possibility of scouring

5
deep foundation is provided. In deep foundation both well and pile foundations are provided,

but due to ease in construction and economy pile foundation is the first preference to the

designers. Generally bored cast- in- situ piles are provided for this purpose.

Types of Pile Foundation

Bored cast-in situ concrete piles are provided for foundation of transmission line tower. These
are:
1. Pile
2. Underreamed Pile

2.3.3.1. Pile Foundation

Fig 2.3 A typical Picture of pile foundation

There are two conditions that exist in field where pile foundation is provided, these are as
follow:
I. Where there is no scouring
2. Case of scouring
Pile provides resistance against compressive load by both skin friction resistance and end
bearing resistance. The uplift resistance is provided by skin friction and self weight of pile. In
case of scouring the force due to the flowing water and the buoyant force also come into
picture.

6
2.3.3.2. Under-reamed Pile Foundation
An Underreamed pile is a special type of bored pile which is provided with a bulb at end.
This type of foundation is suitable for uplift load and also in the case of black cotton soil.
The uplift load is resisted by skin friction and self weight of pile and Underreamed bulb.

2.3.4. Well Foundation

Now a day's Well foundations are widely used as foundation for transmission line tower,
where the uplift loads are large. When tower passes through river bed or bank, scouring takes
place due to flow of water, and then well foundation is designed. Well foundation is a
massive sub-structure; it is monolithic and relatively rigid in its structural behavior.
Circular well are provided for well foundation, as the legs of tower are symmetrical and
equidistant to each other. Circular well is simple in construction, easy to sinking and have
uniform strength in all directions. It has only one dredge hole. Its weight per square meter of
peripheral surface is the highest and hence the sinking effort is less, thus facilitating easier
sinking.

7
 CHAPTER 3
DESIGN OF PAD AND CHIMNEY FOUNDATION

The analysis and design part has been dealt in this chapter.
3.1 ANALYSIS OF FOUNDATION
There are two conditions of load application
1.Broken wire condition (B.W.C)
2. Normal condition (N.C)
A load factor of 1.5 is taken for B.W.0 and a load factor of 2 is taken for N.C.
Followings are Steps of designing of Footing:
Stepl. Determine the ultimate compressive load, uplift load and horizontal load by
multiplying appropriate load factor i.e.2 for N.0 and 1.5 for B.W.C.
Step2. Determine the area of footing required:
Ultimate Compressive load=Po kN
Ultimate Uplift load = Uu kN
Ultimate Horizontal thrust = Ho kN
Safe bearing capacity of soil = Po kN/m2
Select any trial depth of foundation =D

Plan area of footing=A=

Pu0
Get the width of footing= L m
For square footing

Net uplift pressure =P1= — kN/m22

2

Step 3.Uplift Resistance

Soil property: cohesion = c, angle of internal friction =
Is Code Method
As per IS: 4091-1979 clause 5.1.3 the uplift load is resisted by the weight of the footing plus
the weight of inverted frustum of the pyramid of earth on the footing pad with side inclined
at an angle up to 30° with vertical.

8
 GL
GL

Cohesive Soil

Fig. 3.1 Resistance against Uplift by Weight of Frustum of Earth plus Weight of
Concrete in cohesive soil
IS: 4091, Clause 5.1.3.2 and clause 5.1.3.3, 30° cones are used to be taken for average firm
cohesive soil and 20° cones are used to be taken for non-cohesive material like sand and
gravel.

CL

Cohesionless SoII
Fig. 3.2 Resistance against Uplift by Weight of Frustum of Earth plus Weight of
Concrete in cohesion-less soil

9
Vertical Loads from superstructure = P CosO
Where,
O - Inclination of leg of footing with vertical
For Square footing:
Volume of frustum of soil (V)

V= —
D (3L2 + 4D2 tan2 +6LD tan a)

For Circular footing:

Volume of frustum of soil (V)

V= 713s–(3L2 +4D2 tan2 a +6LD tan a)

12
Where,
a = angle that frustum of cone makes with vertical, 30° for cohesive soil and 20° for non-
cohesive soil
Weight of frustum of soil=W1=V x y KN
Weight of footing = W2= 10% of load coming to foundation (assumed)
Total uplift resistance =W = WH-W2

By Mayerhof and Adams Ultimate Uplift Capacity of Foundation

As per the work done by Mayerhof and Adams: Ultimate uplift Capacity of foundation

Table 3.1 Relation of H/B and Angle of Internal Friction of Soil

Friction Angle 4 20 25 30 35 40 45 48

Depth H/B 2.5 3 4 5 7 9 11

Coefficient m 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.5 0.6

Max factor s 1.12 1.3 1.6 2.25 3.45 5.5 7.6

10
 B. GREAT DEPTH

Fig. 3.3 Failure of Soil above a Strip Footing Under Uplift Load

For square footing

For shallow depth (D<H) (Fig. 3.3; Table 3.1)
Qu = 4cDL +2sLyD2 Kutan0 + W

For great depth (D>H)

Qu = 4cHL +2sLy142D — 11)Ku tan 0 + W

Where
1,--= width of footing,
H = height up to which failure surface reach from foundation level as shown in Fig3.3,
and Fig.3.4
C= cD = cohesion along vertical plane through footing edge,
W= weight of soil wedge + weight of footing , and
Ku =Normal uplift coefficient of earth pressure on vertical plane through footing edge.
Varies from 0.7 to 1 for simplicity take it as 0.85.

11
Factor of safety against uplift=Fi=
U ult

As per IS: 11233-1985, clause 5.4.1 specifies that in case of foundations with an undercut, the factor
of safety of 1.25 may be adopted and a factor of safety of 1.5 is taken for footing without undercut.
So if F1 <1.5 for footing without undercut then increase the depth of foundation
So if F1<1.25 then increase the depth of foundation,
3.1.2. Check for horizontal stability

20

8.5C.b

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

ULTIMATE LATERAL RESISTANCE

Fig. 3.4 Ultimate Lateral Resistance, (For Cohesive Soil)

Cub2

12
 20

15
EMBEDMENT DEPTH,d/b

10

120 140 160 180 200

ULTIMATE LATERAL RESISTANCE

Fig. 3.5 Ultimate Lateral Resistance, (For Non-Cohesive Soil)

yK pb3

Calculate d/b ratio and h/b ratio, and then from the Fig.3.4 and. Fig 3.5 get the value of

H for cohesive soil

Cu be
H for non-cohesive soil
yK pb3

Where,
Cu=un-drained cohesion
b= width of pedestal
I+ Sin0
K p-
1— Sin0
Get the value of H=Ultimate horizontal force resistance

13
For calculation resisting moment lever arm (g) is given by:

For cohesive soil:

H +b
g=
8.5Cub

For cohesion-less soil:

g = 0.9
yK pb

Design Moment for shaft = Mu H x g

3.1.3. Stability against Overturning

Fig. 3.6 Stability Study for Overturning.

The foundation tilts about the base at a distance 1/6 of its width from the toe. The resistance
against this overturning moment is provided by the weight of that cone of the soil which is
over the heel of footing.

14
 UL PcosOxL
+H(D+h)
W' 3
3
2 S L.
6
Where, W'=weight of soil cone/ pyramid for stability
Up= Uplift on leg of tower
H=horizontal shear on tower leg
L= length of footing

3.2 DESIGN OF FOUNDATION

3.2.1. Design of Chimney
Minimum dimension of shaft should be greater than section of angle used for leg + 50 mm
Take moment at point of intersection of shaft and pad
Ultimate Moment=K-x=My-y= Mult=M x 1.5 kNm
Ultimate load = PuitKN
Ultimate uplift = Uwt KN
Neglecting tension in concrete, the steel required resisting the direct pull
U x1000
Ast=
0.8735

dl =clear cover,
D=Overall depth of cross-section of shaft, and
b=width of cross-section of shaft
From design aids
d' P
For the value of , and
D f ek bD fa bD 2

Get percentage of steel required =p

Asa required = p x Area of section of shaft
As per IS 456:2000, percentage of longitudinal reinforcement should not be less than 0.8% .

15
3.3.2. Design of Pad

P.O P0,1

Fig. 3.7 Pressure Distribution below Footing

L=length of footing (in m).
M=Moment occurring in foundation= Hu x D kNm
Net maximum and minimum intensity of pressure is given by
P M M 2
pal = kN/m2 and P02 = P"
Mtn
6 6

p PO2
) X b)) kN/sq m
P'o=i 02 -I- (P01
9L

16
 P +P
P"— " kN/sq m
2
Where,
Po' Intensity of pressure at the face of pedestal
P"= Average Pressure intensity
L—b
Maximum bending moment occurs at face A-B, cantilever length=l=
2

— br
Moment at face A-B= M — 24 + P'0 ) kNm

1
For the moment of resistance the effective width is b'=b + — b)
8
L—b
Maximum bending moment occurs at face A-B, cantilever length=l=
2

L(L — )2
Moment at face A-B= M — 01 + P'0 ) kNm
24 (2P
1
For the moment of resistance the effective width is b'= b + —(L — b)
8

M, x 1o6
Effective depth required = mm
(0.138 x bt x.ick
Check for Punching Shear
The critical section for punching shear is at a distance d/2 from section A-B
1)0= b + d
Shear force = F = Pu — P" b0 2

F
ry =
4bod 0

r, = K,rc

K=1, for square footing,

Tc = 0.25g;

F
d=
° 4bor

Providing minimum thickness at edge = 200mm

17
 Thickness of footing at a section d/2 from face of pedestal =

1= 200+r d
d„1=
200
x(L—b — d))
L—b
dot should not be greater than clo, otherwise increase the depth.
Check for one-way shear
Critical section is at a distance d from face of shaft at section C-D.
L—b
The cantilever length to the right of C D-1"— dm
2
Intensity of pressure at face C-D is given by

.., poi + P02 — P01

p/50. X
(L —1")

As the section is trapezoidal in shape, so the width at top is given by:

b'= b+2d

(d-200))xr L—b d
Effective depth at this section = d'= 200 +
(L, 2

Depth of Neutral Axis = d2=0.42Xd'

L—b)x
Width of sectional neutral axis= b2= b'+ d2
d'-200

+ P" 0
Shear force at section C-D=V= L x /nx P02
2

Tv— (
b2x
d')

Percentage of steel for balance section = p

From Table23, of IS456:2000, Get the value of 'cc
If tv>tc, Increase the depth of footing.
Calculation of area of steel

f A
0.87fyAsa, =
fa bd
Get the value of Ast
Providing the same reinforcement of both faces in both directions.

18
 Sectional Elevation

Fig. 3.8 Plan and Sectional Elevation of Reinforced Footing

An example problem is worked out in Annexure-1

19
 CHAPTER 4

DESIGN OF PILE FOUNDATION

4.0. GENERAL
Pile foundation is generally provided as foundation for transmission line towers. The
transmission line tower may passes through different topographical conditions like river,
marshy land hills etc. The design of pile foundation is divided into two categories i.e. (1).Pile
situated in normal condition. (2).Pile situated where scour is expected to occur.
For transmission line tower foundation two types of piles are provided, these are:
1. Pile Foundation
2. Underreamed Pile Foundation
4.1. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF PILE FOUNDATION FOR NORMAL
CONDITION
4.1.1 Analysis of Pile Foundation
There are two conditions of load application
1.Broken wire condition (B.W.C)
2. Normal condition (N.C)
A load factor of 1.5 is taken for B.W.0 and a load factor of 2 is taken for N.C.
Steps of designing of Footing:
Stepl. Determine the ultimate compressive load, Uplift load and horizontal load by
multiplying appropriate load factor i.e.2 for N.0 and 1.5 for B.W.C.
Step2. Determine of loads coming on each Pile:
Ultimate Compressive load=Pu kN
Ultimate Uplift load = Uu kN
Ultimate Horizontal thrust = Hu kN
Step3. Soil profile study
From SPT Standard Penetration Test value get the value of a and unconfined compressive
strength respectively from table 4.1.1 and table 4.1.2

20
 Table 4.1 Relationship between SPT value and a
Consistency N Value Value of a
Soft to very soft <4 1
Medium 4 to 8 0.7
Stiff 8 to 15 0.4
Stiff to Hard >15 0.3

Table 4.2 Relationship between SPT value and undrained compressive strength
Unconfined Compressive
N value
strength(KN/m2)qu
<2 <25
2 —4 25 - 50
4—8 50-100
8 — 16 100-200
16 — 32 200-400
>32 >400

Enter the value of c and 4) for different soil layer.

Step4. Select the length of pile. If there is any firm stratum in the bottom layer then at least 5
times the diameter of pile should be embedded into that stratum.
Step5. Uplift resistance
For cohesive soil:
Uplift resistance =Qu
= A.Z±W
Where
As = Surface area of pile shaft below GL,
cu= undrained cohesion of soil, and
W= unit weight of soil + Pile + Pile cap

21
For non cohesive soil:
The uplift resistance is provided by the skin friction resistance with a reduction factor of 0.6
plus the weight pile. Safe uplift capacity of single pile is given by
fs 2,1 x RF
a afe =
FOS
+ W

Where
fs = average unit skin friction = Ka, tan 8 ,
As = Surface area of pile shaft below GL,
K= coefficient of horizontal pressure =0.35 (for bored pile),
av= effective vertical stress at mid depth of pile below GL,
8= angle of wall friction =2/34),
RF=reduction factor= 0.6 for cohesion less soil
W = weight of pile.
Uplift capacity of group of pile = nO
,safe
Step6. Calculate ultimate load resistance of each pile:
1. For cohesive soil:
Qu = Ap.Nec p +a.c.A T

Where
Qu= ultimate bearing capacity of pile (in IN/ sq m),
Nc= bearing capacity factor, usually taken as 9 ,
cp= average cohesion of soil at pile tip IN/sq m,
a = adhesion factor from table 4.1,
c= average cohesion throughout the length of pile, and
Ap= cross Sectional area at pile toe in m2
2. For Cohesionless soil:

Qu = a-v Ap(Nq 1) ± KpD, tan As,

i=1
Where
D = stem diameter in m ,
Pp— effective overburden pressure at pile toe in kM/m2 ,
Nc, Nq = bearing capacity factor depends upon the value of 4),

22
 K= coefficient of earth pressure,
8= angle of wall friction between pile and soil in degree, and
As, = surface area of stem in m2.
From the above formula determine the value of ultimate bearing capacity Quit of single pile.
Step7: Determination of group capacity of pile
Select a spacing of pile
There are two types of failure of pile group.
1. By block failure
2. By individual pile failure
In block failure the whole group of pile acts like a single individual pile. The ultimate load
capacity of pile group by block failure, Qug is given by
Qug = cubNA,+ pb Leu

Where
cub = undrained strength of clay at base of pile group,
c'= average undrained strength of clay along the length of block,
Nc= bearing capacity factor, taken as 9 ,
Ap= cross Sectional area at block in m2,
Pb perimeter of block in m, and
L= embedded length of pile in m .
In individual pile failure mode, ultimate failure mode is given by

Qug = Pah
Where, Quit= ultimate bearing capacity of single pile
The ultimate load capacity of group is taken as the smaller of these two values.
Step8.Spacing of pile
As per IS: 2911 (Part1), if the pile is founded on very hard stratum and deriving there
capacity mainly from end bearing, minimum spacing in such case should be 2.5 times the
diameter of pile.
If the pile is founded get there bearing capacity mainly from the friction resistance minimum
spacing in such case should be 3 times the diameter of pile.
Step9. Effect of lateral load
Calculate the depth of fixity for calculating bending moment induced by horizontal load.

23
Following steps to be followed for determining that:
1. The long flexible pile, fully or partially embedded, is treated as cantilever fixed at some
depth below the ground level
Determine the depth of fixity
For Granular Soil

EI
Stiffness factor T (in m) = s (4.1)
gb

Where
E=Young's modulus of the pile material in MN/m2,
I=moment of inertia of pile cross-section in m4, and
lb= coefficient of modulus variation in MN/m3 from table 4.1.3

Table 4.3 Value of coefficient of modulus variation ilh in kN/m3

ih KN/m3 X 103
Soil Type N (blow/30cm)
Dry Submerged
Very Loose Sand 0-4 0.4 -

Loose Sand 4 — 10 2.5 1.4

Medium Sand 10 — 35 7.5 5.0

Dense Sand >35 20.0 12.0

Very Loose Sand - - 0.4

For Cohesive Soil

E1
Stiffness Factor R in m= 141 (4.2)
KB
Where, K= 1.5K1 , the value of K1 in MN/m3 from table 4.4

24
 Table 4.4.The Value of Subgrade Modulus K1 in KN/m3
Unconfined compression Range of K1 IN/m3 X 103
Soil Consistency
strength qu kN/m2

Soft 25 — 50 4.5 — 9.0

Medium Stiff 50 -100 9.0 — 18.0
Stiff 100 — 200 18.0 — 36
Very Stiff 200 — 400 36 — 72
Hard >400 > 72.0

Depth of point of fixity can be obtained from Figure 4.1(Ramasamy,G.,Gopal Ranjan, &
Jain,N.K.-1987)

F
NOOR PILLELSYIN
RMA ADE
LOSANDDAN
Cays

a FOR PILES IN PRELOADED

CLAYS

Fig 4.1 Determination of Depth Fixity

Then a fixed end moment (MF) of equivalent cantilever is calculated and then by multiplying
with the reduction factor (m) from figure 4.2 determines the value of actual maximum
bending moment (M).

25
The fixed end moment of equivalent cantilever is given by: (Ramasamy, G., Gopal Ranjan, &
Jain, N.K.-1987)
.....for
MF =-"Q(Li + free head pile (4.3)

+
...for fixed head pile (4.4)
2
Actual maximum moment =M= m x M F

1.2
FOR PILES IN SAND OR NORMALLY LOADED CLAY

FOR PILES PRELOADED CLAY

z0
E 0.8
1,11

0 1.5 2 2.5

Fig.4.2 Reduction Factor

Piles are attached to pile cap so it is the case of fixed head pile.
Step.10. Using SP: 16 and IS: 456-2000, gets the area of steel for this moment (M)
Minimum area of longitudinal reinforcement in pile should not be less than 0.4%.

Step.11. At top piles are attached to pile cap. The function of pile cap is to distribute the load
coming to it equally to all piles beneath it. The thickness of pile cap such that it provides
necessary anchorage of column and pile reinforcement. Clear cover for main reinforcement
should not be less than 60n-irn.Pile should project 50mm into the pile cap.

26
4.1.2. Design of Pile Foundation for Normal Condition
Design of pile
The ultimate MOMellt=-Mult= MF
Ultimate compressive load = Puit = Pu
Ultimate Uplift load = Uu kN
d'
Calculate the value of
Pu and
M u for particular value of —
fag fag
Where
d'= clear cover , and
D = diameter of pile
Using the SP: 16 get the value of percentage of steel
Is 456:2000, clause26.5.3 specify that
• Minimum diameter of longitudinal reinforcement = 12mm
■ Spacing of longitudinal bars measured along the periphery of pile shall not exceed
300mm.
• Diameter of lateral tie shall not be less than one fourth of the diameter of longitudinal
bar and in no case less than 6mm.
As per IS: 2911(Part-2), the minimum area of longitudinal reinforcement is 0.4% of sectional
area calculated on the basis of outside diameter.
Clear cover to all main reinforcement in pile shaft shall be not less than 50mm. the minimum
diameter of the links shall not be less than 6mm and minimum spacing should not be less
than 150mm.

Design of Pile cap

Calculate the bending moment at the face of pedestal.
a. Determination of depth of pile cap
For this moment determine the depth of pile cap

d-
(0.138xbxfck )

Compare the depth calculated with the development length required for pile reinforcement.

27
The maximum among these two will be provided

Calculation for Area of steel

f AstL
0.87 f yilsthc/( J= M
1 f abd

The minimum reinforcement required = 0.12% of cross-sectional area.

The maximum among these will be provided

Check for punching shear

The critical section for punching shear is d/2 from the face of pedestal.

4.2. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF PILE FOUNDATION FOR SCOUR CONDITION

4.2.1 Analysis of Pile Foundation for Scour Condition
Determination of Maximum Depth of Scour: The maximum scour depth should be measured
by soundings in the vicinity of the site of proposed transmission line tower. Such soundings
are best done during or immediately after the flood. The scour pattern of individual stream
depends on the discharge, bed slope, direction of flow, bed material shape and size of well.
The formula developed by Lacey for alluvial stream bed is well known. The normal depth of
scour below the HFL in a regime channel is:

D = 0 .473( 2 ) 3

Where
D = normal depth of scour,
Q= discharge in cumecs,
f = silt factor =1.76Vin , and
m= mean size of particle in mm.
[RC: 78- 2000 recommends that scour calculations for foundation may be made for a
. ischarge larger than the design discharge as per the table 4.5.

28
 Table 4.5 Increase over Discharge for Foundation
Catchments area ,km2 Increase over design discharge in present
0-3000 30
3000-10000 30-20
10000-40000 20-10
above 40000 10

For determining the maximum depth of scour, the normal depth of scour is multiplied by the
given factor as shown in table 4.6
Table.4.6 Factor for Determining Maximum Depth of Scour
Condition of river. Factors
In straight reach 1.27
At moderate bend 1.50
At a severe bend 1.75
At right angle bend 2.0
At noses of Pier 2

Determination of Length of Pile

In general case the minimum grip provided is 5 times the diameter of pile and from scour
considerations; the base of the foundation may be at a minimum depth of 1.33 times the
maximum scour depth measured from HFL. The maximum of these two will be provided.

Single Pile Capacity

Under Uplift Loading
Uplift capacity of the pile governs the design.
For cohesive soil:

Uplift resistance =Qu = AS cu + W

Where,
As --surface area of pile below maximum scour level,

29
 cu= undrained cohesion of soil, and
W= weight of soil + Pile.
For non cohesive soil:
The uplift resistance is provided by the skin friction resistance with a reduction factor of 0.6
plus the weight pile. Safe uplift capacity of single pile is given by
fsilc x RF w
Qsaj = r
e FOS
Where
fs=average unit skin friction = Ka, tan g ,
As= area of pile shaft below maximum scour level,
K= coefficient of horizontal pressure =0.35 (for bored pile),
av= effective vertical stress at mid depth of pile below maximum scour level,
8= angle of wall friction =2/30,
RF= reduction factor = 0.6 for cohesion less soil, and
W = weight of pile.
Uplift capacity of group of pile =nQsafe
Factor of safety against uplift should not be less than 2.5 to 3.

Safety against compressive loads

For cohesive soil:
Qu = Ap Arc .C p +a.C.Ars

Where
Qu= ultimate bearing capacity of pile (in kN/ sq m),
bearing capacity factor, usually taken as 9,
cp= average cohesion of soil at pile tip kN/sq m,
a = adhesion factor,
c= average cohesion throughout the length of pile, and
AP cross Sectional area at pile toe in m2

30
For Cohesionless soil:
n
Qn = crvil p(N g —1)+ E Kpa tan SAS,

Where
D=Stem diameter in m,
Pn=effective overburden pressure at pile toe in kM/m2,
Nc, Nq=bearing capacity factor depends upon the value of 4:1),
K= coefficient of earth pressure,
8= angle of wall friction between pile and soil in degree, and
As; = surface area of stem in m2.
From the above formula determine the value of ultimate bearing capacity Quit of single pile.
Safety against Lateral Load
The scour under design flood results in large length of pile laterally unsupported. In addition
the flowing water exerts additional lateral load on the foundation,
(1) Estimation of lateral load on pile
Load from the tower:
The leg of the tower is inclined and transmits an axial load Qum'. The axial load has a
horizontal component, Ht obtained as:
Ht = Qaxial x Sin a
Where
a = inclination of the leg to vertical.
The intensity of pressure due to flowing water is given by:
p = 0.52KV2
Where
p = intensity of pressure due to flowing water in kN/m2,
V =the velocity of current at the point considered, and
K =a constant: 1.5 for square / rectangular end shapes 0.66 for semi -circular end
shapes.
The velocity of water current varies linearly with maximum at HFL to zero at the scour line.
The maximum pressure component is obtained as,

31
 p = 0.52K (-5V)2

(ii) Lateral Analysis of Piles

For lateral analysis, the pile may be considered as an equivalent cantilever
The equivalent length is calculated by using equation 4.1and 4.2 and using figure 4.1

Then moment is calculated by using equation 4.3 and 4.4 and using figure 4.2
Structural Design
Structural design of Pile and pile cap remain same as mentioned earlier in section 4.1.2.

4.3. ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF UNDER-REAMED PILE

The Under-reamed piles are bored cast-in-situ concrete pile with there lower portion enlarged
or reamed in the form of bulb These type of foundation are commonly recommended for
providing safe and economical foundation in expensive soil like black cotton soil ,filled up
ground and other type of soil having low bearing capacity. It is also recommended in the case
of transmission line tower foundation where uplift load is governing force for designing.
Under-reamed piles are very effective in the case of uplift load. The Under-reamed pile gives
satisfactory result in expensive soil.
Steps of designing of Under-reamed pile are as follow:
Stepl. Determine the ultimate compressive load, Uplift load and horizontal load by
multiplying appropriate load factor i.e.2 for N.0 and 1.5 for B.W.C.
Step2. Determine of loads coming on each Pile:
Ultimate Compressive load=Pu kN
Ultimate Uplift load = Uu kN
Ultimate Horizontal thrust = Hu kN
Step3. Refer soil test report and decide the type of under-reamed pile to be provided i.e.,
whether single under-ream or double under-ream.
In case the site is such that the depth of fill is more and water table is high, as far as
possible choose single under-reamed pile. If, on the other hand, the water table at the site is
low and the depth of pile is less, choose single or double under-reamed pile depending
upon load. In case of double under-reamed pile, the first under-ream should be 2 m below
the ground level.

32
Step4. Refer Table4.7 and choose suitable diameter and length of pile.
Step5. Check the capacity of the pile by following steps:
• Let the safe bearing capacity of the pile selected pile for standard length of 3.5 m
from table be = WI kN.
• Let, L meter be the total length of pile and let the difference between the total length
of pile and the standard length of 3. 5 m is represented by x.
x = (L-3.5) m,
• Refer column (10) in Table (4.7) and work out allowable increase in capacity (W2) of
pile due to increased length x
w _xxp
2 — 0.3

p= increase in the capacity due to increase in length of pile beyond 0.3m

Basic Safe load= W3=W1+W2
Step6. The value of W3 requires further modification to account for the particular site
conditions as under:
a. In case it is necessary to keep the diameter of under-ream as 2 times the shaft
diameter (instead of 2.5 times the shaft diameter for normal piles) to meet the site or
design requirement, the safe load in (step 5)) above shall be reduced by 10%.
The modified safe load =r
W4 =W3-0 . W3 = 0.9W3
b. In case, it is necessary to keep the c/c spacing between piles as 1.5 times the under-
reamed diameter (instead of 2 times the under-reamed diameter as per normal
requirement); the safe load shall be reduced by 10%. Thus in situations where
condition at (a) above is also applicable, the modified safe load or
W5 = W4-0.1W4 = 0.9 W4
c. If the soil is loose (having N value less than 10), the safe load shall be reduced by
25%. Thus in situations where condition (a) and (b) above are also applicable, the
modified safe load becomes.
W6 = W5 — 0.25 W5 = 0.75 W5

33
 d. If the water table is high, the safe load shall be reduced by 25%. Thus, in situation,
where conditions (a), (b) and (c) above are also applicable, the modified safe load
becomes
W7= W6— 0.25 W6=0.75 W6
e. In case the moment due to wind or earthquake is considered in working out the load
on pile, the safe load shall be increased by 33%. (Since the stresses can be increased
by 33% when either of the forces i.e., winds or earthquake is considered). Thus, in
situation where all the above conditions are also applicable, the modified safe load
becomes
W8 = W7 + 0.33W7= 1.33W7
The value of final modified safe load should work out to be same or slightly more than P, the
design load for pile. In case the modified safe load works out to be lesser than P, revise the
design by adopting increased diameter and/or length of pile.
Step7. Using table 4.7 calculate the ultimate bearing capacity of pile

Factor of safety (FOS) = FOS = P

8

IS: 2911(Part3) specify that this FOS should not be less than 2.5
Step8. In the similar way uplift capacity of pile will be calculated

Uurt
Factor of safety (FOS) = F.O.S =
URes
Where
Ures = uplift resistance of pile.
IS: 2911(Part3) specify that this FOS should not be less than 3
Step9. In the similar fashion uplift capacity of pile will be calculated

Factor of safety (FOS) = F.O.S =

"'Res

Where, Lres = Lateral load resistance of pile

IS: 2911(Part3) specify that this FOS should not be less than 2.5
Step8. The area of longitudinal reinforcement can be obtained using table 4.7
Spacing of spiral reinforcement can be obtained from table 4.7

34
Fig.4.3 A typical Reinforced Under-Reamed Pile

35


-7,
.- -0 at ,,,
eL), _ N oo -1- ..c. c)
= oo nr
0 (t) = ,,
o ‘-' .—."
—. N• en' vr• vo• kr)'
A it:.

Late:

4.0 I
Resist
1:11) 7:1 8
.5 ,_5 a
... Lel •cs-•
—• ri en m kr)
4
v) .) ?I?
0
2 0 U "S v") o kr) c) kr)

0.85
a) tio

0.7
lei I-4 ,—$ (e•I et
,
)
C.. Cn =
a) k-, 0 6 .-- — — —

o
A

a) E
Safe loadin uplift

cn
co c> vn ton kr) ,r) kr, o o
I-. c) o
a) en `0
_,„ °°
_. c:°. cl 't. `tp. °°.
.a.) ago —.
I
Il v■I 1■1 ,-/
= 1
I■1 04 "
1).

.0 lai
a) o

25.75
CI) SL

31.5
= -0 kr) 0. N

18
IZ
o =
A Q `'f
Table 4.7 Safe loads for vertical, Bored cast-in-situ Underremmed pile in sandy and clayey soil

i
ob)
..g4 4 la
5 -1. ,.0 oo
14
r-: N
2
.5 5 a
cn Q 1:1(4)
a) e
Eo u t s cr, . 6.1
S'I

.3 en o ci. 6 ,....1
a) 6. 0
A a

a> E
t)
a, c) ...,t, kr)
--. °°. (:7 --.• N
kr,
Compression

,-. en 0 c) • --. - -
c.)
0 t N
.-, " ),
rn

a> 0 U
.0
0 0 U
52.5

N
18

7:1
§
63
36
42
24

0 0 ,-.
0 0 il2

a) 4 I?,
of) 43 g N
oo — —
28
35
24

42

■D
.5 = a
C/3 4,2

tO .s I .s ,
18

30
30

30
30
ZZ
SZ

*g k3) ■0 '-:
,3
ta, 0
vi 4-■ • .
"0
0
... OONNNNN
— — 1-... e-4 o■I v•-•I v■.,
reinforcement
Longitudinal

CI

I-.
a)
-0
E n-et v- kr) 2 N C'
g
Z
a) 4, 'lc ,,
..0 0) (I) 5
3.75
-0 E

3.5
3.5

4.0
4.5
5

0 o co .5 en
t) A P2. '...-'
0
a)
,--1 a.) 4. -o
a, ,..,
a> 5
OA ..0
3.5

3.5
3.5

3.5
3.5
S.£
S.£

.5 c co .5
v) 5, ..._.

0) 4 Ica ....N
,n• un
112.5

to .8 E cz, N
125
100

....
94

a) .5 = a3 .5 -,,
N
■4:) ,
..•
a) v) 5 ......
§
.5 s c> , o kr) o
kon o ..._.
A o N N M ,en- Tr •zr vl
 CHAPTER 5
WELL FOUNDATION

5.0. GENERAL
Well foundations are widely used as foundation for transmission line tower, where the uplift
loads are large. When tower passes through river bed or bank, scouring takes place due to
flow of water, and then well foundation is designed. Well foundation is a massive sub-
structure; it is monolithic and relatively rigid in its structural behavior.
Circular well are provided for well foundation, as the legs of tower are symmetrical and
equidistant to each other. Circular well is simplicity in construction, ease in sinking and its
uniform strength in all directions. It has only one dredge hole. Its weight per square meter of
peripheral surface is highest and hence the sinking effort is less, thus facilitating easier
sinking. It can be more easily controlled against tilt and tilt correction is also easier in this
case.
5.1. ELEMENTS OF WELL FOUNDATION FOR TRANSMISSION LINE TOWER
The various elements for foundation for transmission line tower are as follow:
PEDESTAI.

WELL CAP RIVER BED

WELL STEINING

SCOUR LEVEL

GRIP LENGTH

WELL CURB

Fig.5.1 Cross-Sectional Dimension of Well Foundation

37
5.1.1 Pedestal
Short section of leg angle embedded in the concrete along the slope of tower leg. Slope of
pedestal is provided along the slope of leg of tower. The leg of tower is anchored to the
concrete by clit angle. The function of pedestal is to transfer the load of tower to well. It is a
reinforced concrete section having thickness at the junction of pedestal and well cap is
1000mm.
5.1.2 Cantilever Beam
Pedestal used to transfer the load from tower to well cap through cantilever beam. Provide
an outstanding of 100 mm on each side pedestal.
5.1.3 Well Cap
It is a R.C.0 slab of sufficient strength to transmit the load from superstructure to well
foundation. Its top level of well cap is generally kept at L.W.L or river bed level. It is
monolithically constructed with well steining.
5.1.4 Well Steining
It is hollow cylindrical reinforced concrete member, having sufficient thickness to transmit
all the loads coming to it through well cap. As per IRC, dredge hole should be large enough
to permit easy dredging, the minimum dimension not being less than 2 m.
The minimum thickness of the well steining should not be less than 500 mm. Thickness of
steining should be such that it is possible to sink the well without excessive kentledge and
without getting damaged during sinking or during rectifying the excessive tilts and shifts.
Stress at various levels of steining should be within the permissible limits under all
conditions of loads that may transfer to the well.
5.1.5 Well Curb
The curb of the well have to transfer the entire load through the cutting edge to the ground
during sinking. RCC well curb with steel cutting edge for any type of well are commonly
used. Steel cutting edges are used as a possibility of coming across small builder during
sinking cannot be ruled out. Curb cut through the soil by the dead weight of the well steining
and kentledge if any, when the inside of the well is dredged. The well curb is slightly
projected beyond the steining by about 75 mm.

38
5.1.6 Bottom Plug
After the well is sunk to required depth, the base of the well is plugged with concrete. It is
called as bottom plug. It transfers the loads to the subsoil and acts as raft against the soil
pressure from below. Generally M20 grade of concrete are generally provided.

5.2. DETERMINATION OF MAXIMUM DEPTH OF SCOUR

The maximum scour depth should be measured by soundings in the vicinity of the site
proposed bridge and for any structures nearby. Such soundings are best done during or
immediately after the flood. The scour pattern of individual stream depends on the discharge,
bed slope, direction of flow, bed material shape and size of well.
The formula developed by Lacey for alluvial stream bed are well Known. The normal depth
of scour below the HFL in a regime channel is:

D = 0 .473( 2 )3

Where
D = normal depth of scour,
Q= discharge in cumecs,

f = silt factor =1.76j , and

m= mean size of particle in mm
IRC: 78- 2000 recommends that scour for foundation shall be designed for larger discharge
than the design discharge as per the table 5.1.
Table 5.1. Increase over discharge for foundation

Catchments area ,km2 Increase over design discharge in present

0-3000 30

3000-10000 30-20

10000-40000 20-10

above 40000 10

39
For determining the maximum depth of scour, the normal depth of scour is multiplied by the
given factor as shown in table 5.2.

Table 5.2.Multiplying Factor for Different River Condition

Condition of river Factors
In straight reach 1.27
At moderate bend 1.50
At a severe bend 1.75
At right angle bend 2.0
At noses of Pier 2

5.3. ALLOWABLE BEARING PRESSURE

For cohesionless soil, the Indian standard (IS: 3955-1967), recommends the following
equation to estimate the allowable bearing pressure of a well foundation:
qa= 5.4N2 B + 16(100 + N 2 )D f

Where,
qa = allowable bearing pressure, Kg/m2,
N = Corrected standard penetration resistance value,
B = Smaller dimension of well cross-section (in m), and
Df =Depth of foundation below scour level

5.4. LOAD CALCULATION

5.4.1. Force from Tower

The loads coming from tower are axial; it may be either uplift or compressive load. They are
inclined at the same slope with the vertical as the tower legs are inclined. It is resolved in two
orthogonal coordinates as vertical and horizontal. In structural designing usually a factor of
safety of 2 and 1.5 are taken for normal and broken wire condition respectively.

40
5.4.2 Dead Load:
The dead load carried by foundation consists of its own weight
5.4.3 Seismic Force:
An earthquake is perceptional motion of the ground; it is irregular and random both in
magnitude and direction. Motion of ground in the form of vibration can be both horizontal
and vertical in all coordinal directions. The horizontal motion usually greater than the vertical
.Vertical acceleration usually varies from 1/10th to 1/5th of the horizontal acceleration. Only
the weight of structure above the maximum scour level should be considered in calculating
the seismic force. The seismic force assumed to act at the center of gravity of each member
or mass.
5.4.4 Water Current Force
Any part of foundation which may be submersed in running water shall be designed to
sustain safely the horizontal pressure due to force of the current.
Intensity of pressure parallel to direction of water current P
P = 0.52KV 2
Where,
P = Intensity of pressure due to water current in kN/m2,
V = the velocity of the current at the point where the pressure intensity is
being calculated (in m/s), and
K = a constant having different values for different shapes.

In case of the water current striking the piers at an angle, for calculating the pressure due to
the components of velocity perpendicular to the pier, constant K should be taken as 1.5 in all
cases except in the case of circular piers where the constant should be taken as 0.66.
For calculating the pressure on the pier, angle 0 that the current makes with the axis
of the pier should be taken into account. The pier should then be designed for variation of
current angle between (20° ±0°). Thus the pressure along the axis of the pier and transverse
to it will respectively be given by

Pi = 0.52KV2 cost (20° ±0°), and

P2= 0.52 K V2sin2 (20° ±0°).

41
 Table 5.3 Value of K for Different Shape of Pier
Shape K values
1.5
Square ended piers

0.66
Circular piers or piers with semicircular ends

Piers with triangular cut and ease waters, the

angle included between the faces being 30° or
0.50
less

Piers with triangular cut and ease waters, the angle

included between the faces being more than 30° but 0.50 to 0.70
less than 60°
Piers with triangular cut and ease waters, the angle
included between the faces being more than 60° but 0.70 to 0.90
less than 90°

Piers with cut and ease waters of equilateral arc of

0.45
circles
Piers with arcs of the cut and ease waters inter-
0.45
section at 90°

5.4.5. Buoyant Force:

The effect of buoyancy is considered in the design of a well, only if the strata of soil are
permeable or in other words, if bridge foundations are resting on homogeneous and
impermeable strata of soil, no provision is made for buoyancy in the design of bridge.
I.R.C:6-1966 specifies following points which should be taken into consideration for the
computation of the buoyancy force:

42
 1.The effects of buoyancy are to be considered in the design of a steining, in case of a
submersible well foundation. In such a case, it is assumed that the filling behind the steining
is washed away or removed by scouring action.
2. For the design of submerged masonry or concrete structure, the buoyancy effect
through pores is limited to the extent of 15 per cent of full buoyancy effect.
3. If the member under consideration displaces water only, the reduction in weight due to
buoyancy for that member is taken equal to the volume of the displaced water.

5.5. ANALYSIS OF WELL FOUNDATION

Analysis of well foundation involves two theory, Elastic theory and Ultimate resistance
theory. Elastic theory method gives the soil pressure at the side and the base under the design
load loads, but to determine the actual factor of safety against failure, it will be necessary to
calculate the ultimate soil resistance .Therefore the design of well foundations shall be
checked by both the methods.

5.5.1 Elastic Theory

5.5.1.1 Assumptions
The following assumptions are made in deriving the equations based on elastic theory:
1.The soil surrounding the well and below the base is perfectly elastic,
Homogeneous and follows Hooke's Law.
2. Under design working loads, the lateral deflections are so small that the unit soil
reaction "p" increases linearly with increasing lateral deflection "z" as expressed by p =
KHZ
Where, KH =the coefficient of horizontal subgrade reaction at the base.
3. The coefficient of horizontal subgrade reaction increases linearly with depth in the
case of cohesionless soils.
4. The well is assumed to be a rigid body subjected to an external unidirectional
horizontal force H and a moment M. at scour level.
5.5.1.2 Steps of analysis
The various steps involved in the analysis of well foundation are as follow:

43
Step 1: Determine the value of W, H and M under combination of normal loads without wind
and seismic loads assuming the minimum grip length below maximum scour level.
Where
W = total downward load acting at the base of the well, including the self weight of well.,
H = external horizontal force acting on the well at scour level, and
M = total applied external moment about the base of the well.
Step 2: Compute IB, L, and I;
Where
113 = moment of inertia of base of the well about the axis normal to the direction of
horizontal force passing through its C.G.
Ir B 4 for circular well,
=--
12
I = I B +Ma ± 2,u' a), and
Iv= moment of inertia of the projected area in elevation of soil mass offering resistance. =
LD f 3
12
Where
L= projected width of the soil mass offering resistance multiplied by appropriate value of
shape factor. The value of shape factor for circular wells shall be taken as 0.9,
Df = depth of well below scour level,
m = KH/K; ratio of horizontal to vertical coefficient of subgrade reaction at base,
W=tan8 , where 8 is the angle of wall friction between well and soil, and
diameter
a = (for circular well).
RD
Step 3: Ensure the following:

M + SIC') — ,uW ,
H >—

H < M (1 — ,uu')+ ,uW

Where
/ Df
r
m/v 2

44


,u = coefficient of friction between the base and the soil. Taken as tan 0 , and
0 = angle of internal friction of soil.
Step 4: Check the elastic state
mM
y(Kr )
I
mM mM
If > p K a ) , get new grip length by equating it i.e. = ykK p — K

Where, y= density of soil (submersed density),

( \2
Cos0
Passive pressure Kp — ,and
-j Cos8 V sin(0 + 8)Sin O ,

Cos 0
Active pressure coefficient Ka
■V cos + V sin(( + g )sin0
Step 5: Calculate
W ,u ' P + MB
a1 =
A 2 I
W — ,u' P MB
62 =
A 21
Where
& 62 =maximum and minimum base pressure respectively,
A=area of base of well,
B= width of base of well in the direction of force and moments, and
P= M/r
Step 6: Check a2 0 , i.e. no tension

a2 5_ Allowable bearing capacity of soil

5.5.2. Ultimate Resistance Approach

The elastic theory described above determines the stress in the soil mass but does not indicate
the safety against ultimate failure of the foundation. For checking the ultimate load capacity
of well foundation, the applied load are magnified by suitable load factors for various load

45
combinations and the ultimate resistance is reduced by appropriate under-strength factors and
the two are compared. The steps to be taken are as shown below:
Step 1. The various applied loads i.e. uplift load, moment and down thrust load are computed
.In the ultimate resistance case, the point of rotation is assumed to occur at 0.2Df above the
base of the well. The moment to be calculated about this point instead of base of well.
Step 2. Check for maximum average pressure at base:
W. < qu
A 2
Where, qu= the ultimate bearing capacity of the soil below base of well, and
Wu ultimate downward load acting at base, including the self weight of well,
A = area of base of well

WEI < qu
A 2
If this condition is not satisfied then increase the diameter of the well.
Step 3. Compute the base resistance moment Mb at the plane of rotation by following
formula:
Mb = QW.B tan 0
Where, Q = A constant depend upon the shape of the well as well as the ratio D/B ratio. A
shape factor 0.6 is to be multiplied for wells with circular base.

Table.5.4 Value of Q
D
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
B
Q 0.41 0.45 0.5 0.56 0.64

Step 4. Compute the ultimate moment of resistance on the well sides. This has two parts, one
due to passive resistance and other due to frictional resistance.
Ms = 0.107 (K p —KA )D f3L
Where
y=submersed density of soil,
L = 0.9 times the diameter of the well,

46
 Df = depth of grip below the maximum scour level, and
Kp, KA= passive and active pressure coefficient to be calculated using Coulomb's
2
theory assuming "8" angle of wall of friction between well and soil equal to — 0:1) but
3
limited to a value of 22.5°.
Step 5. Compute the resisting moment due to friction at front and back faces (Mf) about the
plane of rotation by following formulae:
M f = 0.11y (K p — K A )D f 2 B2 sin 8

Step 6. Check the applied ultimate moment with the total ultimate moment of resistance
0.7y(Mb +M, +M f )

Where, 0.7 is the strength reduction factor

5.6. STRUCTURAL DESIGN

Steps of design of well foundation for transmission line tower are as follow:
Step 1. Determine the ultimate compressive load, uplift load and horizontal load by multiplying
appropriate load factor i.e.2 for N.0 and 1.5 for B.W.C.
Step 2. Design of Pedestal
Ultimate Compressive load=Pu kN
Ultimate Uplift load = Uu kN
Ultimate Horizontal thrust = Hult kN
Horizontal thrust includes the horizontal component of load from tower + water current force.
Water current force= Intensity of pressure parallel to direction of water current P
P1= 0.52KV2 cost (20° ±00),
Where
P1 = Intensity of pressure due to water current in kN/m2,
V = the velocity of the current at the point where the pressure intensity is
being calculated (in m/s), and
K = a constant having the values for different shapes. = 1.5 for square pedestal
2
Force due to water current=Pi x exposed area it act at a distance — times the depth of
3
pedestal which is exposed to water current from the bottom of pedestal

47
Calculate the designing moment= Muit at the base of pedestal
Neglecting tension in concrete, the steel required resisting the direct pull
U x 1 000
Ast-
0.87fi,
d i=clear cover,
D=Overall depth of cross-section of shaft, and
b=width of cross-section of shaft
From design aids
P
For the value of , '1 and
D f cic bD fck bD2
Get percentage of steel required =p using the SP: 16 codes
Asti required = p x Area of section of shaft
As per IS 456:2000, percentage of longitudinal reinforcement should not be less than 0.8%

Step 3. Design of Cantilever Beam:

Providing thickness of beam as 0.75 m at edge as there is no bending moment and thickness
at face of staining should be sufficient for anchorage of pedestal and steining.
The shear force at face of staining = V
Bending moment at face of staining = M
Pint = 1.5 x 737.5 kN = 1106.25 IN
Must = 1.5 x 3163.4 kNm = 4745.1 kNm

d= Mtn
Mithfck b
0.137x

Area of steel required Ast

(Ad.y ))
M = 0.87 f y A 4 1
bdfck
For balance section % of steel required "p"
The maximum of these two will be provided
Providing Ast/2 on each face of beam.
V
=—
bd

48
As per Table 23 of IS 456:2000 get the value of tic
If T, > (0.5-cc) provide shear reinforcement
If the depth of beam >750 mm, provide side face reinforcement of 0.1% of cross sectional
area of beam
Step4.Design of Well Cap
Thickness of well cap will remain same as that of the cantilever beam at the external face of
well staining. Providing a nominal reinforcement of 0.12 % of gross section area of cap
Step 5.Design of Well Steining
As per IRC: 78-2000 clauses 708.2.3.1
h= KdVi
Where
h = minimum thickness of steining in mm,
d = external dia of steining,
1= depth of well below Bed Level, and
K = 0.03 for RCC.
Calculate the downward load V ult , bending moment (M) and horizontal load (H) at the scour
level due to dead load, seismic load, buoyant force, water current force and force coming
from tower.
Calculate depth of zero shear force below scour level

[ 2FH 12
X =
y(K p — K A )B

Where
F=constant whose value = 2, and
B= external diameter of well
Net downward load about this point V
Eccentricity on top of well due to
As per IRC: 78-2000: Permissible tilt of 1 in 80 and Permissible shift =150 mm
Calculate Moment due to tilt and shift and total moment
Moment of inertia of well steining I

49
 , V My )
f1,2=1.J(— ± —
A I

fcc= 0.45 .rf:

Check fi and f2 both should be less than fee,
Hence provide minimum reinforcement.
Assume that open dredging method has been used for sinking of well, the maximum pressure
intensity action on well from outside= ybhK A
2
r +r
Maximum hoop stress along outer face= p 122 2 2
— r2

Where, 1.ff-internal diameter of well, and

r2=external diameter of well
As per IRC: 78-2000 clauses 708.35
Minimum vertical reinforcement =0.2% of gross area
Minimum Ast on inner face =0.06 %of gross cross sectional area
IRC: 78-2000, clause708.3.5specify that
Minimum transverse reinforcement = 0.04% of gross cross sectional area

Development length required La- Oa,

4rbd

Step 6. Design of Well Curb

Stress due to sinking:
N=weight of steining per m run
Assuming angle of bevel face with vertical as0= 30°, µ =0.4
(Sin0 - PCosi9jd
Total hoop tension =0.75N
pSin 9 + Cos 9
Stress in curb when resting on bottom plug q
Assuming height of imaginary arch = r =4m
qd 3
Hoop Tension =
16r
Assuming height of well curb =b=3 m
\bd
Hoop compression= yb K A(2p f - b)-4-

50
 03 \ bd)
Design hoop tension = HT=1.5 x ( --71,K A (2D f b )--4–
16r

Hoop reinforcement =
HT
—
fy
As per IRC: 78-2000, clause708.7.3
Minimum reinforcement = 72Kg/m3
Step7. Design of Bottom Plug
Using M20 grade of concrete for bottom plug
Thickness of bottom plug=t

t= 1.18r 2q
Where,
r = external diameter of well

51
 CHAPTER 6
FLOW CHART

C Start
/ Input Compressive Loari(P),uplift Load(U)
and Lateral Load coming from tower in
B.W.0 and N.0 ,
Inclination of tovwr leg, properties of soil

Shallow Foundation Select Type Pile Foundation

of Foundation

Well Foundation

Is it a rasr
Calculate length of footing Enter Discharge of river, Velocity of scouring
of water and mean size of particle

/ Enter the trial depth of /

footing Calculate Maximum Scour
Calculate Maximum Scour
Eepth
Depth

Enter trial dimension of different

component of foundation Enter The Diameter of Pile /

Check for Elastic Theory Determination of Length of Pile

and
Check for overturning of footing Ultimate Resistance licory

Uplift Capacity of Single Pile

Structural Design of Different
Structural Design of Chimney and components of well foundation
Pad Determination of Number o f Pile

Determination of Ultimate load

(Pult)Bearing capacity of Pile Group

Increase Diameter
of Pile

Design The Pile and Pile Cap

52
 Select Diameter and Length
of Pi le and Bulb

V
Select Diameter and Length Calculate Uplift resistance
of Pile of single Pile

Determine The Number of Increase Diameter of

Calculate Uplift resistance Pile Pile
Increase Diameter of
Pile of single Pile

Determine The Number of Calculate The Ultimate Bearing

Pile (Pult) Capacity of Pile Grow

Calculate The Ultimate Bearing NO

(Pult) Capacity of Pile Group

Structural Design of Pile and Pile Cap

Structural Design of Pile and Pile Cap

53
 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

From:the previous. discussion &ming-conclusion can be drawn

1) Software, support has been developed for the design of all the type of foundation that
are commonly used for transmission me tower
2) The use of the software has been demonstrated by solving typical problems of design
of tower foundation and provides graphical output of the designed foundation
3) The design specifications are as per Indian Standard Codes and Indian Road Congress
has been incorporated in this package.

54
 REFERENCES

1. Wiggins, R.L (1969),"Analysis and Design of Tower Foundation" Proc. ASCE, Jr.
Power Division, Vol. 95, No. P01
2. Down,Dallas.I,and Chierzzi, Robart,"Transmission Tower Foundations" Proceedings,
Journal of Power Division, ASCE, Vol. 92, No P02.Proc. Paper 4750, April, 1966.
3. Radhakrishna.H.S and Adams.J.I (1973) "Long Term Uplift Capacity of Augured
Footing in Fissured Clay" Canadian Geotechnical Journal , Vol.10
4. Mayerhoff,G.G. and Adams,J.I. 1968."The uplift capacity of foundations." Canadian
Geotechnical Journal , 5 (4) ,pp.225-244
5. Richard,L.Wiggins,A.M-1969,"Analysis and Designing of Tower
Foundations"Journal of Power Division, Proceedings of the American Society of
Civil Engineering.
6. IS: 4091-1979, "Indian Standard code of practice for Design and construction of
foundations for Transmission Line Tower and Piles". Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi
7. IS: 11233-1985, "Indian Standard code of practice for Design and construction of
Radar, Antenna, Microwave and T.V. Tower foundations" Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi
8. IS: 2911 sec.2 Part.2," Indian Standard Code of practice for design and construction
of Pile foundation" Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi
9. IS: 3955 (1967), "Indian Standard Code of Practice of Design and Construction of
Well Foundations", Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
10.IRC: 78-2000, "Code of Practice for Road Bridges - Section VII, Foundations and
Substructure", The Indian Road Congress, New Delhi..
11.IRC: 45-1972, "Recommendations for estimating the resistance of soil below the
maximum scour level in the design of well foundations of bridge" The Indian Road
Congress, New Delhi.
12.IRC: 6-1966, "Indian Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges —Section
2 (Load and Stresses)"The Indian Road Congress, New Delhi.

55
13. McCarthy (1988), "Essentials of Soil Mechanics and Foundations", Prentice Hall,
New Jersey.
14.Ramasamy, G. (2006), "Soil Investigations - Ganga River Crossing of Nehtaur-Metor
220 kV Transmission Line, Bijnor (U.P.)", A report submitted by Deptt. of Civil
Engg., NT, Roorkee.
15.Tomlinson, M.J. (1977), "Pile Design and Construction Practice", A Viewpoint
Publication.
16.Varghese, P.C. (2005), "Foundation Engineering", Prentice Hall of India, New Delhi.
17.SP: 34, (1987)"Handbook on Concrete Reinforcement and Detailing" Bureau of
Indian Standards, New Delhi.
18.Down,D.I and Chieurzzi.R,(1966)"Transmission Tower Foundation" Journal of
Power Division ,A.S.C.E ,Vol 92,No P02
19.IS: 456-2000,"Indian Standard Code of Practice of Plain and Reinforced Concrete
(Fourth Revision)." Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
20. IS: 1904(1986) ," Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design and Construction of
Foundation in Soil :General Requirement (Third Revision)" Bureau of Indian
Standards, New Delhi.
21. IS: 2911 (Part 3)-1980, Indian Standard Code of Practice for Design and Construction
of Pile Foundation: Under reamed Pile (First Revision)" Bureau of Indian Standards,
New Delhi.
22. Mayerhof,G.G. and Ranjan,G.-1973,"The bearing Capacity of rigid piles under
inclined loads in sand III:Pile Groups. "Canadian. Geotech.Journal.
23. Ramasamy,G., Ranjan . G and Jain,N.K.(1987) ," Modefication of Indian Standard
Code Practice on Lateral Capacity of Piles" , Indian Geotechnical Journal ,Vol-
17,No.-3
24. Balwant Rao, B. and C.Muthuswami (1963),"Considerations in the Design and
sinking of well foundation for Bridge Piers," Journal of the Indian Road Congress,
New Delhi, Vol XXVII.
25. Saran,S. "Design of Sub Structure"

56
 ANNEXURE I
DESIGN PROBLEM FOR PAD AND CHIMNEY
FOUNDATION

Table A.1.1 Design Footing for Transmission Line Tower subjected to

Compressive Load( in kN) Uplift Load ( in kN)
Normal Condition 180 125
Broken wire Condition 235 180

Tower is inclined to 7° to vertical

DESIGN PROCEDURE:
Taking a factor of safety of 2 for load in Normal condition (NC) and 1.5 for Broken wire
condition (BWC)
Table A.1.2 Load for Normal Condition and Broken Wire Condition
N.0 BWC
Ultimate Compressive load 360 352.5
Ultimate uplift load 250 270

Thus design load for:

Compression =360 KN
Uplift = 270 KN
Compressive load = 360 kN
Puit=360 Cos° =360 cos7° kN X357.3 kN
Uplift load= 270 kN
Ut1 =270 .Cos0=270 .Cos7 KN 268 kN
Trial dimension of pedestal:
Providing square pedestal, having side length of 400mm
Safe Bearing Capacity of soil =120 kN/m2

57
Assuming weight of footing =10% of compressive load=26 kN
Total down thrust= 357.3+35.7 kN =393 kN
393 2
Area of footing required= — m =3.275m2
120

Proportioning Of Footing:
Length of footing =1= J.TS m = 1.81 m
Let us provide 1.9 x1.9 m2 footing

Net Upward pressure = 393– 108.9 kN/m2

1.9x1.9

Check for Uplift:

As per IS code:
Assume a suitable depth of footing (say) 2m
Volume of frustum of soil

D (3l2 + 4D2 tan 2 0 + 61D tan 0)

V= —
3
Where,
1=lengtli=1.9 m
D=depth of footing = 2m
0=20° for cohesive material
V=19.55.m3
Density of soil Isoil=20kN/m3
Considering the worst possible case when the soil is submersed
-
Ysub=20 9.81A:,10 kN/m3

Weight of frustum of soil (Wi) =VxTsub kN =19.55x10 kN =195.5 kN

Assuming the thickness of footing =150mm
Weight of footing–IA/2= (1.9 x1.9 x 0.15 x 25) =14 kN

Weight of pedestal=W3= (0.4 x 0.4 x 2 x 25) = 8kN

Total weight=W=W1+W2+W3= 195.5+14+8 = 217.5 kN

This weight is not sufficient to resist the uplift load

58
Hence change the dimension,
Increase depth = 2.5 m, and Length =2.6
Volume of frustum of soil V=37.78m3
Weight of frustum of soil (WI) =VxYsub kN = 37.78 x 10 kN X377.8 kN
Weight of footing=W2 = (2.6 x 2.6 x 0.2 x 25) =33.8 kN

Weight of pedestal=W3 = 3 (0.4 x 0.4 x 2.5 x 25) = 101cN

Total weight=W=Wi+W2+W3= 420.8kN

As per Mayerhof and Adams

1B1 = 4
For (1)=30°, m=0.15, s=1.6, —

H=2.6 x 4 = 10.4 m
As D (=2.5 m) <H, so it is a case of shallow depth.
Qu = 4cDB +2sByD2 Ku tan 0 + W

As the soil is cohesion less,' c=0

Qu =(2x1.6x2.6x10x2.52 x0.85xtan30)+W

W=33.8+10+((2.6 — 0.4)2 x 2.5 x 10) kN = 164.8 kN

Q„=255+ 164.8 kN = 419.8 lcN
Thus uplift resistance =Qu=419.8 kN
— = 419.8
Factor of safety (FOS) = W -1.56 >1.5
Uurt 268
Hence safe in Uplift capacity.

Stability Against Overturning

W'=weight of soil, in cone= 195.5 kN
H= maximum horizontal shear on leg of tower= PsinO =360Sin7 kN = 44 kN
Up= uplift on leg of tower = 268 kN
L=2.6 m
D+h=2.5+0.3 =2.8 m

59
UpL Pcosex L (268x2.6), 44x 2.8) 357.3x 2.6
+H(D+h) +k
3 3 3 3
—21.26 kN
5L 5
. — x 2.6
6 6
Pcost9xL
, PL +H(D+h)
W 3 3
2 5
L
6
Hence safe in overturning moment

Effect of Lateral Load

Let Top of pedestal is 0.2 m above GL

Now dlb= ratio of depth of footing and width of pedestal = 2.5/0.4 = 6.25

h 0`2 _
0.2 d 2.5
-7 = 0.5, — = — =6.25, then H — 5
b 0.4 b 0.4 yK pb3

1 +Sin30
Ku— —3
' 1— Sin30
H=10 x 3 x 0.43 x 5 kN = 9.61th
As Hu>H,so it is shallow shaft

g = 0.9 H =0.9 9.6 — 0• 72 m

yxK p xb 10x3x0.4

Moment of resistance= 360 x Sin? x 0.72 = 31.6 kNm

Design of Pedestal
As we selected dimension of pedestal as 400 x 400 mm
Pu= ultimate compressive load = 352 kN
Mu = Ultimate Moment = 486 kNm
P. — 352x103 —
0.11
fabD 20 x 400 x 400

60
Mu _ 31.6x106
—0.025
fthbD 2 20 x 400 x 4002

Providing a clear cover (d') of 40mm

d' 40 A
--v.
D 400

P is negligible
fck

So providing minimum reinforcement of 0.8 %

400 x 400
Area of main reinforcement Ast = 0.8x —1280mm2
100
Using 16mm dia bar (A4=201mm2)
1280
No of 16mm dia bar= — 7 nos
206
Providing 8 Nos of 16mm dia bar.
Dia of transverse reinforcement
As per IS: 456-2000, clause26.5.3.2.c.2. Dia of transverse reinforcement should be minimum
of:
1.16/4=4mm, or
2. 6mm
Clause.26.5.3.2.c.1. Pitch of transverse reinforcement should be minimum of these:
1. 400 mm ,or
2. 16 x 16 = 256 mm ,or
3. 300mm
Providing 10 mm dia bar transverse reinforcement @ 250 mm c/c
But as in the case of transmission line tower there is problem of uplifting so arrangement of
two sets of transverse reinforcement should be provided as shown in the fig.a1.1

Design of Footing
Dimension of footing that we provide is 2.6 x 2.6 sq m.
Depth of foundation = 2.5m
Moment occurring at foundation = Muir = 31.61cNm
Net Upward pressure =

61
 6M 352 6 x 31.6
P01= + — + — 62.86 kN/m2
L2 L3 2.62 2.63

Pu 3
P0_2= L2 6M
L =41.3 kN/m2

m — 41.3 + (62.86 — 41.3)

1,42 ) X (L. + b)) kN/sq
P'0=P02 (419- x (2.6 + 0.4) =44.06 kN/m2
9 x 2.6

_ 62.86+ 41.3 _
P"= P01 P02 kNisq m
52.08 kN/m2
2 2
L—b
Maximum bending moment occurs at face A-B, cantilever length=l= — 1.1m
2

LL
Moment at face A-B= M — ( (2Po, + P' ) kNm
24

— 2.62.6 — 0.4)2 (
(2 x 62.86) + 44.06) =89kNm
24
1
For the moment of resistance the effective width is b'= b + — — b) = 0.675m

89 x106
Effective depth required = mm = 218 mm
(0.138x 675x 20)

Providing a clear cover of 50mm and 20mm diameter bar

Total Depth=218+50+10=280mm
Effective depth=def=280-50-10=220mm

Check for Punching Shear

The critical section for punching shear is at a distance d/2 from section A-B
1)0= b + d =400+220 =620 mm

Shear force = F = Pu — P" bo2 =1357 .3 — (52.08 x 0.622 )1 =337.2 x 103kN

F 337.2x103 2
T= — 0.64n/mm
4b0 d0 4x 620x 212

K=1, for square footing,

is = 0.25VT
_ =0.25125 =1.118 N/mm2

62
r, = Ks r,=1.118 N/mm2

F 337.2x103
do1 = = —121.6 mm
4bor, 4x 620x1.118
Providing total thickness at edge is 200mm, effective depth at edge =d1 =140mm
Thickness of footing at a section d/2 from face of pedestal =
2x(d—d1)( B—b—d 2x(220-140)(2600-400-220)
do= d + )-140+ -212
1 ()
B —bL 2 (2600— 400) 2

As doi<do, so safe in Punching Shear

Check for one-way shear

Critical section is at a distance d from face of shaft at section C-D.
B — b del _ 2.6 —2 0.4
The cantilever length to the right of C-D=11= 0.62=0.48m
2 m
Intensity of pressure at face C-D is given by

P"o= P02 41 — 42 X (L 1") — 41.3 + 62.86-

2.641.3
x (2.6 —0.48) =58.88 kN/m2

As the section is trapezoidal in shape, so the width at top is given by:

b'= b+2d = 400 + (2 x 220) =840mm
Effective depth at this section =
(d — 140) L — b (220 -140) 2600
-840
d'=140+ +
140+ x 220 —200mm
L —b) 2 () 2600-840 2
2 ) 2
Depth of Neutral Axis = d2=0.48 x 200 mm= 96mm
Width of sectional neutral axis= b2= 840
62.86+ 58.88
Shear force at section C-D=V= L x 1"x P02 ro — 2.6x 0.48x —55.901(N
2 2

V )
Tv— —0.033
b2 x d'

Safe in one way shear.

Reinforcement

63
 f
0.87fyAs,L41 y M =89 x 106 Nmm
fa bid

AstL= 1390.7mm2
Using 16 mm dia bar (A4)=201mm2)
(1000x201)
S pacing = —144.5mm
1390.7

16mm cp @ 140 mm c/c

IINOS46NIM DIA 'BAR

A
10MM DIA eAR!.@,250MIVI!C/C

16MM DIA BAR@140MM C/C ON

BOTH FACE IN BOTH DIRECTION
10MM DIA BAR @250MM C/C

280
200MM 8NOS-16MM DIA BAR
STUB ANGL
Sectional
Elevation AT SECTION A-A
OLOOMON MMMMMM IMMOMUNIOUN
111111011111111111111101111111101111111111111114111111

1141111112411:11112111111
........ MMMMMM OVII4SIOMUMM

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
OMMMOMMIOmmilIMM MEM
11IMM DIA BARC#140MM C/C ON
BOTH FACE IN BOTH DIRECTION
1111111111141111111111
rf
e i
lithil i
itaina ill ii
i
M M
UMPAMM MMM MUMMIMMONOM

OWINOMM MMOIMMOMN
O M
VORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!0

2600 MM
PLAN

Fig.A.1.1 Reinforcement detail of foundation and pedestal

64
 ANNEXURE 2

DESIGN EXAMPLE OF PILE FOUNDATION FOR TRANSMISSION

LINE TOWER

The data has been taken from the project -"Design of Transmission Line Tower Foundations

- 220 KV Nehtaur - Metor Line Crossing Ganga Near Bijnor for analysis and design of the

transmission line tower.

Table A.2.1 - Details of the Proposed Towers

SI. Tower C/C Spacing Max. Compression Max. Max. Leg
N.C. (kN) BWC
No. No. Type between legs Uplift Uplift inclination
(kN)
of tower @ N.C. (kN) BWC with vertical,
1 83 C 12124.90 515.6 586.9 414.9 486.9 11.3
2 84 A+3 7,491.2 180.3 234.3 125.2 179.8 7.0
3 85 C 12124.90 515.6 586.9 414.9 486.9 11.3
4 86 A 6,750.0 180.3 234.3 125.2 179.8 7.0
5 87 A 6,750.0 180.3 234.3 125.2 179.8 7.0
6 88 A 6,750.0 180.3 234.3 125.2 179.8 7.0

River Data

Design discharge = 18700 cumecs

Maximum velocity = 3 m/sec

RL of HFL= 77.0m

RL of bed level = 75.0m

Soil Data (Report on 'Soil Investigations, Ramasamy, 2006)

65
Poorly graded sand (SP) - Up to about 15 m below bed level

- ranges from about 15m below bed level to Gravels

Poorly graded sand with

(SP, Gravelly) about 30m below bed level.

Average corrected SPT value (N) = 20

Angle of internal friction,cb = 33°

Mean size of top erodable soil = 0. 25mm

3. DESIGN FOR TYPE 'A' TOWER FOUNDATIONS.

3.1 Portioning Of Foundation
3.1.1. Depth of Scour
The foundation has to be taken adequately below the maximum depth of scour. The depth of
scour is estimated using Lacey's formula as:

d =0.47342)3
f
Where , d = normal depth of scour in m,
Q = design discharge in cumecs,

f = Lacey's silt factor =1.76-srnZ , and

m= mean size of particle in mm

IRC: 78-2000 recommends that scour calculations for foundation may be made for a
discharge larger than the design discharge as per TableA.2.2

Table A.2.2 - Increase over Design Discharge for Foundation

Catchments area, km2 Increase over design discharge in percent

0-3000 30
3000-10000 30-20
10000-40000 20-10

Above 40000 10

66
A barrage with a design discharge of 15,000 cumecs is located at a distance of about 16 km
upstream of the tower alignment crossing the river. Thus, the maximum discharge is likely to be
only marginally higher than 15,000 cumecs. Accordingly, the design discharge of 18,700
cumecs is adopted for scour depth calculation.
Adopting the average size of the top erodable soil as 0.25 mm

Silt factor = f =1.76 0.25 =0.88

x(18700)3—
d =0.473 13.10m
0.88
Further, IS:3955 (1967) recommends that the maximum depth of scour may be increased to 1.27
d if the foundation is located at a section of the river having straight reach. Accordingly, the
maximum depth of scour dmax is taken as,
dmax = 1.27 x13.1m = 16.6 m

3.1.2. Length, Size and Type of Pile

HFLV
RL 77.0m

21V1.
RL 75.0m BED LEVEL
R041,0m 1m
16.6m
6mm THICK MS LINEAR,1Om LONG
1m

SCOUR LEVEL.

22,OM
im

8.4m

Fig.A.2.1. Pile Soil Situation

67
The estimated depth of scour below bed level (Fig. A.2.1)
75.0 - (77. 0-16.6) =14.6m
The soil investigation report (Ramasamy, 2006) suggests that the depth of scour in' the recent
past could be about 5.0 m below the bed level based on results of penetration resistance.
Accordingly, the above estimated scour depth is on the safe side.
As the scour depth below bed level is large, pile foundation may be adopted. From
scour considerations, the base of the foundation may be at a minimum depth of 1.33 times the
maximum scour depth measured from HFL.
Accordingly, the pile may be taken upto a minimum depth of 1.33 x 16.6 = 22.0 m below HFL
(i.e. upto RL 55.0 m). This provides an embedment length of 5.4 m below scour line.
However, considering the importance of the structure, the pile may be taken upto a depth
providing a depth of embedment of about 8 m below the scour level. Thus, the foundation
details may be as below (Fig. A.2.1):
Type of pile = Bored cast-in-situ piles
Dia. of pile = 1.0m
Tip of pile at 52.0 m
Length of pile below pile cap = 22 m
Length of pile below scour line = 8.4 m
HFL = 77.0 m
Bed level = 75.0 m
Cut-off level of pile = 74.0 m
Scour line = 60.4 m
Choose a group of four piles under each leg. A MS liner of 6mm thick may be used upto a
depth of 10 m below the top of pile.

3.1.3 Single Pile Capacity

(a) Under Uplift Loading: Uplift capacity of the pile governs the design. The safe uplift
capacity may be computed as the frictional resistance of the pile shaft with a factor of safety
plus weight of the pile. For piles in sand, a reduction factor of 0.6 may be adopted for
estimating the frictional resistance of pile shaft under uplift loading.

68
(i) Safe Uplift capacity of pile (Qsafe)
_ f s xAs xRF +w
Qsafe (2)
FOS
Where
fs = average unit skin friction, = Kcry tan S,
AS area of the pile shaft below scour level,
K= coefficient of horizontal pressure = 0.35 (for bored piles),

= effective vertical stress at mid depth of the pile below the scour line,

8 = angle of wall friction, 8 = 2/34) = 22°,

RF = reduction factor = 0.6 for piles in sand,

FOS = Factor of safety = 3.0, and
W = submerged weight of total length of pile, 22 m,
(Unit weight of the concrete may be taken as 24 kN/m3)
Thus, substituting appropriate values, the uplift capacity is obtained as

8 4- xl0xtan22)x7rx1x8.4x 0.6
(0.35x--*- x12
2
Qsafe = 2 x 22x(24-10)}
3 4

= 31 + 242 = 275 kN
Uplift load / leg = 486.9 kN, Say 487 kN
= Uplift load/pile = 487/4= 122 kN < 275 kN; safe.
(b) Safety against compressive loads:

(Kay tan SA,)+(a•y(N q—1)A p )

FOS
Safe compressive load carrying capacity of each pile=

For 4=33.0°, Ng = 40

Substituting the appropriate values and adopting a factor of safety of 3, the safe compressive
load,

69
 gx 12
(0.35x 21xl0xtan22x7rx1x8.4)+(8.4x10x39x )
2 4
—910 IN
3

Maximum compressive load / pile = 5871N/4 < 910 IN , Hence safe

(c) Safety against Lateral Load

The scour under design flood results in large length of pile laterally unsupported. In addition
the flowing water exerts additional lateral load on the foundation,
(1) Estimation of lateral load on pile
Load from the tower:
The leg of the tower is inclined and transmits an axial load Qaxtal. The axial load has a
horizontal component, Ht obtained as:
Ht = Qaxial x Sin a
Where,
a = inclination of the leg to vertical (a = 11.3° for the 'C' type of tower)
Ht = 587 x Sin 11.3° =1151th
Load on each pile = 115/4 = 29 kN acting on the pile cap i.e. RL 74.6 m (mid depth of pile cap)
Load due top flowing water
Maximum velocity =3 m/s
The intensity of pressure due to flowing water is given by:
p = 0.52KV2
Where,
p = intensity of pressure due to flowing water in IN/m2,
V = the velocity of current at the point considered,
K = constant: 1.5 for square / rectangular end shapes 0.66 for Semi -circular end
shapes,
The velocity of water current varies linearly with maximum at HFL to zero at the scour line.
According, the pressure distribution is as shown in Fig. A.2.2.
The maximum pressure component is obtained as,

p = 0.52K (-502

70
 9.36kN/ sq, m
R,L 77,0m HFL

8.0 kN/

R,L 74,6m

4kN sq•m
R.L 67.5m

SCOUR LINE
R.L 60.4 m

Fig.A.2.2. Pressure Distribution on Foundation Due to Flowing Water

Assuming a pile cap of 4.3 m wide and 1.2 m deep
K = 1.5 for rectangular shape
p=9.36 K kN/m2 acting at HFL level (Fig. A.2.2)
Load on pile cap = 8 x1.5 x1.2 x 4.3 =61.921(N acting at RL 74.6 m
Share of Load on each pile = 61.92/4= 15.5 kN
K = 0.66 for circular shape
Load on pile = 4.0 x 0.66 x 1.0 x 13.6 = 35.9 kN on each pile acting at RL 70.3 m

(ii) Lateral Analysis of Piles

For lateral analysis, the pile may be considered as an equivalent cantilever (Fig.A.2.4).
Relevant pile - Soil parameters:
For sand of medium relative density, the coefficient of modulus of variation,

71
 LP/ ROR1,t/ T

--- FOR PILES IN SAND AND

NORMALLY LOADED CLAYS

FOR PILES IN PRELOADED

CLAYS

L1/Ft OR Ll/T

Fig.A.2.3 Ll versus Depth of Fixity

nh = 5000 kN/m3 (IS: 2911-Part 2).
E for pile = 2.5 x 1071cN/m2

El 2.5x10' x x14
Thus, T = 5 = 5 - 3.0m
nh 5000 x 64

Maximum fixed end moment on the pile due to all the lateral forces,
Mmax = 29x [(74.6-54.88)/2] +15.5x [(74.6-54.88)/2] +35.9[(70.3-54.88)/2]
= 286 + 152.8 + 276.8 = 715.5kN-m
Factored moment = 715.5 x 1.5 = 1073 kN-m
Pile need to be structurally designed as column subjected to axial load and moment. The pile
cap shall also be subjected to a moment of 1073 kN-m and be designed to resist the same.

3.2 Structural Design

3.2.1. Design of Pile

Total maximum compressive load on each leg of the tower = 587 kN
Total maximum uplift load on each leg = 487 kN

72
Load on each pile
Compressive load = 587/4 = 147 kN
Uplift load= 487/4 = 122 kN
Projection of pile above scour level = 74.0-60.4 =13.6m
The depth of virtual fixity may be taken as 1 m or 3 times the dia. of pile below scour level in
good ground conditions (Tomlinson, 1971). Thus, the effective length = 13.6 + 3.0 = 16.6m.
Slenderness ratio = 16.6/1.0 > 12
The pile may be designed as long column.
Using M-25 grade of concrete
Compressive load on pile = 147 kN x Load factor (1.5) = 221 kN
The safe structural capacity (design load) is calculated assuming the pile is un-reinforced and
the maximum allowable stress in concrete is 0.25 fck (Varghese, 2005, IS: 2911, Sec. 2 Part 2).
Thus, the safe Compressive load = 0.25 fck x Area of pile
0.25x25 rx10002
– 4908 kN > 221 kN (Safe)
1000 x 4
Longitudinal reinforcement:
Minimum % steel to be provided = 0.8%
0. 7r
8 x 10002 _
Area of steel required = — 6283 mm
100 4
x

Provide 25 mm bars (A0=490.7)

6283-
Number of bars required = 13
490.7

Provide 16 bars of 25 mm(1).

Provide 8 mm lateral ties @ 150 mm c/c.
Provide an effective cover of 75 mm.
/Tx 252 x16
Longitudinal steel provided = – 1 % of pile cross sectional area
Ir x 10002
4
Maximum factored moment on pile = 1073 kN-m

73


Moment capacity, Mu is calculated from chart 56 of SP-16-1980 as below

P 221x103
For u –8.84 x 10-3
fa D2 25 x10002

P=1—_– 0.04 and M "= 0.043

fck 25 fd,D3

M, =0.043 x 25 x 10003 N-mm = 1075 kN-m > 1073 kN-m; safe.

3.2.2 Design of Pile Cap Depth of the pile cap

The depth of the pile cap should be adequate to provide minimum anchorage of the main
reinforcement of the pile.
0.874,0
Minimum anchorage required = La –
4rbd

Where, La = development length

= dia. of bar
fy = characteristic strength of steel
tba=design bond stress, 1.54 N/mm2 for deformed bars (IS: 456-2000)

0.87x 415x 25

L – 1465 mm
d = 4x1.54

Choose D of cap as 1200 mm and bend the bars to provide addition anchorage length of 400
mm.
Check from bending moment consideration M = Rbd2
Where,
M= maximum bending moment = 1073 kN-m
d =effective depth
b = width of pile cap
R = a factor =0.138 fck for Fe 415 steel.

74


d= \IM = 1073x106
—269 mm
Rb 0.138x 25x 4300
Providing an effective cover of 75 mm, d provided = 1125 mm > 269mm

Check for two way shear.

The critical section for two way shear is the peripheral section at half the effective depth from
the face of the pedestal, i.e. on a peripheral cylindrical area of (1 + 1.25) m dia. The
compressive load transmitted by the pedestal under the breaking wire condition is 587 IN.
Adopting a load factor of 1.5,
1.5
1. x 587 x
Shear stress= r = — 0.117N/mm2<permissible shear stress ( 0.25j: )
ir(1000+1125)x1125

Reinforcement

Minimum reinforcement required = 0.12% of cross sectional area for deformed bars.
0.12 x 4300 x1200
= 6192mm 2
100
Choosing 20 mm dia. bars,
X 202
Spacing of bars required = x 4300— 218mm
4x6192
Provide 20 mm dia. bars at a spacing of 200 mm in both ways. As the pile cap is subjected to
uplift, provide 20 mm dia. bars at 200 mm spacing in both the directions at the top also.
7r X 202
Area of steel provided = x 4300— 6751mm
4x 200
Moment capacity is given by

M = 0.87f yil,i(d fA81

fck b

Substituting appropriate values,

415x 6751
M = 0.87x 415x 6751
(1125 Nmm
25x 4300
= 2678.6 IcN-m > 1073 kN-m (safe).

75
Design of Pedestal
The stub angle of the tower leg may be encased in a reinforced concrete pedestal as shown in
Fig. A.2.4. A reinforced concrete pedestal of lm dia. is provided. Pedestal may be reinforced
as column providing a minimum reinforcement of 0.8% of area of the pedestal.
Provide 25mm dia bars 16 Nos. as in piles.
Area of steel provided = 1.0%
Providing Lateral ties of 8mm dia @ISO mm c/c.
Thus, the load on the pile cap is transferred through the pedestal.
Embedment of Stub into the Pedestal
Maximum uplift force transmitted by the stub = 487 kN
Design bond stress = 0.9 N/mm2 (Adopted same as for plain bars)
Required embedment of stub (stub angle 150 x 150 x 16)
Ld x (150 x 4) x 0.9 = 487 x 103 x 1.5 = 1353 mm
Provide a minimum embedment of 2.0 m of stub length into the pedestal.

Moment Capacity of Pedestal

The tower leg is reported to be inclined at 11.3° to vertical. The axial load from tower leg may
be resolved in vertical and horizontal directions.
The factored axial load from each leg = 587 x 1.5 = 880.5 kN
Thus, the vertical load =880.5 cos 11.3° = 863 kN
Horizontal load = 880.5 sin 11.3° = 1731N
Moment at the base of the pedestal

=(173.2 x 2.1)+ (863 x 2.1tan11.3° )=363 + 362 = 725kN-m

The area of reinforcement required is computed using design charts (SP-16:1980).

Pu _ 880.5x103
= 0.035
fth D2 — 25 x10002

Mu _ 725x106
=0.029
fd D3— 25 x10003

d 75
= = 0.075
D 1000
Referring to chart 56 of SP 16: 1980,

76
 P =0.02
fk

p = 0.02 x 25= 0.5%

p provided = 1.0%; Hence safe
The reinforcement details of the pile, pile cap, and pedestal are shown in Fig.A.2.4

77
 1..--tic Pedes t al —
nt°
Stub Anglt
TIL 111m
111110m 33m RI713m

11m Pitt cop

A1 111m rlitditto NFL ThOm
Ora% 41m1117n
OF 1110m 020
Distance 101101 PM Om L I v., Pt dtslal,1000 mo
Pt dastal R1115

Boo TIRO 16 Bars of

711S im
Av.Btdltrell'yOrn tiS taw
Im
100m SO long
Cul oil ltvtlalPilt14 gm LI/
8 0p1SO Spating
2.3m Ptle 1.0 m
Dia :0 9 @ 200 C/a

64.0m RL15.0T maribx.:

Bed Devil
Horizontal Tits
h3R6151Bursii4

Scour Line 60,4 m RI. 52•0 m

11111111111
16q1S120.

•
WO Mg(
1.0m Dia Bored Pie _L
'5mm
Distance belvfafft Lags
The Totorqa the Top---I T
of ql 01 Pile Op
Blot
00 00
Ties 69ISISI/a 0t09

00 00 2SM,1 CN00

Pitt

qc Spacing A
01 lower legs
of Pile Cop
LevtI

1 00 00 11cAt
Pea( slot 4.3m

00 00 1. Deformed Bore as Pontorctment

2.011 dimensions in mm
3:Not to Scale

c/a Spacing of Tower

Its at Pitt Cop level —7
Reinforcement Detailing
Nol Io Stale Not to Scale

v;, layout of Tower Foundation

Chosen Foundation Details 20 11 2000/0 BOTH OIREC110NS
BOTH 4110P AND BOTTOM

,A, -I.
--\
-1---- 1
NOTES :
Ir , Ai, 1
1. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ARE TO BE FOLLOWED 2 5$,16 NOS '111/1110" 1
2. CLEAR COVER TO MAIN REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE 75 MM ISO do

3. LAP SHALL BE STAGGERED AS FAR AS PRACTICABLE AND NOT

MORE THAN 50% BAR SHALL BE LAPPED AT A PARTICULAR 4100

SECTION. LAP LENGTH SHALL BE 50 TIMES THE DIA. OF BAR.

4. HIGH YIELD STRENGTH DEFORMED BARS SHOULD BE USED

NOtliZONIAL
TIES 10735151
5. MINIMUM CEMENT CONTENT IN THE PILE SHOULD BE 400 KGIMi
," BURSTING
16141S
SECTION 'AA
i 'I II
REINFORCEMENT DETAILING
/
 ANNEXURE 3

DESIGN EXAMPLE OF WELL FOUNDATION FOR TRANSMISSION

LINE TOWER

The data has been taken from the project -"Design of Transmission Line Tower Foundations

- 220 KV Nehtaur - Metor Line Crossing Ganga near Bijnor for analysis and design of the

transmission line tower.

1. Details of Towers
A sketch of the river course at the proposed alignment of towers is shown in Fig A.3.1.
The details of the proposed towers and river data relevant to foundation design, are given in
Table A.3.1
Table A.3.1 Details of the Proposed Towers
SI. Tower C/C Spacing . .Max. Compression Max. Max. Leg inclination
Type BWC
No. No. between legs of N.C. (kN) Uplift Uplift with vertical,
, i 4 J. 1 ' ,-,11 ,,l(- . ; I ;.)-, ,,I. ,),,,,,T,'
tower km-N) N.C. (kN) BWC degree
/1,1■T1
1 83 C 12124.90 515.6 586.9 414.9 486.9 11.3
2 84 A+3 7,491.2 180.3 234.3 125.2 179.8 7.0
3 85 C 12124.90 515.6 586.9 414.9 486.9 11.3
4 86 A 6,750.0 180.3 234.3 125.2 179.8 7.0
5 87 A 6,750.0 180.3 234.3 125.2 179.8 7.0
6 88 A 6,750.0 180.3 234.3 125.2 179.8 7.0

River Data

Design discharge 18700'cumecsi

Maximum velocity = 3 m/sec

RL of HFL = 77.0m

79

RL of bed level = f 75.0m

FLOW .CHAN NEL `AT THE 1114i'bF

l;N VESTJGAtl+N

' ii■■•■■■ • ■■11.1416

Fig A.3.1 River Course and Crossing of Tower- Ganga near Bijnor

80
Soil Data (Report on 'Soil Investigations, Ramasamy, 2006)

Poorly graded sand (SP) - from bed level up to RL ± 60.0 m

Poorly graded sand with - RL ± 60.0 to RL 45.0 m

Gravels (SP, Gravelly)

Average corrected SPT value (N) = 20

Angle of internal friction,() = 330

Mean size of top erodable soil = 0. 25mm

Analysis and Design of foundation for Tower Type 'C'

2. Proportioning of foundation
2.1 Depth of Scour
The foundation has to be taken adequately below the maximum depth of scour. The depth of
scour is estimated using Lacey's formula as:

d = 0.473 x (PI
f
Where,,,, ,.;ft.,., , i; (i)
d = normal depth of scour
Q = design discharge in cumecs
f = Leacy's silt factor =1.76V7n , and
m= mean size of particle in mm
IRC: 78-2000 recommends that scour calculations for foundation may be made for a
discharge larger than the design discharge as per Table A.3.2.
Table A.3.2 Increase over Design Discharge for Foundation
Catchments area, km2 Increase over design discharge in percent
, , 0-3000 30
3000-10000 30-20
10000-40000 20-10
Above 40000 10

81
A barrage with a design discharge of 15,000 cumecs is located at a distance of about 16 km
upstream of the tower alignment crossing the river. Thus, the maximum discharge is likely
to be only marginally higher than 15,000 cumecs. Accordingly, the design discharge of
18,700 cumecs may be adopted for scour depth calculation.
Adopting the average size of the top erodable soil as 0.25 mm
Silt factor = f =1.76 0.25 =0.88

(18700ji
Depth of scour = d = 0.473 x — 13.10m
0.88
Further, IS:3955 (1967) recommends that the maximum depth of scour may be increased to
1.27 d if the foundation is located at a section of the river having straight reach. Accordingly,
the maximum depth of scour dmax is taken as,
dm. = 1.27 x,13.1m.= 16.6'm
As per IRC: 78-2000 clauses 705.3.1
(in] hL\ adopted for sco ur Lierth
Grip length = — x dn. =5.5 rn
3 ‘, ;12C 04. ,`1 0, II
Providing a grip length of 8m
Thus total depth =D=16.6+8 m 24.6 m from HFL

2.2Trial Dimension of well

As c/c spacing between legs of tower at pedestal level = 12.12 m
Angle of inclination of leg with vertical = 11.3°
So c/c spacing ,between legs of tower at bed level = (12.12 + (2 x 2.3 tan )) =13.04 m

C/C spacing between leg of tower diagonally at bed level =13.04-5 m = 18.5 m
Assuming length of square pedestal = lm.
Maximum lateral dimension at top =18.5+1 m = 19.5 m
If cantilevers are provided as shown in Fig A.3.2 with projected length beyond well cap
equal to 60% of external diameter of well.
Now,
Let external dia of steining = x
x +1.2x=19.5rn

82

pt..!ut)1:11

,t1 n :11 I, ! •
x =8.9 m
Let us provide external dia of steining =9 m
Length of Cantilever part of beam = 0.6 x 9m z5.4m

,N, •
t" ..
5 ,.:. 4
i

Fig A.3.2 Plan of Proposed Foundation

/
As the length of-side of pedeStal = lrn
So providing width of cantilever part =1.2m
Considering the requirement of development length
The average thickness of cantilever part of beam =0.75m and
Thickness of well cap =lm
As per IRC: 78-2000, minimum thickness of steining =t = KDI/.
Where
K=0.03 for circular well,
1=depth below LWL, and
D=External dia of well.

83


t= 0.03x 9x.,52.6m=1.28m
Providing thickness of steining 1.5 m
Internal dia of well = 9-3 =6 m

2.3 M .0M
12 RIVER BED

1 .5 M
14.5M
13.5M

BM

9M;. SCOURE LEVEL

M GRIP LENGTH

Fig A.3.3 Front View of the foundation

I of soil=33°
Due to submergence condition 8=0.50=16.5°
Coefficient of earth pressure
2

KA
cos
— cos 33 —0.2671
q cos 8 + Vsin(0 + 8)sin
0 [ Vcos16.5 + Vsin(33 + 16.5)sin 33
12 r
cosq$ cos 33
Kp— , , - = 6.243
[1/cos — Vsint0 + 8)sin 0 Licos16.5 — Vsin(33 +16.5)sin 33

84
3. ELASTIC THEORY
Load calculation
Water current force,As per IRC: 6-1966 clause213.2
Intensity of pressure at free surface of water =P=0.52KV2 kN/sq m
V=1.414 x mean velocity=1.414 x 3= 4.242 m/s
At free surface of water P=0.52 x 0.66 x 4.2422 =6.18 kN/sq m
P at level of river bed=6.18 x 14.5/16.5 = 5.43 kN/sq m
Area of exposure =A = 9 x 14.5 = 130.5sq m
(2 x34.5)
1
Water current force = 0.5 x 5.43 x 130.5 kN =354.3 kN at = 9.66m from scour

level
Table A.3.3 Load Calculation for Elastic Theory
Lever arm
LI; • 1". • ( , I. ). ,
from scour
level Moment
Force (in kN) Direction
( M m) (in kNm)
1.Force on
586.9Cos11.3 x 4=2302 vi•
Tower

586.9Sin11.3 x 4=460 41-- 16.8 7728

2.Dead Load
2.3 xlx1 x25x 4=230
a. Pedestal
vir
.
b. Well cap E x 92 x 1 x 25= 1590.4
4 i•

x(92 —62 )x 21.5x 25= i,

c. Well steining 4
18996.8

d. Sand filling x 62 x 21.5x 23=13981.7 1

4
e. Cantilever 0.75x1.2 x 5.4 x25 x 4
I,
beam = 486

85
 Lever arm
from scour Moment
Force (in kN) Direction level (in kNm)
( in m)
Taking
3. Seismic Force
aH=0.1
on D.L
av=0.1 x 0.5=0.05
a. Pedestal 23 4-- 16.8 386.4
11.5
Iv
b. Well cap 159 14 2226

79.5 ,iv
(13.5 x18996.8 x 0.1)/21.5 .--
C. Well steining 6.75 8051.4
=1192.8
596.4
iv
13981.7 x 13.5 x 0.1/21.5
D. Sand Filling 6.75 5926
-878

439

E. Cant. Beam 486 x 0.1=48.6 14 680.4

24.3
Jr
3.Water current
on well and well 354.3 4.---
9.66 3422.5
cap

f.x92 x 21.5x10x0.15=
4.Buoyancy 4
2051.7

Total horizontal force at scour level = H"=--3111.8 kN

)4 _. 4‘.
Total Vertical force at Base level = W=36685.9 kN

86
Moment at Scour level =M 28383.1 kNm
Dia of well = B = 9m
L= Projected width of soil mass offering resistance multiplied by appropriate shape factor
(0.9 for circular well) =0.9 x 9 =8.1 m
.
4-
113=(';14B Hr x9 j
– 322 m4
64 64

v _. LD/ )_(8.1x j
-345.6m3
I[ 12 12

a_ B 9 )
–0.358
rxD f )

I=IB+mIv(1+212' a) =322 + x 345.6 x (1+ (2 x 0.296 x 0.358)))=740.8m4

I x D f j_r 740.8 8)
r R 57m
= ( MiV 2 x 345.6 x 2) ---
1)() ()
28383.1
—(1+,/.40-= pW, = + (0.649 x 0.296)) – (0.649 x 36685.9)
r 8.57 '
3948-23809 = - 19861 IN < H (3111.8 kN)

(1-- ,u,u')+ ,uW 2675.7+23809=26484.8 kN >H (3111.8 kN)

mxM lx 28383.1
–38.3 kN/m3
1 740.8
y(Kp-KA) = 10 x (6.243-0.267) =59.76 kN/m3
mM
As <7(KP-KA) . Hence safe

( -- 0.269x 28383.1 \
36685.9
MB , 8.57 28383.1x 9
a- I =ti pp A- Mr F (o) 6-i' ,<)(( )92')(1))--(■; f ' ;+
, 2'x'740.8
4
=561.3+172.4 = 733.67. kN/m2

W '
62 = r MB –388.8 kN/m2
A 21
/

87
Allowable Soil Pressure = 5.4N2B +16 x 100 + N 2 )D j kg/M2

Qallowable 1(5.4 x 202 x 9)+ (16 x (100 + 202 )x 8)j= 832.24 x 102 kg/m2 =832.24 kN/m2
at and a2 both < Qallowable. Hence Safe

4. ULTIMATE RESISTANCE APPROACH

Ultimate load combination=DL+ Buoyancy load + Water current +Earthquake load
The point of rotation assumed to occur at 0.2Df =1.6m above the base of well. So moment
will be calculated at this point.

H.Pi
RIVER BED

Fig A.3.4 Figure for Ultimate Resistance Approach

873


Table A.3.4 Load Calculation for Ultimate Resistance

Lever arm
from point
of rotation Moment
Force.(in kN) Direction
( in m) (in kNm)
1.Force on
586.9Cos11.3 x 4=2302
Tower

586.9Sin11.3 x 4=460 44--- 23.2 10672

2.Dead Load
2.3 x 1 x 1 x 25 x4 =230
a. Pedestal

7r
—x9 2 xlx 25= 1590.4
b. Well cap
4 -iv

-x 2
5 . )X 21.5x 25=
c. Well steining 4
, , r1
,r, ,c(18996.8 , ,,,(1 ,

LT x 62 x21.5x 23=
d. Sand filling 4 4.
13981.7
e. Cantilever 0.75x1.2 x 5.4 x25 x 4
beam = 486 1
Taking
3. Seismic Force
ax=0.1
on D.L
av=0.1 x 0.5=0.05
a. Pedestal 23 4--- 22 506
11.5
i St).-1;, ',
b. Well cap 159 20.4 3243.6

79.5 ,I,

89
 Lever arm Moment
from point (in kNm)
Force (in kN) Direction of rotation
( in m)
C. Well steining (13.5 x18996.8 x 0.1)/21.5 4-- 13.15 15685.3
=1192.8
596.4
D. Sand Filling 13981.7 x 13.5 x 0.1/21.5 i 13.15 11545.7
=878 ie---

439

E. Cant. Beam 486 x 0.1=48.6 20.4 991.44

4

24.3

3.Water current
on well and well 354.3 4----- 16.06 5690
cap
4.Buoyancy
Ex 92 x 21.5x10x 0.15=
4
2051.7

Total horizontal force at scour level = H =3115.7 kN

Total Vertical force at Base level = W =36685.9 kN
Moment at Scour level =M = 48334kNm
(

35501:12
576.66 kN/sq m
A ) flx 92
(W
4
Ultimate bearing capacity of the soil below the base of well:
Qu= Pv(Ncr1)+0.3yBNy

.1 .90
Pv=ysubx Df=10 x 8 =80 kN/ sq m
For SPT value=20 ,N,4=25, Ny=25
Qu=80(25-1)+(0.3 x 10 x 9 x 25) --2587.5kN/sq
- m
Qui2 = 1293.75 kN/m2

(---
w )<(-91-̀) Hence safe
A 2
From IRC: 45-1972
Base resisting moment = Mb = QWB tang
B= dia of well = 9m
Df/B = 8/9 =0.9, 4)=33°
From IRC: 45-1972,table 1
Q=0.6 x 0.442 =0.2652
W= 36685.9 kN
Mb= 0.2652 x 36685.9 x 9 x tan 33 = 56863.3 kNm
Resisting moment due to friction
Mf = 0.11y(Kp-KA)B2D2sin6 =0.11 x 10 x (6.243-0.2671) x 9 2 x 82 x sin 16.5.
=9678 4kNm --
Ms=0.107(1(p-KA)D3L =0.1 x 10 x (6.243-0.2671) x 83 x (0.9 x 9)
=24783.2 kNm
0.7(Mf+Mb+Ms) =63927.5 kNm >M (48334 kNm)
Hence Safe

5. STRUCTURAL DESIGNING
Designing of Cantilever Beam:
Providing thickness of beam as 0.75 m at edge as there is no bending moment and thickness
oir‘ )1/4 , n.
at face of staining is 1.25m for bending moment and development length requirement.

; ) .• ts :111

91
 Fig A.3.5 Cross Section of Cantilever Beam
Total dead load of cantilever part
t't ri• •-; • ■ ..;
= (0.75 x 1.2 x 5.4 x 25) + ((1.25-0.75) x 5.4 x 1.2 x 25/2) kN
=121.5+40.5kN=162kN
Point load from each tower = (586.9 x Cos 11.3) = 575.5 kN
The shear force at face of staining = V = 162 + 575.5 kN = 737.5 kN
Bending moment at face of staining = M
M = (121.5 x 2.7) + (40.5 x 5.4 / 3) + (575.5 x 4.8) kNm
= 3163.4 kNm
Putt = 1.5 x 737.5 kN = 1106.25 kN
Mutt = 1.5 x 3163.4 kNm = 4745;1 k1\1m ‘t
0.1379f,kbd2= 4745.1x 106 Nmm
Using M25 grade of concrete and Fe415 grade of steel

4745.1x 106
d — mm =1075 mm
0.137x 25x1200
Considering the requirement of development length we provide total depth D
=1350mm
Providing a clear cover of 75 mm
Dia of bar = 25 mm
Effective depth d = 1350 —100 —12.5 mm =1162.5 mm
‘.
\h
92
Area of steel required Ast

M = 0.87f y il„41
bd f ck)
(AstfY )

(4„ x415) )
4745.1 x 106=0.87x 415x As, x1162.541
1200 x1162.5x 25
Ast = 13462 mm2
For balance section % of steel required .
p= 1.196%
Ast — (1.196 x1162.5x1200) 2
MM
100
= 16684.2 mm2
Providing Ast/2= 0.5 x 16684.2 mm2 = 8342.1 mm2 on each face
Providing 25mmcb (A0=490.87 mm2)
8342.1
No of bars required = — 17 nos
490.87
The shear force at face of staining V = Puit= 1106.25 IN

,Y,t1,111C0 SeCtii)11"o ()i TC(111,

V 1106.25 x103
Tv —0.79 N/mm2
bd '1200 x1162.5

As per Table 23 of IS 456:2000

For p = 1.196 % , tc =0.43136 N/mm2
0.5t = 0.5 x 0.43136 N/mm2 = 0.216 N/mm2
Shear force for which shear reinforcement required
V' = (0.79 -0.43) x 1200 x1162.5 N = 502200 N
Providing 4 nos of 10mm dia bars shear reinforcement
Asv=4 x 78.5 mm2 = 315 mm2
0.87 x x Asvxd 0.87 x 415 x 315 x1237.5
Spacing = , , 263 mm
V'" m2 475200
t.

Providing 4 legged 10 mm dia @250mm c/c

93
As depth of beam >750 mm, so providing side face reinforcement of 0.1% of cross
sectional area of beam

0.1x1200x(1250+750I
Side face reinforcement = l
l 2 ) —1200mm2
100

Providing Side face reinforcement on each face=1200/2 = 600mm2

600—
No of 10mm dia (A4)=78.5) = 8 Nos
78.5

lommtiiplA:BARS

,17 NOS-254) MM BARS BOTH

AT TOP AND BOTTOM

10MM4)-4LEGGED STIRRUPS@300MM C/C

75MM CLEAR COVER

1200 MM

Fig A.3.6 Reinforcement Detail of Cantilever Beam

Design of well cap

ThicknessiofNell cap will remain same as that of the cantilever beam at the external
face of well staining_Providing a nominal reinforcement of 0.12 % of gross section
' — - - I
area of cap
Ast = 0.12 x 1200 x 1250/100 = 1800 mm2
Using 20mm diameter of bar (A4)=314 mm2)

Spacing of bar = 314 x1000— 174.4 mm

1800
Providing 20mm dia bar @ 170mmc/c on both face in both direction.

94
t:i. ■‘..s1! cap \\ r,m
-taintncr. PrCwidaii<< a nominal IcH . or') i'-'
 1•11111111111111MININIEENNEW
1111111111111111111111111111111111•WAIMP
71111110.111111111=11111•%•111W
11•11110.41■111•Miram51.2r 20MMct @ITOMMCrC
- grumlismotwur
- 1p

DETAI OP TOP AND B ONI REINFORCEI

(CENTRAL CIRCULAR SLAB OF TOP RING

Fig A.3.7 Reinforcement Detail of Well Cap

Design of well steining
As per IRC: 78-2000 clauses 708.2.3.1

h= KdVi
Where,

h = minimum thickness of steining in mm

d = external dia of steining

1= depth of well below Bed Level =2.2,15. in On this case)
K = 0.03 for RCC r.
t'1% flr"

95
h= 0.03 x 911275 = 1.266 m < 1.5m
Table A.3.5 Load Calculation for Staining
Lever
arm

' from
scour Moment
Force (in IN) Direction
level (in kNm)
( in m)
1.Force on
575.5 x 4=2302
Tower

112.8 x 4=451.2 4--- 16.8 7580.16

2.Dead Load

2.3 xlx1x25x4=230
a. Pedestal

3.14 x 92x0.25x1.25x25
b. Well cap 1,
=1988 '

5-- x(92 —6$13.5x 25

c. Well steining 4
iv
= 11928

d. Cantilever 41-25+ 035) x x1.2

4 5.4 25
x 1
2
beam = 648
......, . . . , _. ,
, ,1,,,■•.1

Taking
3. Seismic Force- ---i -
I \ '). )
.
oH=0.1
on D.L
ocy=0.1 x 0.5=0.05

a. Pedestal 23 16.8 386.4

11.5

96
 Lever
arm
from
Force (in kN) Direction Moment
scour
(in kNm)
level
(inm)

b. Well cap 198.8 4._____ 14 893.2

99.4
C. Well steining 11928x 0.1= 1192.8 6.75 8051.4

596.4
1r
D. Cant. Beam 680.4x 0.1=68 14 952
.4--
34
Jr

3.Water current 354.3 9.66 3422.5

on well and well 4
cap
4.Buoyancy
-7
,71 x92 x 21.5x10 x0.15= I
'0'
l

.. 'i '- - - -- ...051.7

Total horizontal force at scour level = H

H= 2288.1 kN
Total Vertical force at Base level = W= 15785.6 kN
Moment at Scour level =M
M = 23175.7kNm
Depth of zero shear force below scour level

2FH 2 [ 2x 2x 2288.1 2
=4.14m
[
y(K p - K A )B 10(6.243 - 0.2671) x 9

97
 2 2
Mmax= M + - x HX = 23175.7 + - x 2288.1x 4.14 = 29490.86 kNm
3 3
7r(92 -62
Additional weight of steining - x 4.14 x 25 =3658 kN
4
x9 2
Buoyancy on this part - x 4.14 x10 x 0.15 = 395 kN

- Net downward load V=15785.6+3658- 395 =19048.6 kN

Eccentricity on top of well due to
Permissible tilt of 1 in 80 =9/80 =0.1125 m
Eccentricity at depth of X (=4.14 m) below scour level
0.1125 x 4.14
- 0.021m
21.5
Moment due to tilt = 19248 x 0.021 = 400 kNm
Permissible shift =150 mm
Moment due to shift = 19048 x 0.15 = 2857.3 kNm
Thus total moment = 32748.16 kNm ,
492 - 62
Area,of cross section of well steining= 735.34 m2

494 - 64j
I- - 258.4 m4
64
, c V , My) = .5 x (19048 ± 32748.16x 9)
f,2=1 ..3
51( - - 1
A I l 35.34 258.4 x 2 )
f1= 1663.4 kN/m2
ff= -46.96 kN/m2
f„=0.45 Tr
. a, =0.45 x 5 = 22501(1\1/m2

As f1 and,f2 both< fec9

Hence provided thickness of steining is appropriate

Hence provide minimum reinforcement.
Assume that open dredging method has been used for sinking of well, the maximum
pressure intensity action on well from outside=
ybhK A = 10 x 13.5 x 0.2671 KN/m2 =36.06 KN/m2

98


(6)2
2 2 -
p 12 2
r + r2 +
Maximum hoop stress along outer face= 36.06 ( 2 2
) ) (
r —r22
(.92) — 6
2)
= 93.756 kN/m2=0.093756 N/mm2
As per IRC: 78-2000 clauses 708.35
Minimum vertical reinforcement =0.2% of gross area
0.2x 35.34x106 2 2
1MM = 70680 mm
100
Using 25 mm dia bar (A0=490.8 mm2)
No of bars = 70680/490.8 144
Minimum Ast on inner face =0.06 of gross cross sectional area
0.06x 35.34 x106
-21204 mm2
100

No of 25 mm dia bar = 21204/490.8 z44

Providing 25 mm dia bar @250mmc/c on inner face
7t
No of bar provided— 250 0 76Nos (Hence safe)

Providing 25 mm dia bar @ 250 mm c/c on outer face
x 9000
No of bar provided — 2 114 Nos

50
N1+N2=i76 + 114 = 190>144 (Hence safe)
Minimum transverse reinforceriient (IR(:;78-2000, clause708.3.5)
0.04 x 35.34 x106
— 14136 mm2
100
Area of transverse reinforcement on each face = 14136/2 = 7068 mm2
Providing 25mm dia bar as circular ring (A0=490.8 mm2)
S . — 490.8 x1000
Spacingg
p z170 mm
7068
25mm dia bar as circular ring @ 60 mm c/c on both inner and outer face.
As longitudinal bars are embedded in well cap, so development length required

;ni Ci l' (`111 IR (.' 7c:
99
 00- 20 x 0.87fy _ 25x 0.87 x 415
La s — 1288.75 mm
4rbd 4x1.25x1.4 4x1.25x1.4

25MM4BARS AS CIRCULAR RING

@60MM CIC ON EACH FACE
OF STEINING (STAGGERED)

BOND RODS-20MM
8 NOS-2600MM LONG

25MM VERTICAL BARS@250MM

c/c ON BOTH FACE OF STEINING

9000 Mlti
y.
Fig A.3.8 Reinforcement Detail of Well Steining

Design of well curb

Stress due to sinking:

N=weight of steining per m run = 4 (92 - 62 )x 1 x 25 = 883.6 kN/m

Assuming angle of bevel face with vertical as0= 30°,11 =0.4

Total hoop tension
0.754Sing — pCos0)`,' Sin30 — 0 .4Cos30 x 9 + 6
a x0.75 883.6
x
PSin 0 + Cos° 0.4Sin30 + Cos30 2
=711.11(N
Stress in curb when resting on bottom thug

100
Net vertical weight=

1-4. (9.2 — 62 )x 21.5.x 25 x 1.05] +680.4+11.5+107.35+34

2302+230+2147+P:

(54- 62 x21.5 x 20x1.05)-2051.71N= 36173 kN

36173
q — 578kN/m2
x 92
4
Assuming height of imaginary arch = r =4m

Hoop Tension — qc13 = 57"

x 93 — 6584.9 IN
16r 16 x 4
Assuming height of well curb =b=3 m
3 9+6)
Hoop. comprdskion= nic-)A (2D, 4 =10 x 0.2671x (2 x.8 3) x 2 )

=187.5 kN.
Net Hoop Tension = 6584.9-187.5 kN = 6397.4 kN
Design hoop tension =1.5 x 6397.4 kN = 9596.1 kN
x
Hoop reinforcement = 9596.1 103 — 23123 mm2
415
23123 —
No of 25 min dia bar= 48 Nos
490.8
As per IRC: 78-2000, clause708.7.3
Minimum reinforcement =-72Kg/m3
Arrangement of, i;cinf7orRement is as shown in figure A.3.8

18 7 5 kN

101
 1 6MM(i) VERTICAL BAR. EMBEDED IN
CURB,EMBEDED LENGTH NOT LESS
THAN 1000 MM
75MM 1-
12 MM DIA BAR

1200. M

CUTTING EDGE
ANGLE IRON ,150x150x12 MM

SHIFTING FLAT 400x12 MM

Fig A.3.9 Reinforcement Detail of Cutting Edge
,

Design of bottonniPlug
!S ri
Using I■420 gradei o cpncrete for bottom plug
Thickness of bottom plug=t
92
1 18x— x578.9
1.18r2q _ . 4 —6.9m
t=
woo x 0.45V20
Providing thickness of bottom plug = 3000mm

102
 SIB ANGIE rib,A4NINELL
FOUNDATION- TOWER TYPE'C' 5 NOS-25M4 BARS ON EACH
NEHTAUR-METOR LINE FACE(TOTAL 16NOS)
HFl

1148 OF MON BAR ON

ROTH FACF
LUGS
10MMOARS©150MMCIC

lib rag II KOMMDEEP LEM CPC

1:16 OVER SAND FIWNG

iNtS
@AMOS
B Rom%

VERT)/ INt92914
BARS 02111U AT EACH IOMM,STIRRUPS(IWO SETS)EACH 00MM CIC PLACED
FAGGOT STININGTOBE lit SET
2nd SET
TORN IXON MOH STIRRUP ALTERNATEDISTANCE BETWEEN 1ST 8, 2ND SET(150MM CIC
TOP RUG STIRRUP

0%411 VERTICAL BAR EMBEDED IN

CURB,EMBEDED LENGTH NOT LESS
THAN 1050 MM
29/481113AS 75MM 1 SNOS25MMBARS
coCULAR RNG Voi
GC ON EACHFACEOF 20 MM DIA BAR EACH FACEITOTAL 18 NOS)
1200MM
SETINGISTAGGERED)

48 NOS -25MM OS

1681114(fl BAR @300MM 8-NOS-10M4 DIA BARS "' 1000 —

3000
C/C ON EAC -I FACE
SECTION AT D•D

5 MM THICK M.S.SHEET
17 NOS-24 MM BARS
BOTH
CUTTING EDGE AT TOP AND BOTTOM
ANGLE IRON 151(150)(12 MM
;2 10M4-4LEGGED STIRRUPS@250MM
1 CIC
SHIFTING FLAT 400)(12 MM
SECTIONAL ELEVATION AT P P
75MM CLEAR COVER

DETAIL OF CURB 1200 MM

SECTION OF BEAM AT AA
ILEGGED.10MMISTIRRUPS#200=
17 N09.25MMIIBARS AT
TOP AND BOTTOM

25M4BARS AS CIRCULAR RING ..adam

@60MM DC ON EACH FACE _ , . .11 16
411111 IIIL
OF STEINING (STAGGERED) AMP "imse.
IIMI11011111L
HIM INN 1101111,
IMO 5400MM
Irllirrr rip111101111111
IMM• 1•1111,1 11111 II 110 111111Immumil-
6000MM urr
BOND RODNOMM
8 NOS-2600MM LONG MUM IIII/111/
111111111111•1111U11111
MEIKIIItt.
5400 20MMO@P0MMC/C
5400MM 'Rol IN= lir'
'RI Nom II' ON BOTH FACES

25MM VERTICAL BARS@250MM

cic ON BOTH FACE OF STEINING
1111111 III 1200 MM
1111111 III

TOP & BOTTOM REINFORCEMENT OF

H— s000 mm
0000
BEAMS OF TOP PLUG 9000 MM lam

DETAIL OF TOP AND BOTTOM REINFORCEMENT

SECTION AT Ea (CENTRAL CIRCULAR HI AR AA TAD own