Subgrade reaction

modulus required for

design of mat and slab-
on-grade
Posted February 12, 2018April 25, 2018 Amin






Rate this (14 Votes)

Subgrade reaction modulus is the ratio of soil pressure to deflection. This
modulus is widely used in structural design of mats and slabs. The structural
design is completed by structural engineer of record (SEOR) where he/she
utilizes the concept of Beam on Nonlinear Winkler Foundation in order to
estimate the pressure of soil as well as shear forces and bending moments
induced to the foundation element. Geotechncial engineer of record (GEOR) is
responsible to provide appropriate subgrade reaction modulus to
characterize the Winkler springs. Appropriate estimation of subgrade reaction
modulus would result in appropriate estimation of soil pressure distribution
under the mat/slab which would consequently result in accurate structural
design of mat/slab.

Unfortunately, there is a widespread misconception in the use of subgrade

reaction modulus. Structural engineers often expect to see a single constant
value for subgrade reaction modulus in soils report. However, subgrade
reaction modulus is not a fundamental soil property. It is a function of
(Walker and Holland, 2016):

1. Geometry of loading surface area: loads with larger surface area influence
deeper soil deposit that can be very soft or compressible.
2. Load magnitude: soil behavior is highly nonlinear so soil would have
lower subgrade modulus when subjected to larger loads.
 3. Soil stiffness and strength parameters as well as compressiblilty indices
within the stress bulb.
4. Type of loading (long term or short-term loads) for cases that foundation
soil is compressible.
5. Stiffness of the mat/slab which affects distribution of the soil bearing
pressure.

Geometry of loading surface and type of loading must be provided by

structural engineers for appropriate estimation of subgrade reaction. By
former parameter, the geotechnical engineer will know to what depth stress
bulbs extend, and by latter parameter, the geotechnical engineer will know
whether to include consolidation in the calculation of subgrade reaction
modulus or not. For example, lift-truck wheel loads (short-term loading) will
cause very little, if any, long-term consolidation settlement.

Given that the above two parameters are available, let’s see how the
geotechnical engineer should calculate the subgrade reaction modulus value.

1. Advanced Method (Walker and Holland, 2016):

The best approach to appropriately include the effects of all five items
described above in the calculation of subgrade reaction modulus, is to analyze
full-scale three-dimensional continuum model of the mat and the underlying
soil domain. Walker and Holland (2016) proposed the following approach to
determine subgrade reaction modulus:

 Develop three-dimensional continuum model of the mat and the soil.

Representative soil properties are assigned to the soil elements (see Fig.
1)
 Develop three-dimensional spring model (Winkler model) where soil
elements are replaced by a series of one-dimensional linear elastic
springs (see Fig. 1).

The spring model is analyzed iteratively by varying the spring stiffness until
the computed slab pressure becomes similar to that in the continuum model.
See Figure 1 below for better illustration. This may raise the question that
why subgrade reaction modulus is not obtained directly from the continnum
model results as the ratio of applied pressure to average of computed
deformations. The reason is that the spring model has some analytical
limitations. The model uses a series of uncoupled springs where deformation
of one spring does not influence the deformations of other springs. In addition
the springs are linear elastic while soil in the continuum model is highly
nonlinear and elastoplastic. Therefore, iterative analysis of spring model is
required.

Figure 1. Approach #1-Determination of subgrade reaction modulus (Walker

and Holland, 2016).
Note that Walker and Holland (2016) used secant elastic stiffness for the
simulation of soil behavior in their continuum model analysis; however, I
personally believe that soil nonlinear elastoplastic behavior as well as soil
creep behavior (consolidation) must be taken into account in any advanced
geotechnical analysis. Note that since the model is nonlinear the subgrade
reaction is going to vary for different load levels. If structural loads are not
available, the iterative procedure discussed above has to be repeated for some
typical loading levels, and subgrade reaction modulus should be provided for
each load level.

2. Simplified Method
The above-mentioned iterative analysis procedure can be tedious and may
require purchasing computer programs which may not be affordable for some
individuals/firms. If some levels of approximation is acceptable for project
design team, subgrade reaction modulus can be determined directly from a
typical soil settlement analysis results. Note that it is assumed that the surface
area of loading and its type (long-term or short-term) are all provided by the
structural engineer.
Settle3D computer program can be used to calculate ground settlement under
the given load surface area. Note that in this approach the following items are
excluded from subgrade reaction calculations:

1. Soil nonlinear elastoplastic response,

2. Stiffness of slab/mat, and
3. performing iterative analysis on spring model to ensure that stress
distributions are similar.

Items 1 and 2 can be included in the calculation by performing the settlement

analysis using finite element (e.g. PLAXIS) or finite difference programs (e.g.
FLAC). Unfortunately, there is no way to account for Item #3 in this approach.

Concluding Remarks
Geotechnical engineers must report subgrade reaction modulus with
providing some qualifiers on how the modulus should be used. It should be
clearly specified that the reported subgrade reaction modulus is valid for
what:

 load magnitude (e.g., 2000 psf)

 load surface area (e.g., point load or 6-foot wide storage rack)
 type of load: short-term or long-term

Some geotechnical consulting firms may report typical subgrade reaction

modulus obtained from plate load test (rigid plate 12″x12″) and provide
Terzaghi’s equation (1955) to modify the modulus for different foundation
sizes. This approach might be appropriate for a uniform soil deposit. For a
non-uniform soil deposit with interbedded compressible layers, plate load test
results are NOT reliable. It is recommended to follow the procedures
described in this article.

For the sake of completeness, the typical subgrade reaction modulus are listed
below in Table 1. Note that these values are valid for a 12″ plate resting on
uniform soils. If there is no potential for creep and long-term consolidation,
the following equations can be used in order to account for different
foundation sizes (Terzaghi, 1955):

 Square Footing: ks=k[B+B12B]2 k_{s}=k[\frac{B+B_1}{2B}]^2 ks

=k[2BB+B1]2
 Rectangular Footing: ks,rect.=ks(1+B/L)1.50
k_{s,rect.}=k_{s}\frac{(1+B/L)}{1.50} ks,rect.=ks1.50(1+B/L)
 Continuous Footing: ks,cont.=0.67ks k_{s,cont.}=0.67k_{s} ks,cont.=0.67ks
where k k k is 12″ plate subgrade modulus, B1B_1B1 is plate width in the load
test (typically 12″), B B B is foundation width, and L L L is the rectangular
footing length.

Table 1. Typical subgrade modulus for a rigid plate 12 inch in diameter.

Ref: Lindeburg – Civil Engineering Reference Manual (15th Edition)

As noted in the table the subgrade reaction modulus varies in a wide range for
each soil type. It is highly recommended to follow either of approaches 1 or 2
as described in this article to determine subgrade reaction modulus.