See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/288115326

Codal Provisions for Design of Machine Foundations - A Review

Conference Paper · November 2014

CITATIONS READS

5 7,412

3 authors:

Bharathi M. Dhiraj Raj

Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur
33 PUBLICATIONS   37 CITATIONS    42 PUBLICATIONS   61 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

R. N. Dubey
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
36 PUBLICATIONS   101 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Next Generation Earthquake Loss Estimation Tool for Hilly Regions View project

Slope Building Interaction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bharathi M. on 26 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Kathmandu, Nepal International Symposium
November 20-21, 2014 Geohazards: Science, Engineering and Management

Paper No. EQ-17

Codal Provisions for Design of Machine Foundations – A Review
Bharathi M1†, Dhiraj Raj1, Dr. R.N. Dubey2
1
Research Scholar, Department of Earthquake Engg., Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, India
2
Assistant Professor, Department of Earthquake Engg., Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, India
†
Corresponding Author, Email: bharathi.iitr@gmail.com

Key words Abstract

Machine foundation, Machine foundations are of prior importance in almost all types of industries, as
Code, Design, these are subjected to dynamic loads generated by rotating equipmentsmounted
Recommendations on them. Hence, these should be designed in such a waythat they do not cause
any inconvenience during operation. Machine foundations are analyzed and
designed based on the machine specifications and soil parameters
available.Theprovisions for the design of machine foundations vary among
codes/standards of different countries. All the codes/standardsprovide the
guidelines forthe design of the foundation and also specify the permissible limit
for displacements to ensure proper functioning of the system. An attempt is
made to review the codes/standards on machine foundations that are available
for practicing in differentparts of the world. The codes/standards considered for
this study includes ACI 351 3R 04 (America), CP 2012 (British), DIN 4024
(German), SAES Q 007 (Saudi Aramco) and IS 2974 (Indian).

1. Machine foundations
Due to tremendous increase in both large and small scale industries, all over the world, the
importance of machine foundation also increases over the time. Engineers fromdifferent
backgrounds are engaged in the analysis, design, construction, maintenance and repair of
machine foundations. Hence, it is important that the operator, engineers involved from different
specialization and equipment supplier should collaborate during the design process to make the
system more efficient and convenient.

2. Considered Codes/standards on Machine Foundations

In this paper, codes/standards from five different countries are selected for extensive study. The
different types of machines and foundations, design criteria, design methods and construction
considerations are elaborated in [1]. Technical terms, materials & methods, design
considerations for machine foundations and work on site have been discussed by [2]. [3]
Describes the flexible structures that support machines with rotating elements, whereas[4]
explains about rigid structures that support machines with periodic excitations. Both [3,
4]discuss about the basic concepts involved, materials, loads, design and reinforcement

- 459 -
Kathmandu, Nepal International Symposium
November 20-21, 2014 Geohazards: Science, Engineering and Management

detailing.Discussion about the basic definitions, forces, loads, design and drawing of machine
foundation system is available in [10].
The Indian Standardsconsists of five parts which consists of foundation for reciprocating
type machines [5],foundations for impact type machines (hammer foundations) [6],foundations
for rotary type machines (medium and high frequency)[7], foundations for rotary type machines
of low frequency[8], and foundations for impact type machines other than hammer (forging and
stamping press, pig breaker, elevator and hoist towers) [9]. An overview of all the considered
codes/standards is presented in the next part.

3. Overview
All the considered codes/standardsdiscuss the basic terminologies involved in the analysis and
design of machine foundations. The dynamic soil properties used for the design are discussed
along with the test methods in [1, 2, 10]. The considered loads and their combinations for
analysis are discussed in [1, 10]. Both static and dynamic analysis procedures are elaborated in
[1, 3]. Mathematical model of the machine foundation system for simplified analysis with a set
of assumptions are described in [3, 6]. A special consideration to steel foundation is given by
both [3, 10]. All the considered codes/standards have depicted the details of reinforcement in
the foundation for better understanding during construction. Design of block and pile
foundation with anti-vibration mounting, workmanship and responsibilities of civil engineering
contractor, testing and measurement prior to initial running to ensure proper functioning are
special provisions by [2].

4. Design Recommendations
The design recommendations by all the considered codes/standards are presented in the form of
tables as presented in Table 1. Among them, the Indian Standards have given their
recommendations for the analysis and design of machine foundations based on the type of
machine to be mounted on the foundation. Hence, the recommendations by the Indian
Standards are represented separately in Table 2.
The recommendations for the analysis and design of both foundation block and pile
foundation have been discussed. Apart from that, the important parameters viz., eccentricity,
frequency ratio and limiting amplitude have been compared for the considered
codes/standards.Both [3,10] are silent about the recommendations for pile foundations
supporting machines; [3] does not specify any eccentricity and limiting amplitude; and [1] is
silent regarding frequency ratio.

- 460 -
 Kathmandu, Nepal International Symposium
November 20-21, 2014 Geohazards: Science, Engineering and Management

Table 1: Recommendations by Considered Codes/Standards other than Indian Standards

Description ACI 351 [1] CP 2012 [2] DIN 4024 [3] SAES Q 007 [10]
Generally the  Width of foundation ≥ the  Discussion is available on  Thickness of the foundation ≥ 0.6+ (L/30) in
surface area of distance from center of various foundation loads, meter, where L is the length of the
the foundation is crank shaft to the bottom of but not on the geometry. foundation.
provided by the foundation to ensure the  For simplified vertical  Depth of foundation slabs ≥ 1/10 of length of
manufacturer of stability against overturning. vibration, the effect of the slab.
the machine  The proportion of the ground and mass of the  The foundation must have sufficient width to
foundation block should be foundation may be prevent rocking and adequate depth to permit
such as to ensure stability neglected for conditions properly embedded anchor bolts.
against rocking. stated below:  For < 500 HP
 Mass of foundation = 3 to 5 Lowest natural Foundation weight ≥ 3  Machinery weight
* Mass of the plant frequency in Limit  For < 200 HP
case of Foundation weight ≥ 5  Total machinery
2. Foundation Foundation ≥ 0.80 weight
block (rigid) and fs  For reciprocating machines, a minimum of
machine on 50% of the block thickness should be
spring support embedded in soil.
Entire system ≥ 0.80
( rigid) on fs 3.
flexible ground
Foundation as ≥ 0.75
rigid ff
where, fs is the lowest
service frequency
ff is frequency of rigid
foundation on flexible
ground
It is suggested  The code specifies
that the block, circumstances where pile
combined block, foundation is required.
table top with or  Pile cap thickness ≥ max
without isolators, (0.6, 1/10 of width)
spring mounted  The mass of soil
blocks should be participating with a
supported on foundation supported on end
Pile piles in case of bearing piles may be NA NA
foundation soft ground assumed to be the same as
conditions where for a raft foundation.
low allowable  The interaction of closely
contact pressure spaced friction piles should
and excessive be considered. This
settlements are interaction will not be same
obtained in case as that under static loading.
of mat
foundation.
 For, axial and  Plan geometric center of The horizontal eccentricity, between the CG of
centrifugal foundation is within 5% of the machine foundation system and centroid of
compressors, center of mass. soil contact area ≤ 0.05  width or length of
with operating  The CG of machine and the foundation.
speed > 25,000 foundation system should if
rpm, eccentricity possible be below the top of
of 250 nm. the foundation block.
Eccentricity NA
 For compressors
at lower speeds,
the maximum
allowable
eccentricity is
dependent on
operating speed.

- 461 -
Kathmandu, Nepal International Symposium
November 20-21, 2014 Geohazards: Science, Engineering and Management

Table , Continued…
Description ACI 351 [1] CP 2012 [2]
 Important installations:
Frequency ratio ≤ 0.5 or ≥ 2
 For less importance
installations:
Frequency ratio ≤ 0.6 or ≥
Frequency 1.5
NA
Ratio  When machine is connected
to the foundation by means
of low frequency resilient
anti vibration mountings the
frequency ratio > 3.
DIN 4024 [3] SAES Q 007 [10]
 Further analysis may be  For high tuned system:
dispensed with, if both the Frequency ratio < 0.7
following conditions are  For low tuned system:
satisfied. Frequency ratio > 1.3
 First order frequency
Lowest natural frequency
≤ 0.80fs or 1.25 fs
 Higher order frequency
Natural frequency ≤ 0.90
fs or ≥ 1.10fs

The dynamic To avoid If manufacturer’s vibration criterion is not

Limit
force amplitude is damage to available 0.12 and 0.15 inch per second for
a function of Specified by centrifugal and reciprocating machines shall be
Machinery
rotating mass, manufacturer considered as limiting velocity.
mass eccentricity, A chart is
operating Person
proposed
frequency and Low speed
Limiting service factor. Settlement machines NA
amplitude
200µm.
For f < 20Hz
its 200µm.
For f > 20Hz
Building
a chart is
proposed. f =
frequency
Only discussions Excite the block to same Damping factor of the  For fatigue, the dynamic loads shall be
are available on mode of vibration as entire system (machine increased by a factor of 1.5.
important expected from operating plus foundation) may be  Any structural component not subjected to
parameters machinery. The vibrations assumed to be 0.02 for both dynamic forces shall be designed for a quasi-
involved since measured by transducers RC and steel structure static load of 50% of dead weight of the
this is a with linear response over the where precise information component in any direction in addition to the
committee report. range 2 to 200 Hz. The is not available. static design loads.
accuracy of transducers  Transmissibility of amplitudes shall be
Others should be better than 10% limited to 20% between adjacent foundations.
and they should respond to a  For high or low tuned foundations the soil
uniaxial motion with not bearing pressures shall not exceed 50% or
more than 10% cross 75% of the allowable bearing pressures
sensitivity. permitted for static loads.
 For a system with continuous support, the
stiffness of the supporting members of the
steel plate will have 3 times the stiffness of
the base plate.

- 462 -
Kathmandu, Nepal International Symposium
November 20-21, 2014 Geohazards: Science, Engineering and Management

Table 2, Recommendations by Indian Standards

Description IS 2974 [5] IS 2974 [6, 9] IS 2974 [7, 8]

 Empirical rules (related to mass, Thickness of Girder Girder
eccentricity and stability) are suggested Mass of tup
foundation block Dimension supporting supporting
for deciding the geometry of foundation (Tons)
(m) Turbine Generator
block.
 Mass of foundation >> Mass of machine Up to 1.0 1.00
Clear span
2 to 3 2.5 to 3.5
to depth
Depth to
1.0 to 2.0 1.25 1 to 3 1 to 1.5
width
2.0 to 4.0 1.75  Base Mat

4.0 to 6.0 2.25

Foundation ≥2
Over 6.0 2.50
block
4. Ratio
5. Range
6. Soil Type  Thickness of base raft > 0.07 L4/3, L is the
7. Mf/ 8.
Mt 60 9. General average of two adjacent clear span length.
10. Mf/ 11.
Mt 80 to
12. stiff clay or (only for raft)
100 compact sandy
13. Mf/ 14.
Mt 10015.
to Moderately
120 firm to soft
clays and
medium dense
to loose sand
16. Where, Mf = Mass of the foundation
17. Mt= Mass of the tup
 Pile caps thickness > 60cm
 Pile Soil Stiffness factors is obtained by in situ test on single pile with free head condition. In actual practice the pile is used in a
Pile group with pile heads largely restrained by the pile cap. If it is not possible to conduct in-situ tests, computative method of
foundation estimation can be adopted.
 The CG of the system (foundation and machine) < 5% length of the foundation with respect to the CG of the pile group. (Applicable
for reciprocating machine only)

CG of anvil and the foundation block, Under unavoidable circumstance, a

 The eccentricity < 5% of the base
resultant force in the elastic pad and maximum eccentricity of 3% base
dimension of block.
Eccentricity supported foundation should coincide dimension may be allowed.
 CG of combined system should lie below
with the line of fall of hammer tup as
the top of the foundation block. far as practically possible.
Frequency 1.43 < <0.67
1.5 < <0.4 1.25< <0.83
Ratio (Impact machine other than hammer)
To avoid Limit Tup mass  Amplitudes ≤ 0.20 mm in lateral
<1 1-3 >3
damage to (tons) directions.
Machinery Specified by manufacturer
18.
Amplitude (mm)  Amplitude ≤ 0.26 mm (several
Part foundations are erected on a common mat)
Person A chart is proposed Foundation 1 1.5 2
Settlement Low speed machines 200µm. Anvil 1 2 3-4
For f < 20Hz its 200µm.
Building For f > 20Hz a chart is
Limiting proposed. f = frequency
amplitude  In case of important structures present
near the foundation, the amplitude of the
foundation should be adjusted so that the
velocity of the vibrations at the structure
does not exceed 0.3cm/s.
 If the soil at site is subjected to excessive
settlement then a semi-buoyant or fully
buoyant foundation may be provided.

Fatigue factor of 3 is used for design to take
care of reduction in strength of concrete and
Others
steel due to repeated loading.
Load intensity on the soil below the Fatigue factor of 2 is used for dynamic
foundation ≤ 80% of the allowable analysis.
bearing pressure of the soil or
material.

- 463 -
 Kathmandu, Nepal International Symposium
November 20-21, 2014 Geohazards: Science, Engineering and Management

5. Conclusions
An extensive study about theconsidered codes/standards on machine foundation is carried
outand a common observation is that the procedure for the design of machine foundation
supported on piles is not available in detail. Some of the considered codes/standards suggest
that the dynamic analysis procedure of piles can be adopted for the analysis and design of pile
foundations supporting machines. This is due to fact that the design of pile foundations
supporting the machines depends on several non-dimensional and interaction parameters.

Acknowledgment
The authors are grateful to IIT Roorkee for providing the facilities for this investigation.

References
1. ACI: 351-3R-2004, "Foundations for Dynamic Equipment", American Concrete
Institute.
2. CP: 2012 (Part I)-1974, "Code of practice for Foundations for Machinery",
BSI,London.
3. DIN: 4024 (Part I)-1988,"Machine Foundations – Flexible Structures that Support
Machines with Rotating Elements", German Standards.
4. DIN: 4024 (Part II)-1988,"Machine Foundations – Rigid Structures that Support
Machines with Periodic Excitation", German Standards.
5. IS: 2974 (Part I)-1982, “Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Machine
Foundations - Foundation for Reciprocating Type Machines”, BIS New Delhi, India.
6. IS: 2974 (Part II)-1980, “Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Machine
Foundations - Foundations for Impact Type Machines (Hammer Foundations)”, BIS
New Delhi, India.
7. IS: 2974 (Part III)-1992, “Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Machine
Foundations - Foundation for Rotary Type Machines (Medium and High
Frequency)”, BISNew Delhi, India.
8. IS: 2974 (Part IV)-1979, “Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Machine
Foundations - Foundation for Rotary Type Machines of Low Frequency”, BISNew
Delhi, India.
9. IS: 2974 (Part V)-1987, “Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Machine
Foundations - Foundations for Impact Machines other than Hammers”, BISNew
Delhi, India.
10. SAES: Q–007-2003, "Foundations and Supporting Structures for Heavy Machinery",
Onshore Structures, Saudi Arabia.

- 464 -

View publication stats