Professional Documents
Culture Documents
351.3R-18 Report On Foundations For Dynamic Equipment
351.3R-18 Report On Foundations For Dynamic Equipment
00
'
I
0:::
(Y) •
'
l.()
(Y)
u
<( �
� acI • �
American Concrete Institute
Copyright by the American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI. All rights reserved. This material
may not be reproduced or copied, in whole or part, in any printed, mechanical, electronic, film, or other
distribution and storage media, without the written consent of ACI.
The technical committees responsible for ACI committee reports and standards strive to avoid
ambiguities, omissions, and errors in these documents. In spite of these efforts, the users of ACI
documents occasionally find information or requirements that may be subject to more than one
interpretation or may be incomplete or incorrect. Users who have suggestions for the improvement of
ACI documents are requested to contact ACI via the errata website at http://concrete.org/Publications/
DocumentErrata.aspx. Proper use of this document includes periodically checking for errata for the most
up-to-date revisions.
ACI committee documents are intended for the use of individuals who are competent to evaluate the
significance and limitations of its content and recommendations and who will accept responsibility for
the application of the material it contains. Individuals who use this publication in any way assume all
risk and accept total responsibility for the application and use of this information.
All information in this publication is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either express or
implied, including but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular
purpose or non-infringement.
ACI and its members disclaim liability for damages of any kind, including any special, indirect, incidental,
or consequential damages, including without limitation, lost revenues or lost profits, which may result
from the use of this publication.
It is the responsibility of the user of this document to establish health and safety practices appropriate
to the specific circumstances involved with its use. ACI does not make any representations with regard
to health and safety issues and the use of this document. The user must determine the applicability of
all regulatory limitations before applying the document and must comply with all applicable laws and
regulations, including but not limited to, United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) health and safety standards.
Par,ticipation by governmental representatives in the work of the American Concrete Institute and in
the development of Institute standards does not constitute governmental endorsement of ACI or the
standards that it develops.
Order information: ACI documents are available in print, by download, through electronic subscription,
or reprint and may be obtained by contacting ACI.
Most ACI standards and committee reports are gathered together in the annually revised the ACI
Collection of Concrete Codes, Specifications, and Practices.
Consulting Members
This report presents to industry practitioners the various design 3.2-Machine types, p. 5
criteria and methods and procedures of analysis, design, and 3 .3-Foundation types, p. 6
construction applied to foundations for dynamic equipment.
CHAPTER 4-DESIGN LOADS, p. 8
Keywords: amplitude; foundation; reinforcement; vibration.
4. 1-0verview of design loads and criteria, p. 8
4.2-Static machine loads, p. 9
CONTENTS
4.3-Dynamic machine loads, p. 1 1
4.4-Environmental loads, p. 17
CHAPTER 1-INTRODUCTION, p. 2
4.5-Load conditions, p. 1 7
1 . 1-Background, p. 2
4.6-Load combinations, p . 1 8
1 .2-Purpose, p. 2
1 .3-Scope, p. 2
CHAPTER 5-IMPEDANCE OF THE SUPPORTING
MEDIUM, p. 18
CHAPTER 2-NOTATION AND DEFINITIONS, p. 3
5 . 1-0verview and use of soil impedance, p. 1 8
2 . 1 -Notation, p. 3
5.2-Basic dynamic concepts, p . 1 9
2.2-Definitions, p. 5
5 .3-Calculation o f dynamic foundation impedances,
p. 2 1
CHAPTER 3-FOUNDATION AND MACHINE
5 .4-Dynamic impedance of soil-supported foundations,
TYPES, p. 5
p . 22
3 . 1-Genera1 considerations, p. 5
5 .5-Dynamic impedance of pile foundations, p. 28
5.6-Transformed impedance relative to center of gravity,
ACI Committee Reports, Guides, and Commentaries are
p. 3 5
intended for guidance in planning, designing, executing, and 5 .7-Added mass concept, p . 35
inspecting construction. This document is intended for the use 5 .8-Sample impedance calculations, p. 36
of individuals who are competent to evaluate the significance
and limitations of its content and recommendations and who
will accept responsibility for the application of the material it
contains. The American Concrete Institute disclaims any and
all responsibility for the stated principles. The Institute shall
not be liable for any loss or damage arising therefrom. ACI 351.3R-18 supersedes ACI 351.3R-04 and was adopted and published January
2018.
Reference to this document shall not be made in contract
Copyright© 2018, American Concrete Institute.
documents. If items found in this document are desired by
All rights reserved including rights of reproduction and use in any form or by
the Architect/Engineer to be a part of the contract documents,
any means, including the making of copies by any photo process, or by electronic
they shall be restated in mandatory language for incorporation or mechanical device, printed, written, or oral, or recording for sound or visual
by the Architect/Engineer. reproduction or for use in any knowledge or retrieval system or device, unless
permission in writing is obtained from the copyright proprietors.
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI Not ftr Resale, 2018/6/28 12:40:39
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
2 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
ACI 3 5 1 .2R was published prior to a major revision to ACI force in vibration isolator spring, lbf (N)
3 1 8 and some of the section numbers that it references in dynamic force amplitude (zero-to-peak), lbf (N)
ACI 3 1 8 may have changed. lateral/longitudinal pseudo-dynamic design force,
lbf (N)
CHAPTER 2-NOTATION AND DEFINITIONS Fpv vertical pseudo-dynamic design force, lbf (N)
F,. maximum horizontal dynamic force, lbf (N)
2.1-Notation Fred = force reduction factor to account for the fraction of
A steady-state vibration amplitude, in. (mm) individual cylinder load carried by the compressor
Ahead, frame (frame rigidity factor)
Acrank= head and crank areas, in.2 (mm2) Frod = force acting on piston rod, lbf (N)
Ap = cross-sectional area of the pile, in.2 (mm2) Fs = dynamic inertia force of slide, lbf (N)
a, b = plan dimension of a rectangular foundation, ft (m) F rHRovF horizontal force to be resisted by each throw 's
dimensionless frequency anchor bolts, lbf (N)
cylinder bore diameter, in. (mm) F (t)= generic representation of time-varying load (force
B; mass ratio for the i-th direction or moment) horizontal
Emf= machine footprint width, ft (m) Funbatance= maximum value applied using parameters for a
BM = width of mat foundation, ft (m) horizontal compressor cylinder, lbf (N)
B,. ram weight, tons (kN) fc' specified concrete compressive strength, psi (MPa)
b�, bz= constants 0.425 and 0.687, respectively fn,Ji2= dimensionless pile stiffness and damping functions
c damping coefficient or total damping at center of for the i-th direction
resistance operating speed, rpm
[ C] damping matrix dynamic shear modulus of the soil, psi (MPa)
CCR = critical damping coefficient torsional stiffness of the pile, lbf-ft2 (N-m2)
Cn,C; 2= dimensionless stiffness and damping parameters, dynamic shear modulus of the embedment (side)
subscription i = u, v, \jl, YJ material, psi (MPa)
c viscous damping constant, lbf-s/ft (N-s/m) depth of soil layer, ft (m)
c; damping constant for the i-th direction gross area moment of inertia, in.2 (mm2)
c; (adj) = adjusted damping constant for the i-th direction moment of inertia of the pile cross section in. 4
cu = equivalent viscous damping of pile j in the i-th (mm4)
direction -1-1
CG = center of gravity directional indicator or modal indicator, as a
CF center of force subscript
Cg; pile group damping in the i-th direction K stiffness or total stiffness at center of resistance, lbf/
D damping ratio ft (N/m) or lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad)
D; damping ratio for the i-th direction [KJ stiffness matrix
Drod= rod diameter, in. (mm) K' total stiffness at center of gravity, lb£'ft (N/m) or
d pile diameter, in (mm) lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad)
ds displacement of the slide, in. (mm) Ku* = impedance in the i-th direction due to a displace
dmf distance from machine shaft centerline to top of ment in thej-th direction
foundation, ft (m) actual negative stiffness, lbf/ft (N/m) or lbf-ft/rad
E static Young's modulus of concrete, psi (MPa) (N-m/rad)
Ed dynamic Young's modulus of concrete, psi (MPa) arbitrary chosen positive stiffness value (typically
EP Young's modulus of the pile, psi (MPa) set equal to the static stiffness), lbf/ft (N/m) or
em mass eccentricity, in. (mm) lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad)
F peak value of harmonic dynamic load (force or effective bearing stiffness, lbf/in. (N/mm)
moment) static soil stiffness, lbf/in3 (N/m3)
F1 correction factor pile group coupling impedance
Fblock= force acting outward on the block from which pile group horizontal impedance
concrete stresses should be calculated, lbf (N) pile group vertical impedance
(FbottkHc = force to be restrained by friction at the crosshead pile group rocking impedance
guide tie-down bolts, lbf (N) individual pile stiffness at center of resistance, lbf/
(FbotJrJ ame = force to be restrained by friction at the frame ft (N/m) or lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad)
tie-down bolts, lbf (N) impedance in the i-th direction due to embedment
FD = damper force, lbf (N) pile group stiffness in the i-th direction, lbf/ft (N/m)
FGMAx = maximum horizontal gas force on a throw or or lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad)
cylinder, lbf (N) static stiffness for the i-th direction, lbf/ft (N/m) or
F1M� maximum horizontal inertia force on a throw or lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad)
cylinder, lbf (N)
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
4 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
k;' frequency-dependent impedance in the i-th R'¥a' R>¥b = equivalent rocking radius of foundation about a-
direction and b-axis, respectively, ft (m)
k; (adj) = adjusted static stiffness for the i-th direction, lbf/ft R� equivalent torsional radius of foundation, ft (m)
(N/m) or lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad) r length of crank, in. (mm)
k;' (adj)= adjusted frequency-dependent impedance in the r; radius of the crank mechanism of the i-th cylinder,
i-th direction in. (mm)
ku stiffness of pile) in the i-th direction, lbf/ft (N/m) or r0 pile radius or equivalent radius, in. (mm)
lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad) S press stroke, in. (mm)
static stiffness of an individual pile j in the i-th Sa11 allowable foundation settlement, in. (mm)
direction, lbf/ft (N/m) or lbf-ft/rad (N-m/rad) s1 service factor, used to account for increasing unbal-
ks soil modulus of subgrade reaction, lbf/in3 (N/m3) ance during the design service life of the machine
ks t static stiffness constant s i l , si2 = dimensionless stiffness and damping parameters
ku* horizontal impedance of supporting medium for side layer, subscription i = u, v, "'' 11
kv* vertical impedance of supporting medium Smax = maximum foundation settlement, in. (mm)
k./ rocking impedance of supporting medium SVR = seismic shear force due to the rigid foundation and
�· torsional impedance of supporting medium other rigid components, lbf (N)
k(w)= frequency (w)-dependent dynamic impedance SVs = seismic shear force due to the superstructure,
L length of connecting rod, in. (mm) machine and other flexible components, lbf (N)
greater plan dimension of the mat foundation, ft SVseismic=total seismic shear force machine-foundation
(m) system, lbf (N)
machine footprint length, ft (m) s pile center-to-center spacing, ft (m)
lateral distance from center of resistance to indi [ T] transfer matrix
vidual piles, ft (m) TM mat foundation thickness, ft (m)
depth of embedment, ft (m) T,11;11 = minimum required anchor bolt tension, lbf (N)
lp pile length, ft (m) time, s
M mass, Ibm (kg) u displacement amplitude, in. (mm)
[MJ = mass matrix peak displacement amplitude, in. (mm)
hammer mass, including any auxiliary foundation, compressive velocity of a pile, ft/s (m/s)
Ibm (kg) transmissibility factor
M0 = overturning moment on foundation, lbf-ft (N-m) Lysmer's analog wave velocity, ft/second (m/s)
MR = mass ratio of concrete foundation to machine Vmax= maximum allowable bearing vibration, in. (mm)
M,. ram mass, including dies and ancillary parts, Ibm Vpeak= peak velocity, in./s (mm/s)
(kg) VRMs= root mean square velocity, in./s (mm/s)
Mres= foundation overturning resistance, lbf-ft (N-m) vs shear wave velocity of the soil, ft/s (m/s)
Mt; added mass, Ibm (kg) post-impact hammer velocity, in./s (mm/s)
m mass of the machine-foundation system; Ibm (kg) reference velocity = 1 8 .4 ft/s (5 .6 m/s) from a free
slide mass including the effects of any balance fall of 5 .25 ft ( 1 .6 m)
mechanism, Ibm (kg) ram impact velocity, ft/s (m/s)
m,. rotating mass, Ibm (kg) equipment weight at anchorage location, lbf (N)
mrec reciprocating mass in a reciprocating machine, Ibm weight of the foundation, tons (kN)
(kg) machine weight, tons (kN)
m,v1 rotating mass in a reciprocating machine, Ibm (kg) rotating weight, lbf (N)
m5 = added mass (inertial), Ibm (kg) y generic representation of displacement (transla
N number of piles
'
tional or rotational), in. (mm) or rad
(NboltkHc = number of bolts holding down one cross- y (ji)= generic representation of velocity (translational or
U; pile dynamic interaction factor in the i-th direction, e) Allowable amplitudes of vibration associated with each
subscription i = z (axial), HH (horizontal), MM (in dynamic load case
phase rocking), MH (sway rocking) f) Construction requirements such as limitations or
aj coefficients,}= 1 constraints imposed by construction equipment, procedures,
�i rectangular footing coefficient for the i-th direction techniques, or the sequence of construction
�j yj= coefficients,}= 1 to 4 g) Operational requirements such as accessibility, settle
'
�m material damping ratio ment limitations, temperature effects, and drainage
concrete density, lbf/ft3 (kN/m3 ) h) Maintenance requirements such as temporary access,
phase angle laydown space, in-plant crane capabilities, and machine
mode shape vector removal considerations
mode shape factor i) Regulatory factors, owner requirements, or building
tuning ratio code provisions such as tied pile caps in seismic zones
phase angle, or angle between the direction of load j) Economic factors such as capital cost, useful or design
action and the plane in which piles lie, rad service life, and replacement or repair cost
soil mass density, lbm/ft3 (kg/m3) k) Environmental requirements such as secondary contain
pile mass density, lbm/ft3 (kg!m3) ment or special concrete coating requirements
peak amplitude (translational or rotational), in. or 1) Recognition that certain machines, particularly large
rad reciprocating compressors, rely on the foundation to add
coefficient of friction strength and stiffness that is not inherent in the structure of
Poisson's ratio of the soil the machine
w circular frequency of motion, rad/s
wd damped circular natural frequency, rad/s 3.2-Machine types
ffi; undamped circular natural frequency for the i-th 3.2.1 Rotating machinery-This category includes
mode, rad/s gas turbines, steam turbines, and other expanders; turbo
ffi11 undamped circular natural frequency, rad/s pumps and compressors; fans; motors; and centrifuges .
W0 circular operating frequency of a machine or other These machines are characterized b y the motion o f rotating
driving force, rad/s components.
ffisu. ffisv =circular natural frequencies of a soil layer in hori Unbalanced forces in rotating machines are created when
zontal (u) and vertical (v) directions, rad/s the mass centroid ofthe rotating component does not coincide
u, v, with the center of rotation (Fig. 3.2. 1 ). This dynamic force
ljl, 11 = subscriptions used for notating horizontal, vertical, is a function of the mass of the rotating component, speed of
rocking, and torsional direction, respectively rotation, and the magnitude of the eccentricity of offset. The
offset or eccentricity should be minor under manufactured
2.2-Definitions conditions when the machine is well balanced, clean, and
Please refer to the latest version of ACI Concrete Termi without wear or erosion. Changes in alignment, operation
nology for a comprehensive list of definitions. Definitions near resonance, turbine blade loss, and other malfunctions or
provided herein complement that resource. undesirable conditions can greatly increase the force applied
root cause analysis-collective term that describes a wide to its bearings by the rotor.
range of approaches, tools, and techniques used to uncover 3.2.2 Reciprocating machinery-For reciprocating
causes of problems. machinery, such as compressors or diesel engines, a piston
moving in a cylinder interacts with a gas through the kine
CHAPTER 3-FOUNDATION AND MACHINE TYPES matics of a slider crank mechanism driven by, or driving,
a rotating crankshaft. Individual inertia forces from each
3.1-General considerations cylinder are inherently unbalanced with dominant frequencies
The type, configuration, and installation of a foundation or at one and two times the rotational frequency (Fig. 3 .2.2).
support structure for dynamic machinery may depend on the
following factors:
a) Site conditions such as soil characteristics, topography,
seismicity, climate, and other effects
b) Machine base configuration such as frame size, cylinder
supports, pulsation bottles, drive mechanisms, and exhaust
ducts
c) Process requirements such as elevation requirements
with respect to connected process equipment and support
requirements for piping
d) Anticipated loads such as the equipment static weight, of mass
along with loads developed during construction, startup,
operation, shutdown, and maintenance Fig. 3.2.1-Rotating machine diagram.
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
6 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
.@ t5 = Decoupling
Primary and
.. ..
Rotatio secondary �
0
Crankshaft force LL
ro
c r-
Fig. 3.2. 2-Reciprocating machine diagram.
2
/ !"\
·.:::
0 0
The unbalanced forces and moments generated by recip I
,\ I ti me
rocating machines with more than one piston are dependent
I "'-. / I\
on the crank arrangement. The optimum crank arrangement
lo.2 0.4 0.6 1.2
t
0.8 1.0 1.4 1.6
that minimizes loading is generally not possible because the
1.
=I
mechanical design will be optimized to satisfy the operating t1 t2 3 ts
t4 �
requirements. This leads to piston/cylinder assemblies and
crank arrangements that do not completely counter-oppose; Cran kshaft Rotation
1
therefore, unbalanced loads occur, which should be resisted
by the foundation. Fig. 3. 2. 3-Example ofaforcingfunctionfor aforgingpress.
Individual cylinder fluid forces act outward on the cylinder
head and inward on the crankshaft (Fig. 3 .2.2). For a rigid
low velocities but with greater forces. The mechanical drive
cylinder and frame, these forces are internally balanced in
system generates horizontal dynamic forces that the engi
the machine, but deformations of large machines can cause
neer should consider in the design of the support system.
a significant portion of the forces to be transmitted to the
Rocking stability of this construction is important. Figure
mounts and into the foundation. Particularly on large recip
3 .2.3 shows a typical example of a horizontal forcing func
rocating compressors with horizontal cylinders, it is inap
tion through one full stroke of a forging press.
propriate and unconservative to assume the compressor Mechanical metal forming presses operate by squeezing
frame and cylinder are sufficiently stiff to internally balance
and shearing metal between two dies. Because this equip
all forces. Such an assumption has led to many inadequate
ment can vary greatly in size, weight, speed, and operation,
mounts for reciprocating machines.
forces and design criteria used for the foundation design can
3.2.3 Impulsive machinery-Equipment, such as forging
vary greatly. Speeds can vary from 30 to 1 800 strokes per
hammers and some metal-forming presses, operate with regu
minute. Dynamic forces from the press develop from two
lated impacts or shocks between different parts of the equip
sources: the mechanical imbalance of the moving parts in
ment. This shock loading is often transmitted to the foun
the equipment and the response of the press frame as the
dation system of the equipment and can propagate into the
material is sheared (snap-through forces). Imbalances in the
surroundings and is a factor in the design of the foundation.
mechanics of the equipment can occur both horizontally and
Closed die forging hammers typically operate by dropping
vertically. Generally, high-speed equipment is well balanced.
a weight (ram) onto hot metal, forcing it into a predefined
Low-speed equipment is often not balanced because the
shape. While the intent is to use this impact energy to form
inertia forces at low speeds are small. The dynamic forces
and shape the material, there is significant energy trans
generated by all of these presses can be significant as they
mission, particularly late in the forming process. During
are transmitted into the foundation and propagate into the
these final blows, the material being forged is cooling and
subgrade.
less shaping takes place. Thus, pre-impact kinetic energy
3.2.4 Other machine rypes-Other machinery generating
of the ram converts to post-impact kinetic energy of the
dynamic loads include rock crushers and metal shredders.
entire forging hammer. As the entire hammer moves down
While part of the dynamic load from these types of equip
ward, it becomes a simple dynamic mass oscillating on its
ment tend to be based on rotating imbalances, there are also
supporting medium. This system should be well damped so
random characteristics to the dynamic forces that vary with
that the oscillations decay sufficiently before the next blow.
the particular operation and design.
Timing of the blows commonly range from 40 to 100 blows
per minute. The ram weights vary from a few hundred pounds
3.3-Foundation types
to 35,000 pounds ( 1 6 tons). Impact velocities in the range of
3.3. 1 Block-rype foundation-Dynamic machines are
25 ft/s (7.6 rn/s) are common. Open die hammers operate in a
preferably located close to grade to minimize the eleva
similar fashion but are often of two-piece construction with
tion difference between the machine dynamic forces and
a separate hammer frame and anvil.
the center of gravity of the machine-foundation system
Forging presses perform a similar manufacturing func
(Fig. 3 . 3 . 1). The low location also reduces the moments
tion as forging hammers but are commonly mechanically
due to horizontal forces. The ability to use such a founda-
or hydraulically driven. These presses form the material at
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 7
Elevated supporting
dec k
Columns or
supporting
frames
Fig. 3. 3. 1-Block-typefoundation.
Mat
Pedestal-2 foundation
D
r= .....___ Vibration
Fig. 3.3.2-Combined block-type foundation.
Isolator
communication of data and its appropriate use. Machines tion of the machine components provided by the machine
always experience some level of unbalance, vibration, and manufacturer can be used to distribute machine dead loads
force transmitted through the bearings. Under some off to the supporting points.
design conditions, such as wear, the forces may increase Some machine manufacturers provide the weights of
significantly. The machine manufacturer and engineer turbine and generator at certain support points. These forces
responsible for the foundation design should work together are due to axial movements of the turbine-generator rotor
so that their combined knowledge achieves an integrated only at the bearing casing connection points of the combined
machine-foundation system that robustly serves the needs of radial/axial bearing (thrust bearing). These weights should
its owner and operator and withstands design loads. be used in the dynamic analysis, seismic analysis, or both,
Usually the machine loads, including normal operation of the foundation.
loads, emergency loads, catastrophic loads, and accidental 4.2.2 Live loads-Live loads are produced by personnel,
loads, are provided by the machine manufacturer. Seismic tools, and maintenance equipment and materials. The live
loads and their distribution pattern from machine to the foun loads used in design should be the maximum loads expected
dation at the machine support points should be provided by during the design service life ofthe machine. For most designs,
the manufacturer based on the machine configuration and live loads are uniformly distributed over the floor areas of
mounting system. The total seismic loads for the foundation platforms of elevated support structures or to the access areas
analysis should include the seismic loads induced from the around at-grade foundations. Typical live loads vary from
machine mass and the seismic loads induced from foundation 60 lbf/ft2 (3 kPa) for personnel to as much as 250 lbf/ft2 ( 1 2
concrete mass. However, the engineer responsible for the foun kPa) for maintenance equipment and materials (ASCE/SEI
dation design should have a good understanding of each load 7). For steam turbine generator machines, it is common to
and how the seismic load is transferred to the foundation. The also consider a value of 400 to 500 lbf/ft2 ( 1 9 to 24 kPa) for
machine seismic loads provided by the machine vendor may machine parts (such as rotors and casings) in a laydown area.
need to be adjusted based on the seismic design code require 4.2.3 Normal operating loads-Static operating loads
ments. Seismic loads from the mat foundation are, in general, include the weight of the machine contents during normal
out of phase from the seismic loads due to the machine and operation. Static operating loads include forces such as the
superstructure, unless the machine or superstructure are rigid. drive torque developed by some machines at the connection
Therefore, the seismic shear due to the foundation and other between the drive mechanism and driven machinery. Static
rigid members (SVR) and the seismic shear due to the super operating loads can also include forces caused by thermal
structure + machine and other flexible (SVs) members should growth of the machinery equipment and connecting piping.
be calculated by similar combinations such as square root of Time-varying (dynamic) loads generated by machines
sum of the squares (SRSS) approach as follows during operation are covered in 4.3.
4.2.3.1 Operating torque loads-Machines such as
SVseismic = (SVi + SVi)05 (4. 1 ) compressors, turbines, and generators require some form of
drive mechanism, either integral with the machine or sepa
Close cooperation and coordination with the machine rate from it. When the drive mechanism is nonintegral, such
vendor is essential for a successful foundation design. as a separate electric motor, reciprocating engine, and gas or
Sections 4.2 to 4.4 provide some of the commonly used steam turbine, it produces a net external drive torque on the
loading descriptions, evaluations, or both, for determining driven machine. For turbine-generators, fluid or magnetic
machine-induced forces and other design loads for foun coupling between the rotor and stator of the generator can
dations supporting machinery. They include definitions produce an overturning torque about the longitudinal axis
and other information on static and dynamic loads. These (shaft) equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the
loads should be provided by the machine manufacturer, and driver and driven machine. For example, the normal opera
alternative assumptions should be made when such data are tional torque load from turbines is oriented in the opposite
unavailable or are under-predicted. direction to that of shaft rotation, whereas for the generator,
the normal operational torque load is oriented in the direc
4.2-Static machine loads tion of shaft rotation (Fig. 4.2.3 . l a). The normal torque
4.2.1 Dead loads-A major function ofthe foundation is to (sometimes called drive torque) is generally applied to the
support gravity (dead) loads due to the weight ofthe machine, foundation as a static force couple in the vertical direction
auxiliary equipment, piping, valves, and dead weight of the acting about the centerline of the shaft of the machine based
foundation structure. The weights of the machine compo on the highest expected output of the machine. The magni
nents are normally supplied by the machine manufacturer. tude of the normal torque is often calculated as
The distribution of the weight of the machine on the foun
dation depends on the location of support points and on the (5250)(P, )
NT = (lbf-ft)
rigidity or flexibility of the machine frame. Typically, there ;;,
are multiple support points and, thus, the distribution is stati (4.2.3 . l a)
(9550)(P, )
cally indeterminate. In many cases, the machine manufac NT = (N-m)
turer provides a loading diagram showing the vertical loads ;;,
at each support point. Sometimes the center of gravity loca-
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
10 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS F O R DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
� MACIDNE
Shaft rotation
ROTATION
+Z
+Y
Width
GAS
FLOW
S haft rotation
I. t
resisted by transverse equipment soleplates.
S pac i n g
neck duct opening area of the LP turbine. The vacuum loads
•� ,
are normally supplied by the machine manufacturer.
4.2.3.3 Axial thrust loads-Axial loads result from gas
� flow momentum changes through gas turbines, or from the
pressure differences between the gas inlet and exhaust. These
loads generally are treated as a static load whose magnitude
Force = torque/spacing
varies depending on the normal operation level exhaust of
Fig. 4.2. 3. 1 b-Equivalent forces for torque loads-torque back pressure or shut-down level of exhaust back pressure.
resisted by longitudinal equipment soleplates. The axial thrust loads are normally supplied by the machine
manufacturer.
The torque load is generally resolved into a vertical force 4.2.3.4 Piping loads-Piping forces can be calculated
couple by dividing it by the center-to-center distance between based on the pipe stress analysis, taking into account the
longitudinal soleplates or anchor points (Fig. 4.2.3. 1 b). pipe weight (including insulation weight), fluid weight, fluid
When the machine is supported by transverse soleplates dynamics, thermal expansion/contractions, valve opera
only, the torque is applied along the width of the soleplate tions, and environmental load conditions (seismic, wind, and
assuming a straight line variation of force (Fig. 4.2.3 . l c). ice). These forces are transferred to the foundation by pipe
The torque on a generator stator is applied in the same supports, attachments, or anchors attached to the foundation
direction as the rotation of the rotor and can be high due to along the piping system.
startup or an electrical short circuit. The piping load results from steam pipes and circulating
4.2.3.2 Condenser vacuum loads-For steam turbine water pipes attached to the turbine sections. The resultant
generator machines, usually a condenser is connected to piping loads acting on various points of support and guid
the low-pressure (LP) turbine and may share one common ance for the turbine casing reach the foundation as forces.
foundation with the steam turbine-generator. The condenser During a valve trip, the turbine foundation can be subj ected
generates vacuum loads on the steam turbine (LP turbine) to significant piping valve trip loads. The piping loads
when an expansion joint is provided between the condenser usually are determined by the mechanical pipe engineers.
duct and the LP turbine exhaust neck. Condenser vacuum 4.2.3.5 Thermal loads Changing temperatures of-
loads are normally based on zero absolute pressure. The machines and their foundations cause expansions, contrac
vacuum loads can act vertically on the tabletop of the foun tions, and distortions, causing the various parts to try to
dation if the condenser is located directly below the LP slide on the support surfaces. Thermal loads or self-straining
turbine, and it can also act laterally to the foundation if the loads may be divided into one of three loads types:
condenser is not located directly below the LP turbine. The a) Thermal friction loads
magnitude of the vacuum load can be estimated as the stan b) Thermal expansion/contraction loads
dard atmospheric pressure ( 14.7 psi [ 1 0 1 .4 kPa]) times the c) Temperature change and temperature gradient change
on the foundation member cross section
Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 11
Thermal friction load occurs at the machine supports (at significant means for dissipating heat, and its effect should
sole plates) from static friction resistance to the thermal be included when establishing surface temperatures.
movement of the machine components. The magnitude of 4.2.4 Special loads for foundations-The following
the resulting frictional forces depends on the magnitude of special static load conditions are recommended in some
the temperature change, the location of the supports, and on proprietary standards for large equipment on foundations to
the condition of the support surfaces. The thermal forces do ensure adequate strength and deflection control, especially
not impose a net force on the foundation to be resisted by if the appropriate information is not provided by the equip
supporting medium (soil or piles) because the forces on any ment manufacturer:
surface are balanced by equal and opposite forces on other a) Vertical force equal to 50 percent of the total weight of
support surfaces. Thermal forces, however, may govern the each machine
design of the grout system, pedestals, and hold downs and b) Horizontal force (in the transverse direction) equal to
may cause thermal stresses in the supporting concrete struc 25 percent of the total weight of each machine
tures, including girders, slabs, and columns/pedestals. c) Horizontal force (in the longitudinal direction) equal to
It is not possible to exactly calculate the exact thermal 10 percent of the total weight of each machine
loading because it depends on numerous factors, including These forces are additive to normal gravity loads and
distance between anchor points, magnitude of temperature are considered to act at the centerline of the machine shaft.
change, the material properties, the condition of the sliding Loads a, b, and c are not considered to act concurrently with
surface, and the magnitude of the vertical load on each sole one another.
plate; it is, therefore, approximated. The static friction resis 4.2.5 Construction and maintenance loads-Construction
tance has to be overcome before thermal movements occurs (erection and installation), hydro test, and maintenance loads
and many engineers use this value for the design loads. The are temporary loads required for installing or dismantling
magnitude of the frictional load may be calculated as follows machine components during erection or maintenance. Erec
tion loads are usually furnished in the manufacturer's foun
friction force = (friction coefficient) dation load drawing and should be used in conjunction with
x (normal load acting through soleplate) (4.2.3.5) other specified dead, live, and environmental loads. Mainte
nance loads occur any time the equipment is being drained,
The friction coefficient generally varies from 0.2 to 0.5. cleaned, repaired, and realigned or when the components are
Loads acting through the soleplate include machine dead being removed or replaced. Loads may result from mainte
load, normal torque load, anchor bolt load, and piping loads. nance equipment, davits, and hoists. Guidance on construc
Normally, the expected thermal deflection at various bear tion loads is provided in ASCE/SEI 3 7. Environmental loads
ings is estimated by the manufacturer based on past field can be reduced per ASCE/SEI 37 when combined with
measurements on existing units. The machine erector then maintenance or construction loads.
compensates for the thermal deflection during installation. A hydro-test load is the weight of water or other fluid that
Mandke and Smalley ( 1 989, 1 992) and Smalley ( 1 985) is placed temporarily into a vessel to confirm the integrity of
illustrate the effects of thermal loads and deflections in the the equipment.
concrete foundation of a large reciprocating compressor and 4.2.6 Machine catastrophic loads-Machine catastrophic
their influence on the machine. loads are caused by machine malfunction such as generator
Heat transfer to the foundation can be by convection short circuit, turbine loss-of-blade/loss-of-bucket or a bowed
across an air gap and by conduction through points of phys rotor in a steam turbine. Catastrophic loads are generally
ical contact. The resultant temperature gradients induce applied at the bearings of the machine shaft vertically or
deformations, strains, and stresses. horizontally and are not considered to act simultaneously
When evaluating thermal stress, the calculations are with seismic loads, as there is a very low probability of these
strongly influenced by the stiffness and restraint against loads occurring at the same time. Often in the design for an
deformation for the structural member in question. There electrical-short-circuit-induced torque load, the emergency
fore, it is important to consider the self-relieving nature of drive torque is treated as an equivalent static load and the
thermal stress due to deformation and concrete cracking to magnitude is determined by applying a magnification factor
prevent being overly conservative in the analysis. As the to the normal torque. Although these loads are time-depen
thermal forces are applied to the foundation member by dent, they are normally given as equivalent static loads to
the machine, the foundation member changes length and simplify the foundation design efforts. These loads are
thereby provides reduced resistance to the machine forces. normally provided by the machine manufacturer. Consulta
This phenomenon can have the effect of reducing the thermal tion with the generator manufacturer is necessary to estab
forces from the machine. lish the appropriate magnification factor.
Accurate determinations of concrete surface temperatures
and thermal gradients are also important. Under steady- 4.3-Dynamic m achine loads
state normal operating conditions, temperature distribu- 4.3.1 Rotary machine loads due to unbalanced masses-
tions across structural sections are usually linear. The air These rotating loads are generated by the rotating motion of
gap between the machine casing and foundation provides a one or more impellers or rotors. Unbalanced forces in rotating
.
macliities are created when the mass centroid of the rotating
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org ��
CCI1 ..
OC j.•
.
12 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS F O R DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
Table 4.3. 1.2-Balance q uality grades for selected groups of re presentative rigid rotors'
Balance quality Product of ero,
guide in./s (mm/s) Rotor types-general examples
G40 1 . 6 (40) Crankshaft/drives of elastically mounted, fast four-cycle engines (gasoline or diesel) with six or more cylinders
Parts of crushing machines; drive shafts (propeller shafts, cardan shafts) with special requirements; crankshaft/
Gl6 0.6 ( 1 6)
drives of engines with six or more cylinders under special requirements
Parts of process plant machines; centrifuge drums, paper machinery rolls, print rolls; fans; flywheels; pump
G6.3 0.25 (6.3) impellers; machine tool and general machinery parts; medium and large electric annatures (of electric motors
having at least 3 - 1 /4 in. [80 mm] shaft height) without special requirement
Gas and steam turbines, including marine main turbines; rigid turbo-generator rotors; turbo-compressors;
G2.5 0. 1 (2.5)
machine tool drives; medium and large electric armatures with special requirements; turbine driven pumps
W f l .s
r o
0.012
F =
0 322,000
(4. 3 . 1 .2c)
.£ 0.010 \
�
'(3
·;:: 0.008 \ I;Eq. (4.3. 1 .2c)
Units of Fa and w;. are lbf and N in inch-pound and SI
systems, respectively.
'E
§
0.006 \I
4.3.1 .3 Machine unbalance load (determined from a UJ 0.004
\
� v
/
,..... Eq. (4.3. 1 .3)
formula) Rotating machine manufacturers often do not
- �
t5 0.002
� --��
---..:: - - - -
report the unbalance that remains after balancing. Conse - - - - - -
that the design force at operating speed varies linearly with rotor is often set to trip off at high vibration, it can be expected
both the mass of the rotating body and the operating rota to operate continuously at any vibration level up to the trip
tional speed. Once that state is identified, Eq. (4.3 . 1 . 1 ) can limit. Given the effective bearing stiffness, it is possible to
be adjusted to reflect the actual speed of rotation, and the calculate the maximum dynamic force amplitude as
dynamic centrifugal force is seen to vary with the square of
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@1!Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
14 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS F O R DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
"'
-�
>
]
0
6
Crank Throw
(Length = r ylindcr
(4.3 . 1 .4) added absolutely. In other cases, the loads are treated as
out-of-phase so that twisting effects are increased. Often,
To use this approach, the manufacturer should provide the operating speed of the equipment should be consid
effective bearing stiffness from the bearing geometry and ered. Even if operating speeds are nominally the same, the
operating conditions (such as viscosity and speed) or provide engineer should recognize that during normal operation,
the corresponding forces for the foundation design. the speed of the machines will vary and beating effects can
4.3. 1.5 Steam or gas turbine generator units-The deter develop. Beating effects develop as two machines operate at
mination of the transmitted dynamic rotating unbalanced close to the same speed. At one point in time, responses to
forces from the bearings to the foundation, for large rotating the two machines are additive and motions are maximized.
machines such as steam turbine generator units and combus A short time later, the responses cancel each other and the
tion turbine generator units with complicated rotor configu motions are minimized. The net effect is a continual cyclic
ration, shaft configurations, or both, can be completed by rising and falling of motion.
a dynamic analysis of the rotor-bearing system (the rotor/ 4.3.2 Reciprocating machine loads-Internal-combustion
shaft power train dynamic analysis). This dynamic analysis engines, piston-type compressors and pumps, some metal
should be completed under varying conditions of unbalance forming presses, steam engines, and other machinery are
and at varying speeds. This dynamic analysis is based on the characterized by the rotating motion of a master crankshaft
expected level of rotor/shaft unbalance that corresponds to a and the linear reciprocating motion of connected pistons or
turbine generator rotor in operable condition but in need of sliders. The motion of these components causes cyclically
balancing. The analysis can be completed by using an appro varying forces, often called reciprocating forces.
priate combination of computer programs for calculating 4.3.2.1 Primary and secondary reciprocating loads-The
bearing dynamic characteristics and the response of the simplest type of reciprocating machine uses a single crank
rotor in the bearings due to the unbalance and the operating mechanism, as shown in Fig. 4.3.2. 1 . The idealization of this
speeds. Such an analysis would usually be performed by the mechanism consists of a piston that moves within a guiding
machine manufacturer. Results of such analyses, especially cylinder, a crank throw of length r that rotates about a crank
values for transmitted bearing forces, represent the best shaft, and a connecting rod of length L. The connecting rod
source of information for use by the engineer responsible for is attached to the piston at Point P and to the crank at Point
foundation design. C. The Wrist Pin P oscillates while the Crank Pin C follows
4.3. 1.6 Loadsfrom multiple rotating machines-If a foun a circular path. This idealized single cylinder illustrates the
dation supports multiple rotating machines, the engineer concept of a machine producing both primary and secondary
should calculate the unbalanced dynamic force based on reciprocating forces.
the mass, unbalance, and operating speed of each rotating If the crank is assumed to rotate at a constant angular
component. The response to each rotating mass is then velocity ffi0, the translational acceleration of the piston
combined to determine the total response. Some practitio along its axis may be evaluated. If zp is defined as the piston
ners, depending on the specific situation of machine size and displacement toward the crankshaft (local z-axis), an expres
criticality, find it advantageous to combine the unbalanced sion can be written for zp at any time t. Further, the velocity
forces from each rotating component into a single resultant and acceleration can also be obtained by taking the first
unbalanced force. The method of combining two dynamic and second derivatives of the displacement expression with
forces is up to individual judgment and often involves some respect to time. The displacement, velocity, and acceleration
approximations. In some cases, loads or responses can be expressions for the motion of the piston are as follows.
z
P
= ( �) (
r+
4L
- r cos roo t + � cos 2ro t
4L o
) (4.3 .2. l a)
(4.3 .2. l b)
(4.3 .2. l c)
Identifying a part of the connecting rod (usually one Ahead = (n/4) B/ (4. 3 .2.2b)
third of its mass) plus the piston as the reciprocating mass
m,.ec concentrated at Point P and designating the remainder Acrank = (n/4)(B/ - Dro}) (4.3 .2.2c)
of the connecting rod plus the crank as the rotating mass
m,.01 concentrated at Point C, expressions for the unbalanced The head and crank end pressures vary continuously
forces are as follows. and the differential force takes both positive and negative
Force parallel to piston movement: net values during each cycle of piston motion. The normal
approach is to establish the head and crank pressures using
the maximum and minimum suction and discharge pres
sures. For design purposes, it is common to multiply Eq.
(4.3.2.2a) by a factor F1 to help account for the natural
Force perpendicular to piston movement: tendency of gas forces to exceed the values based directly
on suction and discharge pressures due to flow resistances
(4.3.2. l k) and pulsations. Machines with good pulsation control and
low external flow resistance may achieve F1 as small as 1 . 1 .
Note that Eq. (4.3.2. lj) consists of two terms, a primary For machines with low compression ratio, high pulsations,
force: or highly resistive flow through piping and nozzles, F1 can
approach 1 .5 or even higher. A reasonable working value for
(4.3 .2. 1 1) F1 is 1 . 1 5 to 1 .2.
Preferably, the maximum rod force resulting from gas pres
and a secondary force: sures is b(lsed on knowledge ofthe continuous variation ofpres-
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
16 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS F O R DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
sure in the cylinder (measured or predicted). In a repair situ manufacturer or calculate the maximum horizontal gas
ation, measured cylinder pressure variation using a cylinder force and maximum horizontal inertia force for any throw
analyzer provides the most accurate value of gas forces. Even or cylinder. The mounts, anchor bolts, and blocks are then
without cylinder pressure analysis, extreme operating values designed for
of suction and discharge pressure for each stage should be
recorded before the repair and used in Eq. (4.3 .2.2a). FTHRo w = (greater ofFGMAX or F,MAX)/2 (4.3 .2.2g)
On new compressors, the engineer should ask the machine
manufacturer to provide values for maximum compressive 4.3.2.3 Reciprocating inertia loads for multi-cylinder
and tensile gas loads on each cylinder rod and to recom machines-As a practical matter, most reciprocating
mend a value of F1 if these forces are based on suction and machines have more than one cylinder, and manufacturers
discharge pressures. arrange the machine components in a manner that mini
Gas forces act on the crankshaft with an equal and oppo mizes the net unbalanced forces. For example, rotating
site reaction to the force on the cylinder. Thus, crankshaft parts such as the crankshaft can be balanced by adding or
and cylinder forces globally balance each other. Between the removing correcting weights. Translating parts such as
crankshaft and the cylinder, however, the metal compressor pistons and those that exhibit both rotation and translation
frame stretches or contracts in tension or compression under such as connecting rods can be arranged in such a way as
the action of the gas forces. The forces due to frame deflec to minimize the unbalanced forces and moments generated.
tions are transmitted to the foundation through connections Seldom, if ever, is it possible to perfectly balance recipro
with the compressor frame. When acting without slippage, cating machines .
the frame and foundation become an integral structure and The forces generated by reciprocating mechanisms are
together stretch or contract under the gas loads. functions of the mass, stroke, piston arrangement, connecting
The magnitude of gas force transferred into the foundation rod size, crank throw orientation (phase angle), and the mass
depends on the relative flexibility of the compressor frame. and arrangement of counterweights on the crankshaft. For
A very stiff frame transmits only a small fraction of the gas this reason, calculating the reciprocating forces for multi
force while a very flexible frame transmits most or all the cylinder machines can be quite complex and are therefore
force. Similar comments apply to the transfer of individual normally provided by the machine manufacturer. If the
cylinder inertia forces. machine is an integral engine compressor, it can include, in
Based on limited comparisons using finite element anal one frame, cylinders oriented horizontally, vertically, or in
ysis (Smalley 1 988), the following guidelines are suggested between, all with reciprocating inertias.
for gas and inertia force loads transmitted to the foundation Some machine manufacturers place displacement trans
by a typical compressor ducers and accelerometers on strategic points on the
machinery. They can then measure displacements and accel
Fblock = Frod/Fred (4.3.2.2d) erations at those points for several operational frequencies
to determine the magnitude of the unbalanced forces and
couples for multi-cylinder machines .
4.3.2.4 Estimating reciprocating inertiaforcesfrom multi
(Fbo!t)Jrame = [(Funba/ancdCNbo!t)]/Fred (4. 3 .2.2f) cylinder machines-In cases where the manufacturer's
data are unavailable or components are being replaced, the
The factor Fred is used to simplify a complex problem, engineer should use hand calculations to estimate the recip
thus avoiding the application of unrealistically high loads on rocating forces from a multi-cylinder machine. One such
the anchor bolts and the foundation block. The mechanics procedure for a machine having n number of cylinders is
involved in transmitting loads are complex and cannot easily discussed by Mandke and Troxler ( 1 992).
be reduced to a simple relationship between a few parameters 4.3.3 Impulsive machine loads-The impulsive load
beyond the given load equations. A detailed finite-element generated by a forging hammer is caused by the impact of
analysis of metal compressor frame, chock mounts, concrete the hammer ram onto the hammer anvil. This impact process
block, and grout will account for the relative flexibility of the transfers the kinetic energy of the ram into kinetic energy of
frame and its foundation in determining individual anchor the entire hammer assembly. The post-impact velocity of the
bolt loads and implicitly provide a value for Fred· If the frame hammer is represented by
is very stiff relative to the foundation, the value for Fred will
be higher, implying more of the transmitted loads are carried M
v" = -' (1 + a , ) v, (4.3.3a)
by the frame and less by the anchor bolts and foundation M"
block. Based on experience, a value of 2 for this factor is
conservatively low; however, higher values have been seen
with frames designed to be especially stiff. General experience indicates that a11 is approximately 60
Simplifying this approach, Smalley and Harrell ( 1 997) percent for many forging hammer installations. From that
suggest using a finite element analysis to calculate forces point, the hammer foundation performance can be assessed
transmitted to the anchor bolts. If a finite element analysis as a rigid body oscillating as a single degree-of-freedom
is not possible, the engineer should obtain from the machine SY,Stem \\lith an initial velocity of v11•
American Co ete Ins Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by I ftQJn r license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
No reproduction��or mg permitted without license from IHS
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 17
For metal-forming presses, the dynamic forces develop Most structural systems involving machines and machine
from two sources: the mechanical movement of the press foundations are relatively stiff (natural frequency in the
components and material-forming process. Each of these lateral direction greater than 1 Hz). Consequently, the
forces is unique to the press design and application and systems can be treated as rigid with respect to the wind gust
needs to be evaluated with proper information from the press effect factor, and simplified procedures can be used. If the
manufacturer and the owner. machine is supported on flexible isolators and is exposed to
The press mechanics often include rotating and recipro the wind, the rigid assumption may not be reasonable and
cating components. The dynamic forces from these individual more elaborate treatment of the gust effects is necessary as
pieces follow the rules established in earlier sections of this described in ASCE/SEI 7 for flexible structural systems.
document for rotating and reciprocating components. Only Appropriate consideration of the exposure conditions and
the press manufacturer familiar with all the internal compo importance factors is also recommended to be consistent
nents can knowledgeably calculate the specific forces. Figure with the facilities' requirements.
4.3 . 1 .3 presents a horizontal force time-history for a forging 4.4.2 Seismic loads-Machinery foundations located in
press. Similar presses can be expected to have similar charac seismically active regions are analyzed for seismic loads.
teristics; however, the specific values and timing data differ. These loads should be determined as equivalent static loads
The press drive mechanisms include geared and direct or dynamic loads per applicable codes and standards.
drive systems. Depending on the design, these drives may Building codes and standards such as the International
or may not be balanced. The press slide travels vertically Building Code (International Code Council 20 1 5), ASCE/
through a set stroke of 112 in. ( 1 2 mm) to several inches SEI 7, FEMA P-750, and SEAOC Blue Book (2009)
(millimeters) at a given speed. Some small presses may have contain provisions for design of nonstructural components,
inclinable beds so that the slide is not moving vertically. It including dynamic machinery. The seismic loads and design
is often adequate to assume that the slide moves in a vertical requirements for nonbuilding structures, including elevated
path defined by a circularly rotating crankshaft; that is, tabletop-type foundation pedestals, are also contained in
-
the provisions of these codes. For machinery supported
above grade or on more flexible elevated pedestals, seismic
(4.3 .3b)
amplification factors are also specified. For where isolators
are used (such as spring/damper/absorber configurations)
to support the machine, ASCE/SEI 7 provides criteria for
This leads to a dynamic inertia force from the slide of
seismic load calculation and design.
Depending on the weight ofthe machine with respect to the
F: (t) = md w ; � sin(wJ) (lbf) total weight of the machine-foundation system, the design
2 seismic forces of the machine (nonbuilding structure) can
(4.3.3c)
F: (t) = mdw; % sin(W0t)/1000 (N) be determined either by treating the machine weight as an
integral part of the foundation weight (ASCE/SEI 7), or by
treating the machine as a nonstructural component attached
This assumption is based on simple circular motions and to the foundation (ASCE/SEI 7). For the seismic design of
simple linkages. Other systems may be in place to increase tabletop foundations, the foundation is usually treated as a
the press force and improve the timing. These other systems supporting structure that should be designed in accordance
may increase the acceleration of the unbalanced weights and with the requirements of ASCE/SEI 7.
thus alter the magnitude and frequency components of the For most heavy machine foundations, it is common to
dynamic force transmitted to the foundation. treat the machine weight as an integral part of the foundation
for determining machine seismic load effects. In the seismic
4.4-Environmental loads weight calculation, the full or percentage of the live load
4.4.1 Wind loads-Loads due to wind on the surface areas should be used per ASCE/SEI 7.
of the machine, auxiliary equipment, and the support foun Horizontal and vertical components of seismic loads
dation are based on the design wind speed for the partic should be investigated in the load conditions and combina
ular site and are normally calculated in accordance with the tions in the following sections per ASCE/SEI 7.
governing local code or standard. Wind loads rarely govern 4.4.3 All other loads-Environmental loads such as earth,
the design of machine foundations except, perhaps, when the water, rain, snow, and ice should be included in the design
machine is located in an enclosure that is also supported by per applicable building codes.
the foundation.
When designing machine foundations and support struc 4.5-Load cond itions
tures, most practitioners use the wind load provisions of During their lives, machinery equipment support struc
ASCE/SEI 7. The analytical procedure of ASCE/SEI 7 tures and foundations undergo different load conditions,
provides wind pressures and forces for use in the design including construction, testing, shutdown, maintenance, and
of the main wind-force-resisting systems and anchorage of normal and abnormal operation. For each loading condition,
machine components. there can be one or more combinations of loads that apply
Table 4.6-L oad classifications for ultimate iii. Dead loads + test loads + reduced wind loads +
strength design snow, ice, or rain loads
Load c. Normal operation
Design loads classification i. Dead loads + machine operation loads + live loads
Weight of structure, equipment, internals, insulation, (for multi bearings machine post-alignment deflection
and platforms check)
Dead
Fluid loads during testing and operation ii. Dead loads + machine operation loads + live loads +
Anchor and guide loads
wind loads + snow, ice, or rain loads
Platform and walkway loads iii. Dead loads + machine operation loads + seismic
Materials to be temporarily stored during maintenance loads + snow, ice, or rain
Materials normally stored during operation such as tools
Live d. Abnormal operation
and maintenance equipment
Vibrating equipment forces i. Dead loads + upset (abnormal, emergency, cata
Impact loads for hoist and equipment handling utilities strophic) machine loads + live loads + reduced wind
Seismic loads
loads
Snow, ice, or rain loads Environmental e. Maintenance loads
Wind loads i. Dead loads + maintenance loads + live loads + snow,
Notes. Thermal or self-strammg loads classJficatwns should be evaluated per reqUire ice, wind or rain loads
ments of ASCE/SEI 7 . Environmental loads can be reduced per ASCE/SEI 37
Load due to lateral earth pressure, ground water pressure, or pressure of the bulk mate
when combined with maintenance or construction loads due
rials classifications should be evaluated per guidelines of ASCE/SEl 7.
to the low probability ofthe loads occurring at the same time.
to the structure or foundation. The following load conditions
are generally considered in design: CHAPTER 5-IMPEDANCE OF THE SUPPORTING
a) Construction condition represents the design loads that MEDIUM
act on the structure/foundation during its construction.
b) Testing condition represents the design loads that act 5.1 -0verview and use of soil i m pedance
on the structure/foundation while the equipment being The foundation dynamic response depends on the stiffness
supported is undergoing testing, such as hydro test. and damping characteristics of the machine-foundation-soil
c) Normal operating condition represents the design system. This section presents a general introduction to this
loading during periods of normal equipment operation. subject and a summary of approaches and formulas often
d) Abnormal operating condition represents the design used to evaluate the stiffness and damping of both soil
loading during periods when unusual or extreme operating supported and pile foundations. These stiffness and damping
loads act on the structure/foundation. relationships, collectively known as impedance, are used for
e) Maintenance condition (empty or shutdown) represents determining both free-vibration performance and motions of
the design loads that act on the structure when the supported the foundation system due to the dynamic loading associated
equipment is at its least weight due to removal of process with the machine operation.
fluids, applicable internals, or both, as a result of mainte The simplest mathematical model used in dynamic anal
nance or other out-of-service disruption. ysis of machine-foundation systems is a single-degree-of
freedom representation of a rigid mass vertically supported
4.6-Load combinations on a single spring and damper combination (Fig. 5 . l (a)).
Table 4.6 shows the general classification of loads for use This model is applicable if the center of gravity of the
in determining the applicable load factors in strength design machine-foundation system is directly over the center of soil
(ACI 3 1 8; ASCE/SEI 7 ; ASCE/SEI 37). In considering soil resistance and the resultant of the dynamic forces (acting
stresses or loading on piles, the normal approach is working through a center of force [CF]) is a vertical force passing
stress design without load factors and with overall factors of through the center of gravity. The vertical impedance (kv*) of
safety identified as appropriate by geotechnical engineers. the supporting medium is necessary for this model.
The load combinations frequently used for the various load The next level of complexity is a two-degree-of-freedom
conditions are as follows: model commonly used when lateral dynamic forces act on
a. Construction the system (Fig. 5 . l (b)). Because the lines of action of the
i. Dead loads + construction loads applied forces and the soil resistance do not coincide, the
ii. Dead loads + construction loads + reduced wind rocking and translational motions of the system are coupled.
loads + snow, ice, or rain loads For this model, the engineer needs to calculate the horizontal
iii. Dead loads + construction loads + seismic loads + translational impedance (ku*) and the rocking impedance
snow, ice, or rain loads (k'l'*) of the supporting medium. These impedance values,
b. Hydro testing especially the rocking terms, are usually different about
i. Dead loads + test loads different horizontal directions.
ii. Dead loads + test loads + live loads + snow, ice, or Application of the lateral dynamic forces can cause a
rain loads machine-foundation system to twist about a vertical axis.
To model this behavior, the engineer needs to determine
Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
. .
Amencan Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
REPORT ON FOU N DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 19
Equivalent
Damping
Plan View
Fig. 5. 2a-Lumped system for afoundation subjected to vertical, horizontal, and torsional
excitation forces (Richart et al. 1970).
p (t)
mass
k = ca nst
k
0 frequency
(a ) (b ) (c )
Fig. 5.2b-Effect ofmass on dynamic stiffness.
top of the lumped mass is the sum of the elastic force in the
(5.2b )
column and the inertia force of the mass. If the displacement
of this mass varies harmonically
and the inertia force is
u(t) = U0COSffit (5 .2a)
(5.2c)
Then, the acceleration is
(5.2e)
For instance, as previously discussed, six lumped dynamic in Fig. 5 .3 .2, where i = -1- 1 . Such force/moment excites the
impedances-three translational and three rotational foundation, which in turn generates stress waves that propa
dynamic impedances-are needed to model the dynamic gate into the underlying soil. Where the soil is modeled as
response of an infinitely rigid foundation. These impedances a viscoelastic material, therefore, the following properties
are defined and calculated as explained in the following. are needed for each soil layer supporting the foundation:
5.3.1 Dynamic impedance definition-The response of thickness (h), modulus of elasticity (£5), Poisson's ratio (v) ,
an infinitely rigid foundation to static or dynamic load, P density (p), and material damping CPm).
or P(wt), arises solely from the deformation, U or U(wt + c) Calculate the vibration response ( U(wt + q,) U0eiwr+i$ =
q,), of the supporting soil. In particular, the static founda or 8(mt + <!J) = 80eiwr+i4>) of the foundation under the applied
tion stiffness, ks = PIU, is used for modeling the soil-foun harmonic excitation. It should be noted that the steady-state
r
dation response to static loads. In an analogous manner, the vibration amplitude is obtained by keeping track of the
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
22 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
Equations (5.3 .2c) and (5.3 .2d) are analogous to Eq. (5.3 .2b ).
A
/ I \
f) Repeat steps (b) to (e) for each frequency of interest
I I \ until the range of vibration frequencies of the machine is
I
/ I \\
I \
covered.
I \
I \ The aforementioned approach may also be used for calcu
lating the dynamic impedance of a single pile or pile founda
tion. Because, in this case, the mass and flexibility of each
pile are considered, the pile impedance is a function of the
pile stiffness and density per unit length. Furthermore, the
concept of dynamic impedance can be extended to flex
ible foundations; however, in this case, it is more natural to
I define a dynamic impedance matrix. Details regarding the
[4
I
generalization of the dynamic impedance concept can be
found in Wolf and Song ( 1 996) and Lysmer et a!. ( 1 999).
Fig. 5. 3. 2-Downward and upward wave propagation for
surface disk in layered halfspace (Wolfand Deeks 2004). 5.4-Dynamic im pedance of soil-supported
foundations
reflections and refractions that take place every time that a The engineer can calculate the dynamic impedance of
stress wave, generated by the foundation vibration, reaches a a soil-supported foundation using the steps presented in
soil layer boundary. This is achieved by finding the different 5 . 3 .2 in a finite or boundary element code. Many founda
wave paths shown in Fig. 5 . 3 .2, which can be done analyti tion impedances of practical importance, however, have
cally or numerically. Note that <!> represents the phase differ been published in the literature as closed-form solutions,
ence (lag) of the response relative to the applied force or tables, or charts. Therefore, for application purposes, the
moment. engineer can estimate the dynamic impedance, k* (ro) , of a
d) Calculate the translational/rotational dynamic imped soil-supported foundation by one or a combination of the
ance k* (ro) as the ratio between the harmonic excitation following approaches:
(force/moment) acting on the foundation and its corre a) Frequency-dependent equations Veletsos and Nair -
sponding vibration amplitude, as shown in Eq. (5 .3.2a) and ( 1 974), Veletsos and Verbic ( 1 973), and Veletsos and Wei
(5.3 .2b). It is important to note that k* (ro) is a frequency ( 1 97 1 ) have developed appropriate equations that represent
dependent quantity with a real (Re) and imaginary (Im) part. the impedance to motion offered by uniform soil conditions.
They developed these formulations using an assumption of
. P( rot) a uniform elastic or viscoelastic half-space and the related
k ( ro) =
U(rot + <)>) motion of a rigid or flexible foundation on this half-space.
Motions can be translational or rotational. While the calcu
lations can be manually tedious, computer implementation
provides acceptable efficiency. Some of the simpler equa
tions are presented in 5 .4. 1 .2 of this report. More extensive
equations are presented in Gazetas ( 1 99 1 ) and Sieffert and
e) Separate the real and imaginary parts of the dynamic Cevaer ( 1 992).
impedance to streamline its use in computer codes used for b) Constant approximation-If the frequency range of
structural analysis. It is customary to express the complex interest is not very wide, an often-satisfactory technique
dynamic impedance as shown in Eq. (5 .3.2c). The real and is to replace the variable dynamic stiffness by the constant
imaginary parts of the dynamic impedance are associated, representative of the stiffness in the vicinity of the domi
by analogy to the system described in 5 .2, with a dynamic nant frequency (Fig. 5 .2b(c)). Another constant approxima
(frequency-dependent) spring and dashpot as shown in Eq. tion can be to add an effective or fictitious in-phase mass of
(5.3 .2d) and (5 .3.2e). the supporting soil medium to the vibrating lumped mass of
the machine and foundation and to consider stiffness to be
k*(ro) = k + iroC (5.3 .2c) constant and equal to the static stiffness. Nevertheless, the
variation of dynamic stiffness with frequency can be repre
sented by a parabola only in some cases, and the added mass
is not the same for all vibration modes.
* Po cos<)>
k(ro) = Re(k (ro)) = - (5 .3.2d) c) Computer-based numerical analysis-For complex
Uo
geometry, flexible foundations, or variable soil conditions,
the recommended approach is to obtain the stiffness and
* damping offoundations using dynamic analysis of a three- or
Im(k (ro))
C(ro) = = - � sin <)> (5.3 .2e)
(J) ro U0 two-dimensional continuum representing the soil medium.
The continuum is modeled as an elastic or viscoelastic half
space. The half-space can be homogeneous or nonhomoge-
Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
REPORT ON FOU N DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 23
t z. w
, - i - - .....
.. ...
'
b
I
- t
\
'
'-"'V
mw"/
/ 1�
� 'V
/
/ff
m u...
X, u
-
'
... ..... _ _ _ ...
..
.. ..,.I
Y, v
I� a a
neous (layered) and isotropic or anisotropic. The governing The equivalent radius works very well for square founda
equations are solved analytically or by means of numerical tions and rectangular foundations with aspect ratios alb of
methods such as the finite element method. The major advan up to 2. With alb above 2, the accuracy decreases. For long
tages ofthis elastic half-space technique are that it accounts for foundations, the assumption of an infinite strip foundation
energy dissipation through elastic waves (geometric damping, may be more appropriate (Gazetas 1 983). Alternatively, the
also known as radiation damping), provides for systematic formulas and charts provided by Dobry and Gazetas ( 1 986)
analysis, and uses soil properties defined by constants that and Gazetas ( 1 99 1 ) can be used for the analysis of rigid
can be established by independent experiments. Computer surface foundations of arbitrary shape.
programs are very useful in this regard. These dynamics problems are addressed either with real
Commonly, the analysis of dynamically loaded founda domain mathematics or with complex domain mathematics,
tions is performed considering the rectangular foundation as as illustrated in 5.2 and 5 . 3 .2, respectively. The real domain
if it were a circular foundation with equivalent properties solution is more easily understood and is typified by the
(Fig. 5 .4). Bowles ( 1 996) and Gazetas ( 1 99 1 ) provide alter damped stiffness models of Richart and Whitman ( 1 967) and
nates to this approach. The equivalent circular foundation Richart et al. ( 1 970), in which the stiffness and damping are
is not the same for all directions of motion. For the three represented as constants. The complex domain impedance
translational directions, the equivalent circular foundation is is easier to describe mathematically and is applied in the
determined based on an area equivalent to the rectangular impedance models of Veletsos and Nair ( 1 974 ), Veletsos and
foundation; thus, these three share a common equivalent Verbic ( 1 973), and Veletsos and Wei ( 1 9 7 1 ). Equation (5.4e)
radius R. For the three rotational directions, three unique characterizes the relationship between impedance models
radii are determined that have moments of inertia equiva and damped stiffness models.
lent to their rectangular counterparts. These relationships are
reflected in the following equations. k/ = k; + iWC; (5.4e)
Translation:
f!
Another common approach is to calculate impedance
parameters based on a dimensionless frequency a0, first
R= (5 .4a) introduced by Reissner ( 1 936), and calculated as
= Jlb (5 .4b)
In the most common circumstances, the soil and founda
R
ljfb v� tion are moving at the same frequency the machine operates
at. Thus, w is commonly equal to W0• In unusual cases, such
as when motions result from a multiple harmonic excitation
Rocking (about an axis parallel to a):
of the equipment speed, from blade passage effects, from
multiple speed equipment combinations, and from some
Jzl-:; (5.4c) poor bearing conditions, the motion may develop at a speed
R
ljfa
=
v� different from the equipment speed. These situations are
more commonly found during in-place problem investiga
Torsion: tions rather than initial design applications. In those cases,
the correct frequency to consider is determined by in-place
field measurements.
(5 .4d) 5.4.1 Uniform soil conditions-In many instances, engi
neers approximate or assume that the soil conditions are
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
24 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
Torsion:
3 1.5
(5.4. 1 . 1 1) �
""L:::::=::l'" IP'z
t---':-----1 1---
1..--
..IC>
I
2 • 1.0
Vertical: O'z
!!! I t 13,
!::� ....IR
...
(5 .4. 1 . 1 m) -� 0.5
1---!-
�.
Horizontal: 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 1.0 2 4 6 8 10
LIB
k, = 2(1 + v)G�, M (5.4. 1 . 1 n)
Fig. 5.4. 1. 1-Rectangularfooting coefficients (Richart e t al.
1 9 70).
Rocking (about an axis parallel to b):
(5.4. 1 . 1 o)
Torsional impedance:
The damping constants can be determined from the calcu
lated damping ratio, system mass, and stiffness as 1 6G�
k� = --[A + ia0B] (5.4. 1 .2d)
3
(5.4. 1 . 1 p)
b1 (b2 aj
• b1b2 (b2 aj •
where A -
_ 1- 2 and B = 2
or 1 + (b2 a0 ) 1 + (b2 aJ
'
where j 1 to 4 as appropriate and b1 and b2 = 0.425 and :
=
(5 .4. 1 .2e)
Rocking impedance:
Rocking impedance:
(5 .4. 1 .2f)
Vertical impedance:
(5.4. 1 .2g)
Torsional impedance:
Vertical impedance:
(5.4. 1 .2h)
(5 .4. 1 .2c)
Constant approximations of Ci l and C;2 are given in Table
5 .4. 1 .2 for two broad classes of soils (cohesive and granular)
and for dimensionless frequency values a0 less than 2.0. The
polynomial expansions given in Eq. (5.4. 1 .2a) to (5.4. 1 .2d) Novak 1 970; Gazetas 1983). Specific recommendations
cover a wide range of dimensionless frequencies. While the vary with the type of application. The engineer needs to
practical application of the closed-form solution presented select proper soil damping values and limits based on the
in this section and in 5 .4. 1 . 1 is rather limited because real specific application. For example, EPRl ( 1 980) recommends
foundations are not infinitely rigid or rest on a homogeneous the soil damping ratio for use in the design of power plant
half-space, closed-form solutions are important because they fan foundations should not exceed 20 percent for horizontal
can be used to validate numerical impedance calculations. motion, 50 percent for vertical motion, 1 0 percent for trans
Therefore, the engineer should become familiar with these verse rocking motion, and 1 5 percent for axial and torsional
formulations and use them to judge the results from more motions. DIN 4024-2 recommends that the soil damping
complex approaches. For this purpose, the compilation of ratios used in vibration analysis of rigid block foundations
dynamic foundation impedances provided by Sieffert and should not exceed 25 percent. Novak ( 1 970) recommends
Cevaer ( 1 992) is particularly useful. reducing the analytically determined geometric damping
5.4. 1.3 Other methods-Engineers have used finite ratios (from elastic half-space models) by 50 percent for
element models as another approach to obtain stiffness and a dynamic analysis of the foundation. Therefore, the engi
damping relationships. Rather than theoretically assessing neer should generally be conservative in the application of
the behavior of an elastic continuum, parametric studies analytically determined damping values.
with a finite element model determine the impedance rela Although material damping is often neglected, as
tionships. Given all the approximations involved, the agree presented in 5 .4. 1 , that assumption often leads to overesti
ment between the solutions-the half-space theory and the mating the first resonant amplitude of the coupled transla
finite element modeling-is very good. The exception is the tion/rocking response of surface footings by several hundred
rocking stiffness k"' for which researchers have calculated percent because very limited geometric damping develops
substantially larger values by finite element solutions (Karab during rocking. This overestimation can be reduced by the
alis and Beskos 1 985; Kobayashi and Nishimura 1 983 ; Wolf inclusion of material damping (5.4.4).
and Darbre 1 984). Additionally, empirical expressions for Torsional response is difficult to predict because of slip
the static stiffness of circular foundations embedded into a page. For surface foundations, slippage reduces stiffness
homogeneous soil layer can be found in Elsabee and Morray and increases damping; for embedded foundations, slip
( 1 977) and Kausel and Ushijima ( 1 979). page reduces damping. The inclusion of the weakened zone
5.4.2 Adjustments to theoretical values-Damping in around the footing may improve the agreement between the
a soil-foundation system consists of two components: theory and the experiments. This typically requires more
geometric damping and material damping. The geometric complete computer-based numerical analysis.
damping represents a measure of the energy radiated away Another correction of the half-space theory may be
from the immediate region of the foundation by the soil. required if the soil deposit is a shallow layer resting on a
Material damping measures the energy loss as a result of soil rigid substratum. In such cases, the stiffness increases and
hysteresis effects. geometric damping decreases and can even vanish if the
Sections 5.4. 1 . 1 and 5 .4. 1 .2 present equations to eval frequency of interest (for example, the excitation frequency)
uate geometric damping for various foundation geometries is lower than the first natural frequency of the soil layer
and different types of soils using elastic half-space theo (Kausel and Ushijima 1 979). For a homogeneous layer of
ries. Both experience and experimental results show that thickness H with soil shear wave velocity V5, the first natural
damp�ng values for large foundations undergoing small frequencies of the soil deposit are
vibration amplitudes are typically less than those predicted Horizontal direction:
analytically (EPRl 1 980; Novak 1 970). This discrepancy is
attributed to the presence of soil layers that reflect waves n V,
(!)su = __. (5.4.2a)
back :to the vibrating foundation. Various sources recom 2H
mend reduced geometric soil damping values (EPRl 1 980;
American Co ete Ins Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by I ftQJn r license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L2JW�oncrete.org
No reproduction��or mg permitted without license from IHS
REPORT ON FOU N DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 27
�
Vertical direction:
w n� 2(1 - v)
= (5.4.2b)
sv
2H 1 - 2v - S eparati on�
� � � � � � �-� �
· . ·
: .. . : . . . : ; �
. . - -
At excitation frequencies W0 lower than W511 and COm only 2R Bac kfill
material damping remains because no progressive wave
occurs to generate geometric damping in the absence of
material damping, and only a very weak progressive wave
occurs in the presence of material damping. The damping
parameters generated by the material alone to be used for
excitation frequencies C00 lower than C0511 and COsv are
(5.4.2d)
less cylinder undergoing a uniform motion in an infinite
homogeneous medium.
where Bm is the material damping ratio.
The plane strain approach to the side reactions has many
In the impedance models, the imaginary terms of the hori
advantages: it accounts for energy radiation through wave
zontal (k,,*) and vertical (kv*) impedance become +2Bmi within
propagation, leads to closed-form solutions, and allows for
the brackets of Eq. (5.4. 1 .2a) and (5 .4. 1 .2c). This correction
the variation of the soil properties with depth. It can also
is most important for the vertical and horizontal directions
allow for the slippage zone around the footing. Also, the
in which the geometric damping of the half-space is high bu�
approach is simple and makes it possible to use the solu
is minimal for the shallow layer. This correction is not an
tions of surface footings because the effect of the indepen
absolute breakpoint based on the calculated layer frequency
dent side layer actually represents an approximate correction
and the excitation frequency. Therefore, the recommended
of the half-space solutions for the embedment effect. This
approach is to use computer-based numerical solution
approach works quite well, and its accuracy increases with
techniques that reasonably represent the loss of geometric
increasing frequency. Alternatively, the formulas and charts
?amping. If this is not possible, the engineer should apply provided by Gazetas ( 1 99 1 ) can be used if more accurate
Judgment to decrease the geometric damping for shallow
expressions are required.
layer sites, as well as the aforementioned recommendations.
Equations (5.4.3a) to (5.4.3d) describe the side resistance
5.4.3 Embedment effects Most footings do not rest on
-
the impedance in other directions. In complete form, these plies the complex impedance, evaluated without regard to
si parameters also depend on material damping of the side material damping, by the complex factor ( 1 + i2 �m) to deter
layer soils. mine an adjusted complex impedance
The mathematical expressions for the parameters Sn
and Si2 can be found in Novak et al. ( 1 978) and Novak and k/(adj) = (ki + iwci) x ( 1 + 2 i�m)
Sheta ( 1 980). These parameters are frequency-dependent; = (ki - 2�m weD + iw (ci + 2�m k/w) (5.4.4a)
nevertheless, given all the approximations involved in the
modeling dynamic soil behavior, it is often sufficient to Recognizing the stiffness as the real part of the impedance
select suitable constant values to represent the parameters, at and the damping as the imaginary term of the impedance, the
least over limited frequency range of interest. Table 5 .4. 1 .2 adjusted stiffness and damping terms considering material
shows constant values for cohesive soils and granular soils damping become
with Poisson's ratio of0.4 and 0.25, respectively. The values
correspond to dimensionless frequencies between 0.5 and kladj) = ki - 2�mffiCi (5 .4.4b)
1 .5, which are typical of many machine foundations. If a
large frequency range is important, parameter S should be ci(adj) = ci + 2�mk/w (5.4.4c)
considered as frequency-dependent and calculated from the
expression of impedance functions given in Novak et al. where ki and ci are calculated assuming perfect elasticity,
( 1 978) and Novak and Sheta ( 1 980). Material damping is and ci includes only geometric damping. Studies indicate
not included in Table 5 .4. 1 .2 but can be accounted for by that this approximate approach gives sufficient accuracy at
using Eq. (5 .4.4b). low dimensionless frequencies, but the accuracy deteriorates
The engineer can approximate the complex stiffness of with increasing frequency. Equations (5 .4.4b) and (5.4.4c)
embedded foundations by adding the stiffness generated by show that material damping reduces stiffness in addition to
the footing sides to that generated in the base. In some cases, increasing damping.
consideration of the difference in location of the embedment As another approach, variations of Eq. (5 .4. 1 .2a) to
impedance and the basic soil impedance may be included (5 .4. 1 .2d) are available, which include material damping
in the analysis. For vertical translation and torsion, the total directly as a distinct parameter (Veletsos and Verbic 1 973 ;
stiffness and damping results in simple addition of the two Veletsos and Nair 1 9 74).
values. For horizontal translation and rocking, coupling Finally, some engineers simply add the material damping to
between the two motions should be considered. the geometric damping otherwise determined by the preceding
5.4.4 Material damping-Material damping can be equations. This approach is more commonly used with the
incorporated into the stiffness and damping of the footing Richart-Whitman (Richart and Whitman 1 967) formula
in several ways. The most direct way is to introduce the tions and does not alter the stiffness. In such circumstances,
complex shear modulus into the governing equations of the broad judgments are often applied at the same time so that
soil medium at the beginning of the analysis and to carry out if the geometric damping is large, the material damping may
the entire solution with material damping included. be neglected. Similarly, material damping may be included
Another way is to carry out the purely elastic solution and only in those cases where excessive resonance amplification
then introduce material damping into the results by applying is expected. This simple additive approach is generally recog
the correspondence principle of viscoelasticity. With steady nized as the least accurate of the possible methods.
state oscillations considered in the derivation of footing stiff
ness, the application of the correspondence principle consists 5.5-Dynamic im pedance of pile foundations
of replacing the real shear modulus G by the complex shear Stiffness and damping of piles are affected by interaction
modulus G*. of the piles with the surrounding soil. The soil-pile inter
This replacement should be done consistently wherever G action under dynamic loading modifies the pile stiffness,
occurs in the elastic solution. This includes the shear wave making it frequency dependent. As with shallow founda
velocity and the dimensionless frequency (Eq. (5 .4f)), which tions, this interaction also generates geometric damping.
consequently become complex. Therefore, all functions that In groups of closely spaced piles, the character of dynamic
depend on a0 are complex as well. The substitution of G* can stiffness and damping is further complicated by interaction
be done if analytical expressions for the impedance k/ or between individual piles known as pile-soil-pile interaction
constants ki and ci are available from the elastic solution. With or group effect.
the material damping included, the parameters have the same Therefore, recent approaches for determining stiffness and
meaning as before, but also depend on the material damping. damping of piles consider soil-pile interaction in terms of
The aforementioned procedures for the inclusion of mate continuum mechanics and account for propagation of elastic
rial damping into an elastic solution are accurate but not waves. The solutions to the problem are based on various
always convenient. When the elastic solution is obtained approaches such as continuum mechanics methods, lumped
using a numerical method, the impedance functions are mass models, the finite element model, and the boundary
obtained in a digital or graphical form, and analytical integral method (Fig. 5 . 5).
expressions are not available. In such cases, an approximate In most cases, the impedance of a pile foundation is deter
approach often used to account for material damping multi- mined considering only the impedance of the piles. Because
American Co ete Ins Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by I ftQJn r license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
No reproduction��or mg permitted without license from IHS
REPORT ON FOU N DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 29
piles are typically used due to poor surface layer soils, the The engineer can determine the constants experimentally
effects of the soils directly under the cap are often neglected; or theoretically. The theoretical approach is commonly used
a settlement gap is assumed to develop. Similarly, the effects because experiments, though very useful, are difficult to
of embedment are often neglected. If circumstances indicate generalize. In the theoretical approach, the dynamic stiffness
that the embedment effect may be significant, the procedures is obtained by calculating the forces needed to produce a unit
outlined in 5.4.3 are often applied. amplitude vibration of the pile head in the prescribed direc
The basic approach toward pile analysis is to first evaluate tion as shown in Fig. 5 .5 . l a and discussed in 5.3. For a single
the impedance parameters of a single pile. Once these param pile, the impedance at the pile head can be determined from
eters (stiffness and damping) are established for the single the following equations
pile, the group effects are determined. Other approaches, Vertical translation:
such as finite element analysis, may model and consider both
effects simultaneously.
5.5.1 Single piles Dynamic behavior of embedded
-
(5.5 . l b)
piles depends on excitation frequency and the material and
geometric properties of both the pile and soil. The pile is
described by its length, bending and axial stiffness, tip/end and
conditions, mass, and batter (inclination from the vertical).
Soil behavior depends on soil properties and the soil's varia
(5 . 5 . l c)
tion with depth (layering).
Dynamic response of a pile-supported foundation depends
on the dynamic stiffness and damping of the piles. These
Horizontal translation:
properties for a single pile can be described in terms of either
impedance or dynamic stiffness and equivalent viscous
damping. As previously established, these are related as (5.5 . l d)
k/ = k; + iWC; (5 .5 . l a)
and
E A
___1!__1'_ .(
c'U = (5 .5.
2 Juz
r V
0 s
kvl
v=I
Table 5.5. 1-Stiffness and dam ping parameters for Eq (5 5 1 a) to (5 5 1 k) for Ip/r0 > 25 (Nova k 1974)
Stiffness parameters Damping parameters
0.4 0.7 (Concrete) 0.03 0.349 -0.0582 0.0 1 85 0.243 -0.0848 0.0438
0.25 0.7 (Concrete) 0.03 0.337 -0.0543 0.0 1 66 0.235 -0.0793 0.0395
0.1 0
and f18,1 - STIFFNESS
=
EI
__1!__1'_ f.
f1e, e - DAMP ING
c
\jlj v s
\jl2 (5.5 . 1 g) .08
(5 .5. 1h)
and
(5.5 . 1 i)
Torsion:
k = -
GJ
P _J (5 .5. 1j)
Fig. 5. 5. 1 b-Stiffness and damping parameters for Eq.
l\i ro ) Jl] (5. 5. 1 b) and (5. 5. 1c) (Novak 19 74). Note:Ji8, , = fv, andfisf
fv2- Also, Vc is the compression wave velocity ofthe pile (refer
to section 5. 5. 1).
and
and pinned heads. The rotational parameters � 1 , h,2, J,,"'� o
f,,"'z,��o and�z) are applicable only i f the pile i s assumed or
(5 .5. 1 k)
designed to be rotationally fixed to the pile cap. In general,
the j1 andfz functions depend on the following dimension
less parameters:
Graphical or tabular compilations of the fil and fi2 func
a) Dimensionless frequency a0 mr01Vs (note that this=
tions are presented in a variety of sources (Novak 1 9 74,
value is calculated using the pile radius and typically is much
1 977; Kuhlmeyer 1 979a,b) and are included in some soft
smaller than the a0 calculated for a complete soil supported
ware packages. Table 5 . 5 . 1 and Fig. 5 . 5 . 1 b show these func
foundation)
tions for concrete piles. Note that these functions are gener
b) Relative stiffness of the soil to the pile, which can be
ally dependent on many parameters, and the original source
(Novak 1 974) should be consulted for further informa
described either by the modulus ratio or the velocity GIEP
ratio VsfVc in which Vc is the compression wave velocity of the
tion. If the pile heads are pinned into the foundation block,
then k"' = k""' = � = 0 and c"' = c""' = c� = 0 in the previous pile equal to JE/PP
with Pp equal to the pile mass density
formulas, and k" should be evaluated for pinned head piles. c) The mass density ratio p/pP
of the soil and the pile
The vertical constants labeled v are the same for the fixed d) The slenderness ratio lp/r0 in which lp is pile length
e) Material damping of both soil and pile underestimation of stiffness and overestimation of damping
f) The pile's tip restraint condition and rotational fixity of values at frequencies wd!V, < 1 (Gazetas et al. 1 993). Addi
the head tionally, the lateral radiation damping exhibits spurious high
g) Variation of soil and pile properties with depth sensitivity to Poisson's ratio, which is mainly caused by the
These factors affecting the functions f are not of equal restriction of vertical soil deformation introduced by the plain
importance in all situations. Often, some of them can be strain model (Gazetas et al. 1 993). Therefore, it is recom
neglected, making it possible to present numerical values of mended that dynamic pile impedance be calculated using
the functions fin the form of tables and charts for some basic finite element models or computer codes specifically devel
cases. oped for this purpose. Alternatively, the approach proposed
The pile stiffness diminishes with frequency quickly if the by Gazetas et al. ( 1 99 1 , 1 993) and Mylonakis and Gazetas
soil is very weak relative to the pile. This happens when the ( 1 998, 1 999) could be used if the scope of the foundation
soil shear modulus is very low or when the pile is very stiff. design does not warrant more sophisticated techniques.
In addition, dynamic stiffness can be considered practically 5.5.2 Pile groups-Piles are usually used in a group. The
independent of frequency for slender piles in average soil. behavior of a pile group depends on the distance between
The imaginary part of the impedance (pile damping) individual piles. When the distance between individual piles
grows almost linearly with frequency and, therefore, can be is large (20 diameters or more), the piles do not affect each
represented by constants of equivalent viscous damping ci, other, and the group stiffness and damping are the sums of
which are also almost frequency-independent. Only below the contributions from the individual piles. If, however, the
the fundamental natural frequencies of the soil layer (Eq. piles are closely spaced, they interact with each other. This
(5.4.2a) and (5 .4.2b)) does geometric damping vanish and pile-soil-pile interaction or group effect exerts a consider
material damping remain as the principal source of energy able influence on the stiffness and damping of the group.
dissipation. In particular, Eq. (5.4.2a) applies to founda 5.5.2. 1 Pile interaction neglected-When spacing between
tion vibrations producing horizontal motion (for example, piles reaches 20 diameters or more, the interaction between
horizontal and torsion vibrations), and Eq. (5.4.2b) applies piles can be neglected. Then, the stiffness and damping of the
to foundation vibrations producing vertical motion (for pile group can be determined by the summation of dynamic
example, vertical and rocking vibrations). Soil damping stiffness and damping of the individual piles. In many cases,
can then be evaluated using Eq. (5.4.2c) and (5.4.2d). The initial calculations are performed neglecting the interaction.
disappearance of geometric damping may be expected for An overall group efficiency factor is then determined and
low frequencies and shallow layers, stiff soils, or both. applied to the summations.
Apart from these situations, frequency-independent viscous In the vertical and horizontal directions, the summation
damping constants, and functions Ji2, which define them, are is straightforward. For torsion and sliding coupled with
sufficient for practical applications. rocking, the position of the center of gravity (CG) and the
The mass density ratio p/pP is another factor whose effect arrangement of the piles in plan are important. Thus, the
is limited to extreme cases. Only for very heavy piles do group stiffness and damping with respect to rotation are a
the pile stiffness and damping change significantly with the function of the horizontal, vertical, and moment resistance
mass ratio. of individual piles and the pile layout.
The Poisson's ratio effect is very weak for vertical vibra Under the assumption of infinitely rigid pile cap behavior,
tion, absent for torsion, and not very strong for the other if the pile group is rotated, an amount 1Jf about the axis
modes of vibration, unless the Poisson's ratio approaches passing through its CG (Fig. 5 . 5 .2. 1 a), the head of pile j
0.5 and frequencies are high. The effect of Poisson's ratio on undergoes horizontal translation ui = 'VYi• vertical transla
parameters/; 1 andfi2 can be further reduced if the ratio EIEP, tion vi = IJ!Xi, and rotation 'Vi = IJ!. For the torsional stiffness
rather than GIEP, is used to define the stiffness ratio. and damping of the group, the rotation 11 applied at the CG
The slenderness ratio !Jr0 and the tip conditions are very twists the pile by the same angle and translates its head
important for short piles, particularly for vertical motion horizontally by a distance equal to l]R (Fig. 5.5.2 . 1 b). With
because the piles are stiff in that direction. Floating piles these considerations and the notation shown in Fig. 5 . 5 . l a
(also called friction piles) have lower stiffness but higher and 5 . 5 . 1 b, the stiffness and damping of the pile group, for
damping than end bearing piles. In the horizontal direction, individual motions, as referenced to the centroid of the pile
piles tend to be very flexible. Consequently, parameters /; 1 group, are as follows
and/; become practically independent of pile length and the Vertical translation:
2
tip condition for lp!r0 greater than 25 if the soil medium is
homogeneous.
(5 .5.2. 1 a)
Observations suggest that the most important factors
controlling the stiffness and damping functions /; 1 and h are
the stiffness ratio relating soil stiffness to pile stiffness, the and
soil profile, and, for the vertical direction, the tip restraint
condition. It should be noted that the stiffness and damping N
cgv
= I cvj (5. 5 .2 . 1 b)
functions/; 1 andfi2 reported by Novak ( 1 974) were obtained
j=l
using plain strain models, which introduce substantial
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
32 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
- -��--T and
(5 . 5 .2. l g)
(5 .5.2. l i)
and
N
Fig. 5. 5.2. 1a-Pile displacements for determination of cg� = I [c,!i + c,1 (xJ + zJ )] (5 .5.2. lj)
j=l
group stiffness and damping related to unit rotation If·
where the pile cap is assumed infinitely rigid. The summa
tions extend over all the piles. The distances xi and zi refer to
the distances from the centroid of the pile group to the indi
z •I vidual pile. If the CG is located directly above the pile group
centroid, these distances are as indicated in Fig. 5 .5.2. l a and
5 . 5 .2. l b . The vertical eccentricity Yc should be addressed as
presented in 5 .6. These stiffness and damping terms, or their
® impedance equivalents, represent values comparable to the
terms developed for a soil-supported foundation in 5 .4.
5.5.2.2 Pile interaction considered-When spacing
between piles is less than 20 diameters, they interact with
Q ® each other because the displacement of one pile contrib
utes to the displacements of others. Studies of these effects
call for the consideration of the soil as a continuum. The
Fig. 5.5.2. 1 b-Pile displacements for determination of studies of the dynamic pile-soil-pile interaction provide the
group stiffness and damping related to unit torsion '7· following findings:
a) Dynamic group effects are profound and differ consid
Horizontal translation: erably from static group effects.
b) Dynamic group effect is more pronounced as the
number of piles increases.
(5 .5.2. l c) c) Dynamic stiffness and damping of piles groups vary
with frequency, and these variations are more dramatic than
and with single piles.
d) Group stiffness and damping can be either reduced or
N increased by pile-soil-pile interaction.
cgu = I cj
j=l
ll (5 .5.2. l d) These effects can be demonstrated if the group stiffness
and damping are described in terms of the group efficiency
ratio (GE) defined as (Gazetas et a!. 1 993)
Rocking about vertical plane:
(5 .5 .2. l f) (5 . 5 .2.2b)
and
c
Dv =
____£___
(5.2.2.2c)
I er
VJ
Horizontal translation:
(5 .5.2.2d)
and
(5.5 .2.2e)
R = �x 2 + z 2
r r
(5 .5.2.2g)
Interaction factors:
o v.. ( L)
(5.5 .2.3g)
Fig. 5. 5.2.2c-Normalized rotational dynamic stiffness and
damping group factors ofn x n rigidly-capped pile groups in
a nonhomogeneous halfspace. (Epi'Es = 5000, Lid = 1 5, s/d
Coupling group impedance:
=5, p/pp 0 . 7, f3 0. 05 and v 0. 4) : effect ofpile group
= = =
configuration.
K: = k17 I I £ ;,- 1 , 21 (5 .5.2.3h)
additional displacement of pile q caused by pile p
i=l )=I
a = ---- ---- -- � -- ------ � -- � ------ � � �
'
displacement of pile q under own dynamic load
where [Ev] = [a] v- 1 (where a;/ is complex interaction factors
(5 .5.2.3a) between piles i and j for vertical translations) and [E"] [a] =
[k']; = [TY[k]j[TJ (5 .5 .3a) constants such as k"'!l = k'!l" and c"VI = c'!l"' Double subscripts
are used to indicate coupling. Equations (5 . 5 . l h) and (5.5 . l k)
in which the transformation matrix [T) depends on direction also introduced coupling of terms.
cosines from the batter. The horizontal and vertical stiffnesses For coupled horizontal and rocking motions, the genera
for the individual battered pile can then be combined with the tion of the stiffness and damping constants is developed as
other pile stiffnesses, as presented in 5.5.2 for pile groups. shown in Fig. 5.6. By applying unit translations to a free
[ ]
When the horizontal coordinate axis lies in the plane of body of the foundation, examining the forces developed in
the batter, the transformation matrix is the support system by the translation, and determining the
forces needed to cause this unit translation, the coupled
cos a sin a 0 � impedances can be determined with respect to the center of
gravity. Figure 5.6 is presented for a simple system where
[T ] = - sin a cos a (5 . 5 .3b)
both embedment and bottom support are provided. Evalu
0 0
ation of the forces associated with free-body movements
yields the following impedance matrix for the system with
[K,:K', , ]
The pile stiffness matrix in global coordinates becomes respect to the center of gravity:
-(k,: Yc + k; Ye )
(k'!/ + k,yc + keu' Ye
[
• • 2 2
U'!/
)
(5. 6)
k, cos2 (a) + kv sin2 (a) cos(a) sin(a)(k, - kJ
= cos(a) sin(a)(k, - kv ) k, sin 2 (a) + kv cos2 (a) If the CG is not directly over the center of vertical imped
cos(a)k,,, sin(a)k,,,, ance, additional coupling terms between the rotation and the
vertical motion are introduced. Thus, most engineers dili
K'
(5 .5 .3c) gently adhere to guidelines to minimize such in-plan eccen
tricities. In extreme cases, it may be appropriate to develop
The element stiffness functions k are calculated assuming the matrix as a full six-by-six matrix due to eccentrici
that the pile is vertical, thus ties. For other combinations of directions in other coordinate
systems, the sign on the off-diagonal terms may change, so
(5.5 .3d) close attention to sign convention is required. This trans
formation to the CG may be developed on stiffness and
In some cases, the off-diagonal terms of the transformed damping terms or based on impedance.
stiffness matrix may be ignored and only the diagonal terms
carried forward. One criterion for this is if the off-diagonal 5.7-Added mass conce pt
terms are small in comparison to the diagonal terms (for The dynamic stiffness of surfaces and pile foundations
example, less than 1 0 percent on an absolute value compar may become negative for certain frequencies, as shown
ison). The same process may be applied to the damping in previous sections. This is because the dynamic stiff
terms, or, for more accuracy, the transformation can take ness captures the rigidity and inertia of the vibrating soil,
place using the complex impedance functions. Dynamic as discussed in 5 .2 and Eq. (5 .2f). Typical structural codes
group effects on battered piles are complex and should be do not have the capability to conduct analysis using the
calculated using specialized computer codes. complex frequency response method and, therefore, cannot
deal with negative springs directly. In this case, the concept
5.6-Transformed im pedance relative to center of of added mass can be used when dealing with negative
gravity springs. This is done by analogy with the single-degree-of
A machine foundation implies a body of certain depth, freedom (SDOF) system studied in 5 .2 . For this purpose,
and, typically, the center of gravity of the system is above Eq. (5.3 .2d) is rewritten and shown in Eq. (5.7). Additional
the center of resistance provided by the soil, embedment, details regarding the concept of added mass/inertia to model
piles, and any combination of these. For simplicity of anal frequency-dependent impedance functions can be found in
ysis, many foundations are treated as a rigid body, and their Saitoh (2007)
center of gravity is used as the point of reference for all
displacements and rotations. Thus, stiffness or impedance k(ru) = Re(k'(ru)) = k51 - m5W2 = k5; - m5;W2 (5. 7)
provided by the support system (piles, isolation springs, soil,
or soil embedment) should be transformed to reflect resis where k(w) k;(w) is dynamic stiffness coefficient of the
=
tance provided against motions of the center of gravity. In foundation for vibration mode i and machine frequency w
this analysis, a horizontal translation is resisted not only by (that is, /(,, ku, k�, �, etc.); k5; = k;(O) = k;'(O) is static stiffness
horizontal soil reactions, but also by moments. This gives coefficients of the foundation (that is, k5, ksw k5�, ks�); and
rise to a coupling between translation and rotation and the m5; = [k5; - k;(ru)]/ru2 is added inertia for vibration mode i at
corresponding off-diagonal or cross stiffness and damping frequency ru� (that is, m5, m5u, 15�, J�).
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- CoWri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11� 3!1 www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
36 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
'
'
CG ,
P = (k*u + k* eJ u u
o�---
------------ I 1� -- -------L..,-
� k* ljl \jl
) ( �24 )
Mat foundation length b = 1 5 ft (4.5m)
(
Machine speed = 350 rpm
( )
Effective embedment depth = 3 ft ( l m) 3 .73 lbf
rad
ao = (9.77 ft) 36.65 -- �-----"..,-- = 0.576
Base calculations: s lbf
Circular operating frequency ffi0: 1 ' 440' 000
fe
Eq. (5A. 1 .2g), Table 5.4. 1 .2 8790 ( 1 439.3) 1 25.3 (21 .94) No material damping
Method 1 : Base vertical im pedance-Section Table 5 .8.1 b-Va l ues of a, fli, and Yi
5.4. 1.2, Eq . (5.4. 1.2c) v=O v = 0.33 v = OA5 v = 0.50
From Table 5.8. 1b: Ot 0.775 0.650 0.600 0.600
(Values for 0.45 are interpolated between 0.33 and 0.5.)
�I 0.525 0.500 0.450 OAOO
v = 0.33 v = 0.5 v = 0.45
�2 0.800 0.800 0.800 0.800
'¥3 0 . 1 70 -
= 0.000 0. 120 Y2 1 .000 0.800 0.000
-
'¥4 = 0.750 0.850 0.82 1 Y3 0.000 0.000 0. 1 70
-
Y4 0.850 0.750 0.850
Parameter Xv
k} 1 02,3 1 8,545[0.9583 + i0.473 1 ]
=
Parameter 'l'v
The damping constant is derived from the imaginary part
'Jf
=
Y1Y2 Cy2aJ 2 of kv *
v
1 + (y2aj
(5 .8. 1 f) Cv = (48,400,000 lbf/ft)/(36.65 rad/s) ;::: 1 ,3 2 1 ,000 lbf-s/ft
= (0. 1 03)(0.235)[( 0.235)(0.576)] 2 = 0.000436 or 1 1 0 . 1 kip-s/in. ( 1 9.28 kN-s/mm) (5 .8. l i)
1 + [(0.235)(0.576)]2
Including material damping through Eq. (5 .4.4b) and
(5 .4.4c) yields adjusted stiffness and damping terms of
Vertical impedance
(5 .8. lj)
(5 . 8 . 1 g)
kv(adj) 98, 1 00,000 - 2(0.05)( 1 ,32 1 ,000)(36.65)
=
cv(adj) = 1 ,3 2 1 ,000 + 2(0.05)(98, 1 00,000)/(36.65) W = (20 ft)( 1 5 ft)(3 . 5 ft)(0. 1 5 kef) + (30 kip)
;:::; 1 ,5 89,000 lbf-s/ft = 1 32.4 kip-s/in. (23 .2 kN-s/mm) = 1 87.5 kip (;:::; 835 kN) (5 .8. 1 r)
Method 2: Base vertical im pedance-Section Either weights (W, w) or masses (m, p) can be used in
5.4.1.2 and Eq. (5.4.1.2g), Table 5.4. 1.2 Eq. (5.4. 1 . 1 a), provided consistency is maintained. The mass
Use the same input data as before. Use of Table 5 .4. 1 .2 ratio for this calculation is
is allowed because a0 is less than 2.0. From Table 5.4. 1 .2,
using cohesive soil, Cv1 = 7.5, Cv2 = 6.8 Bv = ( 1 - v) WI[4wR03] = (1 - 0.45)( 1 87.5 kip)/
[4(0. 1 2 kcf)(9.77 ft)3] = 0.230 (5 .8. 1 s)
Vertical impedance
Damping ratio (geometric damping)
kv* = GR(Cv l + iao Cv2)
2
= (1 ,440,000 lbf/ft )(9.77 ft)[7.5 + i(0.576)(6.8)] 0.425 0.425
= = = =
D 0.886 88.6%
v JB: �0.23 (5.8 . 1 t)
k/ ;:::; 1 05,500,000 + i55, 1 00,000 lbf/ft (5 .8. 1 1)
The stiffness is equivalent to the real part of k/ The total system mass is
ke/ = G,l[Sv l + iaoSv2] F = 1 0,000 lbf x 350/6000 = 583 lbf (5 .8. 1 ee)
= ( 1 ,440,000 lbf/ft2)(3 ft)[(2 .7 + i (0.576)(6.7)]
;::; 1 1 ,660,000 + i 1 6,670,000 lbf/ft (5 .8. 1 x) Calculating the natural frequency C011 and damping ratio D,
The stiffness is equivalent to the real part of ke/ COn = (k/m) 1 12 = (kg/W) 112 (5 .8. l ff)
kv = 1 1 ,660,000 lbf/ft or 972 kip/in. ( 1 70.25 kN/mrn) (5 . 8 . 1 y) COn = (8860 kip/in. x 32.2 ft/s2 x 1 2 in./ft/ 1 87.5 kip) 112
= 1 35 . 1 rad/s (5 .8. l gg)
The damping constant is derived from the imaginary part
of kev * c c
D-
- -- -
- -== (5 .8. 1 hh)
2 & 2 �kW/g
Cv = ( 1 6,670,000 lbf/ft)/(3 6.65 rad/s)
= 455,000 lbf-s/ft or 37.9 kip-s/in. (6.65 kN-s/mm) (5 .8. 1z)
87 kip-s/in.
D = ----=
--c ==��===:=:====:=:=== = 0.663
These values can be adjusted for the material damping 1 87.5 kip (5 .8. 1 ii)
2 8860 kip/in.
effects of the embedment material. The material damping of (32.2 ft/s2 )( 1 2 in./ft)
this side material may be different from the base material.
Using Eq. (5 .4.4b) and (5.4.4c) yields adjusted stiffness and
The closed-form solution for a harmonically excited
damping terms of
SDOF system is given by
kv(adj) = (972 kip/in.) - 2 (0.05)(37.9 kip-s/in.)(36.65 rad/s)
F /k
o
= (972 kip/in.) - ( 1 3 9.0 kip/in.) = 833 kip/in. ( 1 46 kN/mm) A=
(5 .8. 1 aa) �(1 - (w)w,, )2 )2 + (2 Dw)wj (5 .8. ljj)
w
""" �151.Q <9�
: �.���
l;:r� Naggar and Novak ( 1 995), Mylonakis and Gazetas ( 1 998,
�" 1\ 1 999), and Gazetas et al. ( 1 991 , 1 993) may be consulted for
It
1 .00
� 1'o .
'I'
25 .4 sample calculations.
.><
"' Q_�
k . 0o
;.-�.9- 6'
0
0..Q) No.I!>� � ' � CHAPTER 6-VIBRATION ANALYSIS AND
.9 " v
�
.><
"' 1'\ � ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
0..Q) �
v
I � ' " i l\ 6'
,s . ·0
�Q) 0.10 -� �� CJo �-;�- �� 2.54
0�
�
�19 6 . 1-0verview
a. --)&
,., u>�. "?o '�' The purpose of this chapter is to describe analytical
E :t-&
�
<(
c:
Q)E
"-'o0� ,, )'& )'0 'V methods to determine the adequacy of foundations subject
: '\ to dynamic machine forces. This is part of the overall design
8
"' ��
procedure described in Chapter 7.
g. 0.01
v:9.-,; 0
v.
·.:>
s 'V 0.254 A complete dynamic analysis of a machine foundation
0 ';!- 0.
())'<"s '\.v system is normally performed in two stages:
•
1 . Frequency analysis: Calculation of the natural frequen
_ o
m�i-ri
mils 8� 8 f o. "�
� microns
'{'V I cies of a machine-foundation system and a comparison with
0.001
1 00 1 ,000 10,000
1t
1 00,000
0.0254
the frequency of the applied harmonic force. A frequency
analysis is covered in 6.5.
2. Forced response analysis: Calculation of the machine
Vi bration Freq uency, rpm
foundation system amplitudes caused by the applied dynamic
Fig. 5. 8. 1 a-General machinery vibration severity chart forces. A forced response analysis is covered in 6.6.
(Baxter and Bernhard 1967). These two stages involve a solution of the equation of
motion:
.. ..
... ...
:I .;
.t a.
a.
E
E <(
<( ,.
,. .. 1.0
.. 1.0 ..
.. a.
a.
� �
,.
..
.. ..
..
a.
a.
0.1
0.1
My + Cj + Ky = F(t) (6. 1 )
2540
l Fv(t)
+
I
Q)
1J
�
a.
C> 254
c
E ·c
<( lll
c C!l
Q) Q)
E .J::
Q) c
u
"' 0
Q. "C
(/) �
i5 :::>
-
.Ill r.l
Q) (a) Vertical translation (b) Coupled horizontal
§
N
�
·c
25.4 and rock ing
0
J:
Fig. 6. 2c-Aligned foundation representation. Note:
Subscript U is horizontal, rp is rocking, and C is cross hori
zontal rocking.
microns
Elevated Slab
2.54
:
j_ i
1 00 1 000 1 0000 i :
Operatin g Speed, rpm '
� �
A: No faults. Typical new equipment.
B: Minor faults. Correction wastes dollars.
C: Faulty. Correct with in 10 days to save maintenance dollars.
Column ----._.
D: Failure is near. Correct with in two days to avoid breakdown .
E: Dangerous. Shut it down now to avoid danger.
Mat Foundation
Fig. 6.2b-Vibration criteria for rotating machinery (Blake --
''��
-
frame elements
directly modeling the soil with the structure (6.3 . 1 ) or by of machine symmetry, the axisymmetric soil models described
separating concrete structure and soil/pile models (6.3 .2). in Chapter 5 would not be applicable.
The dynamic concrete modulus of elasticity is higher (that 6.3.2 Substructured model Substructured models are -
is, stiffer) than the static modulus, although not in any simple more commonly used, where machine/foundation and soil/
form. The distinction is more important for elevated tabletop pile properties are evaluated separately (Fig. 6.3 .2a). The soil
type foundations where the frame action of the structure is evaluation can use a finite element model, or use one of the
stiffer if a higher dynamic modulus is used. The difference other procedures described in Chapter 5 . The stiffness and
can also be important for large compressors where the stiff damping from the soil or pile impedance evaluation would
ness of the machine frame should be evaluated against the then be incorporated in the structure finite element model.
stiffness of the concrete structure. For simple, in-block-type Soil/pile impedance is normally applied to the machine/
foundations, the concrete modulus of elasticity has no real foundation model as point values on interface mat founda
effect on the design. Refer to Eq. (7 .2.3 . 1 ) for values. tion and subgrade node points. Pile impedance is normally
6.3.1 Combined model Soil/pile and machine/foundation
- applied as point values at nodes representing the individual
elements may be combined into a single finite element model pile locations. Soil impedance is normally applied in a
(Fig. 6.3 . 1 ). The advantage is that the interaction between soil similar manner, at nodes located to represent equal areas of
and structure is handled automatically through the model solu soil pressure across the mat foundation area. Because the
tion. A second advantage is in the flexibility of model geom impedance of the supporting media is typically evaluated as
etry. The disadvantage is the increased modeling complexity a lumped value, this lumped value should then be divided
and additional solution time. In addition, because of the lack for use at the selected node locations (refer to Fig. 6.3 .2b ).
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
44 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
Stlucture
For stiffness:
, Halfspace
kv = KjN (6.3 .2a) ;, at:,'
kc = KjN !
; , at:,' ' �·
(6.3.2d) E
�
"'
" T
For damping:
/
Fix boundary conditions
Cv = CjN (6.3 .2e)
(b) Soil Model
c" = CjN (6.3.2f) Fig. 6. 3.2a-Substructured model.
(6.3.2g)
For a sample application of usage, refer to Example 1 in
Cc = CjN (6.3.2h) 6.7. 1 .
Some finite element analysis software will not allow the
Computer programs used to calculate foundation imped input of negative values for stiffness. Soil or pile imped
ance often report impedance at the center of gravity of the ance can be negative under certain circumstances (uniform
foundation plus machine (instead of the center of founda high Poisson's ratio soil at higher frequencies, pile groups
tion resistance) unless the data input dictates otherwise. The at specific values of spacing and frequency). For such situ
user needs to be aware of this difference. In the aforemen ations, an alternative method is to use a positive stiffness
tioned equations, subscript v represents vertical, subscript value and to add mass to the foundation. The value of added
u represents horizontal, subscript \jl represents rocking, and mass is given by
subscript c represents cross horizontal-rocking values. The
sign of cross impedance values depends on the axis orienta (6.3 .2i)
tion and can be different between the software used to calcu
late the impedance and the finite element software. Because 6.3.3 Vibration isolation-Impedance characteris-
the input of stiffness and damping into a finite element tics are typically determined from the soil properties, and
model can be different from the positive global axes, values for tabletop foundations, from the soil properties and the
and orientation should be carefully verified. structure flexibility. The designer can modify stiffness and
Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
. .
Amencan Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 45
0
systems, the same basic principles in laying out the isolators
'-o.I
apply. For a sample calculation, refer to Example 2 in 6.7.2.
6.3.3.3 Modeling and design-The arrangement and
0 ' ..../.,. F'- o
02 sizing of isolators should be provided in a manner that prop
erly stabilizes the equipment, distributing both stiffness and
.3
2,0
II / damping. The isolator manufacturer should be consulted to
provide design aids, design recommendations, and possibly
0.5
1,5 could provide the dynamic calculation for the support if
.8 provided with sufficient information. If a design is prepared
by the engineer, then the isolator manufacturer's concur
1,0
1-:- :Y rence on the resulting design should be obtained.
03 0.5 Dynamic calculations using vibration isolators are the
0,5 0.2 same as those made for soil- or pile-supported systems,
o.I""' except with the stiffness and damping coming from the
isolators. The design of the inertia block follows concrete
0
0.3 o.4 0,6 0,8 8 7 8 design recommendations established herein.
Toolng Ratio, 'I
If the inertia block is sufficiently thick to be considered
Fig. 6. 3.3b-Transmissibilityfactors by damping ratio D. rigid (judgment is required), then the dynamic calculation
follows that for a soil- or pile-supported rigid block foun
dation. Resulting natural frequencies of the rigid system
or, for 11 > -J2 and neglecting damping (D = 0), the degree of should be below the machine's operating frequency (prefer
isolation can be expressed as ably 11 > 1 .4).
If the inertia block is not considered rigid, then a finite
(6.3.3c) element analysis can be used to model the desired system.
Appropriate plate/shell or solid finite elements can be used
For different tuning ratios up to 11 = 5, typical for prac to represent the inertia block (Fig. 6.3.3 .3), rigid elements
tical applications, the following gives the degree of isolation are generally used to represent the machine, and single j oint
according to Eq. (6.9): support spring elements can be used to represent the isolation
3 4 5 devices. Modal frequencies representing rigid body move
87.5 93.3 95.8 ment of the inertia block should be below the machine's
operating frequency. Frequencies representing flexing of the
inertia block should generally be above the machine's oper
Note that the transmissibility peaks at resonance (11 = 1 ).
ating frequency.
When the tuning ratio equals -J2, transmissibility will once
If it becomes necessary to determine amplitudes on nearby
again drop to 1 . This is known as the crossover frequency,
machines or work areas, then the model should be expanded
and the frequencies below this frequency are known as the
accordingly. Appropriate plate/shell or solid finite elements
amplification region. Above this frequency lies the isolation
may be used to represent the surroundings and two j oint link
region, where transmissibility is less than 1 . Typically, the
elements can be used to represent the isolation devices. A
isolator designer designs a mounting system that puts the
link element is a member where the user can explicitly input
primary operating frequencies of the system in the isolation
the stiffness and damping. A one-joint link element is like a
region, frequently at isolation efficiencies greater than 90
support point. A two-joint link is like a beam.
percent. Some machine systems need to operate at numerous
primary frequencies or frequently go through a startup or
6.4-Sol ution methods
slowdown as part of the operation cycle. For these systems,
Several methods to solve the equation of motion are
damping in the mount becomes increasingly important when
commonly applied, depending on the type of loading and
it functions at or near resonance.
the model.
6.3.3.1 Direct support systems-With direct isolator
a) One and two degree-of-freedom (DOF) models-A
support of the equipment, the equipment and isolators form
simplification of a rigid foundation into one and two DOF
the complete dynamic system. The foundation supporting
models is significant because the solution of the equations
the isolators is subject only to static loads, with the isolators
of motion can be performed manually or with the aid of a
greatly reducing the dynamic force component.
spreadsheet.
6.3.3.2 Inertia block systems-Inertia block systems are
b) Six DOF models-Solving the six coupled equations
used where the mass of the equipment is insufficient to limit
of motion for a general block foundation is too lengthy for
the vibration response of the system to acceptable levels. The
a purely manual calculation. Computer-aided manual solu
added mass of the interia block also allows the use of stiffer
tions using solvers built into the spreadsheet or engineering
springs while achieving a low natural frequency of the spring/
calculation software can be used, or a solution can be quickly
mass system. For both direct support systems and inertia block
obtained using commercial vibration analysis software.
5990390
. Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb
Amencan Conerete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 47
Fig. 6.3.3. 3-Finite element model ofinertia block and machine (image courtesy ofGERB
Vibration Control Systems, Inc.).
c) Multi DOF models-A solution of the equation of Table 6 .4. 1-MDOF analysis options (com parative
motion for flexible foundations will, of necessity, involve time of analysis using typical sam ple data)
finite element analysis computer software. For harmonic Analysis Max frequency, Mass participation,
loads, a steady-state approach is efficient. A general-purpose Analysis time Hz percent
approach would be to use a modal time history analysis. Steady state 3 seconds NA NA
6.4.1 Modal transformation-This is a transformation of
Modal T-H
a coupled multi DOF (MDOF) model into an equivalent (5 modes)
4 seconds 15 47
system of uncoupled single DOF (SDOF) modes. A model of
Modal T-H
Q independent degrees of freedom will theoretically result in 5 seconds 42 1 00
( 1 5 modes)
Q modes. Each mode is then typically solved using the time
Modal T-H
history method (6.4.2). Finally, the results from each mode 1 5 seconds 412 1 00
(200 modes)
are recombined to produce the total system response.
The computational efficiency of a modal transformation Modal T-H 1 2 minutes,
1 1 06 1 00
( 1 000 modes) 37 seconds
results from the concept that not all modes need to be trans
formed to obtain an accurate result. Additionally, an advan Direct T-H
53 minutes,
NA NA
3 1 seconds
tageously intermediate result of the transformation is the
frequency (or eigenvalue) and shape (or eigenvector) of each
mode. Unlike the more commonly used seismic response Briefly, the modal transformation begins with modifying
spectrum analysis, the forces for a machine dynamic anal Eq. (6.3) for free vibration by setting the damping C 0 and =
ysis are known, and the magnitude and direction of ampli dynamic load, F(t) = 0
tude results from each mode can be accurately combined.
The efficiency of a modal analysis is improved by deter [M] {.Y } + [K] {y } = 0 (6.4. 1 a)
mining the least number of modes to reduce computation
time while still achieving an accurate result. The criterion to Substituting for amplitude and acceleration
select the number of modes to be analyzed depends on two
factors. First, to achieve an accurate calculation of ampli
{y } = { cp } eiwnt (6.4. l b)
tude, the total mass participation should be above a stipulated
percentage (usually approximately 95 percent). Second, and
enough modes should be included so that the highest modal
natural frequency is greater than the machine frequency plus {.Y } =
-m,? { <jJ } eiwnt (6.4. 1 c)
a margin. This margin can be determined from a sensitivity
analysis; however, experience indicates the margin should Applying this substitution to Eq. (6.4. 1 a), and removal of
be approximately 20 percent. For the sample results in Table the common exponential term results in
6.4. 1 , with an operating speed of 25 Hz, the maximum
modal frequency should be at least the operating speed of [-Mm/] {<jl} + [K] { <jl} = 0 (6.4. 1 d)
25 Hz times 1 .2 or 30.0 Hz. Thus, 1 5 modes (with an indi
cated maximum frequency of 42 Hz) would suffice. The and rearranging
minimum mass participation percentage and resonant range
are typically taken from project specifications or internal [K - Mm}] {<jl} = 0 (6.4. 1 e)
procedures.
1200
For a nontrivial solution, <!> t- 0, the determinant of [K I I I
1000 - - - time ste p = 0.01 s
Mco,?] should be equal to zero, or
800 ....,_ -- time step = 0.001 s .t - ,rw;---
600
'1,h; --- .I
IK - Mco}l = 0 (6.4. 1 f)
400 I \
,!!
200 -� j.[--- �
For relatively low DOF models, a direct solution can be �
of
\ � \
manually obtained by expanding Eq. (6.4. 1 f) to solve for
-� -200 \ '
the natural frequencies, and then solving Eq. (6.4. 1 e) for
! -400
1 /
the relative amplitudes. For a further discussion related to a ·600
rll i
frequency analysis, refer to 6.5.2. For sample applications, -800 \ .J'.., ___
undamped natural frequency, Wn = JMIK (6.5a) criteria are typically stated in a proj ect specification, supplier
requirements, client requirements, published criteria, or
damped natural frequency, ffid = Wn .J1 - D2 (6.5b) internal company criteria.
A specified acceptance criterion is usually expressed in
damping ratio, D = C/CCR (6.5c) terms of the frequency ratio. The frequency ratio is a term
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org ��
CCI•1 '
OC j•'
50 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
be handled by repeating the calculation of impedance criteria are typically stated in a project specification, supplier
and natural frequency using different values of assumed requirements, client requirements, published criteria, appli
frequency until the assumed frequency matches the calcu cable legally adopted codes, or internal company criteria.
'
lated :natural frequency. Because of the repetition required, it The engineer should confirm applicable criteria prior to
then becomes more efficient to use the amplitude technique. beginning a design.
American Co -
Prov;ded by It
te Ins Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
The main purposes of the foundation system with respect system. Thus, monitoring accelerations, in particular on an
to dynamic loads include limiting vibrations, internal loads, equipment frame, may not be indicative of foundation suit
and stresses within the equipment. The foundation system ability or adequacy.
also limits vibrations in the areas around the equipment Researchers have presented various studies and papers
where other vibration-sensitive equipment may be installed, addressing the issues of machinery vibration limits. This
where personnel may have to work on a regular basis, or variety is reflected in the standards of engineering compa
where damage to the surrounding structures may occur. nies, plant owners, and industry standards. When the equip
These performance criteria are usually established based on ment manufacturer does not establish limits, recommen
vibration amplitudes at key points on or around the equip dation from ISO 1 08 1 6- 1 , Blake ( 1 964), and Baxter and
ment and foundation system. These amplitudes are based on Bernhard ( 1 967) are often followed. Most of these studies
displacement, velocity, or acceleration units. Displacement relate directly to rotating equipment. In many cases, they are
limitations are commonly based on peak-to-peak ampli also applicable to reciprocating equipment. Rarely do these
tudes measured in mils (0.001 in.) or micrometers o o-6 m). studies apply to impulsive equipment.
Velocity limitations are typically either based on peak veloc ISO 1 0 8 1 6 contains seven parts to address evaluation of
ities or root-mean-square (rms) velocities in units of in./s or machinery vibration by measurements on the nonrotating
mm/s. Displacement criteria are almost always frequency parts. ISO 108 1 6- 1 provides general guidelines and sets
dependent with greater amplitudes tolerated at slower the overall rules. Subsequent parts provide specific criteria
speeds. Velocity criteria may depend on frequency but are for specific machinery types. These standards are primarily
often independent. Acceleration criteria may be constant directed toward in-place measurements for the assessment
with frequency or may be frequency-dependent. of machinery operation. They are not intended to identify
Some types of equipment operate at a constant speed design standards. Engineers, however, have used prede
whereas other types operate across a range of speeds. The cessor documents to ISO 1 08 1 6 as a baseline for design
engineer should consider the effect of these speed variations calculations and can be expected to do similarly with these
during the foundation design. more recent standards.
6.6.2.1 Machine limits-The vibration limits applicable ISO 1 08 1 6 presents vibration criteria in terms of rms
to the machine are normally set by the equipment manufac velocity. Where there is complexity in the vibration signal
turer or are specified by the equipment operator or owner. The (beyond simple rotor unbalance), the rms velocity basis
limits are usually predicated on either limiting damage to the provides the broad measure of vibration severity and can be
equipment or ensuring proper long-term performance of the correlated to likely machine damage. For situations where
equipment. Limits specified by operators of the machinery and the pattern of motion is fairly characterized by a single
engineers are usually based on such factors as experience or frequency, such as simple rotor unbalance, the rms, veloci
the installation of additional vibration monitoring equipment. ties can be multiplied by -12 to determine corresponding
For rotating equipment (fans, pumps, and turbines), the peak velocity criteria. For these same cases, displacements
typical criterion limits the vibration displacements or veloci (�) can be calculated as
ties at the bearings of the rotating shaft. Excessive vibra
tions of the bearings increase maintenance requirements and (6.6.2 . 1 )
lead to premature failure of the bearings. Often, rotating
equipment has sensors for monitoring vibrations and control The displacements determined from Eq. (6.6.2 . 1 ) are
switches to alarm operators or automatically shut down the zero-to-peak displacement values, which can be doubled to
equipment if vibrations become excessive. determine peak-to-peak values. If the motion is not a simple
Reciprocating equipment, such as diesel generators and pure harmonic motion, a simple relationship among the
compressors, tends to be more dynamically rugged than rms displacement, rms velocity, peak velocity, zero-to-peak
rotating equipment. At the same time, reciprocating equip displacement, and peak-to-peak displacement does not exist.
ment often generates larger dynamic forces. While the limits ISO 1 08 1 6- 1 identifies four areas of interest with respect
may be higher, motions are measured at bearing locations. to the magnitude of vibration measured:
In addition, operators of reciprocating compressors often a) Zone A: vibration typical of new equipment
monitor vibrations of the compressor base relative to the b) Zone B: vibration normally considered acceptable for
foundation (sometimes referred to as frame movement) as a long-term operation
measure of the foundation and machine-mounting condition c) Zone C: vibration normally considered unsatisfactory
and integrity. for long-term operation
Impulsive machines, such as presses and forging hammers, d) Zone D: vibration normally considered severe enough
tend not to have specific vibration limitations that are control to damage the machine
lable by the foundation design. With these machines, it is The subsequent parts of ISO 108 1 6 establish the bound
important to recognize the difference between the inertial aries between these zones as applicable to specific equip
forces and equipment dynamics as contrasted with the foun ment. ISO 1 08 1 6-2 establishes criteria for large, land-based,
dation system dynamics. The equipment forces can generate steam-turbine generator sets rated over 67,000 horsepower
significant accelerations and stresses that are unrelated to (50 MW). ISO 1 08 1 6-3 is the most general of the stan
the stiffness, mass, or other design aspect of the foundation dards. It addresses in-place evaluation of general industrial
American Concrete InstitUte Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit un�er license with ACI
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org ��
CCI•1 '
OC j•'
52 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
machinery nominally over 1 5 kW and operating between that results in the straight sloping lines shown in Fig. 5.8. 1 b.
1 20 and 1 5,000 rpm. Within ISO 1 08 1 6-3, criteria are estab Companies A and B use a constant value of amplitude for
lished for four different groups of machinery, and provisions reciprocating machines. The collection of amplitudes shown
include either flexible or rigid support conditions. Criteria in the figure indicates a significant variation at low frequen
are also established based on both rms velocity and rms cies, with Companies A and B at the low end of the range
displacement. ISO 1 0 8 1 6-4 identifies evaluation criteria and Companies D and E at the high end. All values are fairly
for gas-turbine-driven power generation units (excluding close, at frequencies just above 1 000 rpm. Harris ( 1 996)
aircraft derivatives) operating between 3000 and 20,000 contains further general information.
rpm. ISO 1 08 1 6-5 applies to machine sets in hydropower 6.6.2.2 Physiological limits-Human perception and
facilities and pumping plants. ISO 1 08 1 6-6 provides evalu sensitivity to vibration is ambiguous and subjective.
ation criteria for reciprocating machines with power ratings Researchers have studied and investigated this topic, but
over 1 3 4 horsepower ( 1 00 kW). ISO 1 0 8 1 6-7 gives guid there are no clear uniform U.S. standards. Important issues
ance for the evaluation of vibration on rotodynamic pumps are the personnel expectations and needs and the surrounding
for industrial applications with nominal power above 1 kW. environment. Industrial workers near such equipment have
The scope of Part 5 is not applicable to general equipment different expectations than office workers or the public.
foundations and the criteria of Part 6 needs additional verifi ISO 263 1 , Parts 1 , 2, 4, and 5, provides guidance for human
cation and is seldom used. exposure to whole-body vibration and considers different
Lifshits et al. ( 1 986) also establishes vibration limitation. comfort levels and duration of exposure. The frequency of
This document follows Blake ' s ( 1 964) approach of identi the accelerations also impact fatigue and proficiency. Indus
fying five different categories from No Faults to Danger of trial workers near such equipment have different expecta
Immediate Failure. In addition, a series of correction factors tions than office workers or the public.
are established to broaden the applicability to a wider range The modified Reiher-Meister figure (barely perceptible,
of equipment and measurement data. noticeable, and troublesome) is also used to establish limits
Blake ( 1 964) has become a common basis for some with respect to personnel sensitivity, shown in Fig. 6.6.2.2.
industries and firms. His work presented a standard vibra DIN 4 1 50-3 defines permissible velocities suitable for
tion chart for process equipment with performance ratings assessment of short-term vibrations on structures, which are
from No Faults (typical of new equipment) to Dangerous given in Table 6.6.2.2. Furthermore, DIN 4 1 50-2 defines
(shut it down now to avoid danger). The chart was primarily limitations for allowable vibrations based on perception
intended to aid plant personnel in assessing field installa as a function of location (residential, light industrial) and
tions and determining maintenance plans. Service factors for either daytime or nighttime. In the design of foundations
different types of equipment are used to allow widespread for dynamic equipment, most engineering offices do not
use of the basic chart. This tool uses vibration displacement consider human perception to vibrations, unless there are
(in. or mm) rather than velocity and covers speed ranges extenuating circumstances, such as proximity to office or
from 1 00 to 1 0,000 rpm. Figure 6.2b presents the basic chart residential areas.
established by Blake ( 1 964). There are no conclusive limitations on the effects of vibra
Baxter and Bernhard ( 1 967) offered more general vibra tion of surrounding buildings. Figure 6.6.2.2 identifies levels
tion tolerances and is widely referenced. Again, with primary of vibration from mining operations that have damaged
interest to the plant maintenance operations, they established structures.
the General Machinery Vibration Severity Chart, shown in
Fig. 5 .8 . l a, with severity ranging from extremely smooth to 6 .7-Sam ple calculations
very rough. These are plotted as displacement versus vibra The following examples are provided to illustrate imple
tion frequency so that the various categories are differenti mentation of the procedures described in Chapter 6 and to
ated along lines of constant peak velocity. illustrate the use of a manual calculation.
,The American Petroleum Institute (API) also has a series 6.7.1 Example 1: Distribution of lumped impedance on a
of standards for equipment common in the petrochemical finite element method mat foundation-This example illus
industry (API 541 , 6 1 0, 6 1 2, 6 1 3, 6 1 7, 6 1 8, and 6 1 9). ISO trates how a lumped value of impedance can be approxi
1 08 1 6-3 can be applied for some large electrical motors. HI/ mately separated into distributed values for input into a finite
ANSI 9.6.4 can be applied for water pumps. element model, as described in 6.3.2.
Internal company practices frequently provide the basis to Given: lumped impedance results at the center of resis
be used for design. Figure 5 . 8 . 1 b(a) and 5 . 8 . 1 b(b)c provides tance as follows:
a comparison of five company standards, designated A Kv = 2.604 X 1 06 kip/ft Cv = 1 .480 x 1 04 kip-s/ft
through E, plotted against the Baxter and Bernhard ( 1 967)
K11 8 .400
= X 1 05 kip/ft Cu 5 .400 x 1 03 kip-s/ft
=
Industrial and commercial 0.8 in./s (20 mrnls) 0.8 to 1 .6 in./s (20 to 40 m1nls) 1 .6 to 2.0 in./s (40 to 50 mm/s) 1 .6 in./s (40 mrn!s)
Residential 0.2 in./s (5 mrnls) 0.2 to 0.6 in./s (5 to 15 m1nls) 0.6 to 0.8 in./s ( 1 5 to 20 mm/s) 0.6 inls ( 1 5 mm/s)
Special or sensitive 0. 1 in./s (3 mrnls) 0 . 1 to 0.3 in./s (3 to 8 m1nls) 0.3 to 0.4 in .Is (8 to I 0 mm/s) 0.3 in .Is (8 mm/s)
�
10 254
I
6.0 ft Q)
<E------7 "0
:E
c.
E
X <{
c
• Q)
E
1l 1 .0 25.4
"'
c.
"'
Ci
• • • mils microns
Permissible peak-to-peak amplitude at foundation: 75 !lm Calculate the natural undamped frequency using Eq.
Permissible tuning ratio: W0IW11 = outside of 0.6 to 1 .4 (6.5.2a):
resonant range
0011
= sqrt[Kv'IM] = sqrt[( 1 1 ,000 lbf/ft)/(93 lbf-s2/ft)]
Calculation: = 1 0. 8 8 rad/s
Assume no damping and a rigid inertia block
Select an inertia block: 2 . 7 m wide by 5 . 8 m long by 6.7.4 Example 4: Two DOF determination of natural
0.46 m thick frequency using modal transformation-This example illus
Inertia block mass: (2.7 x 5.8 x 0.46 m)(2400 kg/m3 ) = trates a manual calculation for coupled horizontal translation
1 7,289 kg and rocking as described in 6.4. 1 .
In this example, springs are selected, by trial calculation, Given impedance at center of resistance, aligned vertically
that target a natural frequency of one-third that of the fan. with center of gravity:
Select springs: Eight each at 1 9,600 N/cm K, = 8.5 1 8 X 1 07 lbf/ft
Stiffness: K"' = 5 .085 x 1 09 lbf-ft/rad
Kc = 0 lbf/rad; supposedly a soil-supported mat foundation
Kv = (8 each)( 1 9,600 N/cm)( l OO crn/m) = 1 5,680,000 N/m Mass: M = 5350 lbf-s2fft
Mass moment of inertia: M"' = 240,000 lbf-s2-ft
Mass: Base to center of gravity: h = 3 .861 ft
l�
w, 1 2 {-B1 + �·B--=-12---4-B-2 } I 2
)
-(-4.23 8 x 1 04 1 /s2 )
-
- /2
Single (zero-to-peak) displacement amplitude:
+ (-4.23 8 x 1 04 1/s2 )2 - 4(3.370 x 1 08 l /s4)
l
(78.5 rad/s?J = 4.61 x 1 0-6 m = 4.6 1 1-lm = 0. 1 8 1 mil
w,/ {-B1 - �,---B--::-12---4-B-2 }/2
=
l
Double (peak-to-peak) amplitude: -(-4.23 8 x 1 04 l !s 2 )
-
- J(-4.23 8 x 1 04 l !s 2 )2 - 4(3.370 x 1 08
- /2
l /s4)
DA = 2(SA) = 2(4.61 !lm) = 9.22 !lm
= 0.363 << 75 !lm = 2 .95 OK 1 0, 605 s-2
=
oo" z = 1 03 rad/s
Note that nonrigid inertia blocks would require the addi
tional calculation ofnatural frequencies within the block itself. For the first mode, the shape factors derived from Eq.
6.7.3 Example 3: SDOF determination of natural ( 6.4. 1 d) are:
frequency-This example illustrates a manual calculation for <jl 1 = -Kc'I(K,' - Moo, 1 2) = -(-3 .289 x 1 08 lbf/rad)/
vertical translation as described in 6.5.2. [(8.5 1 8 x 1 07 lbf/ft) - (5350 lbf-s2fft)( 1 78 rad/s?J = -3 .87
Stiffness: Kv' = 1 1 ,000 lbf/ft <Pz = 1 .0
Weight: WT = 3000 lbf
Mass: (WT)/g = (3000 lbf)/(32.2 ft/s2) = 93 lbf-s2/ft For the second mode, the shape factors derived from Eq.
(6.4. 1 d) are:
Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>1Mate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 55
1.5E-05 �---,-----,--,--,
(0 lbf-ft)]/( 1 .970 X 1 0 1 7 - i8.440 X 1 0 1 7 lbf2)
-3 .697 x 1 0·6 - i9.341 x 1 0-7 ft
l.OE-05 hi-�J---+---+--+----j =
Amplitude:
5.0E-06 HU.--1-Itll--ll-lh.HI-.JH-ft-;II+A-+tl-ft-Atf\+ll-ft-iltliHIHI""fti 1'1u = modulus (Au) = sqrt[a2 + b2] = sqrt[(-3 .697 x 1 0-6 ft)2
., + (-9.341 x 1 0-7 ft?J = 3 . 8 1 x 1 0-6 ft
.
E� O.OE+OO II Phase angle:
}
c
v 8, = argument (A,) , with both a and b being negative:
-5.0E-o6 -I-U--U--11--Iii--!--V-IIJ-V--f.--li-U-f-#--V-ll-li--ll-f--v-11t--V--f--tll--H+-IH = - 1 8 0 + arctan[b/a] = -180 + arctan[(-9.341 x 1 0-7 ft)/
(-3 .697 X 1 0-6 ft)] = - 1 65.8 deg
-l.OE-05 f-1---f--
- +---�+---+--+--+--- All! = [(BJ )(Fil/) - (B )(F,)]/B4 = [ (-2. 3 54 X 1 08 + i4.527 X
2
1 07 lbf/ft)(O lbf-ft) - (-2.403 X 1 08 - i l .748 X 1 08 lbf/rad)
-l.SE-05 .I---J---+----+--1--<
M U U U U U U
( 1 000 }bf))/( 1 .970 X 1017 - i8 .440 X 1 017 lbf2)
Time.s
= - 1 .334 x 1 0-7 + i3 . 1 59 x 1 0-7 ft
Fig. 6. 7. 5-Time-history amplitude plot. Amplitude:
1'1\JI = modulus (A ll!) = sqrt[a2 + b2]= sqrt[(-1 .334 x 1 0-7 ft?
+ (3 . 1 59 x 1 0-7 ft?J = 3 .43 x 1 0-7 n = o . 1 o5 J-lm
6.7.7 Example 7: Two DOF determination of response Phase angle:
using steady state method-This example illustrates a 8lll = argument (All!), with a positive and b negative:
manual calculation for peak horizontal translation and = arctan[b/a) = arctan[(3 . 1 59 x 1 0-7 ft)/(-1 .3 34 x 1 0-7 ft)] =
rocking response as described in 6.4.3. -67 . 1 deg
Given impedance at center of resistance·
Ku = 5.634 X 107 lbf/ft Cu = 1 .44 1 x 105 lbf-s/ft CHAPTER 7-DESIGN AND MATERIALS
Kill = 3 . 636 x 1 09 lbf-ft/rad Cll/ = 7.225 x 1 06 lbf-ft-s/rad
7. 1-0verview of design methods
Kc = --4.772 x 1 07 lbf/rad Cc = -6. 395 x 1 04 lbf-s/rad
This section presents general considerations and an overview
Given inertia about center of gravity: of three commonly used methods for the design of dynamic
I M = 2956 lbf-s2fft I Mill = 62, 1 83 lbf-s2-ft equipment foundations: the rule-of-thumb method, the equiva
lent static loading method, and the dynamic analysis method.
7.1.1 General considerations-The objectives of the
Given height from center of resistance to center of gravity: machine foundation design are to assess the dynamic
h = 3 .4 1 8 ft response of the foundation and verify compliance with the
required vibration and structural performance criteria.
Given machine properties: Machine foundation design typically includes the
(!)0 = 3 1 4 rad/s (3000 rpm) following steps:
Force: Fu = 1 000 lbf a) Develop a preliminary size for the foundation using
Moment: Fill = 0 lbf-ft rule-of-thumb approaches (7 . 1 .2 . 1 ) or equivalent static
The following equations are from Fang ( 1 99 1 ), and modi loading method (7. 1 .2.2), past experience, machine manu
fied to include damping: facturer recommendations, and other available data.
B 1 = (K,) - (M)(roo? + i(CH)(ro0) = (5.634 x 1 07 lbf/ft) b) Calculate the vibration parameters, such as natural
- (2956 lbf-s2/ft)(3 14 rad/sf + i(1 .441 x 105 lbf-s/ft)(3 14 rad/s) frequency, amplitudes, velocities, and accelerations, for the
= -2.354 X 1 08 + i4.52 7 X 1 07 lbf/ft preliminarily sized foundation (7. 1 .2.3 ) .
B2 = (Kc) - (Ku)(h) + i(Cc)( ffi0) - i(Cu)(h)( roo) c) Verify that these calculated parameters do not exceed
= (--4.772 x 107 lbf/rad) - (5.634 x 1 07 lbf/ft)(3 .4 1 8 ft) generally accepted limits or project specific vibration perfor
+ i(-6.395 x 1 04 lbf-s/rad)(3 14 rad/s) - i( l .441 x 1 05 lbf-s/ft) mance criteria (7. 1 .2.3 ) .
(3 .4 1 8 ft)(3 1 4 rad/s) = -2.403 x 1 08 - il .748 x 1 08 lbf/rad d) If necessary, incorporate appropriate modifications in
B3 = (Kill) - (Mil!)(roo? + (Ku)(h)2 - (2)(Kc)(h) + i(Cill)(roa) the foundation design to reduce vibration responses to meet
+ i(Cu)(ro0)(h? - i(2)(Cc)(ro0)(h) = (3.636 x 1 09 lbf-ft/rad) the specified vibration performance criteria and cost.
- (62, 1 83 lbf-s2-ft)(3 14 rad/s)2 + (5.634 x 1 07 lbf7ft)(3.41 8 ft)2 e) Check the structural integrity of the concrete foundation
- (2)(--4.772 x W lbf7rad)(3.4 1 8 ft) + i(7.225 x 106 lbf-ft-s/rad) and machine-mounting system.
(3 1 4 rad/s) + i( 1 .44 1 x 1 05 lbf-s/ft)(3 1 4 rad/s )(3 .4 1 8 ft? f) If foundation sizes required are excessively large, deter
- i(2)(-6.395 x 1 04 lbf-s/rad)(3 1 4 rad/s)(3 .4 1 8 ft) mine if vibration mitigation measures such as vibration
= -1 . 5 1 7 x 1 09 + i2. 93 6 x 1 09 lbf-ft/rad isolation are required or beneficial.
B4 = (BJ )(B3 ) - (B2 ?= (-2.354 X 108 + i4.52 7 X 1 07 lbf/ft) Preventive measures to reduce vibrations are generally
(- 1 . 5 1 7 x 1 09 + i2.936 x 1 09 lbf-ft/rad) less expensive when incorporated in the original design than
-(-2_403 X 1 08 - il .748 X 1 08 lbflrad? = 1 .970 X 1 0 1 7 - remedial measures applied after machinery is in operation.
i8.440 X 1 0 1 7 lbf2 The following are some common means that can be used
Au = [(B3)(Fu) - (B )(FIJ!)]/B = [(- 1 . 5 1 7 X 1 09 + i2 .936 X separately or combined to reduce vibrations:
2 4
J09 Jbf-ftlrad)(l00D lbf) - (-2.403 x 1 08 - il .748 x WS lbflrad)
Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 57
a) Selection of the most favorable location for the iv. Classification/type of soil
machinery. For example, locating the machine closer to the v. Modulus of subgrade reaction
ground will help reduce rocking vibrations. Another benefi vi. Dynamic soil shear modulus
cial example is keeping the center of gravity of the machine vii. Dynamic soil-pile stiffness and damping data (for
close to the center of foundation rigidity. pile-supported foundations)
b) Adjustment of machine with respect to speed or balance c) Environmental conditions
of moving parts i. Existing vibration sources such as existing vibrating
c) Adjustment of the foundation with respect to mass equipment, vehicular traffic, or construction
(larger versus smaller), stiffness, or both. Piles or caissons ii. Human susceptibility to vibration or vibration-sensi
can increase foundation stiffness substantially. tive equipment
d) Isolation of the machinery from the foundation using iii. Flooding
special mountings such as springs and flexible foundation mats iv. High water table
e) Isolation of the foundations from surrounding by phys v. Seismic hazard
ical barriers vi. Wind
7.1.2 Design methods-Design methods for the founda vii. Snow
tions supporting dynamic equipment have gradually evolved viii. Low or high temperature
over time from an approximate rule-of-thumb procedure Usually, the preliminary foundation size is established
to the more technically sound engineering methods. This using the rule-of-thumb method, and then the performance
evolution has been accelerated by the widespread avail criteria, for both machine and foundation, are verified using
ability of dynamic analysis software. These methods can be the equivalent static loading method or dynamic analysis.
identified as follows: If the equivalent static loading method or dynamic analysis
a) Rule-of-thumb shows that the foundation is inadequate, the engineer revises
b) Equivalent static loading the foundation size and repeats the analysis.
c) Dynamic analysis 7.1.2.1 Rule-ofthumb method-Rule-of-thumb is the
The selection of an appropriate method depends heavily simplest design method for dynamic equipment founda
on machine characteristics, including unbalanced forces, tions. The concept of this method is to provide sufficient
speed, weight, center of gravity location, mounting, impor mass in the foundation block so that the vibration is attenu
tance of the machine, foundation type and size, and required ated and absorbed by the foundation and soil system. Unless
performance criteria. otherwise indicated, the rule-of-thumb methods described
Design of the foundation starts with the selection and in the following are referring to block-type or combined
assessment of the foundation type, size, and location. block-type foundations supported on soil or piles/caissons.
Usually, foundation type is governed by the soil proper Dynamic equipment supported on elevated structures typi
ties and operational requirements. The machine footprint, cally requires dynamic analysis to evaluate its vibration
weight, and unbalanced forces govern the size of the foun performance adequacy.
dation. The location of a foundation is governed by envi For rotating and reciprocating machine foundations, most
ronmental and operational considerations. Thus, the engi engineers consider the rule-of-thumb procedure satisfac
neer should consider information from the following three tory for a preliminary foundation sizing. Sometimes engi
categories before the foundation can be preliminarily sized. neers use this method to design block-type foundations
Note that the following are the sample information required supporting relatively small machinery, up to 5000 Ibm
for foundation design. (2270 kg) in mass and having small unbalanced forces. For
a) Machine characteristics and machine-foundation reciprocating machinery and sensitive machinery, rule-of
performance requirements thumb procedures by themselves may not be sufficient. A
i. Functions of the machine long-established rule-of-thumb for machinery on block-type
ii. Weight of the machine and its moving components foundations is to make the mass of the foundation block at
iii. Location of the center of gravity in both vertical and least three times the mass of a rotating machine and at least
horizontal dimensions five times the mass of a reciprocating machine. For pile
iv. Operating speed ranges of the machine supported foundations, these ratios are sometimes reduced
v. Magnitude and direction of the unbalanced forces and so that the foundation block mass, including pile cap, is at
moments least 2.5 times the mass of a rotating machine and at least
vi. Limits imposed on the foundation with respect to four times the mass of a reciprocating machine. These ratios
differential displacement are machine mass inclusive of moving and stationary parts
vii. Limits with respect to vibration performance as compared with the mass of the concrete foundation block.
criteria: vibration amplitude, velocity, and acceleration Additionally, many designers require the foundation to be
b) Geotechnical information of such weight that the resultant of lateral and vertical loads
i. Allowable soil-bearing capacity (static loads) falls within the middle one-third of the founda
ii. Allowable pile capacity tion base. That is, the net effect of lateral and vertical loads
iii. Effect of vibration on the soil-for example, settle- or the eccentricity of the vertical load should not cause lack
ment or liquefaction -risk · - - · of compression under any part of the foundation.
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥ia�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
58 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
The engineer should determine the shape and thickness Equation (7. 1 .2 . 1 ) assumes an anvil-to-ram weight ratio of
of the foundation to provide uniform distribution of vertical 20: 1 . The minimum foundation weight should be decreased
dead and live loads to the supporting soil or piles, if practical. or increased to make up for a lighter or heavier anvil weight
This can be accomplished by adjusting the length and width relative to the ram weight, respectively.
of the foundation so the center of gravity of the machine 7 .1.2.2 Equivalent static loading method-The equivalent
coincides with the center of gravity of the foundation block static loading method is a simplified and approximate way of
in plan. A common criterion is that the plan-view eccentrici applying pseudo-dynamic forces to the machine-supporting
ties between the center of gravity of the combined machine structure to check the strength and stability of the founda
foundation system and the center of resistance (center of tion. This method is used mainly for the design of founda
stiffness) should be less than 5 percent of the plan dimen tions for machines weighing 1 0,000 Ibm (4540 kg) or less.
sions of the foundation. The shape of the foundation should For design of reciprocating machine foundations by the
fit the supported equipment requirements. Also, the engineer static method, the machine manufacturer should provide the
should provide sufficient area for machine maintenance. The following data:
shape of the foundation should adequately accommodate the a) Weight of the machine and baseplate
equipment, including maintenance space if required. The b) Unbalanced forces and moments of the machine during
minimum width should be 1 .5 times the vertical distance operation
from the machine centerline to the bottom of the foundation c) Individual cylinder forces including fluid and inertia
block. In any case, the foundation is sized so that the foun effects
dation bearing pressure does not exceed the allowable soil For design of rotating machine foundations by the static
bearing capacity. Depending on machine vendors, allowable method, the machine manufacturer should provide:
soil-bearing pressure for dynamic machines may be limited a) Weight of the machine and base plate
to one-half of allowable soil bearing pressure for founda b) Vertical pseudo-dynamic design force
tions supporting static equipment. c) Horizontal pseudo-dynamic design forces:
Thickness criteria primarily serve to support a common i. lateral force
assumption that the foundation behaves as a rigid body on ii. longitudinal force
the supporting material. Clearly, this is a more complex Calculated natural frequencies, deformations (displacements,
problem than is addressed by simple rules-of-thumb. On soft rotations, or both), and forces within the foundation/structure
soils, a thinner section may be sufficient, whereas on stiffer supporting the machine should satisfy established design and
soils, a thicker section might be required to support the rigid performance recommendations outlined in 6.5 and 6.6.
body assumption. If the rigid body assumption is not appli Note that vertical dynamic force is applied normal to the
cable, more elaborate computation techniques, such as finite shaft (for a horizontally shafted machine) at the midpoint
element methods, should be used. Gazetas ( 1 983) provides between the bearings or at the centroid of the rotating mass.
some direction in this regard. One rule-of thumb criterion for If the magnitude of this force is not provided by the machine
thickness is that the minimum thickness of the foundation manufacturer, the engineer may conservatively take it as 50
block should be one-fifth of its width (short side), one-tenth percent of the machine assembly dead weight. Lateral force
of its length (long side), or 2 ft (0.6 m), whichever produces is applied normal to the shaft at the midpoint between the
the largest foundation thickness. Another criterion is given bearings or at the centroid of the rotating mass. Longitudinal
in 6.2 as 1/30 of the length plus 2 ft (0.6 m). Normally, force is applied along the shaft axis. The engineer can conser
dynamically loaded foundations should not be placed on the vatively take both the lateral and the longitudinal force as 25
top of building footings or in such locations that the dynamic percent of the dead weight of the machine assembly, unless
effects can transfer into the building footings. specifically defined by the machine manufacturer. Vertical,
Forging hammer foundations are unique in the sense that lateral, and longitudinal forces are not considered to act
design of the foundation is essentially based on the impact concurrently for many types of rotating machines.
energy and characteristics of the forging process. There is 7.1.2.3 Dynamic analysis meth od Dynamic analysis -
no current U.S. document addressing design requirements incorporates more advanced and more accurate methods of
for forging hammer foundations. Most hammer manufac determining vibration parameters and, therefore, is often
turers are familiar with DIN 4025 issued in 1 958. Although used in the final design stage and for critical machine foun
this document has been withdrawn by the German standards dations. Dynamic analysis (or vibration analysis) is almost
organization, it is still widely referenced, as a more current always required for large machine foundations with signifi
standard is not available. That document is summarized in cant dynamic forces (6.5 and 6.6).
the following paragraphs for general information. For the dynamic analysis of reciprocating and rotating
The required weight of a foundation block resting upon machine foundations, the machine manufacturer should at
soil should be determined by calculation, and such calcu least provide the following data to the extent required by the
lations should consider the effect of vibrations on nearby analysis:
structures and facilities. One reference equation suggested a) Primary unbalanced forces and moments applied at the
by DIN 4025 is machine speed over the full range of specified operating speeds
(7. 1 .2 . 1 )
American Co ete Ins Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by I ftQJn r license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
No reproduction��or mg permitted without license from IHS
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 59
b) Secondary unbalanced forces and moments applied pile-supported, may be modified for reanalysis and reevalu
at twice the machine speed over the full range of specified ation. This may take numerous iterations until the project
operating speeds specific vibration acceptance criteria are completely met.
c) Individual cylinder forces, including fluid and inertia
effects 7.2-Concrete
Note that a more detailed list can be found in 4.3 . 7.2.1 Concrete performance criteria-The design of the
For rotating machinery foundations, the dynamic analysis foundation should withstand all applied loads, both static and
(6.6) determines the vibration amplitudes based on these dynamic, as defined in Chapter 4. The foundation should act
dynamic forces. Refer to 4.3 for the dynamic force calcu in unison with the equipment and supporting soil or struc
lations for both reciprocating and rotating machines. When ture to meet the deflection limits specified by the machinery
there is more than one rotor, however, amplitudes are often manufacturer or equipment owner. The design service life of
calculated with the rotor forces assumed to be in-phase and a concrete foundation should meet or exceed the anticipated
180 degrees out-of-phase. To obtain the maximum transla design service life of the equipment installed and resist the
tional and maximum torsional amplitudes, other phase rela cyclic stresses from dynamic loads.
tionships may also be investigated. Alternatively, to obtain Design of machinery foundations is driven by the unique
maximum values, the loads may be analyzed separately and requirements of the machinery, its size, weight, and the need
the peak responses summed. to control or limit the response to dynamic loading imposed
As discussed in 6. 1 , a complete dynamic analysis of a by the equipment. The performance is more dependent on
system is normally performed in two stages: its mass, footprint, and dynamic response as opposed to
1 . Frequency analysis: Determination ofthe natural frequen building-type structures where strength design controls
cies and mode shapes of a machine-foundation system member size and minimum reinforcement requirements
2. Forced vibration analysis: Calculation of the machine imposed by ACI 3 1 8. Additionally, safety of the general
foundation system response caused by the dynamic forces public is generally not a concern because the foundation is
Determining the natural frequencies and mode shapes of not built to be occupied, as buildings are.
the machine foundation system provides information about ACI 3 1 8 provisions were developed primarily for
the dynamic characteristic of that system. In addition, calcu commercial and office building structures. For these struc
lating the natural frequencies identifies the fundamental tures, member sizes are selected based on the minimum
frequency, usually the lowest value of the natural frequen design strengths to resist environmental and gravity loads.
cies. The significance of natural frequencies and mode Reinforcement is sized to resist temperature and shrinkage,
shapes are discussed in 6.5 . compression, tension, shear, and torsion. Member sizes
Frequency analysis is also called free vibration analysis. may be larger than required by strength to satisfy deflection
The details of frequency analysis methodology are discussed and drift. High occupancy is expected and minimum rein
in 6.5.2 and 6.5.3 . Frequency analysis of a soil-founda forcement using ACI 3 1 8 criteria is maintained to provide
tion-machinery system will provide the dynamic character strength for service loads and ductility during seismic events
istics of the system-for example, natural frequencies, mode to provide a certain degree of over-strength for increased
shapes, and modal participating mass ratio. The calculated design service life safety capabilities of the structure.
natural frequencies can be used for the resonance check of There is limited guidance currently available on how to
that system. In addition, the frequencies and modal shapes can select minimum reinforcement in the design of oversize
be used by the modal superposition/transformation method as sections for machinery foundations. In the absence of this
the basis to perform forced vibration analysis. In many cases, information, users often default to ACI 3 1 8. Applying ACI
slx frequencies are calculated consistent with six rigid body 3 1 8 provisions to oversize members, however, can result in
motions of the overall machine foundation system. Any or all very conservative and costly designs.
of the six frequencies may be compared with the excitation Some equipment vendors may require stresses calculated
frequency when checking for resonance conditions. under service loads to meet their specific allowable stress
Forced vibration analysis calculates the machine-foun acceptance criteria. For some equipment foundations, there
dation system responses caused by the dynamic forces. is neither a published standard nor a clear industry consensus
The results are the specific vibration parameters, such as as to which type of performance criteria is appropriate. In
displacement, velocity, and acceleration of the masses, as those cases, foundation designer, equipment vendor, and
well as the internal forces in the members of the machine owner should seek a clear understanding and mutual agree
support system. Then, these vibration parameters are then ment of the foundation performance criteria.
compared with the defined criteria or recommended allow Concrete cracking, regardless of the causes of the
able values for a specific condition (6.5. 1 and 6.6. 1 ), and cracking, can have negative effects on foundation durability.
internal forces are used to check the structural strength of Unlike statically loaded foundations, cracking of concrete in
the foundation components. The details of forced vibration foundations supporting dynamic equipment can also cause
analysis methodology are covered in 6.6.2. a significant reduction in foundation stiffness and affect
Based on results of vibration analyses, the proportions of vibration performance. Some equipment vendors require
the foundation (shape, width, length, and depth) foundation foundation design to meet their specific cracking acceptance
embedment depth, and pile arrangement if the foundation is
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
60 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
criteria. Minimizing shrinkage and temperature cracking is turbines, and compressors. The engineer should address the
critical to avoid stiffness loss and concrete deterioration. effects of these thermal conditions in the design phase. Inad
In foundations thicker than 4 ft ( 1 .2 m), the engineer may equate consideration of the thermal effects can lead to early
use the minimum reinforcing steel suggested in ACI 207.2R. cracking of the foundation, which is then further increased
The concrete used for the dynamic equipment foundations by the dynamic effects.
should also meet the material requirements of ACI 35 1 .2R. Calculation of thermally-induced bending requires proper
7.2.2 Concrete strength-The basic principles of rein determination of the heat distribution through the thickness
forced concrete design are used in the design of foundations of the foundation. Heat transfer calculations can also be
supporting dynamic equipment. Engineers working with performed either one-, two-, or three-dimensional thermal
specific equipment may apply additional criteria based on analysis. ACI 307 and ACI 349. 1 R provide some guidance
their experience. Such equipment includes forging hammers, that can be extrapolated to hot equipment. Effective methods
turbine generator systems, and large compressors. of controlling the thermal effects include:
The general equipment foundation includes some compo a) Providing sufficient insulation between the hot equip
nents that primarily act in flexure, others that are primarily ment and the concrete
axial, and others may act primarily in shear. Applicable b) Providing sufficient cover to the reinforcement so that
sections of ACI 3 1 8 are often used to establish minimum thermally-induced cracking neither degrades the bond of the
requirements for axial, flexural, and shear reinforcement. reinforcement nor increases the exposure of the reinforce
In some cases, engineering firms have supplemented these ment to corrosives
criteria with internal criteria or internal interpretations of c) Providing sufficient reinforcement to control the growth
the ACI 3 1 8 requirements for foundation structures that are of thermal-induced cracks
nonbuilding structures. For thick sections such as turbine d) Providing high-temperature-resistant concrete
generator pedestals or foundation mats over 4 ft ( 1 .2 m) 7.2.3 Material dynamic properties
thick, special criteria involving location of reinforcement 7 .2.3.1 Dynamic modulus of elasticity-Established rela
or minimum reinforcement may be identified more in line tionships suggest that the ratio of dynamic to static modulus
with mass concrete construction. Such criteria are typically can vary from 1 . 1 to 1 .6, with significant variation with
structure-specific and, thus, are not extendable to the broad age and strength. In practice, engineers treat this strain
class of foundations addressed in this document. rate effect differently. In some firms, engineers perform
Largely because of the broad range represented in this calculations using the higher dynamic modulus whereas
class of construction, accepted standards have not evolved. other firms may consider the difference unimportant and
For example, there is no specific minimum amount of rein use the static modulus from ACI 3 1 8. Note that the static
forcement applicable to all the various equipment founda modulus of ACI 3 1 8 is defined as the slope of stress-strain
tion designs. Most of these foundations are designed for curve drawn from a stress of zero to a compressive stress
mass and stiffness and not necessarily for strength and, thus, of 0.45/c'. This modulus of elasticity is also referred to as
reinforcement is specified by owner or vendor requirements, static secant modulus. The distinction is more important for
historical practices, or rules-of-thumb. A minimum concrete elevated tabletop-type foundations where the frame action
strength of 4000 psi (28 MPa) is commonly specified for of the structure is stiffer if a dynamic modulus is used. The
dynamic equipment foundations and foundations supporting difference in using static and dynamic concrete modulus of
industrial equipment, unless a higher strength is required for elasticity can also be important in compressor foundations,
durability. where the stiffness of the machine frame should be evaluated
7.2.2.1 Consideration of durability-In most cases, the against the stiffness of the concrete structure. For simple,
quality and durability of the concrete is considered more block-type foundations, the concrete modulus of elasticity
critical to good performance than strength. Concrete dura has no real effect on the design.
bility criteria are, however, becoming more stringent. Even For large steam turbine generator foundations, however,
if concrete has adequate strength to resist design loads, ASCE Task Committee ( 1 987) does not recommend the use
concrete strength higher than 4000 psi (28 MPa) may be of a higher dynamic modulus of elasticity because of the
required for applications where the concrete foundation is considerations of concrete cracks that may often be present
subjected to more severe weather (freezing and thawing) in these heavy massive structures.
exposure or sulfate exposure. According to ACI 3 1 8, the Many tests were carried out by researchers to corre
minimum concrete strength is 4500 psi (3 1 MPa) for the late static (E) and dynamic (Ed) moduli for concrete. One
concrete exposed to Exposure Classes F2, S2, and S3, and commonly used formula for the dynamic modulus of elas
5000 psi (35 MPa) for concrete exposed to Exposure Classes ticity of normalweight concrete is shown in the following
C2 and F3. equation, which yields a dynamic modulus equal to 1 .38
7 .2.2.2 Consideration of thermal effects-Some types times the static modulus of ACI 3 1 8.
of dynamic equipment also develop greater-than-normal
thermal conditions, with concrete surface temperatures Ed = 79,000(fc')05 (psi)
exceeding 1 50°F (66°C) around and within the founda (7.2.3. 1 )
tion. This is especially true for combustion turbines, steam Ed = 6550(fc')0 5 (MPa)
Dynamic concrete modulus may also be determined by design practice requires particular attention to the detailing
other appropriate means (Neville 1 997; BS 8 1 1 0-2; USACE of the reinforcement, including proper development of the
EM 1 1 1 0-2-605 1 ; Popovics 2008). bars well into the block of the concrete, avoidance of bar
Dynamic modulus of elasticity is applicable to only ends in high-stress regions, and appropriate cover.
response spectrum and time-history dynamic analysis load Where concrete is exposed to severe weather, sulfate
cases (as they have rapid rate of changes in the loads). There exposure, or both, reinforcing steel may require corrosion
is no common agreement to use it in the static equivalent protection. Depending on the corrosion severity, protec
analysis, steady-state dynamic analysis, or both, unless tion measures could include use of epoxy-coated, metallic
required by machine manufacturers. coated, and solid metallic reinforcing bars (such as galva
In the load combinations composed of static and dynamic nized steel bars and stainless steel bars); use of FRP bars;
load cases, the engineer may need to investigate and develop use of corrosion inhibitors (such as calcium nitrates or other
design values by two separate analyses (static with static organic corrosion inhibitors); use of concrete membranes or
modulus/properties and dynamic with dynamic modules/ concrete sealers; or providing catholic protection.
properties of material). 7.3.2 Minimum reinforcing requirements-Industry prac
7.2.3.2 Concrete material damping-Concrete mate tice on the minimum reinforcement used varies widely,
rial damping typically does not have much impact on the depending on type of dynamic equipment foundations, type
vibration performance of block-type foundations. Concrete of members, and the preference of firms.
material damping is very small compared to soil damping In foundations thicker than 4 ft ( 1 .2 m), the engineer
(geometric damping plus soil material damping). In that commonly uses the minimum reinforcement suggested in
case, the material damping of concrete may be neglected. ACI 207 .2R for mass concrete. Section 7 . 1 2.2 of ACI 350-06
In contrast, concrete material damping can play an impor provides more recent alternative criterion, which states that
tant role in vibration performance of elevated tabletop-type concrete sections that are at least 24 in. (600 mm) thick may
foundations. For foundation vibration analysis, concrete have the minimum shrinkage and temperature reinforcement
material damping ratio is typically taken as 2 percent due to based on a 1 2 in. (300 mm) concrete layer at each face.
low stress levels in the foundations. ASCE Task Committee For large turbine generator foundations, some firms
( 1 987) recommends that damping of concrete structural specify a minimum reinforcement of 3 . l lbf/ft3 (50 kgf/m3 or
members/elements should be taken as no greater than 2 0 .64 percent by volume) for pedestals and 1 .9 lbf/ft3 (30 kgf/
percent. Some engineers conservatively use 1 percent of m3 or 0.38 percent by volume) for foundation slabs. Others
concrete material damping for the dynamic equipment that prefer to use a larger minimum reinforcement of 3 . 1 lbf/ft3
is highly vibration-sensitive. (50 kgf/m3) in the foundation slabs. Some European equip
7.2.3.3 Concrete Poisson s ratio-For an isotropic and ment vendors require the use of multiple layers of reinforcing
linear-elastic material, Poisson's ratio is constant; however, steel spaced in all three directions. For compressor blocks,
in concrete, Poisson's ratio may be influenced by specific some firms suggest 1 percent reinforcement by volume
conditions. For stresses for which the relationship between consisting of multi-layers of reinforcement instead of rein
the applied stress and the longitudinal strain is linear, forcement only at faces of concrete and may post-tension
however, the value of Poisson's ratio for concrete is approxi the block. Many engineers recommend additional reinforce
mately constant. Depending on the properties of the aggregate ment, such as hairpin bars, around embedded anchor bolts
used, Poisson's ratio of concrete lies generally in the range to ensure long-term performance. The criteria and presenta
of 0. 1 5 to 0.22 when determined from strain measurements tions in ACI 3 5 1 .2R for static equipment also can be applied
under a compressive load. The value of Poisson's ratio under to dynamic equipment foundations.
tensile load appears to be the same as in compression. Existing Design of forging hammer foundations considers a stati
research (Popovics 2008) reports that the dynamic and static cally equivalent load determined from the impact energy
values of Poisson's ratio are not strongly related to each other and characteristics of the forging process in addition to other
and dynamic Poisson's ratio can be as high as 0.25. However, design basis loads. Minimum reinforcement of the founda
foundation designers commonly use 0. 1 5 to 0.2 as concrete tion block is set at 1 .56 lbf/ft3 (25 kgf/m3) or 0.32 percent
Poisson's ratio for foundation dynamic analysis. by volume. This reinforcement should be distributed in all
7.2.3.4 Moment of inertia of members-Gross moment three directions throughout the foundation block. The upper
of inertia (!g) calculated based on an uncracked concrete layer of steel should be capable of resisting 1 percent of the
section is typically used for modeling of block-type founda statically equivalent load applied in any horizontal direction.
tions and tabletop foundations because of massive member Bending and shear effects should be addressed in the layout
size and low stresses. If cracked members are to be consid- and design of the reinforcement. In large hammer founda
ered, however, reduced moment of inertia as determined in tions, reinforcement is often installed in all three orthogonal
accordance with 6.6.3 of ACI 3 1 8-14 is typically used. directions and diagonally in the horizontal and vertical
planes. Suitable development of the reinforcement is very
7.3-Reinforcement important. Excessive reinforcement can create constructa
7.3.1 Reinforcing steels-As with most construction, bility and quality problems and should be avoided.
ASTM A6 1 5/A6 1 5 M Grade 60 reinforcing steel is most 7.3.3 Common reinforcing steel design practicefor concrete
commonly used for dynamic machine foundati ?_lls - (]_�od pedestals-ACI 3 5 1 .2R provides a summary of commonly
_ ,
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org ��
CCI1. ..
OC j.•
62 R EPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
7.7-Seismic design considerations block-type foundation, especially when the water content
Seismic design of dynamic equipment foundations in the concrete mixture is excessive. With the addition of
should follow the seismic design requirements stipulated in subsequent vibration, these cracks propagate, allowing oil
ASCE/SEI 7- 1 6 Chapter 1 3 as components or Chapter 1 5 to penetrate the block and eventually destroy the integrity of
as nonbuilding structure components. A detailed discussion the foundation. Post-tensioning puts the block in compres
about seismic loads can be found in 4.4.2. sion, offsetting the dynamic and shrinkage stresses. When
Large tabletop-frame-type foundations such as steam horizontal post-tensioning rods are placed one-third the
turbine generator pedestal foundations can be treated as distance from the top of the block, a triangular compres
building-like nonbuilding structures using 1 5 .5 of ASCE/ sion stress distribution can be idealized. This idealization
SEI 7-16 for their seismic design. maximizes the compression at the top where it is needed the
Due to the massive member sizes of these frame-type most. An average horizontal pressure of 1 00 psi (690 kPa) at
tabletop foundations where member sizes are typically the level of the prestress translates to a horizontal pressure
governed by stiffness/mass rather than strength, providing of 200 psi ( 1 3 80 kPa) at the top, providing the necessary
ductile detailing can be difficult. Industry experience in residual compression.
engineering and detailing of elevated tabletop-type founda Vertical post-tensioning rods are anchored as deep as
tions for high seismic regions is limited at this time. Limited possible into the mat foundation and are sleeved or taped
experience thus far seems to indicate that it is more cost along their length to allow them to stretch during post
advantageous to design a less ductile frame system that tensioning. The embedded end is anchored by a nut with a
results in higher design seismic loads. diameter twice the rod diameter and a thickness 1 .5 times the
rod diameter. Horizontal rods are not bonded (sleeved) and
7.8-Fatigue considerations are anchored at each end of the block through thick bearing
For many dynamic equipment foundations, the cyclic plates designed to distribute the load to the concrete. High
stresses are small, and engineers choose not to perform any strength steel rods are recommended for post-tensioning
specific fatigue stress calculations. Other equipment can compressor blocks (Smalley and Pantermuehl 1 997).
require more significant consideration of cyclic stresses. The concrete should have a 28-day strength of at least
One: example is the foundation of a wind turbine, which is 3 500 psi (24 MPa) and be reasonably free of shrinkage
required to withstand numerous cycles of small to moderate cracks when cured. Compliance with the ACI 3 1 8 provisions
stress range and hundreds of cycles of large stress range. is commonly mandated for these systems.
In such cases, ACI 2 1 5R and other fatigue codes provide
guidiince, particularly where the flexural characteristics of 7.10-Sam ple calculations
the foundation are most important. Note that ACI 2 1 5R first A total of five examples are presented in the following
published in 1 974 was revised in 1 992 and has not been sections. Examples 1 to 3 are to illustrate application of
updated since. Engineers may refer to European codes for the three design methods as described in 7 . 1 .2. Example 4
newer fatigue provisions. EN 1 992- 1 - 1 and DNV-OS-C502 is provided to show determination of anchor bolt tension
seem to provide the most comprehensive fatigue design forces. It should be pointed out that Examples 3a and 3b
guidelines for concrete structures. represent a typical simplified dynamic analysis with rigid
Aside from performing detailed fatigue stress evaluation, foundation assumption. The method is well suited for block
some firms choose to employ simplified methods to implic type foundations. Where the foundation does not meet rigid
itly or explicitly address fatigue. These include: foundation assumption, however, a more refined dynamic
a) Proportioning sections to resist all conventional loads analysis (finite element analysis) will be needed.
plus three times the dynamic load The design input of the first three examples is from an
b) Designing such that concrete modulus of rupture is not indoor block-type foundation supporting a centrifugal
exceeded while including the inertial loads from the concrete dynamic machine. Wind load and seismic load do not govern
motion. In certain cases, the calculated modulus of rupture the design, as the plant is located in a low seismic region.
is reduced by 50 percent to approximate permissible stresses Note that SI values are not provided in sample calcula
reduced for fatigue tions, and U.S. customary units only are used to simplify the
c) Reducing by as much as 80 percent the strength reduc calculations.
tion factors specified by ACI 3 1 8
d) Recognizing that cracking is less likely in structures Given conditions:
built with clean, straight lines and not having reentrant Allowable soil bearing capacity: Pa11 = 5 ksf
corners and notches. Soil modulus of subgrade reaction: ks = 36 lbf/in. 3
Allowable foundation settlement: S011 = 1 in.
7.9-Special considerations for com pressor block Machine speed: fa = 600 rpm
post-tensioning Machine weight: W,, = 98,000 lbf
Some engineers prefer that block-type compressor foun Machine unbalance force at the center of gravity of the
dations be post-tensioned to provide residual compressive machine: Fa = 2000 lbf
stress that will prevent the generation of cracks. Shrinkage Machine footprint: length: L11y= 30 ft, width: B11y = 1 6 ft
cracks or surface drying cracks are expected in any concrete
American Co ete Ins Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by I ftQJn r license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
No reproduction��or mg permitted without license from IHS
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 65
Distance of machine shaft centerline to top of foundation: Vertical pseudo-dynamic design force:
dmf= 1 0 ft Fpv 0.5 X W111 = 0.5 X 98,000 lbf = 49,000 lbf
=
Total mass of the foundation system: 7.10.4 Example 3b: Dynamic analysis method-calcula
tion of vibration magnitudes-All design input are the same
m = ( WJ + W,11)/g = (3 84,000 lbf + 98,000 lbf)/32. 1 7 ft/s2 = as in Examples 1 , 2, and 3a except that the foundation should
1 4,982.9 lbf-s2/ft meet the following allowable vibration magnitude criterion:
Vibration displacements, p-p, at the center of gravity of
Calculate the undamped vertical frequency using Eq. (6.4. l f) : the machine :S 1 .5 mils at machine operating speed of 600
W v = sqrt[Kv!M] = sqrt[(2.629x 1 08 lbf/ft)/( 14,982.9 lbf-s2/ft)] rpm under a dynamic machine unbalance force of 2000 lbf.
= 1 32.5 rad/s = 2 1 . 1 Hz The soil spring stiffness was calculated at the center of
resistance under 600 rpm using software:
Calculate the undamped lateral frequency using Eq. ( 6.4 . 1 f): Soil vertical stiffness: Kv = 2.629 x 1 08 lbf/ft
w11 = sqrt[KHIM] = sqrt[(2.467 x 108 lbf/ft)/( 1 4,982.9 lbf-s2/ft)] Soil horizontal stiffness: KH = 2.467 x 1 08 lbf/ft
= 1 28.3 rad/s = 20.4 Hz Soil rocking stiffness: KR = 5 .292 x 1 0 1 0 lbf-ft/rad
Soil cross stiffness: Kc = -4.933 x 1 08 lbf/rad
Mass moment of inertia about the rocking axis at center Soil vertical damping: Cv = 3.9 x 1 06 lbf-s/ft
of gravity: Soil horizontal damping: CH = 2.522 x 1 06 lbf-s/ft
IR = wf x [(BM2 + TM2)11 2 + (h - TMI2?]1g + w,ll Soil rocking damping: CR = 4.683 x 1 08 lbf-ft-s/rad
X (dmf + TM - h )2/g Soil cross damping: Cc = -5.044 x 1 06 lbf-s/rad
= 384,000 lbf x { [(20 flY + (4 ft?J/1 2 + (4.44 ft - 4 ft?}/32. 1 7 Distance of base to center of gravity: h = 4.44 ft
ft/s2 + 98,000 lbf x ( 1 0 ft + 4 ft - 4.44 ftf/32. 1 7 ft/s2 Dynamic forces at center of gravity of foundation system:
= 763,2 8 1 lbf-s2-ft Unbalanced forces:
Fv = 2000 lbf (vertical) and F11 = 2000 lbf
Calculate the undamped rocking frequency using Eq. (6.4. 1 f):
w$ = sqrt[KRIIR] = sqrt[(5.292 x 1 0 1 0 lbflft)/(763,2 8 1 lbf-s2fft)] (Lateral) dynamic moment:
= 263 .3 rad/s = 4 1 .9 Hz FR = F0 X ( 1 4 ft-h) = 1 9, 120 lbf-ft
B4 = B 1 x B3 - (B2? = ( 1 .875 x 1 08 + i x 1 .585 x 108) lbf/ft x To calculate a minimum required yield stress for this
(5.915 X 10 10 + i X 3 .536 X [ 0 10) lbf-ft/rad - [(-1 .589 X 109 - i application:
X 1 .02 X 1 09) lb£'radF = (4.008 X 1 0 1 8 + i X 1 .276 x 1 0 1 9) lbf-1 Bolt stress = 1 68,750 lbf/3 . 1 4 in.Z = 53 ,700 psi (375 MPa)
AH = (B3 x F11 - B2 x FR)IB4 = [(5 . 9 1 5 x 1 0 1 0 + i x 3 .536 x Required Fy= 53,700 psi/80% = 67,200 psi (463 MPa)
[ 0 10) lbf-ft/rad X 2000 lbf- (-1 .589 X 1 09 - i X 1 .02 X [ 09) A material with a yield stress exceeding 67,200 psi (463
lbf/rad X 1 9, 1 20 lbf-ft]/(4.008 X 1 0 1 8 + i X 1 .276 X [ 0 1 9) MPa) could be substituted for the ASTM A 1 93/A 1 93M,
lb fl = (9.765 X 10·6 - i X 8.583 X 1 0·6) ft Grade B7, material.
b) Change in machinery dynamic forces repair design makes sense. It is undesirable to repair a foun
c) The dynamic equipment has experienced loss of alignment dation back to its original condition if operation has proven
or has degraded in tolerance from the specified vibration levels the original design to be inadequate.
d) Incorrect foundation width to height configuration 9.1.3.3 Replace equipment foundation-Determine
e) Improper attachment to the underlying concrete mat whether a completely new equipment foundation should be
foundation or pile cap engineered and constructed to replace the existing founda
f) Damage caused to the foundation by fire, impact, or tion. The need for extensive repairs with a limited remaining
explosion service life, proactive equipment upgrades, and owner pref
g) Deterioration caused by aging erences typically prompt the replacement of a foundation.
h) Excessive surface temperatures on concrete foundation For reasons of construction safety, this option could require
and thermal cycling causing concrete degradation temporarily lifting the equipment out of the way. This
i) Concrete and grout cracking approach could cost three to five times the cost of partial
9.1.3 Repair mitigation options-An early assessment is foundation removal and upgrade, and cause a much longer
required to decide the extent of repairs needed for the dete out-of-service time for the equipment. When plant outage
riorated foundation (ACI 364. 1 R; ACI 562). The repair plan (loss due to out of service) costs are estimated to be large,
should harmonize with the remaining service life of the building new foundations for equipment may be considered
equipment or planned future equipment for which it serves. as a viable alternative.
Deciding the extent of repairs needed requires responding to 9.1.4 Root cause analysis-A root cause analysis is a better
the three critical options identified in the following. approach than simply addressing the symptoms, and helps
9.1.3.1 Restore foundation to original as-built condition in deciding which of the aforementioned three approaches
Determine whether a repair procedure should simply return should be implemented. This is illustrated with the following.
the foundation back to the original design or as-built condi If deterioration of the equipment grouting results in
tion. There are situations when simple repairs are appro increased vibration levels that exceed safe operating levels,
priate (9.2. 1). Provided the original as-built condition meets simply replacing the grout, or choosing a different brand
the current performance requirements for the equipment and of grout, may not solve the vibrations issue for long if the
could be durable within the environment, simply repairing wrong generic class of grout was originally chosen for the
the foundation to its preservice condition could be appro operating conditions of the equipment (ACI 3 5 1 . 1 R).
priate and cost-effective. Extension of design service life or If the concrete foundation has cracked badly, simply
de�ired upgrade of the foundation may not be practical for patching with epoxy injection or a repair mortar/concrete
various reasons, such as the need to restore service quickly, may not provide extended useful equipment foundation life,
budget constraints, and other factors. Sections 9. 1 .3.2 and especially if the operating speed has changed, resulting in
9. !.3.3 need, in general, more time and higher cost to repair a increased equipment dynamic forces. A repair upgrade with
dynamic machine foundation. At times, restoring a foundation additional reinforcing steel and possibly post-tensioning
to as-built conditions could be the most optimum solution. may be needed to address the cracking and deterioration.
9.1.3.2 Upgrade equipment foundation-Determine
whether an upgrade design should be commissioned and 9.2-Discussion of re pair options
implemented to provide additional years of useful remaining 9.2.1 Simple repair situations-If the root cause analysis
service life for the dynamic equipment. Upgrades to the determines that only a simple concrete repair is needed to
foundation occur when the performance of the as-built bring the foundation back to the intent of the original design,
foundation is deemed insufficient for the current equipment guidance can be found in ACI 5 62 and ACI 546R. ACI 546R
performance requirements, leading to structural cracking considers surface preparation as one of the most important
and damage to its foundation, or will not be durable for the steps in the repair of a concrete structure. It further states
remaining service life mandated by the owner. To determine that the repair is only as good as the surface preparation.
whether this option is appropriate, the engineer needs to It provides enhanced guidelines for surface preparation that
understand the following, which is applicable to severely would be beneficial to adopt in a repair project.
degraded foundations. Poor workmanship in the initial construction of a dynamic
It has been observed that often the greatest deterioration equipment foundation is the most likely situation where a
from structural cracking, or other deterioration, is in the simple repair is applicable. Various evaluation methods
upper one-third of the concrete foundation where loads are (ACI 228.2R) can provide valuable information about the
greater and deterioration from process fluids or lubricating condition of the concrete before removal. Quality control
oil are more likely to be present. With proper engineering, and assurance procedures (ACI 5 62) are required throughout
the upgrade can be accomplished with the equipment left in the repair project to validate that the repair work complies
place. In many cases, the extended remaining service life of with the design intent and specified performance criteria.
an upgrade/repair can be 30 years, when the root cause of the Construction problems are often seen in the first 6 to 1 2
equipment foundation deterioration is properly addressed. months of operation, whereas a problem due to poor design
If repair is needed because the original design was inad may take years to develop.
equate, the loads were increased, or any other significant 9.2.2 Complex repair situations-Often, the root cause
reasons exist for repair, then incorporating upgrades into the analysis indicates that the dynamic forces are not being
American Co ete Ins Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by I ftQJn r license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
No reproduction��or mg permitted without license from IHS
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 69
constrained and transmitted smoothly from the machine flexural strength, develops a better bond and adhesion to the
down through the foundation and into the soil below. When original concrete, and develops less heat of hydration than
the symptoms are high vibration of the equipment, cracked ready mixed concrete.
concrete and grout, anchorage failure, or foundation rocking, Material selection for concrete repair is an important step.
the causes could be one or more of the following: ACI 546R and ACI 546.3R provide guidelines for material
a) Incorrect original calculation of the projected magni selection of concrete repairs.
tude of the dynamic forces, or a change in magnitude after a c) Upgrade the anchor bolts from typical 36,000 psi (248
mechanical repair. Note that sometimes a very small change MPa) lower-strength steel to higher-strength alloy steel, such
in a rotating part's weight can cause large increases in vibra as ASTM A 1 93/A 1 93M, Grade B7, with rolled threads. This
tory forces. material has minimum tensile strength of 1 25 ,000 psi (860
b) A change in operating speed can increase dynamic forces MPa) and minimum yield strength of 1 05,000 psi (720 MPa)
c) A tall narrow foundation, made only as wide as the foot for rods of various diameters (ACI 355.3R- l l Appendix A).
print of the machine The increased clamping force transfers the vibratory forces
Often the minimum width and length supplied by the orig more efficiently into the foundation.
inal equipment manufacturer (OEM) will have more rocking d) Add horizontal post-tensioning both ways in the upper
around the horizontal axis than a shorter, wider foundation. one-third of the foundation. Earlier repair techniques used
An OEM suggested concrete outline should only be a guide steel bolts to accomplish this, but newer techniques have
to minimum size. The OEM is not the foundation designer, been developed using closely spaced post-tensioned cables
and it is the engineer of record's responsibility to provide the because of lower cost and ease of installation in a dense rein
best width-to-height ratio to help control rocking. Excessive forcing bar grid. This technique is beneficial when severe
rocking can be reduced in an existing foundation by adding vertical cracks exist.
vertical post-tension bolts (9.2.3(a)) and by adding founda e) Make changes to the concrete mass by increasing the
tion mass (9.2.3(e)). However, a revised vibration analysis horizontal width, length, or both, of the concrete where
with new parameters needs to be conducted to verify vibra possible without equipment interference.
tion levels and design allowable. When applicable, soil f) The connection between the equipment and the foun
structure interaction effects need to be included in the revised dation is a critical point in providing a smooth path of the
vibration analysis, as discussed in Chapter 5 . Moreover, a equipment vibratory forces down into the concrete foundation
parametric study would be beneficial to determine optimum and into the soil or bedrock below. The improved anchorage
values for bolt tension or additional foundation mass. suggested in 9.2.3(c) can help with increased clamping forces.
For any repair options, concrete foundation problems Further, transmission of vibratory forces can be improved
caused by equipment vibration can worsen over time as the by changes such as using a poured polymer chock at each
equipment foundation deteriorates and causes an increase anchorage point in place of a full bed of grout, or one of the
in equipment vibratory forces. These increased equipment several adjustable steel or composite machinery supports that
forces may further deteriorate the dynamic equipment foun additionally correct for angularity and vertical alignment.
dation with potential for further cracking of the concrete The aforementioned tools and techniques are generic sugges
foundation and loosening of anchor bolts. This results in tions; details depend on specific repair conditions, budget
even further increases in vibratory forces. This cycle of availability, significance of machine, desired design service
degradation phenomenon continues as time progresses, life extension of the machine foundation, and feasible design
demonstrating that an early and timely repair is always details. It is advisable to verify design modifications for the
warranted for a dynamic machine foundation. repair job against applicable codes, standards, and specifica
9.2.3 Tools and techniques for machine foundation tions, and it should depend on the discretion of the engineer.
repair-A variety of tools and techniques exist that may be Consider different options and costs associated with each of
applicable to the repair of a foundation that has deteriorated them and come to an optimum solution for the repair job.
due to the problems described previously. The tools and
techniques are described in the following: CHAPTER 10-REFERENCES
a) Drill and install vertical post-tension bolts completely Committee documents are listed first by document number
through the cracked sections and often down to an under and year of publication followed by authored documents
lying concrete mat foundation or pile cap. listed alphabetically.
b) After partial or complete removal of the concrete and
grout in the upper one-third of the foundation, replace it with Acoustical Society ofAmerica
a dense reinforcing bar grid of 1 percent (No. 6s [No. 1 9] on ASA/ANSI S2. 19: 1 999-Mechanical Vibration-
6 in. [ 1 50 mm] centers in 6 in. [ 1 50 mm] vertical layers), B alance Quality Requirements of Rigid Rotors, Part 1 :
and replace with a stronger concrete such as a steel fiber Determination of Permissible Residual Unbalance
reinforced polymer-modified concrete (PMC).
PMC (ACI 548.3R) is considered because the repair is American Concrete Institute
being made, in most cases, from a degraded foundation or an ACI 207.2R-07-Report on Thermal and Volume Change
inadequate original foundation design. A stronger concrete is Effects on Cracking of Mass Concrete
beneficial in such situations. PMC is stronger in tensile and
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
70 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
ACI 2 1 5R-92(97)-Considerations for Design of Concrete ASTM A 1 93/A 1 93M- 1 6-Standard Specification for
Structures Subjected to Fatigue Loading Alloy-Steel and Stainless Steel Bolting for High-Temper
ACI 228.2R- 1 3-Report on Nondestructive Test Methods ature or High Pressure Service and Other Special Purpose
for Evaluation of Concrete in Structures Applications
ACI 307-08-Code Requirements for Reinforced ASTM A6 1 5/A6 1 5M- 1 5-Standard Specification
Concrete Chimneys and Commentary for Deformed and Plain Billet-Steel Bars for Concrete
ACI 3 1 8- 1 4-Building Code Requirements for Structural Reinforcement
Concrete and Commentary ASTM D40 1 5- 1 5-Standard Test Methods for Modulus
ACI 349. 1 R-07-Reinforced Concrete Design for and Damping of Soils by Fixed-Base Resonant Column
Thermal Effects on Nuclear Power Plant Structures Devices
ACI 3 50-06-Code Requirements for Environmental
Concrete Structures and Commentary British Standards
ACI 3 5 l . I R- 1 2-Report on Grouting Between Founda B S 8 1 1 0-2 : 1 985-Structural Use of Concrete-Part 2:
tions and Bases for Support of Equipment and Machinery Code of Practice for Special Circumstances
ACI 3 5 1 .2R- 1 2-Report on Grouting Between Founda
tions and Bases for Support of Equipment and Machinery European Standards
ACI 3 5 1 .4- 1 4-Specification for Installation of Cementi EN 1 992- 1 - 1 :2004-Eurocode 2 : Design of Concrete
tious Grouting between Foundations and Equipment Bases Structures-Part 1 - 1 : General Rules and Rules for Buildings
ACI 3 5 1 .5 - 1 5-Specification for Installation of Epoxy
Grout between Foundations and Equipment Bases Federal Emergency Management Agency
ACI 35 5.3R- 1 1-Guide for Design of Anchorage to FEMA P-750:2009-NEHRP Recommended Seismic
Concrete: Example Using ACI 3 1 8 Appendix D Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures
ACI 3 64.1 R-07-Guide to Evaluation of Concrete Struc
tures before Rehabilitation Det Norske Veritas
ACI 546R-1 4-Guide to Concrete Repair DNV-OS-C502:20 1 2-0ffshore Concrete Structures
ACI 546.3R- 14-Guide to Materials Selection for
Concrete Repair Deutsches Institutfiir Normung
ACI 548.3R-09-Report on Polymer-Modified Concrete DIN 4024-2: 1 99 1 -Machine Foundations: Rigid Supporting
ACI 562-1 6-Code Requirements for Evaluation, Repair, Constructions for Machines with Periodic Excitation
and Rehabilitation of Concrete Buildings and Commentary DIN 4025: 1958-Foundations for Anvil Block Hammers
DIN 4 1 50-2 : 1 999-Structural Vibration-Part 2: Human
American Petroleum Institute Exposure to Vibration in Buildings
API 541 :20 1 4-Form-Wound Squirrel Cage Induction DIN 4 1 50-3 : 1 999-Structural Vibration-Part 3: Effects
Motors-3 75 kW (500 Horsepower) and Larger ofVibration on Structures
API 6 1 0:2004-Centrifugal Pumps for Petroleum, Petro
chemical, and Natural Gas Industry Hydraulic Institute
API 6 1 2 :20 14-Petroleum, Petrochemical and Natural Gas HI/ANSI 9 .6.4-2009-Rotodynamic Pumps for Vibration
Industries - Steam Turbines - Special-Purpose Applications Measurements and Allowable Values
API 6 1 3 :2007-Special-Purpose Gear Units for Petro
leum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services International Standards Organization (ISO)
API 6 1 7 :2014-Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and ISO 1 940- 1 :2003-Mechanical Vibration-Balance
Expander-Compressors Quality Requirements of Rigid Rotors-Part 1 : Determina
API 6 1 8 :2007-Reciprocating Compressors for Petro tion of Permissible Residual Unbalance
leum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services ISO 263 1 - 1 : 1 997-Mechanical Vibration and Shock
API 6 1 9:201 0-Rotary-Type Positive-Displacement Evaluation of Human Exposure to Whole Body Vibration
Compressors for Petroleum, Petrochemical, and Natural Gas Part 1 : General Requirements
Industries ISO 263 1-2 :2003-Mechanical Vibration and Shock
API 684:2005-API Standard Paragraphs Rotodynamic Evaluation of Human Exposure to Whole Body Vibration
Tutorial: Lateral Critical Speeds, Unbalance Response, Part 2: Vibration in Buildings ( 1 to 80 Hz)
Stability, Train Torsionals and Rotor Balancing ISO 263 1-4:200 1-Mechanical Vibration and Shock
Evaluation of Human Exposure to Whole Body Vibration
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Part 4: Guidelines for the Evaluation of the Effects of Vibra
ASCE/SEI 7 - 1 6-Minimum Design Loads for Buildings tion and Rotational Motion on Passenger and Crew Comfort
and Other Structures in Fixed-Guideway Transport System
ASCE/SEI 37- 14-Design Loads on Structures During ISO 263 1-5:2004-Mechanical Vibration and Shock
Construction Evaluation of Human Exposure to Whole Body Vibra
tion-Part 5 : Method of Evaluation of Vibration Containing
ASTM International Multiple Shocks
Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 71
Karabalis, D. L., and Beskos, D. E., 1 985, "Dynamic Neville, A. M., 1 997, Properties of Concrete, John Wiley
Response of 3-D Embedded Foundations by Boundary & Sons, New York.
Element Method," 2nd Joint ASCEIASME Mechanics Novak, M., 1 970, "Prediction of Footing Vibrations,"
Conference, Albuquerque, NM, 34 pp. Journal ofthe Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, V.
Kausel, E., and Ushijima, R., 1 979, "Vertical and Torsional 96, May, pp. 83 7-86 1 .
Stiffness of Cylindrical Footings," Research Report R79-6, Novak, M., 1 974, "Dynamic Stiffness and Damping of
Civil Engineering Department, Massachusetts Institute of Piles," Canadian Geotechnical Journal, V. 1 1 , No. 4, pp.
Technology, Cambridge, MA. 574-5 98.
Kausel, E.; Whitman, R.V. ; Elsabee, F. ; and Morray, J. Novak, M., 1 977, "Soil-Pile-Foundation Interaction,"
P., 1 977, "Dynamic Analysis of Embedded Structures," Proceedings of the 9th International Coriference on Soil
SMiRT-4, K 2/6. Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Japanese Society
Kobayashi, S., and Nishimura, N., 1 983, "Analysis of of Soil Mechanics and Found Engineering, Tokyo, Japan,
Dynamic Soil-Structure Interactions by Boundary Integral pp. 309-3 1 5 .
Equation Method," 3rd International Symposium on Numer Novak, M . , 1 979, "Soil Pile Interaction Under Dynamic
ical Methods in Engineering, Paris, pp. 342-3 53. Loads," Numerical Methods in Offshore Piling: Proceedings
Kuhlmeyer, R. L., 1 979a, "Vertical Vibration of Piles," of a Conference Organized by the Institution of Civil Engi
Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, V. 105, Feb., pp. neers, ICE, London, UK, pp. 59-68.
273-287. Novak, M., and Beredugo, Y. 0., 1 972, "Vertical Vibration
Kuhlmeyer, R. L., 1 979b, "Static and Dynamic Later of Embedded Footings," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and
ally Loaded Floating Piles," Journal of Geotechnical Engi Foundations Division, V. 98, Dec., pp. 1 29 1 - 1 3 1 0.
neering, V. 1 05 , Feb., pp. 289-304. Novak, M., and Sachs, K., 1 973, "Torsional and Coupled
Kreyszig, E., 1 967, Advanaced Engineering Mathematics, Vibrations of Embedded Footings," International Journal of
seco,nd edition, John Wiley & Sons, 1 280 pp. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, V. 2, No.
Lakshmanan, N., and Minai, R., 1 98 1 , "Dynamic Soil 1, pp. 1 1 -33. doi: 10. 1 002/eqe.4290020 1 03
Reactions in Radially Non-Homogeneous Soil Media," Novak, M., and Sheta, M., 1 980, "Approximate Approach
Bulletin ofthe Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto to Contact Problems of Piles," Dynamic Response of Pile
Uniyersity, V. 3 1 , No. 279, pp. 79- 1 14. Foundations, Analytical Aspects: Proceedings of a Session
Lifshits,A.; Simmons, H. R.; and Smalley, A. J., 1 986, "More Sponsored by the Geotechnical Engineering Division at
Coniprehensive Vibration Limits for Rotating Machinery," the A SCE National Convention, 30, M. W. O'Neill and R.
Journal ofEngineeringfor Gas Turbines and Power, V. 1 08, Dobry, eds., ASCE, New York.
No. 4, Oct., pp. 583-590. doi: 1 0 . 1 1 1 5/1 .323995 1 Novak, M., and Sheta, M., 1 982, "Dynamic Response
Lysmer, M., and Richart, F. E., 1 966, "Dynamic Response of Piles and Pile Groups," Proceedings of the 2nd Interna
of Footings to Vertical Loading," Journal of the Soil tional Conference on Numerical Methods in Offshore Piling,
Mechanics and Foundations Division, V. 92, Jan., pp. 65-9 1 . University of Texas, Austin, TX.
Lysmer, J.; Ostadan, F.; and Chin, C . C., 1 999, "A Novak, M.; Nogami, T.; and Aboul-Ella, F., 1 978,
System for Analysis of Soil-Structure Interaction," SASSI "Dynamic Soil Reactions for Plain Strain Case," Journal of
2000, Geotechnical Engineering, University of California, Engineering Mechanics, V. 1 04, Aug., pp. 953-959.
Berkeley, CA. Pantermuehl, P. J., and Smalley, A. J., 1 997a, "Compressor
Mandke, J. S., and Smalley, A. J., 1 989, "Foundation Anchor Bolt Design," GMRC Technical Report No. TR 97-6,
Thermoelastic Distortion," Report No. 89-3, Pipeline and Gas Machinery Research Council, Dec.
Compressor Research Council. Pantermuehl, P. J., and Smalley, A. J., 1 997b, "Friction
Mandke, J. S., and Smalley, A. J., 1 992, "Thermal Distor Tests-Typical Chock Materials and Cast Iron," GMRC
tion of Reciprocating Compressor Foundation Blocks," Technical Report No. TR 9 7-3, Gas Machinery Research
ASME Paper No. 92-Pet-3, ASME Energy-Sources Tech Council, Dec.
nology Conference and Exhibition, Houston, TX. Popovics, J. S., 2008, "A Study of Static and Dynamic
Mandke, J. S., and Troxler, P. J., 1 992, "Dynamics of Modulus of Elasticity of Concrete," CRC #43, Concrete
Compressor Skids," GMRC Technical Report No. TR 92-2, Research Council (CRC), Farmington Hills, MI.
Gas Machinery Research Council, Mar. Poulos, H. G., and Davis, E. H., 1 980, Pile Foundation Anal
Mitchell, J., and Soga, K., 2005, Fundamentals of Soil ysis and Design, John Wiley and Sons, New York., 4 1 0 pp.
Behavior, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ. Richart Jr., F. E., and Whitman, R. V., 1 967, "Comparison
Mylonakis, G., and Gazetas, G., 1 998, "Vertical Vibration of Footing Vibration Tests with Theory," Journal of the Soil
and Additional Distress of Grouped Piles in Layered Soil," Mechanics and Foundations Division, V. 93, Nov., pp. 143- 1 68.
Soils and Foundations, V. 38, No. 1, 1 pg. Richart Jr., F. E.; Hall Jr., J. R.; and Woods, R. D., 1 970,
Mylonakis, G., and Gazetas, G., 1 999, "Lateral Vibra Vibrations of Soils and Foundations, Prentice-Hall, Engle
tion and Internal Forces of Grouped Piles in Layered wood Cliffs, NJ, 4 1 4 pp.
Soil," Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Reissner, E., 1 936, "Stationare, axialsymmetrische, durch
Engineering, V. 125, No. 1 , pp. 1 6-25 . doi: 1 0. 1 06 1/ eine schiittelnde Masse erregte Schwingung eines homo-
(ASCE) 1 090-024 1 ( 1 999) 1 2 5 : 1 ( 1 6)
American Co ete Ins Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by I ftQJn r license with ACI American Concrete Institute- Copyright� @>fMate'l'laf6L21W�oncrete.org
No reproduction��or mg permitted without license from IHS
REPORT ON FOUN DATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18) 73
genen elastischen Halbraum," Ingenieur-Archiv, V. 7, No. 6, Veletsos, A. S., and Wei, Y. T. , 1 97 1 , "Lateral and Rocking
pp. 3 8 1 -396. doi: 10. 1 007/BF02090427 Vibrations of Footings," Journal of the Soil Mechanics and
Saitoh, M., 2007, "Simple Model ofFrequency-Dependent Foundations Division, V. 97, Sept., pp. 1 227- 1 248.
Impedance Functions in Soil-Structure Interaction Using Wolf, J. P., and Darbre, G. R., 1 984, "Dynamic-Stiffness
Frequency-Independent Elements," Journal of Engineering Matrix of Soil by the Boundary-Element Method: Embedded
Mechanics, V. 1 33 , No. 1 0, pp. 1 1 0 1 - 1 1 14. doi: 1 0. 1061/ Foundations," Earthquake Engineering & Structural
(ASCE)0733-9399(2007) 1 3 3 : 10( 1 1 01) Dynamics, V. 1 2, No. 3, May, pp. 40 1 -4 1 6. doi: 1 0 . 1 002/
Schenck, T., 1 990, Fundamentals of Balancing, Schenck eqe.4290 1 20308
Trebel Corporation, Deer Park, NY. Wolf, J. P., and Deeks, A. J., 2004, Foundation Vibra
SEAOC Blue Book, 2009, "Seismic Design Recommen tion Analysis: A Strength-of-Materials Approach, Elsevier,
dations," Structural Engineers Association of California Amsterdam.
(SEAOC), Seismology Committee. Wolf, J. P., and Song, C., 1 996, Finite-Element Modelling
Seed, H. B., and Idriss, I. M., 1 970, "Soil Moduli and of Unbounded Media, Wiley, Chichester, UK.
Damping Factors for Dynamic Response Analysis," Report Wolf, J. P., and Song, C., 2002, "Some Comer
70-I, EERC, Dec., Berkeley, CA. stones of Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction," Engi
Seed, H. B.; Wong, R. T.; Idriss, I. M.; and Tokimatsu, neering Structures, V. 24, No. 1 , pp. 1 3-28. doi: 1 0. 1 0 1 6/
K., 1 986, "Moduli and Damping Factors for Dynamic so 1 4 1 -0296(0 1 )00082-7
Analyses of Cohesionless Soils," Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, V. 1 1 2, No. 1 1 , pp. 1 0 1 6- 1 032. doi: 1 0. 1061/ APPENDIX A-DYNAMIC SOIL PROPERTIES
(ASCE)0733-94 1 0( 1 986) 1 1 2 : 1 1 ( 1 0 1 6) Soil properties should be provided by a geotechnical
Sieffert, J.-G., and Cevaer, F., 1 992, Handbook oflmpedance engineer. Appendix A, however, provides engineers with a
Functions, Surface Foundations, Nantes, Ouest Editions. general overview of methods used to determine the various
Smalley, A. J., 1 985, "Topical Report: Misalignment and soil properties required for the dynamic analysis of machine
Temperature Measurements on a Fully Grouted Recipro foundations. Many references are available that provide a
cating Compressor," Project PRJ 5-J 74, American Gas greater level of detail on the theory, standard practice, and
Association. factors that affect dynamic soil properties (Mitchell and
Smalley, A. J., 1988, "Dynamic Forces Transmitted by a Soga 2005 ; Seed and Idriss 1 970; Stokoe et a!. 1 999; Andrus
Compressor to its Foundation," ASME Conference Paper, et a!. 2003).
New Orleans, LA. Many factors affect the ability of a given soil to support a
Smalley, A. J., 1 997, "Epoxy Chock Material Creep Tests," dynamic machine foundation. These include excessive settle
GMRC Technical Report No. TR 97-5, Gas Machinery ment caused by dynamic or static loads, liquefaction, expan
Research Council, Dec. sive soils, and frost heave. All these should be addressed by a
Smalley, A. J., and Harrell, J. P., 1 997, "Foundation geotechnical engineer familiar with the local conditions.
Design," 1 997 PCRC Gas Machinery Conference, Austin, The soil properties that are most important for the dynamic
TA, Gas Machinery Research Council, Dallas, TX. analysis of machine foundations are stiffness, density (p)
Smalley, A. J., and Pantermuehl, P. J., 1 997, "Foundation and material damping (D111) . Stiffness properties are typically
Guidelines," GMRC Technical Report No. TR 9 7-2, Gas provided in the form of small strain Poisson's ratio (v), and
Machinery Research Council, Dallas, TX, Jan. shear modulus (G) , or alternatively in the form of shear ( Vs)
Stokoe, K. H.; Darendeli, M. B.; Andrus, R. D.; and and compressional ( Vp) wave velocities, as discussed in the
Brown, L. T., 1 999, "Dynamic Soil Properties: Laboratory, following.
Field and Correlation Studies," Theme Lecture, Second
International Coriference Earthquake Geotechnical Engi A . 1 -Poisson's ratio
neering, V. 3 , Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 8 1 1 -845 . Poisson's ratio (v) is the ratio of transverse strain to longi
Tyapin, A. G., 1 99 1 , "Influence of Embedment on the tudinal strain in the direction of applied force. In general,
First Resonance of Soil-Structure Systems," Earthquake most soils have Poisson's ratio values in the range from 0.2
Engineering, Proceeding of the 1 6th Regional European to 0.5. Laboratory determination of Poisson's ratio is diffi
Seminar, Rotterdam, Balkema, pp. 220-226. cult; therefore, it is sometimes estimated. Alternatively, for
USNRC, 2013, "Seismic System Analysis," Standard soils above the water table, v is often determined, per Eq.
Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for (A. 1), based on in-place measurements of the shear ( Vs) and
Nuclear Power Plants, Section 3.7.2, NUREG-0800, LWR compressional ( Vp) wave velocities.
edition.
Veletsos, A. S., and Nair, V. V. D., 1 974, "Torsional Vibra
tion for Viscoelastic Foundations," Journal of Geotechnical (A. l )
Engineering, V. 100, Mar., pp. 225-246.
Veletsos, A. S., and Verbic, B., 1 973, "Vibration of Visco
elastic Foundations," Earthquake Engineering & Structural The dynamic response of a foundation system i s generally
Dynamics, V. 2, No. 1 , July-Sept., pp. 87- 1 02. doi: 1 0. 1 002/ insensitive to variations of Poisson's ratio in the range of
eqe.4290020 108 values common for dry or partial saturated soils (that is, 0.25
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided by IHS Markit under license with ACI
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS
American Concrete Institute- Copytri!!lflt�.@11Wlfe¥i11�3!l www.concrete.org ��
OC
C C I1. ..
j.•
74 REPORT ON FOUNDATIONS FOR DYNAMIC EQUIPMENT (ACI 351.3R-18)
-
should be accounted for in the preliminary design by applying Table A.2.3. 1 a-Val ues of K2 coefficient for various
Eq. (A.2a) and (A.2b) with a COY between 2 and 3 . void ratios and relative densities (Seed and ldriss
A.2.3.1 Correlations for sands and gravels Hardin and 1970)
Richart ( 1 963) determined that the soil void ratio (e) and the e K, D, % K,
in-place mean effective stress ( a0) had the most impact on 0.45 70 30 34
the dynamic shear modulus. In general, Gmax decreases with
0.5 60 40 40
an increase of void ratio and increases with the confining
stress and over-consolidation ratio. Accordingly, Hardin and 0.6 51 45 43
Richart ( 1 963) and Hardin and Black ( 1 968) developed the 0-.7 44 60 52
following relationships for estimating the dynamic shear
0.8 39 75 59
modulus Gmax of round-grained sands with e between 0.3
( <>Pao )N
0.9 34 90 70
and 0.8, where a0 = (a 1 ' + az' + a3 ')/3 for laboratory samples,
and a0 = a 1 '( 1 + 2K0)/3 for in-place soils:
32 1(2.97 - e) 2
Gmax OCR M
144, 000(2. 1 7 - e) \/�
=
(A.2.3 .2)
= (lb/ft 2 ) Pa 1+e
Gmax
1+e
2 (A.2.3 . 1 a)
6, 900, 000(2 . 1 7 - e) .{<i; A.3-Soil dam ping
G,a, = 1+ e
(Pa)
The material damping ratio Dm represents the energy
dissipated by the soil during the vibrations induced by the
Similarly, for angular-grained materials with e between 0.6 machine-foundation system. Mechanisms that contribute to
and 1 .3, the dynamic shear modulus can be estimated from material damping are friction between soil particles, strain
rate effects, and nonlinear soil behavior. Referring to Fig.
68, 3 00(2.97 - e) 2 [<i;
A.2, the material or hysteretic damping is defined by Eq.
2
-
G ax
m
=
Table A2.3. 1 b-Val ues of (K2)max of sandy and gravelly soils (Seed et al. 1986)
Soil description Location Depth, ft ( m) (Kz)max
Loose moist sand Minnesota 10 (3) 34
Table A.2.3.2-Val ues of M coefficient for clays content. In a half-space, these waves propagate continuously
(Hardin and Drnevich 1972) away from the structure, as shown in Fig. 5 .3 .2 . Therefore,
Plasticity index M the energy carried by the waves is dissipated (lost) in the
0 0.00 half-space medium, giving rise to attenuation of the vibra
20 0. 1 8
tion (that is, damping). In summary, the term "radiation
damping" is used to characterize a mechanism where energy
40 0.30
seems to be lost due to wave propagation. Unlike the mate
60 0.41 rial damping, radiation damping is frequency-dependent and
80 0.48 is generally modeled using a damper/dashpot.
In the case of a foundation supported on a soil layer over
2: 1 00 0.50
lying a rigid stratum, the radiation damping (not the mate
rial damping) vanishes for vibration frequencies below
this subj ect, refer to Stokoe et al. ( 1 999) and Mitchell and
a threshold or cutoff frequency, which is a function of the
Saga (2005).
vibration mode and soil properties. In the case of horizontal
vibration, the cutoff frequency corresponds to the funda
A.4-Radiation dam ping
mental frequency (f) of the soil layer in Eq. (A.4), where V5
Radiation damping or geometry damping is a term used to
is the shear wave velocity of the layer and H is its thickness.
describe the dissipation of elastic energy that takes place for
a foundation vibrating in an elastic half-space, even when
the half-space has no material damping. (A.4)
To illustrate this phenomenon, consider the system shown
in Fig. 5 . 3 .2. The vibration of the foundation results in elastic
waves (body and surface waves) with significant energy Additionally, the radiation damping also vanishes for half
spaces with rapidly increasing stiffness (Wolf and Song 2002).
As ACI begins its second century of advancing concrete knowledge, its original chartered purpose
remains "to provide a comradeship in finding the best ways to do concrete work of all kinds and in
spreading knowledge." In keeping with this purpose, ACI supports the following activities:
Technical committees that produce consensus reports, guides, specifications, and codes.
Periodicals: the ACI Structural Journal, Materials Journal, and Concrete International.
Benefits of membership include a subscription to Concrete International and to an ACI Journal. ACI
members receive discounts of up to 40% on all ACI products and services, including documents, seminars
and convention registration fees.
As a member of ACI, you join thousands of practitioners and professionals worldwide who share
a commitment to maintain the highest industry standards for concrete technology, construction,
and practices. In addition, ACI chapters provide opportunities for interaction of professionals and
practitioners at a local level to discuss and share concrete knowledge and fellowship.
9 1ij�m11 1 �mllll
American Concrete Institute Licensee=Chongqing Institute of quality and Standardizationb 5990390
Provided b y I H S Markit under license with ACI Not for Resale, 2018/6/28 12:40:39
No reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS