Internationa Journal of Sciontiic& Engineering Research Volume 8, Issue 5, May-2018 ISSN 2229-5518, 458 Design of Well Foundation ‘Thool Kushal P., Pawar Sachin L., Shirsath Abhishek D., Thombre Kiran B. ‘assistant Prof, Deptt of Civl Engg. Vishwaniketan’s MEET. India, shal thool@ gmaéom 2Assistant Prof Deptt of Civil Eng, Vishwanketan's iMEET. in sachinpwr1987 @ mail com ME. Persuing (Cons. Management, Dept of Civil Engg. PVPIT Bavulan, India, abhi shirsah60@ gmail.com “Assistant Prof, Dept of Civil Engg, Vishwamiketan's MEET, India, kthombre2@ gmi.om Abstract: Due to exposure to potential scouring action of | the river water, the foundation of transmission line tower at location no. 456 of Unnao-Bareilly transmission line is proposed to be provided in the form of a well. Detailed design procedure has been carried out also SAP modeling has been made to cheek the hoop stresses onthe steining, Key words: Well Foundation, Well Sting, SAP Modeling INTRODUCTION Due to exposure to potential scouring action of the river water the foundation of transmission line tower at location no, 456 of Unnao-Bareilly transmission line is proposed (0 be provided in the form of well DETAILS OF TOWER ‘A schematic eross section of the stream together with the location is available, The details of the proposed tower and the hydraulic and geotechnical data at the site of the proposed tower are given below. we | get RE PRRE PREP BNE NT ™ | pout | cas | oxo | ar | am | am | aos Fig. l:Schematie eross- section of stream at Jocation of tower No.456 HYDRAULIC DATA [iisxmam Toot asciarge Tok eams [-xtiximo steam velocity —[-= [1.98 mis RL of HEL. =| “194m RL of riverbank =| —1s00m [RE ofriverbed 12S t Si actor 083 SOIL CHARRACTERISTICS ‘© Poorly grad fine to medium sand (SP) upto 32m fiom GL. ‘© Average corrected SPT 'N’ value = 10 ‘© Angle of friction = 32° ‘The legs ofthe tower are placed on the pedestal having height 2.5 m having cross-section decreasing from 600x600 at bottom to 400x600 at top. WELL CONFIGURATION Single well with outrigger arms supporting the tower legs. PROPORTIONING OF FOUNDATION ‘The foundation shall be taken adequately below the minimum scour depth. The normal depth of scour is estimated using Lacey's formula as: d= 0473 (oF =6.79m where, {d= normal depth of seour (Q= design discharge in cumees, and i IRC: 78- 2000 recommends that scour depth calculations for 168 Lacey's silt factor foundations may be made for @ discharge larger than the design discharge. Accordingly, 20% inetease in design discharge has boon assumed in scour depth calculations. Since tower i to be located in straight each ofriver, the ‘maximum seour depth dyus is given by, hoy = 1274 = 8.62 m DIMENSIONING OF THE WELL FOUNDATION From the scour considerations mi mum grip length for the well foundatio 133 x max, scour depth =284m =3m However provide a grip length of 9 m as a conservative RL of base of well w.rt, HEL. 149.4 9-862 m =131.78m Height of wellw.NGL = 150-131.78 m 1822. m USER © 2018 tpi per orgInternationa Journal of Sciontiic& Engineering Research Volume 8, Issue 5, May-2018 ISSN 2229-5518, Thickness of well Steining AsperIRC 78-2000 (Cl. 7082.3) texaWl ~1152m Thickness of well steining Constant = 003m External diameter of well = 9m ‘ re d 1 = Depthofwellwrt NGL = 18. Pryvides = 1.5 m for suicient sinking effect. Internal diameter of well= 91.5 ~15 6m>2m as per IRC 78:2000 hence OK The thickness of well cap is taken as = 1.5m Thickness of top plug 0.6 m (Because we are using well cap) 5 x internal diameter of well 5x6 =30m Height of well C As per IRC 78:2000 projection 75 mm, Take 100 mm projection, 50 x 15x 18mm, =6m>2m as per IRC 782000 hence OK After using AutoCAD for drawing well the length of outrigger for supporting the pedestal is coming out 19 be 12073.47 mm. Taking, Size of ISA cutting edge 700 mm. 414,69 mm Take The outriggers is being tapered from I m to 2.7 m. Thus, the well details are Toial height of well 1322. m Grip length = 09.00m Extomal diameter of well 09.00 m Internal diameter of well 06.00 m Thickness of well steining 01.50m Length of outrigger = 1208m Max. depth of outrigger 02.70 m Width of outrigger 00.60 m 459 ‘The proportioned well dimensions are shown in fig. 2 and 3 eas - @ Mh Pe Fig. 3: Sectional elevation of well foundation a section X-X (all dimensions are in mm) ESTIMATION OF WELL CAPACITY 1. Uplift capacity The safe uplift capacity, Quy. may be calculated as the submerged weight of the well, conservatively ignoring the effect of sie friction, Thus, (gto use aes(25-10) Que = + (4x 5x(1427) x 1208 06x 05.10) y728.138 KN> 1639 KN, O.K, Hence the well is safe in uplift. 2. Axial compression load capacity The effect of skin fiction is conservatively ignored and the axial load capacity is taken as the base resistance with a factor of safety of 3. The base resistance, Quis is calculated Qvuie USER © 2018 tpi per orgInternationa Journal of Sciontiic& Engineering Research Volume 8, Issue 5, May-2018 ISSN 2229-5518, Where, a Effective overburden pressure at bss ™ Bearing capacity fietor A Area of base of well Fos. Factor of safety Forsol at base of wel, ¢= 32°, hence N= 24.36 mute = (9 & 10) x (24.36 — 1) x( ES = 44882.9696 KN> 4264 KN Hence OK. 3. Lateral load capacity The lateral load acting on the well consists of two components Design lateral load corresponding to B.W.C. = 359.4 KN. Lateral load due to water current force corresponding to TLFLL acting on curved surface area of the wel. Intensity of| water current pressure at HEL = 0,52KV" Where, V= Velocity of the current at the point where the pressure tensity is being calculated, in meters per second, K =a constant having a value of 0.66 for circular piers. P=052x 0.66% (V2x 1.94)" S8kNim Water current (lateral) foree = 0.5 x 8.62 x 2.58 x9 = 100.07 kN “Total lateral force = 359.4 + 100.07 459.47 KN, K,=031 and K,=3.25, forp = 32° Let the total lateral is acting ata height ‘h’ above base of | wel. 459.47 x h= (100.07 x 14.74) + 359.4(18.2242.5) 9.42 m, levation of resultant lateral load = 19.42 m. Sale lateral capacity, Hg may be computed as, Hye = 85718, -K.AD~20), SSH KND-2D 0, FOS Where, pin mfr) h Height of resultant lateral load = 19.42 m above base D Gaip length =om k, 3.25 ike 031 y Submerged unit weight of soil = 10 kNim* EOS. = Factor of safety, 30 & External dia. Of well om Dy $4.17 and 4.09. ( we have fo seleet lower value ) Hae = 25810¥12.98)9-8.18)09 = 488.187 > 45957 OK. 40 4. Stability check of outriggers Clear span of cantilever (L.)= 12.07 m. = 185m oF 1850 mm 1775 ma Take smaller value between (a) and (b 1,< 15000 mm OK. DESIGN OF WELL COMPONENTS 1, Design of outriggers ue to the large moments coming on the critical section a no, of trials have to be done because of the change in the value of effective depth after the placement ofthe bars inthe cross section, Final calculations as been shown here. Lar =hy+ (1.52) 2.07.75 = 12.82 m Load (P) = 1085 kN Taking Overall depth (D) = 2700 mm fective depth (d) =2500 mm Bifective cover (€")=200 mm Grade of conerete Grade of tee! Self-weight of beam ‘Volume of RCC = 045 (2.741) x 12.82 «0.6 14.2302 m" ‘Weight ofbeam = 25 x 14.2302 m" = 355.755 kN Factored Moment My = 15x (1085 x 1248 + 355.755 x 6.41) = 23732 kNm "732 x 10° Nom prensa ons +e 4843 @ 362 CEES 1- (0.616 x B22) x fade? = 13134375 x 10" Nmm Since M,> M,.lim_seetion isto be designed as doubly reinforced Puig 41.61 (£5 X @ =12% = 12761.84 mm? 30567.4 mm Provide 28 nos of 366 bars and 6 nos. of 226 bars. Agr = 30781.32 > 3067.44 mm? Calculation of new d 3O781.32 d= 71735N08.84 +6 x (wld) x 22° x 2337 «d= 2504 mm~ 2500 mm , OK USER © 2018 tpi per orgInternationa Journal of Sciontiic& Engineering Research Volume 8, Issue 5, May-2018 ISSN 2229-5518, = 196 mm f= 0.0035 m2? =353.308 Nim Acca ~ 13693. 165 ra Provide 14 nos. 369 bars Ancnn = 14250.26828 mm? > 13693.165 mm? O.K. P, =14250,264(600 x 2504) x 100 9485 2.05 087f (o1-Pesim) Fa OMT Fee 0.8969 P. > Pe (hence beam is under reinforced) O.K. 2, Side face reinforcement Side face reinforcement has to be provided because depth of | the beam is more than 750 man, ‘Minimum area = 0.001 x 600 x 2700 1620 mm? Ata spacing not exceeding 300mm. Provide 8 nos. of 12) bar at each face at equal spaces. of shear reinforcement. Shear at critical section V=05x3.7x 12.07 x25% 0.6 +1085 kN 1419.94 kN) Vy= 1SV= 2129.94 kN My= 1.5 (33494 x 2) + (1085 x11.73)) 2122.61 kNm. au wan = 22 = at (= ane of op Karlene ia = 0588 Ninn? og 3078132 ba foo. 2508 = 205 From table 19 ofS 456:2000, = 0896 Ninn? surftee with the horizontal ) 1 x 100 1. > t,Hence section is safe in shear, and minimum shear reinforcement should be provided, Minimum reinforcement should be provided as per the following formula. ‘Aq = total cross sectional area od stirrups effective in shear. Stirrup spacing along the length ofthe member. eadth of the beam (= 600 mm) Characteristic strength of stirup reinforcement in (415 Ninn) = 236.31 mm. Give shear reinforcement at 230 m cl. 4. Development length Grade of Conerete = M25 Grade of steet ell S The development length Ly is given by iy ea Where, = nominal diameter ofthe bat ‘0, Stress in bar a the section considered at design load = 0876), and Design bond stress ( 4 for M25) For 36mm dia. bar, La For 22mm dia. bar Ly 5, Deflection ‘The total deflection shall be taken as the sum of short-term deflection and the long term deflection, Short term deflection We have b=600mm — D=2700mm. fy =25MPa 15 MPa W=1085kN-—_'1= 12830 mm. M-= 15821330000 Nim, 2 2 Ty =" = 9.84155 x10" fy 3.5 Nim 1 foe 5000. Nim? Let x be the depth of neural axis, then taking moment of transformed section about N.A. We get, x= 980.48 mm. at FE (m= DAs a’) + mAd— xy? 8.355 x 10" ma op= 7.49 x 10" Sines, LaLa hence Ly= 8.385 x 10" mt we Saw Sehgy, 3656 mm ‘due to shrinkage Provide 2-legged 10mm dia. Bars. P.=205, P.=0.95 ‘Aq = 157.08 mm’ Punting the values we get Putting the values in above formula we get a= 306 mm USER © 2018 tpt.