Lessons Learned From Foundation Failure by Prof. Wong

20 Oct 2019
What constitutes foundation failure?

Catastrophic Collapse Excessive settlement
Ultimate Limit State (ULS) Serviceability Limit State (SLS)
Uniform settlement
(may be acceptable)
Excessive Tilting Excessive Distortion

(not acceptable) (not acceptable)
20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 1
Case Study 1
Failure of a Grain Elevator
Fargo, North Dakota
Foundation Failure (WKS) 1

20 Oct 2019
Case 1 -- Failure of Fargo Grain Elevator, Fargo, North Dakota
▪ Soil condition not known 12 June 1955

▪ Hard yellow clay at surface
▪ Owner decided to conduct a PLT
▪ Settlement < 10mm at 2xWL
~23m
qTEST = 2qDESIGN
qDESIGN
June 12, 1955

20 Oct 2019
qTEST = 2qDESIGN
qDESIGN
B1
B2 B2 Foundation
pressure
cu
Case 1
Failure of
Fargo Grain Elevator
After G.P. Tschebotarioff (1973)

20 October 2019

20 Oct 2019
Plate Load Test
What do we get from PLT?

Settlement
Pressure (kPa)
1. Bearing capacity or average 0
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000
shear strength (cu or ф) 1

2
Settlement (mm)
2. Settlement or subgrade 4
5
modulus 6
1st cycle
7
8 2nd cycle
9 3rd cycle
Bearing Capacity 10
Pressure (kPa) Pressure (kPa)

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500
0 0
5 1
10 2
Settlement (mm)
Settlement (mm)
15 3
20 4
25 5
30 6
35 7 1st Cycle
8 2nd Cycle
40
9 3rd Cycle
45
50 10
8
20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS)

20 Oct 2019
Limitations and Range of Application of Plate Load Test

P
Bearing Capacity or Soil Strength B1

• It is testing soil within depth of
B1 below plate.
B
Settlement or Subgrade Modulus

• It is testing soil within depth of 2B
z/Ro
2B1 below plate.
20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) r/Ro 9
What do we learn from this case study?
1. Need proper site investigation!

2. Design by intuition can be dangerous!
3. Engage a geotechnical engineer to do the
foundation design!
4. Plate load test has very limited applications!
10

20 Oct 2019
Case Study 2
Building damage due to Earthquake
11
Earthquake generates
ground movements
and shaking
12

20 Oct 2019
Earthquake Shock
Absorbers
13
14

20 Oct 2019
Soil Liquefaction
Before
earthquake
After
earthquake
15
15
16

20 Oct 2019

1. We are lucky to be living in Singapore!
The risk of building damage due to
earthquake is very low in Singapore.
17
Case Study 3
Building on Timber Piles
18

20 Oct 2019
Examples of Building Collapse due to Failure of Timber Pile
Untreated timber piles
19
Attack of Timber Pile by Marine Borer
5 months after attack
20

20 Oct 2019
Attack by marine borer after 6 months
Treated timber piles after 20 years

21

1. If timber pile is used, it should be chemically
treated against marine borers.
22

20 Oct 2019
Case Study 4
Uniform Settlement & Ground Settlement
Utility
Connection
23
Damage due to
Ground Settlement
Do you remember this place?
Fire broke out twice in this

Gas Line area. The tenants sued the
utility company for gas leak
due to improper installation.
Who should be responsible

for the gas leak?
24

20 Oct 2019
Ground Settlement at
Marina Barrage
Officially opened: 30.10.2008
25
Damages due to Ground Settlement
26

20 Oct 2019
A case study on excessive

building settlement
• In 1972, a supermarket was built in Gretra,
New Orleans.
• The building was supported on pile.
• 1.83m of sand fill was placed before piling
• Columns were supported on long piles,
L=21.3m, WL=142 kN
• Slabs were supported on short piles,
L=12.2m, WL=62 kN
27
Slab Column
Column pile:
FS= 400/142 = 2.82
Slab piles:
FS= 170/62 = 2.74
28

20 Oct 2019
29
Condition of building in 1983

• Entire floor slab were cracked
• Five step cracks in exterior wall
• Separation of internal walls at 5
locations
• Overhead crane derailed
• Ceilings were stained
• Most doors misaligned
• Gutters had to be shortened
several times
Building closed to public in 1987
Owner won the law suit in 1991
Owner compensated for the cost of
building plus interest in 1993.
30

20 Oct 2019

1. Beware of the consequence of adopting slab-on-
grade in settling ground.
2. Floating piles may experience large settlement
in settling ground. Negative skin friction must be
taken into consideration in the design.
31
Case Study 5
Total and Differential Settlement
32

20 Oct 2019
33
Adding a new patio or an extension?
New
extension?
New
patio?
34

20 Oct 2019
Transpiration from trees

can withdraw water
from the ground causing
the soil to shrink and the
house to settle.
After Kemp & Wylie, 2008
35
Ground Movements due to Tree Roots
After Kemp & Wylie, 2008
36

20 Oct 2019

1. New addition or extension can induce excessive
differential settlement to the existing building.
2. Beware of building damage due to tree roots
and transpiration.
37
Tilting of building
This is a very challenging issue in foundation
design for high-rise building.
38

20 Oct 2019
What is the allowable tilt?

• Tilting of smokestacks and tall buildings
become visible at about ω=0.23o (or 1/250).
• When ω>0.29o (or 1/200) at home, tilting
become noticeable by the residents.
• When ω>0.57o (or 1/100) at home, people
begins to experience headache and dizziness.
Leaning Buildings in Mexico City

39
Guadalupe National Shrine

The Leaning Buildings in
Mexico City
40

20 Oct 2019
The National Theatre settled nearly 2m since 1909.
41
Settlement Problems in Mexico City
Volcanic Clay
w ≈ 200% to 500%
e as high as 15
VOID VVOID = 15
VSOLID = 1
➢ City has sunk more than 10m in last 60 years

➢ Continued to settle as high as 1 m/year
➢ Between 1900 & 1957, some buildings settled ~8m.
➢ Disastrous breakage of sewer system and pipe lines
➢ Cracked pavements and undulating streets
➢ Some buildings created a basement with time.
42

20 Oct 2019
The Leaning Houses of Amsterdam
43
The Leaning Houses of Amsterdam
44
44

20 Oct 2019
Plaza de Castilla, Madrid, Spain

Capital Gate Building in Abu Dhabi
Tilt = 15o
Tilt = 18o
45
Case Study 6
The Leaning Tower of Pisa
46

20 Oct 2019
Leaning Tower of Pisa ~5.6m
ω≈
6o
~1.5m
~3m
47
Bell
48

20 Oct 2019
L
C 144.5 MN
e ≈ 2.3m
49
Latest from CNN

22 November 2018
• Tilted back 40mm from

~4000 mm at top
• Back to around 1800’s
• Good for another 200

years!
50

20 Oct 2019
Leaning Tower of Pisa loses some of its tilt

CNN • Published 22nd November 2018
(CNN) — The Leaning Tower of Pisa has slowly started defying its name, losing
four centimeters of its tilt over the past 17 years.
The movement, roughly 1.5 inches, comes after extensive consolidation work
done between 1993 and 2001, which was required to reverse its slump and
keep the tower upright.
It means the building in Tuscany, which attracts thousands of tourists every
day, is back to the tilt it had at the beginning of the 19th century, according to
professor Salvatore Settis, who leads the surveillance group of the monument.
"The reduction of the tilt will not last forever -- but it's very significant and now
we have good reasons to hope that the tower can last for at least another 200
years," Settis told CNN.
When corrective work began on the tower it was leaning six degrees, or 13
feet, off the perpendicular on its south side. Soil was removed on the opposite
side in order to reverse its trajectory.
51
上海护珠塔（A.D. 1079）
(~6o)
Built 1450
Built mid-1200s
Tilted 6.52o degrees in 1982.
Currently tilted further to 7.10o.
The leaning is most likely caused

by the tower being built on two
different surfaces, with one side
on the mountain's bedrock and
the other on stone ballast.
52
52

20 Oct 2019

1. Excessive tilting can produce an iconic building
and a tourist attraction. Is it blessing in disguise?
Don’t try to create one in

your next building project!
53
Case Study 7
Leaning Tower of
South Padre Island, Texas
54

20 Oct 2019
Leaning Tower of South

Padre Island, Texas
The 31 storey skyscraper with magnificent
views over the ocean is located on a
narrow strip of sand just close to the
Mexican border.
Construction was halted in May 2008 when
cracks were found in the supporting
columns, and investigations revealed that
the core of the skyscraper had sunk by
more than 14 inches (360 mm).
The developer sought a $125 million

settlement with the geotechnical and
the structural engineering firms.
55
The 376-foot unfinished skyscraper was brought down with a controlled

implosion on December 13, 2009.
56

20 Oct 2019
Case Study 8
The Leaning Tower of Singapore
57
The Samsung HUB, 3 Church Street, Singapore
Chinese
Newspaper
January 2003
On August 2002, a tilt was detected. The building sank

3 mm to 39 mm to one side between August and November
2002. After discovering the tilt, Samsung immediately
initiated rectification efforts. Micropiles were installed to
correct the tilt. It took 2 years to complete the rectification
work in 2005.

58
58

20 Oct 2019

The Samsung HUB
• 30 storey (H=172m)
• Completed in August 2002
• Contract amount = $320 million
Building Performance
• Excessive settlement and tilt
• Unable to fit curtain wall
• Lift shaft not straight (“banana” shape)
Causes
1. Inadequate site investigation
2. Misinterpretation of soil/rock conditions
3. Over-estimated skin friction & end bearing
4. Piles too short
59
Chinese
Newspaper
January 2003
The QP faced two charges:

(1) for permitting the piling works to be carried out by the Contractor which deviated
from the piling plan in which 66 out of the 73 bored piles had failed to penetrate at
least 5 m into the hard stratum as required in the approved piling plan; and
(2) for falsely certifying to the BCA after the completion of the piling works that these
were carried out in accordance with the approved depths set out in the approved
piling plan and calculations.
The Contractor faced a single charge of carrying out the piling works which deviated in a
material way from the piling plan approved by the BCA.
60

20 Oct 2019
Inadequate site investigation

# of borehole (tender)
with shallow penetration = 5
# of additional borehole
(rectification work) = 29
Misinterpretation of soil/rock conditions

Design assumption: Jurong formation
Actual soil condition: Fort Canning Boulder Bed
61
Design Skin Friction & End Bearing by QPD

• cu = 6N
• fs = 2N = 400 kPa (assumed N=200)
• fb = 9cu = 54N ≈ 12,000 kPa (assumed N=220)
Accepted Skin Friction & End Bearing by Tribunal

• cu = 5N (common practice)
• fs = 2N ≤ 150 kPa (CP4)
• fb = Nc cu ≤ 10,000 kPa (CP4) → Nc = 5 (Broms)
Design Penetration according to Approved Plan

• At least 5m into hard stratum where N≥100 (?)
As-Built Penetration
• 66 out of the 73 piles failed to penetrate at
least 5 m into the hard stratum
62

20 Oct 2019

Rectification Works
• 29 additional boreholes
• 82 pre-bored H-pile
• 80 press-in H-piles
• 4 static load tests + 9 PDA
• Curtain wall → demolished and rebuilt
• Completed in January 2006
Outcome
• QPD to pay $88 million
• Contractor to pay for:
✓ Remedial works
✓ Compensation ($30m) for diminution in
building value
✓ Liquidation damage of $15.7 million
✓ Lease 25% of floor space for 10 years
63

1. Don’t skim on site investigation.
2. Study the soil and rock conditions carefully.
3. Make sure the assumptions adopted and the
method of analysis used can be justified.
4. Are all “P” clauses in EC7 covered?
5. Always keep in mind your fees on this project
and the risk you are taking!
Foundation design of high-rise

building is not for the faint hearted!
64

20 Oct 2019
The “P” Clauses in EC7
65
Case Study 9
Most Common Mode of
Foundation Failure in Singapore
Stockpile
Bearing failure of foundation soil
66

20 Oct 2019
Case 9c -- Soil Movements due Stockpiling
67
Soil Movements due Stockpiling of Excavated Soils
68

20 Oct 2019
Pile Movements due Stockpiling of Excavated Soils
69
Soil Movement & Factor of Safety
70

20 Oct 2019
Case 9d – Improper Stockpiling can be Catastrophic!
71

1. Don’t under-estimate the importance of stockpiling
of soil, dirt or anything on empty ground.
2. Need to:
i. conduct a site investigation;
ii. study the soil conditions;
iii. analyse the bearing stability; and
iv. assess the effect on adjacent structures and
underground utilities.
72

20 Oct 2019
How can we ensure the building is safe against

catastrophic failure and excessive settlement?
1. Conduct a comprehensive
site investigation by a
reliable S.I. contractor.
2. Engage a reputable consultant

to do the design.
3. Engage a reputable contractor

to construct the building.
73
Engaging a reputable contractor?
74

20 Oct 2019
Thank you for

your attention!
75

Lessons Learned From Foundation Failure by Prof. Wong

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lessons Learned From Foundation Failure by Prof. Wong

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

20 Oct 2019

What constitutes foundation failure?

Excessive Tilting Excessive Distortion

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 2

Foundation Failure (WKS) 1

Case 1 -- Failure of Fargo Grain Elevator, Fargo, North Dakota

▪ Soil condition not known 12 June 1955

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 3

Case 1 -- Failure of Fargo Grain Elevator, Fargo, North Dakota

June 12, 1955

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 4

Foundation Failure (WKS) 2

Case 1 -- Failure of Fargo Grain Elevator, Fargo, North Dakota

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 5

After G.P. Tschebotarioff (1973)

Foundation Failure (WKS) 3

Plate Load Test

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 7

What do we get from PLT?

shear strength (cu or ф) 1

Pressure (kPa) Pressure (kPa)

Foundation Failure (WKS) 4

Limitations and Range of Application of Plate Load Test

Bearing Capacity or Soil Strength B1

Settlement or Subgrade Modulus

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) r/Ro 9

What do we learn from this case study?

1. Need proper site investigation!

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 10

Foundation Failure (WKS) 5

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 11

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 12

Foundation Failure (WKS) 6

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 13

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 14

Foundation Failure (WKS) 7

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 16

Foundation Failure (WKS) 8

What do we learn from this case study?

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 17

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 18

Foundation Failure (WKS) 9

Examples of Building Collapse due to Failure of Timber Pile

Untreated timber piles

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 19

Attack of Timber Pile by Marine Borer

5 months after attack

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 20

Foundation Failure (WKS) 10

Attack by marine borer after 6 months

Treated timber piles after 20 years

What do we learn from this case study?

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 22

Foundation Failure (WKS) 11

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 23

Do you remember this place?

Fire broke out twice in this

Who should be responsible

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 24

Foundation Failure (WKS) 12

Officially opened: 30.10.2008

20 October 2019 Foundation Failure (WKS) 25

Damages due to Ground Settlement

上海护珠塔（A.D. 1079）