CHAPTER – III

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 INTRODUCTION:

Raft foundation and Pile foundation are conventional foundation system for which the
foundation behavior is well understood and defined. Piled-Raft foundation system is
combination of former two foundation systems in which the super structure loads are
taken care by both raft and pile. Extensive research activities are going on to study the
piled-raft foundation behavior. From the literature, the research activities are showing
that the pile raft foundation increases the ultimate load carrying capacity and reducing
settlement on sand and clay soils in homogeneous layer with different densities and
consistency. Hence, the present study focused on the Piled-raft behavior on clayey
strata, for variables L/D, S/D and H1/B, where L= length of pile; D = Dia of pile, S =
Spacing of pile and H1 is the thickness of top stiff clay layer. The study carried for two
pile group as well four pile group. The main objective of this investigation is to study
the ultimate load carrying capacity and settlement behavior of piled raft foundation for
L/D =10,40 and S/D=5,10,15 and H1/B = 0,0.3,0.6 having Ic=0.5 ,0.8.

3.2 MATERIALS USED:

3.2.1 Soil Used:
The soils used in the present investigation are obtained from Kotala near Chandragiri.
The Liquid Limit of the soil is 56.0% respectively. Hence the soil is chosen to conduct
tests for two different consistency as 0.5 and 0.8 in order to study the capacity and
settlement behavior o piled raft system. The area is largely covered by expansive
clayey soils.
The required amount of soil is collected from trial pit at a depth of 2m below the
ground level, since the top soil is likely to contain organic matter and other foreign
materials. Sufficient care has been exercised to see that the collected soil sample is
fairly homogeneous. The soil which is obtained is kept for air dried, crushed with
wooden mallet, passed through 4.75mm sieve, kept in polythene bags and stored in
steel drums for further testing. The ‘Kotala soil’ is classified as ‘CH’ as per I.S.
Classification (IS: 1498-1970) indicating that it is inorganic clay of high plasticity.
Its degree of expansiveness is high based on Liquid Limit, Plasticity Index and Free
Swell Index (FSI).

Fig 3.1 soil collection from trail pit

Table 3.1 Properties of the Soil Tested

Sl.No Properties Kotala sample

1 Gravel (%) 0.24

2 Sand (%) 2.02
3 Sand (%)-425μ passing 1.05
4 Silt + Clay (%)(-75μ) 97.74
5 Liquid Limit (%) 56
6 Plastic Limit(%) 23.85
7 Plasticity Index(%) 39.93
8 Free Swell Index(%) 90
9 Cohesion(CUCC) in kN/m2 for IC =0.5 2.15
10 Cohesion(CUCC) in kN/m2 for IC =0.8 7.56
10 I.S. classification CH
3.2.2Model Raft Used:
A rigid M.S plate of size 180mm X 180mm and thickness 10 mm considered as pile cap
material to simulate the rigid raft. A 7 numbers of square raft with different pile
spacing of 0mm, 50mm,100mm and 150 mm is used as pile cap.

3.2.3Model Pile Used:

Circular piles are simulated with the MS steel rods of 10mm diameter having lengths
100mm and 400mm in 4 numbers are used for tests.

3.2.4 Model Test Tank Used:

Cylindrical steel model test tank with diameter of 600mm and 150mm height is used
for preparation of test bed.
3.2.5Load Frame Used:
A hollow square steel frame having 4 columns , base to keep tank and top 6 beams out
of 4 connecting columns to be rigid and for the 2 beams a screw jack is fixed to apply
the load on the test tank through detachable proving ring of capacity 500 kg with least
count of 1kg . And 4 magnetic dial gauges is fixed to the frame with least count of
0.01mm in order to read the settlement behavior of piled raft foundation.

3.3 METHODS OF ADOPTED:

3.3.1: Size of The Piled Raft:
The laboratory experiments were carried out as 2 and 4 piled raft foundation having
180mmX180mm raft and 100mm to 400 mm length and 10 mm diameter piles for
three different spacing as 50mm,100mm and 150mm in homogenous and two layered
soil bed of H1/B=0.3 and 0.6 for consistency of 0.5 and 0.8.

3.3.2: Method of Test Bed Preparation:

A known amount of air dried and pulverised soil passing through 4.75mm is mixed
thoroughly with enough quantity of water so as to get homogenizes paste of desired
consistency having IC= 0.5 and 0.80. In the first instance, the soil thus prepared was
used in packing layers to form the clay bed through hand compaction in order to get as
the natural bed formation, in the model test tank. Test beds were prepared for Ic =0.5
and 0.8 for H1/B=0 as homogeneous bed , H1/B=0.3 and 0.8 as layered soils having
stiff soil over soft soil in order to study the effect of L/D=10 ,40 and effect of
S/D =5,10,15 and to study the effect of settlement and load carrying capacity of piled
raft foundation.

3.3.3 Method of Installation of pile raft foundation:

The piles were screwed to the raft. Now the piled raft foundation is slowly driven in to
the bed upto half depth of the foundation and the remaining depth of the soil is filled
with hand compaction upto raft. And then allowing piled raft foundation for one day
curing in order to get same consistency.
3.4 DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTS:
3.4.1 Strategy of Experimentation:
The general approach to planning and conducting the experiments is called the strategy
of experimentation. There are several experimental strategies like the best-guess
approach, one-factor-at-a-time approach and factorial experimentation. The strategy of
experimentation which is extensively used in practice is the one-factor-at-a-time
approach. This method consists of selecting a base line level for each factor, then
successively varying each factor over its range with other factors held constant at the
base line level. Though it is very useful in understanding the influence of any one factor
on response of interest, its use is limited in analyzing the joint effect of factors on the
response of interest. Factorial experimental design concept is very important in
experiments involving several factors where it is necessary to study the joint effect of
the factors on a response of interest. This strategy of experimentation also enables the
investigator to quantify the relative effect of main factors and their interaction on
response of interest. The details of the method can be found in any standard text-book
on Design and Analysis of Experiments such as the one by Montgomery (2005).
Factorial experimentation involving three factors are adopted in this investigation
which is known as 23 factorial experimentation.

3.4.2 23 Factorial Experimentation:

Suppose that three factors, A, B, and C each at two levels, are of interest. The design is
called a 23 factorial design and the eight treatment combinations can now be displayed
geometrically as a cube, as shown in Fig. 3.1 using the “+ and -” notation to represent
the high and low levels of the factor. Conventionally the eight possible treatment
combinations are denoted in standard order as (1), a, b, ab, c, ac, bc, and abc. These
symbols also represent the total of all n observations taken at that particular treatment
combination. There are degrees of freedom between the eight treatment combinations
in the 23 design. Three degrees of freedom are associated with the main effects of A, B
and C. Four degrees of freedom are associated with interactions; one each with AB, AC
and BC and one with ABC. S/D of piled raft foundation denoted by factor A, number
of piles(N) denoted by factor B and L/D denoted by factor C are the three factors
considered in this investigation. The two levels choose for S/D (Factor A) is (5,15).
Similarly the low & high levels for N (Factor B) and L/D (Factor C) are (2, 4) and (10,
40) respectively. Load tests are conducted on piled raft foundation for 3 models as
H1/B=0,0.3 and 0.6 for two different consistencies Ic=0.5 and 0.8 for 2 3 factorial
designs. Test considerations for 23 factorial designs presented in Table 3.1.

L/D

c ac

bc abc
FACTOR C (10 ,40)

1 S/D
a
,4 )
(2
B
b
OR

ab
CT
FA

FACTOR A (5,15)
N

Fig 3.2 Model for 23 factorial design

Table 3.2 23 Factorial design test combinations and label of experiments

LABEL S/D N L/D
1 5 2 10
a 15 2 10
c 5 2 40
ac 15 2 40
b 5 4 10
ab 15 4 10
bc 5 4 40
 abc 15 4 40

3.4.3 Tests Conducted:

Based on three factors i.e., S/D,L/D and No.of Piles(N) the following tests were
conducted.

TYPE OF
EXP.NO. TYPE OF SOIL L/D S/D H1/B
FOUNDATION
1 IC=0.5 RAFT - - 0
2 IC=0.5 RAFT+2 PILE 10 5 0
3 IC=0.5 RAFT+2 PILE 10 10 0
4 IC=0.5 RAFT+2 PILE 10 15 0
5 IC=0.5 RAFT+2 PILE 40 5 0
6 IC=0.5 RAFT+2 PILE 40 10 0
7 IC=0.5 RAFT+2 PILE 40 15 0
8 IC=0.5 RAFT+4 PILE 10 5 0
9 IC=0.5 RAFT+4 PILE 10 10 0
10 IC=0.5 RAFT+4 PILE 10 15 0
11 IC=0.5 RAFT+4 PILE 40 5 0
12 IC=0.5 RAFT+4 PILE 40 10 0
13 IC=0.5 RAFT+4 PILE 40 15 0
14 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 10 5 0.3
15 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 10 10 0.3
16 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 10 15 0.3
17 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 40 5 0.3
18 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 40 10 0.3
19 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 40 15 0.3
20 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 10 5 0.3
21 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 10 10 0.3
22 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 10 15 0.3
23 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 40 5 0.3
24 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 40 10 0.3
25 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 40 15 0.3
26 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 10 5 0.6
27 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 10 10 0.6
28 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 10 15 0.6
29 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 40 5 0.6
30 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 40 10 0.6
31 stiff over soft RAFT+2 PILE 40 15 0.6
 TYPE OF
EXP.NO. TYPE OF SOIL L/D S/D H1/B
FOUNDATION
32 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 10 5 0.6
33 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 10 10 0.6
34 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 10 15 0.6
35 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 40 5 0.6
36 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 40 10 0.6
37 stiff over soft RAFT+4 PILE 40 15 0.6
38 IC=0.5 PILE 10 - 0
39 IC=0.5 PILE 40 - 0
40 stiff over soft PILE 10 - 0.3
41 stiff over soft PILE 40 - 0.3
42 stiff over soft PILE 10 - 0.6
43 stiff over soft PILE 40 - 0.6
44 IC=0.8 PILE 10 - 0
45 IC=0.8 PILE 40 - 0
46 IC=0.8 RAFT - - 0

3.5TEST PROCEDURES:
3.5.1Liquid Limit:
The Liquid Limit of samples are obtained by conducting Liquid Limit test
according to the standard procedure laid in IS: 2720 (Part 5)–1985. The Liquid Limit
tests have been conducted using Casagrande’s apparatus. Air-dried soil samples have
been used for this test. The soil fraction passing the 425 micron sieve is taken and
thoroughly mixed with distilled water till a uniform paste is formed. A groove is made
by using a grooving tool that completely separates the soil pat into two parts. Counting
the number of blows until the two parts of the sample come in contact at the bottom of
the groove over a distance of 13mm (≈1/2”). A sample of about 25g is collected from
the closed part of the groove for determination of water content. The test is repeated at
least 5 times with increasing moisture contents. A plot is drawn between number of
blows (Log scale) and water content (natural scale). The water content corresponding to
25 blows is read from the plot and is reported as the Liquid Limit of the soil.

3.5.2 Plastic Limit:

The Plastic Limit of samples are obtained by conducting Plastic Limit test
according to the standard procedure laid in IS: 2720 (Part 5)–1985. Air-dried soil
samples have been used for this test. The soil fraction passing the 425μ sieve is taken
for the test. About 30g of soil is taken in an evaporating dish and thoroughly mixed
with distilled water till it becomes plastic and it becomes easily moulded with fingers.
About 10g of the plastic soil mass is taken in one hand and a ball is formed. The ball is
rolled with fingers on a glass plate to form a soil thread of uniform diameter of about
3mm approximately without crumbling. The rate of rolling is kept about 80 to 90
strokes/min. The test is repeated taking a fresh sample each time. The plastic limit is
taken as the average of three values.

3.5.3 Plasticity Index (IP):

Plasticity Index is the range of water content over which the soil remains in the
plastic state. It is equal to difference between the liquid and the plastic limit. Thus
Plasticity Index (IP) = Liquid Limit (WL) – Plastic Limit (WP) -------------------- (3.1)

3.5.4 Free Swell Index Test:

The free swell index tests have been conducted as per the I.S. code of practice
(I.S. 2720 (Part 40)-1987). The test was performed by pouring 10cc of dry soil passing
425μ sieve slowly into a graduated cylindrical jar of 100 cc capacity, filled with water,
and observing the equilibrium swelled volumes. The free swell is expressed as a
percentage increase in the volume to the initial volume of the soil.
The free swell index (FSI) expressed as a percentage is given by

FINAL VOLUME−INITIAL VOLUME

FSI = X 100 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …
INITIALVOLUME

Soils with a free swell of 100% or more were graded as those that would cause damage
to light structures while soils with a free swell value of less than 50% were classified as
those that exhibit only small volume changes. However, the free swell values as low as
100% may undergo considerable volume changes when wetted under light loads and
therefore, be viewed with caution. The free swell test alone does not fully sufficient to
predict the swell potential. It should therefore be supplemented by other tests.
3.5.5 Grain Size Distribution:
Grain size distribution is obtained by conducting mechanical sieve analysis on
+75 micron fraction. Sieve analysis was carried out as per practice (I.S. 2720, Part IV –
1965).

3.5.6 Load Test on piled raft foundation:

Load test was conducted on piled raft foundation for various L/D ratios on loading
frame as a strain-controlled test. The size of the steel plate of adequate thickness and
rigidity may be based on the effective tributary soil area of the raft and supported on 2
or 4 piles with different S/D such as 5,10 and 15. The loading arrangement is shown
in Fig 3.3

1.Screw Jack
2.Proving Ring
2 3. 4No’s of Dail Gauge with magnetic base
4.Piled Raft Foundation
5.Soil bed
6.Loading Frame
3

Fig 3.3 experimental setup model for piled raft foundation

The model test tank is placed on the bottom of the loading frame and then the load is
applied slowly at the rate of 1kg/min with the screw jack through proving ring capacity
of 500kgs. The 4 no.of dial gauges and proving ring readings are set to zero. The
compressive load is applied to the specimen mechanically by rotating the handle of the
screw jack in clockwise direction. The loading is continued until the shear failure of
piled raft foundation is taken. The load is determined from the proving ring reading and
the settlement is determined from the dial gauge reading.
3.6 Failure on Piled raft foundation:
A simplified method of obtaining the load settlement curve to failure for a piled raft
foundation or pile foundation has been described by Davis and Poulos (1972b) and I
similar in principle to the methods suggested by Whitaker and Cooke (1966) and
Burland et al (1966). The overall load –settlement curve is obtained as combination of
the relationships between shaft load and settlement, base load and settlement, which are
assumed to be linear up to failure of the shaft and the base, respectively. The failure
point on the load settlement curve at the point of immediate settlements taken in the
foundation. As the foundation starts shearing due to applied load, then the failure of
the foundation starts and stops when the curve is asymptotic to the y-axis. Typical
failure of the load settlement curves are shown in fig 3.4

Load in kg
Pu

Load at failure point A &B

Settlement in mm

Fig 3.4 Load-Settlement failure curves