Geotechnical Design of Foundations:: Provisions in BNBC 2020

S. K.
Ghosh Associates LLC

International Code Council (ICC)
Geotechnical Design of
Foundations:
Provisions in BNBC 2020
Date: 01 June 2021
Professor Md. Zoynul Abedin, Ph.D.

Military Institute of Science & Technology (MIST)
Dhaka, Bangladesh
URP S-09 Training Module
S7: Soils and Foundations 1
1
Geotechnical Design of Foundations:

Provisions in BNBC 2020
PART : 6 (in Volume 2 of BNBC 2020)

Structural Design
(PART: 6 Title should have been
Structural and Geotechnical Designs)
Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations
www.skghoshassociates.com
1
S. K. Ghosh Associates LLC

Organization of this Chapter (with Appendices)
The Soils and Foundations Chapter of the Code is divided

into 3 major Divisions (A, B & C) consisting of 22
Sections. In addition, there are 5 Appendices (D, E, F, G
& H) related to this Chapter.
A. Definitions, Site Investigations, Soil Classifications,
Materials and Foundation Types
B. Service Load Design Method of Foundations
C. Additional Considerations in Planning, Design and
Construction of Building Foundations
3

Organization of this Chapter (with Appendices)
Appendix D: Methods of Soil Exploration, Sampling and

Groundwater Measurements
Appendix E: Recommended Criteria for Identification and
Classification of Expansive Soil
Appendix F: Construction of Pile Foundation
Appendix G: Other Methods of Estimating Ultimate Axial
Capacity of Piles and Drilled Shafts, and
Design Charts for Settlement
Appendix H: References of Chapter 3 Part 6 (Soils and
Foundations)
4
2

Scope of the Chapter
The provisions of this Chapter shall be applicable to the design

and construction of foundations of buildings and structures for
the safe support of dead and superimposed loads without
exceeding the allowable bearing stresses, permissible settlements
and design capability.
Because of uncertainties and randomness involved in sub-soil

characteristics, Geotechnical Engineering requires a high degree
of engineering judgment. As such the Code provisions of this
Chapter provided here under, are kept elaborative for better
understanding of the readers. Provisions that are stated in
imperative form using “shall” are mandatory. Other provisions of
this Chapter should be followed using sound Geotechnical
Engineering judgment. 5

Lecture Proceedings
The present lecture scheme is arranged in the following order.

Some Basics of Soil Mechanics (a subset of broad subject
Geotechnical Engineering) that may cover some of the aspects of
Code provisions of this Chapter, as well.
Selected Code Provisions for Division A: Site Investigations, Soil
Classifications and Pile Foundation.
Selected Code Provisions for Division B: Service Load Design
Method of Foundations.
Selected Code Provisions for Division C: Additional Considerations
in Planning, Design and Construction of Building Foundations
Appendices
However, even though the details are omitted in many instances, the
Section Titles are intentionally mentioned in order to be familiar with
the Code Provisions or Items that are included in this Chapter.
6
3

Some Basics of Soil Mechanics
Definition of Soil
Soil is considered to include all naturally occurring loose or soft deposit

overlying soil bedrock. It is formed by disintegration and decomposition
of rocks (weathering). It can also be formed by decomposition of organic
matter. The definitions of other professionals along with the Geotechnical
Engineers using soil are illustrated below.
Soil Top soil

Regolith or Mantle
or soil
Soil
Saprolite
Rock
Bed rock Bed rock
(a) Geologist (b) Agriculturist (c) Geotechnical

Engineer 7

Weathering of Rocks & Formation of Inorganic Soil
Weathering
Physical/Mechanical Biological
Chemical
Periodical Solution Plant Animal

Carbonation
temperature changes
Hydration Dehydration
Wedging action of ice
Oxidation Reduction
Splitting action of
plant roots
Hydrolysis Leaching action
Abrasion action of
wind water 8
4

The types and intensity

of weathering
processes, particularly
physical and chemical,
depend on the climatic
conditions of the area
mainly on precipitation
and temperature.

Earth Mass: Consists of 3 Major Layers

Crust Mantle Core
Rock: Three (3) Types of Rock Formed of Several Minerals

Igneous: Sedimentary: Metamorphic
95% of Earth Crust Volume 80% of Surface Area
Minerals
More than 4000 Minerals Rock Forming Minerals = 8
Elements
Basic Elements = 118 98% of Earth Crust is Made of 8
Elements
10
5

11

Common Rock Forming Minerals
Mineral Group Species Structural Class Composition

Quartz Quartz Tektosilicate SiO2
Orthoclase (K, Na)AlSi3O8
Feldspar Tektosilicate
Plagioclase NaAlSi3O8 - CaAlSi2O8
Muscovite KAl2(AlSi3O10) - (OH)2
Mica Phyllosilicate
Biotite K2(MgFe)6(SiAl)8O20(OH)4
Amphibole Hornblende Inosilicate (NaCa)2(MgFeAl)5(SiAl)8O22 (OH)2
Pyroxene Augite Inosilicate Ca(MgFeAl)(AlSi)2O6
Olivine Olivine Neosilicate (MgFe)2SiO4
Kaolinite Al4Si4O10(OH)8
Clays Illite Phyllosilicate KAl2(AlSi3)O10(OH)2
Montmorillonite Al2Si4O10(OH)2nH2O
Calcite CaCo3
Carbonates --
Dolomite CaMg(CO3)2
12
6

Elements of Earth and Rock Forming Minerals
13

Clay Minerals
(a) Silica Tetrahedron unit

(b) Silica Sheet
(c) Alumina octahedron unit
(d) Octahedral (gibbsite) sheet
(e) Elemental silica-gibbsite sheet 14
7

Clay Minerals
The basic structural units clay minerals can be

summarized as follows.
1 Silica ion + 4 Oxygen ion = Tetrahedron unit
Tetrahedron unit + Tetrahedron unit = Silica sheet
1 (Al or Mg) ion + 6 Hydroxyl ion = Octahedron unit
Al octahedron unit + Al octahedron unit = Gibbsite sheet
Mg octahedron unit + Mg octahedron unit = Brucite sheet
These sheets will combine in different layers and
arrangements to form a clay particle. As such, clay
minerals are usually known as layered minerals.
15

Scanning Electron Micrograph of Clay Minerals
Kaolinite Illite Montmorillonite

16
8

Classification of Soil
Depending on origin or depositional mode, soil can

be broadly classified in to two groups:
Inorganic Soil Both coarse grained and fine
grained particles physical weathering forms
coarse grained soil and chemical weathering
forms fine grained soil.
Organic Soil usually fine grained and remains
mixed with inorganic fine grained soil having
various proportions.
17

Classification based on
Origin/ Deposition
Classification based on Grain

Soil Type/ Size
Classification
Schemes Classification based on
Cohesive Properties
(Cohesion Parameter)
Classification based on Use:

Engineering Classification
18
9

OC: d 5%
(Behaviour like inorganic soil
Organic
Soil OC: 6 – 20%
Deposit Organic silt or Organic clay
OC: 21 – 74%
Soil Deposit Silty or Clayey Organic soil
OC: t 75%; Peat soil;
-- High natural moisture content
(up to 1500%).
Inorganic or -- High compressibility .
Mineral Soil -- Low strength in natural
Deposit conditions.
19

InorganicSoilDeposit
Residual Transported
(StaysonParentRock)
Water Glacier Wind Gravity

Laterite (Aeolian) (Colluvial)
(CoarseGrained)
Alluvial Drift
Loess(Silty) Talus
(RunningWater)
Lateritic
Till
(FineGrained)
Lacustrine Dune(Sandy)
(StillWater) Moraine
BlackCotton Tuff/Tufa
Boulder
(Expansive) Marine Clay (VolcanicAsh)
(SalineWater)
Erratics
Marl
(Mudstone) Eskers
Drumlin 20
10

Various
Gravel size Classification
Agencies
Sand size ASTM
Soil AASHTO
Silt size USCS
MIT/ BSI
Clay size
BNBC 2020
21

22
11

Soil Mass Classification Based on Cohesion

Cohesionless Soil: Gravel, sand, non-plastic silt
particles. (Normally Consolidated Soil)
Cohesionless means the soil has no shear strength if
no frictional properties.
Cohesive Soil: Clay and plastic silt particles. Cohesive

soil contains clay minerals and posses plasticity.
‫ ܋‬െ ૎Soil: Any or both types of cohesionless and

cohesive soil particles. (Over-consolidated Soil)
23

Engineering Classification of Soil
Two most common widely accepted classification

systems that being adopted by BNBC 2020 are:
• Unified Soil Classification System (USCS)
• AASHTO Soil Classification System
Both the classification systems use the results of some
basic tests of soil materials. These tests are known as the
classification tests. The numerical results of these tests are
often termed as index properties of soil. Two most common
classification tests are:
• Grain Size Analysis
• Consistency Tests for Fine Grained Soil
24
12

Engineering Classification of Soil [Classification Tests]
Grain Size Analysis
Sieve Analysis (A set of Sedimentation Analysis (If

sieves is used usually more than 10% Passing # 200
ranging from # 4 to #200 Sieve. Tests done on sample
sieves) passing # 200 sieve
Pipette Analysis
Hydrometer (Not common in
Analysis (151H engineering)
and 152H)
25

The results of grain size analysis (sieve and hydrometer

analyses) are generally presented by semi logarithmic plots
known as GRAIN or PARTICLE-SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES.
1. Effective Size
D10
2. Uniformity Coefficient
3. Coefficient of
Gradation/ Curvature
26
13

Consistency Test: Depending on water content, a soil could

have 4 states or conditions & 3 limiting values or limits: Limit
tests are done on soil sample passing # 40 sieve (0.425 mm).
Liquid Plastic State: Can Semi-Solid Solid

State: be remolded to any State: Can be State:
Flows on shape without remolded to any Can not
its own development of shape only with be
weight cracks development of remolded
cracks (breaks)
Liquid Plastic Shrinkage

Limit Limit Limit
Limit Tests must be done on air dried sample, unless

required for the identification of organic soil. 27

Soil Particle Shape
Soil mineral, particle shape and soil structure are perhaps the most
important parameters that determine the consistency limits of soil.
Bulky (All the three dimensions LuWuH are prominent)

Bulky particles are mostly formed by mechanical
weathering. The shapes of the particles are
angular, subangular, subrounded and rounded.
Flaky (Two dimensions LuW are prominent)

Flaky particles have very low sphericity, usually
0.01 or less. These particles are predominantly
clay minerals..
Needle Shape (Only one dimension L is prominent)
Needle shaped particles are much less common.
Coral deposits and attapulgate clays are the
examples. 28
14

Soil Structure and Fabric
• Single grain structure їfor

cohesionless soil (Loose, Dense,
Medium Dense)
• Honeycomb structure ї For silty soil
• Flocculated structure
• Dispersed structure ї For Cohesive soil
• Packet or Ped
29

Soil Structure and Fabric
(c)Dispersed
(a)Singlegrained
(d)Flocculated
(b)Honeycomb (e)PacketorPed
30
15

Soil Classification Based on Use
[Engineering Classification]
Plasticity Index: The range of water contents over which

the soil remains plastic is the plasticity index. It is the
numerical difference between liquid and plastic limits.
IP wL wP
Liquidity Index: The current state of a soil, in terms of
Atterberg limits, is defined by the Liquidity Index.
wn w P wn wP
IL
wL wP IP
Consistency Index: The current state of a soil, in terms

of Atterberg limits, may also be defined as the
Consistency index. w L wn w L wn
IC
wL wP IP
Flow Index: The slope of the flow curve is termed as flow
index, IF. w1 w 2 w1 w 2
I F
log n 2 log n 1 n2
log
n1 31

USCS: Classification of Coarse Grained Soil
In USCS, soils are usually given two-letter designation. The

first letter indicates the main soil type, and the second
modifies the first. The symbols used are presented below.
Symbol Description
G Gravel
Ist Letter S Sand
M Silt
C Clay
O Organic
Pt Peat
W Well graded
P Poorly graded
2nd Letter M Silty
C Clayey
H High plasticity 32
L Low plasticity
16

USCS: Classification of Coarse Grained Soil
33

USCS [Classification of Fine Grained Soil: Plasticity Chart]
34
17

AASHTO Soil Classification System
The AASHTO classification system divides inorganic soil

into two classes granular material and silt-material and
seven main groups, A-1 to A-7, based generally on the
desirability of the soil as a subgrade for highway
construction. The lower the value of “A” designation, the
better is the soil quality. That is A-1 is the best and A-8 is
the worst. There are also subgroup in several of the main
groups Similar to Unified classification, it also uses
grain size distribution and plasticity values as the criteria
to classify the soils.
However, this classification is to examine the soil for the
purpose of any pavement design. 35

In this system organic soils are placed in group A-8, and similar
to USCS, it uses characteristic black colour, bad odour, liquid
limits of air dry and oven dry soils, and loss on ignition as the
criteria of presence of organic matters.
Classification of the soils is examined using a chart that is used
in chronological order from top to bottom using classification
test results, and from left to right for the soil class by elimination
process. Once any of a criteria does not satisfy in a class, the
soil is to be examined for the next class immediately.
In AASHTO soil classification system soil is classified broadly as
granular material and silt clay material. For silt clay material
another different plasticity chart can be used.
36
18

For further quantification an index called group index is used in

parenthesis whose value usually varies between 0 to 20 as
whole numbers. [e.g. A-1-a(0)]. Lower is the value of Group
Index better is the soil as subgrade.
Group Index ,
GI F 35 >0.2 0.005 w L 40 @ 0.01F 15 I P 10
Where,
ࡲ ൌpercent passing No. 200 sieve (i.e. finer than 0.075 Pm)
࢝ࡸ ൌ liquid limit (%)
ࡵࡼ ൌplasticity index (%)
A Partial Group Index (PGI) containing the 2nd term (plasticity
index, IP term) of the equation is used for A-2-6 and A-2-7
37
subgroups.

38
19

AASHTO Plasticity Chart
39

Identification of Problematic Soil
In addition to the traditional soil conditions under which

ground improvement is often implemented (e.g., loose coarse
grained soils, soft fine-grained soils, or loose, non-engineered
fills), there are a number of special natural geologic conditions
that produce problematic soil deposits and may require
treatment and their proper identification is so important.
1. Highly compressible organic soils
2. Liquefiable coarse-grained soils
3. Collapsible soils
4. Expansive soils
5. Highly sensitive “quick” clays
6. Dispersive soils/ Erodible soil
7. Corrosive soils
8. High-sulfate soils
40
9. Unusual or special soil conditions (e.g. Sanitary landfill)
20

Complexities of Soil as Load Bearing Media
(1) Any civil engineering structure must rest on or within

the ground generating stresses within the soil mass due
to both external loading (external stresses) and self
weight of soil mass staying above stressed plane known
as overburden stresses.
(2) Whenever we design any foundation, the two basic
principles are to be considered simultaneously: (i) the
foundation soil should not fail because of excessive shear,
and (ii) there should not be excessive settlement.
41

(3) As soil mass consists of various sizes, shapes and

types or origins of soil particles there exists void spaces
within the soil mass. These void spaces may be filled up
with water or air, or with both. When external loading is
applied the load will be sheared by all the three phases
like soil solid, water and air. That’s why the stressed soil
will have a complex phenomenon, and generates three
categories of stresses total stress, effective stress/contact
stress (??) and neutral stress (porewater pressure). As
such, ground water table has an important role in the
Mechanics stressed soil.
42
21

Total Stress, Contact Stress, Effective Stress & Porewater Pressure

Porewater pressure is also known as neutral stress.
Actualplane,WAVY
Assumedplane
43

ࢀࢎࢇ࢚࢏࢙ࡱࢌࢌࢋࢉ࢚࢏࢜ࢋ࢙࢚࢘ࢋ࢙࢙ ࣌ᇱ ൌ
ࢀ࢕࢚ࢇ࢒ࡿ࢚࢘ࢋ࢙࢙ ࣌ െ ࡼ࢕࢘ࢋ࢝ࢇ࢚ࢋ࢘ࡼ࢘ࢋ࢙࢙࢛࢘ࢋ ࢛
44
22


Example: Calculate effective stress at C.
Solution (considering water as a load):
ܶ‫ݏݏ݁ݎݐݏ݈ܽݐ݋‬, ߪܽ‫ܥݐ‬
ൌ 1 ൈ 9.81 ൅ 3 ൈ 16 ൅ 4 ൈ 18 ൌ 129.8݇ܲܽ
ܲ‫݁ݎݑݏݏ݁ݎ݌ݎ݁ݐܽݓ݁ݎ݋‬, ‫ܥݐܽݑ‬
ൌ 1 ൅ 3 ൅ 4 ൈ 9.81 ൌ 78.5݇ܲܽ
‫ ݏݏ݁ݎݐݏ݁ݒ݅ݐ݂݂ܿ݁ܧ‬ൌ 129.8 െ 78.5 ൌ 51.3݇ܲܽ
Alternative Solution (considering soil only),
ܶ‫ܥݐܽݏݏ݁ݎݐݏ݈ܽݐ݋‬
ൌ 3 ൈ 16 ൅ 4 ൈ 18 ൌ 120݇ܲܽ
ܲ‫ ݁ݎݑݏݏ݁ݎ݌ݎ݁ݐܽݓ݁ݎ݋‬ൌ 7 ൈ 9.81 ൌ 68.7݇ܲܽ
‫ ݏݏ݁ݎݐݏ݁ݒ݅ݐ݂݂ܿ݁ܧ‬ൌ 120 െ 68.7 ൌ 51.3݇ܲܽ
45

Shear Strength of Soil
(4) Whatever, may be the external loading the eventual failure

within the soil mass would occur because of slippage or shear on
a particular surface.
The neibouring soil
,q will have a tendency
to move in the
outward and upward
direction, and the
failure line will follow
the resultant path.
݄ܶ݅‫ݏ݁ݐܽ݊݅݃݅ݎ݋ݐ݌݁ܿ݊݋ܿݏ‬
1
‫ݍ‬௨௟௧ ൌ ܿܰ௖ ൅ ‫ܰߛܤ‬ఊ ൅ ‫ܰݍ‬௤
2
46
23

As a matter of comparison, whenever, forces are used in solid

mass they generate various types of stresses; like tensile,
compressive, shear, flexural, torsional etc.
In case of soil, as being particulate material, these types of direct
stresses do not generate. Rather, stresses will propagate within the
soil mass and failure within the soil mass would occur because of
slippage or sliding on a particular soil surface within the soil
mass. This type of stresses due to sliding on a particular surface is
known as shear stress. Failure theories describe the stresses at
failure surface as -
ᇱ ᇱ
௙
ᇱ
.
47

ᇱ
௩ ௩
ᇱ
௛ ௛
ᇱ
௜ ௜
‫݈݁݃݊ܣ‬, ݅
Illustration of Shear Strength of Soil
48
24

(5) As soil is a particulate material, whenever there is any

vertical stress there must be induced lateral stresses
known as active pressure, passive pressure and earth
pressure at rest. The induced lateral stresses are
functions of type of soil and its deformation
characteristics during failure. Lateral expansion will
induce active pressure, lateral contraction will induce
passive pressure and whereas, earth pressure at rest
concerns with no deformation. The ratio of lateral stress to
vertical stress at failure condition is termed as coefficient
of earth pressure (Ka, Kp, and Ko).
49

(6) Shear strength of soil is depended on drainage conditions

thus involving drained and undrained strength. This involves rate
of construction, slow or fast.
(7) Shear strength parameters of soil depend on depositional
history of soil, that is whether the soil is normally consolidated or
over consolidated.
(8) Settlement of soil in many instances is a time dependent
procedure.
(9) Heterogeneous nature of soil exists both vertically and
spatially.
(10) Degree of saturation of specimens is very important while
determining the shear strength of soil (in unconfined compression
test it is often found to be disregarded).
50
25

Normally Consolidated and Overconsolidated Soil
To illustrate the soil parameters for normally consolidated (the

present overburden stress is the maximum in its life) and over-
consolidated (the present overburden is not the maximum in its life)
soil deposits, examples are taken for alluvial river deposits (Layer 1).
51

Normally Consolidated and Overconsolidated Soil
As such, application of cell pressure in

triaxial test or application of normal load
in direct shear test (??) is important. One
near to the insitu effective overburden
stress, one at its 50% and the other one at
200% may be used unless otherwise
decided by the designer.
52
26

Code Provision in BNBC 2020
DIVISION A: Site Investigations, Soil Classifications, Materials
and Foundation Types (Sections 3.4 To 3.7)
SECTIONS 3.1: GENERAL

SECTIONS 3.2: SCOPE
SECTIONS 3.3: DEFINITIONS AND SYMBOLS
Introductory statements. Scope has already been
discussed.
SECTIONS 3.4: SITE INVESTIONS
3.4.1 Sub-Surface Survey
3.4.2 Sub-Soil Investigations
Omitted in this lecture; Quite straight forward.
53

3.4.3 Methods of Exploration

3.4.4 Number and Location of Investigation Points
Omitted in this lecture; Quite straight forward.
3.4.5 Depth of Exploration
Partially omitted in this lecture; Quite straight forward.
54
27

3.4.5 Depth of Exploration

A POINT TO BE DISCUSSED
A rule of thumb used for this purpose is to extend the
borings to a depth where the additional load resulting from
the proposed building is less than 10% of the average load
of the structure, or less than 5% of the effective stress in the
soil at that depth.
55

3.4.5 Depth of Exploration (Continued)

A POINT TO BE DISCUSSED (ELABORATION)
A commonly used rule is that, unless bed rock is
encountered, boring should be carried to such a depth that
the net increase in soil stress caused by the proposed
construction is less than 10% of the maximum value.
A second technique employs the concept of drilling to depths
where the net increase in soil stress caused by the proposed
construction is limited to less than 5% of the effective stress
caused by the weight of the soil.
. 56
28

57

1800kN
Example: As illustrated.
GroundSurface
1.5m
3mu 3mFooting
1.5 ൈ 16 ൌ 24 ߛ ൌ 16 ݇ܰΤ݉ଷ
2ܸ: 1‫݊݋݅ݐݑܾ݅ݎݐݏ݅ܦܪ‬ 1.0m
Solution: WT
2.5 ൈ 16 ൌ 40
ߛ௦௔௧ ൌ 18 ݇ܰΤ݉ଷ
‫ݖݐܽ݁ݎݑݏݏ݁ݎ݌݈ܽܿ݅ݐݎ݁ݒ݁ݒ݅ݐ݂݂ܿ݁ܧ‬௢ 1800
ൌ 40 ൅ 18 െ 9.81 ൈ ‫ݖ‬௢ ‫ݍ‬ൌ െ 1.5 ൈ 16 ൌ 176݇ܲܽ
3ൈ3
ൌ 40 ൅ 8.19‫ݖ‬଴ ‫݃݊݅ݎ݁݀݅ݏ݊݋ܥ‬2ܸ: 1‫ݏ݁ݏݏ݁ݎݐݏ݂݋݊݋݅ݐݑܾ݅ݎݐݏ݅݀ܪ‬,
‫ ׵‬0.05 ൈ 40 ൅ 8.19‫ݖ‬௢ ൌ ‫݂݋݄ݐ݌݄݁݀݁ݐ‬10%‫ ݏݏ݁ݎݐݏ‬ൌ ‫݂݋݄ݐ݌݁ܦ‬10‫ܽ݁ݎܽݏ݁݉݅ݐ‬
176 ൈ 9 176 ൈ 9
ൌ ՜ ൌ ൌ 176 ൈ 0.1 ൌ 17.6
3 ൅ ‫ݖ‬௢ 3 ൅ ‫ݖ‬௢ 3 ൅ ‫ݖ‬௢ 3 ൅ ‫ݖ‬௢
1368 ‫ ׵‬3 ൅ ‫ݖ‬௢ 3 ൅ ‫ݖ‬௢ ൌ 90 ՜ ‫ݖ‬଴ ൌ 6.5݉
‫ݖ‬௢ ൌ െ 4.88
3 ൅ ‫ݖ‬௢ ଶ 3 ൅ ‫ݖ‬௢
՜ ‫ݖ‬௢ ൌ 7.5݉
40 ൅ 8.19‫ݖ‬଴
58
‫ ݃݊݅ݎ݋ܤ݂݋݄ݐ݌݁ܦ݉ݑ݉݅݊݅݉݁ܿ݊݁ܪ‬ൌ 7.5݉
29

3.4.6 Sounding and Penetration Tests (also Appendix- D)

Partially omitted in this lecture; Quite straight forward.
FEW POINTS TO BE DISCUSSED ABOUT SPT CORRECTION.
Facts Regarding SPT Correction
It was only as late as in 1957, Gibbs & Holtz suggested that
corrections should be made for field SPT values for depth.
As the correction factor came to be considered only after
1957, all empirical data published before 1957 like those
by Terzaghi is for uncorrected values of SPT.
59

3.4.6 Sounding and Penetration Tests (Continued)

Facts Regarding SPT Correction (Continued)
Since then a number of investigators have suggested overburden
correction. Gibbs & Holtz took standard pressure as 280 kN/m2
(corresponding to a depth of 14 m) and duly made overburden
correction for other overburdens. Thornburn suggested a standard
pressure of 138 kN/m2 (corresponding to a depth of 7 m). Finally,
in 1974, Peck, Hanson and Thornburn suggested a standard
pressure of 100 kN/m2 (corresponding to a depth of 5 m). These
days many SPT corrections are suggested.
60
30


Various SPT Designations (Red coloured ones are not in use)
SPT value, N-value, SPT N-value, NSPT, NField, N, Nf = All raw
field values of SPT number
N1 = Field values corrected only for overburden (considering
standard pressure as 1 tsf)
Nc, Nc, = Corrected SPT value (field value ! 15) for silts &
fine sand below water table without considering any
other corrections
N60 = Corrected field SPT value for hammer efficiency only
considering standard hammer efficiency as 60% (0.60)
61


Various SPT Designations (Red coloured ones are not in use)
N70 = Corrected field SPT value for hammer efficiency only
considering standard hammer efficiency as 70 percent
N60 = Corrected field SPT value considering hammer
efficiency and other field procedures (for all types of soil)
(N1)60 , N1(60) = Corrected SPT values with both corrections of
all field procedures and overburden
(N1)60 (CORR) = Corrected SPT value (field value ! 15) for silts
& fine sand below water table after performing both
overburden correction and corrections for field
procedures 62
31


BNBC 2020 Recommended SPT Designations and Corrections
SPT value, N-value, SPT N-value, N = All raw field values of SPT
number
N60 = Corrected field SPT value considering hammer efficiency
and other field procedures (applies to all types of soil)
(N1)60 = Corrected SPT values with both corrections of all field
procedures and overburden (applies only to sandy soil)
(N1)60(CORR) = Corrected SPT values for silts and fine sands under
water table with (N1)60 values t 15 (Terzaghi & Peck, 1948)
63

(a) For All Types of Soil
ࡱࡴ ࡯࡮ ࡯ࡿ ࡯ࡾ ࡺ
ࡺ૟૙ ൌ ሺ6.D.1ሻ
૙.૟૙
Where,
ࡺ૟૙ ൌ Corrected SPT N-value for field procedures
ࡱࡴ ൌ Hammer efficiency in decimals (Table 6.D.4; 0.45 – 0.70)
࡯࡮ ൌ Borehole diameter correction (Table 6.D.5; 1.00 – 1.15)
࡯ࡿ ൌ Sampler correction (Table 6.D.5; 1.00 & 1.20)
࡯ࡾ ൌ Rod length correction (Table 6.D.5; 0.75 – 1.00)
࡯ࡾ ൌ Measured SPT N-value in field 64
32


(b) For sandy soil only (mainly meant for liquefaction analysis;
however, also used in some of foundation designs)
૛૙૙૙
࡯ࡺ ൌ ૙. ૠૠ࢒࢕ࢍ ൑ ૛. ૙૙ ሺ6.D.2ሻ
࣌ᇲ࢕
ࡺ૚ ૟૙ ൌ ࡯ࡺ ࡺ૟૙ ሺ6.D.3ሻ
Where,
࡯ࡺ ൌ Correction factor for overburden (d 2.00)
࣌ᇱ࢕ ൌ Effective overburden pressure (t 25 kPa) at the depth of SPT.
ࡺ૚ ૟૙ ൌ Corrected N value for all field procedures and overburden.
ࡺ૟૙ ൌ Corrected N value for all field procedure incl. hammer efficiency.
65


(c) Dilatancy Correction: For fine sand and silty fine sand with
ܰଵ ଺଴ ൒ 15 (Terzaghi and Peck, 1948)
ࡺ૚ ૟૙ሺ࡯ࡻࡾࡾሻ ൌ ૚૞ ൅ ૙. ૞ ࡺ૚ ૟૙ െ ૚૞ ሺ6.D.4ሻ
Where,
ࡺ૚ ૟૙ሺ࡯ࡻࡾࡾሻ ൌ Corrected SPT value for dilatancy (usually
used with Terzaghi’s formulas)
ࡺ૚ ૟૙ ൌ Corrected SPT value for field procedures and
overburden
66
33

3.4.7 Geotechnical Investigation Report

Partially omitted in this lecture
AN IMPORTANT POINT TO BE DISCUSSED
Geotechnical investigation report is the subsoil investigator’s
findings. They should not recommend any foundation bearing
capacity, as that depends on so many factors especially for both
inorganic and organic problematic or difficult soils. In addition,
this creates confusion when the construction is done by
contractor whose job is to investigate the subsoil independently.
The geotechnical bearing capacity must be estimated by a
competent foundation engineer or geotechnical engineer, and
submitted in a separate report. 67

SECTIONS 3.5: IDENTIFICATION, CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION OF SOILS
3.5.1 Identification of Soils
Quite straight forward.
3.5.2 Particle Size Classification of Soils
3.5.3 Engineering Classification of Soils
3.5.4 Identification and Classification of Organic Soils
Already mentioned in Basics of Soil Mechanics.

68
34

SECTIONS 3.5: IDENTIFICATION, CLASSIFICATION AND

DESCRIPTION OF SOILS
3.5.5 Identification and Classification of Expansive Soils
3.5.6 Identification and Classification of Collapsible Soils
3.5.7 Identification and Classification of Dispersive Soils
3.5.8 Identification and Classification of Soft Inorganic Soils
Already mentioned in Basics of Soil Mechanics.
69

SECTIONS 3.6: MATERIALS

3.6.1 Concrete
3.6.2 Steel
3.6.3 Timber
Omitted in this lecture.
70
35

SECTIONS 3.7: TYPES OF FOUNDATION

3.7.1 Shallow Foundations
3.7.2 Footing
3.7.3 Raft/Mat
3.7.4 Deep Foundations
3.7.5 Driven Piles
3.7.6 Bored Piles/Cast-in-Situ Piles
3.7.7 Drilled Pier/Drilled Shafts
3.7.8 Caisson/Well
Omitted in this lecture; Straight forward.
71

DIVISION B: DESIGN OF FOUNDATIONS (SECTIONS 3.8 to 3.11)
SECTIONS 3.8: SHALLOW FOUNDATION

3.8.1 Distribution of Bearing Pressure
3.8.2 Dimension of Footings
3.8.3 Thickness of Footing
3.8.4 Footings in Fill Soil
3.8.5 Soil and Rock Property Selection
3.8.6 Minimum Depth of Foundation
3.8.7 Scour
3.8.8 Mass Movement of Ground in Unstable Areas
3.8.9 Foundation Excavation
3.8.10 Design Considerations for Raft foundation
Omitted in this lecture. 72
36

SECTIONS 3.9: GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

3.9.1 General
3.9.2 Design Load
3.9.3 Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations
3.9.4 Settlement of Shallow Foundation
3.9.5 Dynamic Ground Stability or Liquefaction Potential for
Foundation Soils
3.9.6 Structural Design of Shallow Foundations
73

SECTIONS 3.10: GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN OF DEEP FOUNDATIONS

3.10.1 Driven Precast Piles
3.10.1.1 Application
3.10.1.2 Materials
3.10.1.3 Penetration
3.10.1.4 Estimated pile length
3.10.1.5 Types of driven piles
3.10.1.6 Batter piles
3.10.1.7 Selection of soil and rock properties
3.10.1.8 Pile driving equipment
3.10.1.9 Design capacity of driven precast pile
37


3.10.1.10 Ultimate geotechnical capacity of driven precast
pile for axial load
The ultimate load capacity, ௨௟௧ , of a pile consists of two
parts. One part is due to friction called skin friction or shaft
friction or side shear, ௦ and the other is due to end bearing
at the base or tip of the pile, ௕ .
75


3.10.1.10 Ultimate geotechnical capacity of driven precast pile
for axial load
The ultimate axial capacity ܳ௨௟௧ of driven piles shall be
determined in accordance with the following for compression
loading.
ܳ௨௟௧ ൌ ܳ௦ ൅ ܳ௕ െ ܹ (6.3.11)
For uplift loading;
ܳ௨௟௧ ൑ 0.7ܳ௦ ൅ ܹ (6.3.12)
The allowable or working axial load shall be determined as:
ܳ௨௟௧ ൌ ܳ௨௟௧ Τ‫ܵܨ‬ (6.3.13)
76
38


3.10.1.10 Ultimate geotechnical capacity of driven precast pile
for axial load
Where, ࢃ is the weight of the pile and ࡲࡿ is a gross factor of
safety as suggested in Tables 6.3.10a and 6.3.10b. Often, for
compression loading, the weight term is neglected if the
weight, ࢃ, is considered in estimating imposed loading.
SUGGESTION: To be consistent with the pile load results and
the effect of overburden, it is reasonable to ignore weight of
pile, ࢃ from both the equation (6.311) and load calculation
which is the current practice.
77

SECTIONS 3.10: GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN OF DEEP

FOUNDATIONS
3.10.1.10 Ultimate geotechnical capacity of driven precast
pile for axial load (Continued)
The ultimate bearing capacity (skin friction and/or end
bearing) of a single vertical pile may be determined by any of
the following methods.
(i) By the use of static bearing capacity equations
(ii) By the use of SPT and CPT
(iii) By load tests
(iv) By dynamic methods 78
39


3.10.1.11 Static bearing capacity equations for driven precast
pile capacity
79


pile capacity
80
40


3.10.1.11 Static bearing capacity equations for driven precast pile
capacity
The skin friction, ࡽ࢙ can be calculated as:
ܳ௦ ൌ ‫ܣ‬௦ ݂௦ (6.3.14a)
Where,
‫ܣ‬௦ ൌSkin friction area (perimeter area) of the pile = Perimeter ×
Length
݂௦ ൌ Skin frictional resistance on unit surface area of pile that
depends on soil properties and loading conditions (drained or
undrained)
81


3.10.1.11 Static bearing capacity equations for driven precast pile
capacity
The end bearing ࡽ࢈ can be calculated as:
ܳ௕ ൌ ‫ܣ‬௕ ݂௕ (6.3.14b)
Where,
‫ܣ‬௕ ൌCross-sectional area of pile tip (bottom)
݂௕ ൌ End bearing resistance on unit tip area of pile, that
depends on soil properties to a depth of 2B (B is the diameter
for a circular pile section or length of sides for a square pile
section) from the pile tip and loading conditions (drained or
undrained) 82
41


pile capacity
For a layered soil system containing n number of layers, end
bearing resistance can be calculated considering soil properties
of the layer at which the pile rests, and the skin friction
resistance considers all the penetrating layers calculated as:
ܳ௦ ൌ σ௡௜ୀଵ ο‫ݖ‬௜ ൈ ‫ ݎ݁ݐ݁݉݅ݎ݁݌‬௜ ൈ ݂௦ ௜ (6.3.15)
Where, οࢠ࢏ represents the thickness of any ࢏࢚ࢎ layer and
࢖ࢋ࢘࢏࢓ࢋ࢚ࢋ࢘ ࢏ is the perimeter of the pile in that layer. The
manner in which skin friction is transferred to the adjacent soil
depends on the soil type. 83


3.10.1.12 Axial capacity of driven precast pile in cohesive soil
using static bearing capacity equations
There are basically two approaches for calculating skin friction:
(i) The ɲ-method that is based on total stress analysis and is
normally used to estimate the short term load capacity of piles
embedded in fine grained soils. In this method, a coefficient ɲ
is used to relate the undrained shear strength ࢉ࢛ or ࢙࢛ to the
adhesive stress ݂௦ along the pile shaft.
84
42

3.10.1.12 Axial capacity of driven precast pile in cohesive

soil using static bearing capacity equations
85


86
43


(ii) The method is based on an effective stress analysis
and is used to determine both the short term and long term
pile load capacities. The friction along the pile shaft is
found using Coulomb’s friction law, where the friction
ᇱ ᇱ
stress is given by ௦ ௫ . The lateral effective stress, ௫
is proportional to vertical effective stress, ௭ᇱ by a co-
efficient, .
COMMENT: method is used for both cohesionless soil
and normally consolidated clay soil.
87


88
44


89


90
45

3.10.1.13 Axial Capacity of driven precast pile in cohesive

soil using SPT values
Skin friction ௦ and end bearing ௕ are determined
directly from SPT values ૟૙ with some restrictions in
their values. That is, limiting values are suggested for both
end .
An enhanced global factor of safety of 3.5 is recommended.
COMMENT: This method (SPT method) should only be used
in preliminary design. For final design, soil parameters
obtained from laboratory testing should be employed.
91

3.10.1.14 Axial capacity of driven precast pile in cohesionless soil using
static bearing capacity equations
For piles in cohesionless soil, the ultimate side resistance may be
estimated using the following formula, where different sets of ߚ and ܰ௤
values are suggested. For ܰ௤ Fig. 6.3.2 can also be used.
92
46

3.10.1.14 Axial capacity of driven precast pile in

cohesionless soil using static bearing capacity equations
COMMENT: ܰ௤ values
can vary widely. BNBC
2020 suggested
moderate values.
93

3.10.1.15 Critical depth for end bearing and skin friction

The vertical effective stress ( ௩ᇱ or ௭ᇱ ) increases with depth.
In reality skin friction does not increase indefinitely. It is
believed that skin friction would become a constant at a
certain depth. This depth is named critical depth.
Experimental data indicates that end bearing capacity does
not also increase with depth indefinitely. Due to lack of a
valid theory, Engineers use the same critical depth concept
adopted for skin friction for end bearing capacity as well.
Both the skin friction and the end bearing capacity are
assumed to increase till the critical depth, ࢉ and then
maintain a constant value.
94
47

3.10.1.15 Critical depth for end bearing and skin friction

Following approximations may be used for the critical depth
in relation to diameter of pile, . Length=20m
PileDia =400mm
GroundLevel
ࢉ For loose sand Claylayer, 2m

J =16kN/m3
16 ൈ 2 ൌ 32݇ܲܽ
ࢉ For medium sand cu =100kPa
ࢉ For dense sand Densesand,10m;

Dc =8m
J =18kN/m3
ĳ =35o
COMMENT: Critical depth will 32 ൅ 8 ൈ 18

ൌ 176݇ܲܽ
begin from top of each sand layer.
95

3.10.1.16 Axial Capacity of Driven Precast Pile in Cohesionless
Soil using SPT Values
Similar to that of cohesive soil (Sec. 3.10.1.13).
3.10.1.17 Axial capacity of driven precast pile using pile load Test
3.10.1.18 Selection of factor of safety for driven precast pile
Discussed before; Omitted in this lecture.
3.10.1.19 Group piles and group capacity of driven precast piles
3.10.1.20 Pile caps
3.10.1.21 Lateral load capacity on driven precast piles
96
48


3.10.1.22 Vertical ground movement and negative skin friction in
driven precast piles
3.10.1.23 Driven precast pile in expansive soils (upward movement)
3.10.1.24 Dynamic/seismic design of driven precast pile
3.10.1.25 Protection against corrosion and abrasion in driven precast
pile
3.10.1.26 Dynamic monitoring of driven precast pile
3.10.1.27 Maximum allowable driving stresses in driven precast pile
97

3.10.1.28 Effect of buoyancy in driven precast pile
3.10.1.29 Protection against Deterioration of Driven Precast
Piles
3.10.1.30 Pile spacing, clearance and embedment in driven
precast pile
3.10.1.31 Structural capacity of driven precast pile section
3.10.1.32 Dynamic monitoring of driven precast pile
3.10.1.33 Maximum allowable driving stresses in driven precast
pile
98
49


3.10.2 Driven Cast-in-Place Concrete Piles
3.10.2.1 Shape
3.10.2.2 Minimum area
3.10.2.3 General reinforcement requirements
3.10.2.4 Reinforcement in superstructure
3.10.2.5 Shell requirements
3.10.2.6 Splices
3.10.2.7 Reinforcement cover

99


3.10.2 Driven Cast-in-Place Concrete Piles
3.10.2.8 Installation
3.10.2.9 Concreting
3.10.2.10 Structural integrity
3.10.3 Prestressed Concrete Piles
3.10.3.1 Shape and size
3.10.3.2 Reinforcement
3.10.3.3 Vertical and spiral reinforcement
3.10.3.4 Driving and handling stresses
50


3.10.4 Bored Piles
3.10.4.1 Shape and size
3.10.4.2 Dimension
3.10.4.3 Ultimate geotechnical capacity of bored pile for axial
load
101


3.10.4.4 Axial capacity of bored piles in cohesive soil using static
bearing capacity equations
The ultimate axial capacity of bored piles in cohesive may be
calculated from the same static formula as used for driven piles,
given by Equations 6.3.14a, 6.3.14b and 6.3.15, using a total
stress method for undrained loading conditions, or an effective
stress method for drained loading conditions. The skin friction ࢌ࢙
may be taken as 2/3rd the value of driven piles and the end
bearing ࢌ࢈ may be taken as 1/3rd of that of driven pile.
COMMENT: Too much conservative: Global FS 2.00 may be used to
compare
102
51


3.10.4 Bored Piles
3.10.4.5 Axial capacity of bored piles in cohesive soil using SPT values
Similar approach to that of driven pile.
3.10.4.6 Axial capacity of bored piles in cohesionless soil using static
bearing
The skin friction ࢌ࢙ may be taken as 2/3rd the value of driven piles and
the end bearing ࢌ࢈ may be taken as 1/3rd of that of driven pile.
COMMENT: Too much conservative: Global FS 2.00 may be used to
compare
3.10.4.7 Axial capacity of bored piles in cohesionless soil using SPT values
103


3.10.4 Bored Piles
3.10.4.8 Axial capacity of bored pile using pile load test
3.10.4.9 Structural capacity of bored concrete pile/drilled shaft
3.10.4.10 Selection of factor of safety for bored pile
3.10.4.11 Group capacity of bored pile
104
52


3.10.5 Settlement of Driven and Bored Piles
3.10.6 Drilled Shafts/ Drilled Piers
Large diameter (more than 600 mm) bored piles are sometimes
classified as drilled shaft or drilled piers. They are usually
provided with enlarged base called bell. The provisions of this
article shall apply to the design of axially and laterally loaded
drilled shafts/ drilled piers in soil or extending through soil to or
into rock.
105


3.10.6.1 Application of drilled shaft
3.10.6.2 Materials for drilled shaft
3.10.6.3 Embedment for drilled shaft
3.10.6.4 Batter drilled shaft
3.10.6.5 Selection of soil properties for drilled shaft
106
53


3.10.6.6 Geotechnical design of drilled shafts
Drilled shafts shall be designed to support the design loads with
adequate bearing and structural capacity, and with tolerable
settlements. The response of drilled shafts subjected to seismic
and dynamic loads shall also be evaluated. Shaft design shall be
based on working stress principles using maximum un-factored
loads derived from calculations of dead and live loads from
superstructures, substructures, earth (i.e., sloping ground), wind
and traffic. Allowable axial and lateral loads may be determined by
separate methods of analysis.
107


3.10.6.7 Bearing capacity equations for drilled shaft
The ultimate axial capacity ࡽ࢛࢒࢚ of drilled shafts shall be determined
in accordance with the principles laid for bored piles.
Skin Friction Capacity in Cohesive Soil
108
54


Skin Friction Capacity in Cohesive Soil
109


End bearing Capacity in Cohesive Soil
For end bearing of cohesive soil, the following relations given by
Equations 6.3.43 and 6.3.44 are recommended.
110
55


End bearing Capacity in Cohesive Soil
111


Skin Friction Capacity in Cohesionless Soil
112
56


Skin Friction Capacity in Cohesionless Soil
113


End bearing Capacity in Cohesionless Soil
114
57


End bearing Capacity in Cohesionless Soil
115


3.10.6.8 Other methods of evaluating axial load capacity of
drilled shaft
A number of other methods are available to estimate the ultimate
axial load capacity of drilled shafts. These methods are based on N-
values obtained from Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and on angle
of internal friction of sand. These methods may also be used to
estimate the ultimate load carrying capacity of drilled shafts
(Appendix G).
Method based on the Standard Penetration Test (CGS, 1985)
Method based on Theory of Plasticity (CGS, 1985)
Tomlinson (1995) Method 116
58


3.10.6.9 Factor of safety for drilled shaft
Similar to bored and driven piles, drilled shafts shall be designed for
a minimum overall factor of safety of 2.0 against bearing capacity
failure (end bearing, side resistance or combined) when the design
is based on the results of a load test conducted at the site.
Otherwise, it shall be designed for a minimum overall factor of safety
3.0. The minimum recommended overall factor of safety is based on
an assumed normal level of field quality control during construction.
If a normal level of field quality control cannot be assured, higher
minimum factors of safety shall be used. The recommended values of
overall factor of safety on ultimate axial load capacity based on
specified construction control is presented in Tables 6.3.10a and
6.3.10b. 117


3.10.6.10 Deformation and settlement of axially loaded
drilled shaft
3.10.6.11 Drilled shaft in layered soil profile
3.10.6.12 Tolerable movement of drilled shaft
3.10.6.13 Group loading of drilled shaft
118
59


3.10.6.14 Drilled shaft in strong soil overlying weak soil
119


3.10.6.15 Lateral loads on drilled shaft
3.10.6.16 Uplift loads on drilled shaft
3.10.6.17 Consideration of vertical ground movement
3.10.6.18 Negative skin friction
3.10.6.19 Expansive soils
3.10.6.20 Dynamic/seismic design of drilled shaft
3.10.6.21 Structural shaft design, shaft dimensions and shaft
spacing
120
60


3.10.6.22 Enlarged base of drilled shaft
3.10.6.23 Construction of drilled shaft
3.10.6.24 Concreting of drilled shaft
3.11 FIELD TESTS FOR DRIVEN PILES AND DRILLED SHAFTS
3.11.1 Integrity Test
3.11.2 Axial Load Tests for Compression
3.11.2.1 Load test evaluation methods for axial compressive
3.11.2.2 Some factors influencing interpretations of load test
results for axial compression

3.11 FIELD TESTS FOR DRIVEN PILES AND DRILLED SHAFTS

3.11.2 Axial Load Tests for Compression
3.11.2.1 Load test evaluation methods for axial compressive
3.11.2.2 Some factors influencing interpretations of load test
results for axial compression
3.11.3 Load Test for Uplift Capacity of Driven Pile, Bored Pile
and Drilled Shaft
3.11.4 Load Tests for Lateral Load Capacity
122
61

DIVISION C: ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS IN PLANNING, DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING FOUNDATIONS (SECTIONS 3.12 to 3.22)
3.12 EXCAVATION
3.12.1 Notice to Adjoining Property
3.12.2 Excavation Work
3.12.2.1 Methods of protection
3.12.2.2 Placing of construction material
3.12.2.3 Safety regulations
3.13 DEWATERING
3.14 SLOPE STABILITY OF ADJOINING BUILDINGS
123

3.15 FILLS
3.15.1 Quality of Fill
3.15.2 Placement of Fill
3.15.3 Specifications
3.16 PROTECTIVE RETAINING STRUCTURES FOR
FOUNDATIONS/ SHORE PILES
3.17 WATERPROOFING AND DAMP-PROOFING
3.17.1 General
3.17.1.1 Waterproofing where hydrostatic pressure occurs
3.17.1.2 Floor waterproofing
124
62

3.17.1.3 Wall waterproofing

3.17.1.4 Damp-proofing with no hydrostatic pressure
3.17.1.5 Floor damp-proofing
3.17.1.6 Wall damp-proofing
3.17.1.7 Perimeter drain
3.17.1.8 Wall damp-proofing
3.17.2 Other Damp-proofing and Waterproofing Requirements
3.17.2.1 Placement of backfill
3.17.2.2 Site grading
3.17.2.3 Erosion protection

3.18 FOUNDATIONS ON SLOPE

3.19 FOUNDATIONS ON ON FILLS AND PROBLEMATIC SOILS
3.19.1 Footings on Filled up Ground
3.19.2 Ground Improvement
3.19.3 Soil Reinforcement
3.20 FOUNDATION DESIGN FOR DYNAMIC FORCES
3.20.1 Effect of Dynamic Forces
3.20.1 Machine Foundation
3.20.1.1 Types of machine foundations
3.20.1.2 Design considerations
63

3.20.1.3 Design methods

3.20.1.4 Vibration analysis of a machine foundation:
3.20.1.5 Determination of parameters for vibration analysis
3.21 GEO-HAZARD ANALYSIS FOR BUILDINGS
3.22 LIST OF RELATED APPENDICES
127

Appendix D: Methods of Soil Exploration, Sampling And
D.1 METHODS OF SOIL EXPLORATION
D.1.1 Open Trial Pits
D.1.2 Auger Boring
D.1.3 Shell and Auger Boring
D.1.4 Wash Boring
D.1.5 Sounding/Probing
D.1.6 Geophysical Methods
D.1.7 Percussion Boring
D.1.8 Rotary Drilling
128
64

D.2 CHOICE OF METHOD
D.3 SAMPLE DISTURBANCE AND SAMPLING METHODS
D.4 GROUNDWATER MEASUREMENTS IN SOIL
D.5 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
D.5.1 Corrections/ Standardization of SPT Value for Field
Procedures for all Soil Types
D.5.2 Corrections of SPT Value for Overburden Pressure for all
Types of Cohesionless Soils
D.5.3 Corrections of SPT Value for Water Table (Dilatancy) in
case of Fine Sand and Silty Sand
D.5.4 SPT Value and Density Index Relations

D.6 DYNAMIC CONE PENETRATION TEST

D.7 STATIC CONE PENETRATION TEST (CPT)
D.7.1 The Penetrometer
D.7.2 Mechanical Penetrometer
D.7.3 Operation of Mechanical Penetrometer
D.7.4 The Electric Penetrometer
D.7.5 Operation of Electric Penetrometer
D.7.6 Piezocone
D.7.7 Temperature Cone
130
65

D.7.8 Effect of Rate of Penetration

D.7.9 Cone Resistance qc and Local Side Friction ࢉ
D.7.10 Friction Ratio, ࢌ
D.7.11 Relationship between ௖ , Relative Density ࢘ and
Friction Angle for Sand
D.7.12 Relationship between ௖ and Undrained Shear
Strength, ࢛ of Clay Soil
D.7.13 Soil Classification based on CPT Results
D.7.14 Correlation between SPT and CPT
131

D.8 GEOPHYSICAL METHODS OF EXPLORATION

D.8.1 Seismic Refraction Survey
D.8.2 Cross Hole Survey
D.8.3 Resistivity Survey
132
66

Appendix E: Recommended Criteria for Identification and
Classification of Expansive Soil
133

F.1 INTRODUCTION
F.2 PILING DRIVING EQUIPMENT
F.3 INSTALLATION OF DRIVEN PILES
F.4 PILE DRIVING LEADS
F.5 PILING HAMMERS
F.6 DRIVING SYSTEM COMPONENTS
F.7 DRIVING PROCEDURES
F.8 PILE HAMMER SELECTION GUIDELINES (Tables Presented)
F.9 NOISE LEVEL IN PILE DRIVING
134
67

Pile Hammer Selection Guidelines

Selection of pile and pile hammer is usually done using wave equation
program. If wave analysis is not done following Tables 6.F.2(a) and
6.F.2(b) may be used as an approximate guide.
135

Pile Hammer Selection Guidelines
136
68

F.10 CONSTRUCTION OF BORED CAST-IN-SITU PILE/ DRILLED

SHAFT
F.10.1 Method of Advancing the Hole for Bored Pile/Drilled Shaft
F.10.2 Limitations of Bentonite Method
F.10.3 Actions to be Taken Prior to Concreting
F.10.4 Concreting of Piles
137

Appendix G: Other Methods of Estimating Ultimate Axial Capacity of
Piles and Drilled Shafts, and Design Charts for Settlement
G.1 METHOD BASED ON THE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST

(CANADIAN FOUNDATION ENGINEERING MANUAL)
G.2 METHOD BASED ON THE THEORY OF PLASTICITY (CANADIAN
FOUNDATION ENGINEERING MANUAL)
G.3 TOMLINSON METHOD
G.4 DESIGN CHARTS FOR ESTIMATION OF SETTLEMENT FOR
DRILLED SHAFTS
138
69

Appendix H: References of Chapter 3 Part 6 (Soils and
Foundations)
139
Questions?
Thank you
140
70

Geotechnical Design of Foundations:: Provisions in BNBC 2020

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

Geotechnical Design of Foundations:: Provisions in BNBC 2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S. K.

Ghosh Associates LLC

Date: 01 June 2021

Professor Md. Zoynul Abedin, Ph.D.

Geotechnical Design of Foundations:

PART : 6 (in Volume 2 of BNBC 2020)

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

The Soils and Foundations Chapter of the Code is divided

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Appendix D: Methods of Soil Exploration, Sampling and

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

The provisions of this Chapter shall be applicable to the design

Because of uncertainties and randomness involved in sub-soil

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

The present lecture scheme is arranged in the following order.

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Soil is considered to include all naturally occurring loose or soft deposit

Soil Top soil

Bed rock Bed rock

(a) Geologist (b) Agriculturist (c) Geotechnical

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Periodical Solution Plant Animal

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

The types and intensity

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Earth Mass: Consists of 3 Major Layers

Rock: Three (3) Types of Rock Formed of Several Minerals

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Mineral Group Species Structural Class Composition

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

(a) Silica Tetrahedron unit

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

The basic structural units clay minerals can be

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Kaolinite Illite Montmorillonite

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Depending on origin or depositional mode, soil can

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Classification based on Grain

Classification based on Use:

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Water Glacier Wind Gravity

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Soil Mass Classification Based on Cohesion

Cohesive Soil: Clay and plastic silt particles. Cohesive

‫ ܋‬െ ૎Soil: Any or both types of cohesionless and

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Two most common widely accepted classification

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Grain Size Analysis

Sieve Analysis (A set of Sedimentation Analysis (If

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

The results of grain size analysis (sieve and hydrometer

Chapter 3 : Soils and Foundations

Consistency Test: Depending on water content, a soil could

Liquid Plastic State: Can Semi-Solid Solid

Liquid Plastic Shrinkage