Behaviour of Piled Raft Foundation

14.
Behaviour of piled raft foundation

for tall building in Japan
M. Majima and T. Nagao
14.1. Introduction
This chapter describes the calculated and observed foundation behaviour of a large
building complex in Niigata City, Japan, completed in 1994 for hotel, office and retail
use. The building is supported on a raft foundation combined with friction piles, and its
behaviour has been monitored during construction and for a short period afterwards. A
simplified settlement analysis has also been carried out, based on a finite element struc-
ture on a layered elastic half-space. The results of this analysis, together with field
observations, are presented herein.
14.2. Project details

The steel framed structure has up to 21 storeys above ground level (125 m in height) and
generally a 3-storey basement, increasing to 4 storeys (19 m depth) beneath the tower
[14.1]; see Figure 14.1. The plan area of the building complex is about 3300 m2. The raft
thickness varies from 2.0 m to 3.7 m, and the 157 cast-in-place concrete piles (1.0–1.8 m
diameter) were designed to carry the entire building load. Two piles per column are used
in the high-rise section, and one pile per column in the low-rise section. These piles were
drilled and cast from the original ground surface, followed by basement excavation and
construction of the raft.
Measured soil properties from laboratory and in-situ tests are shown in Figure 14.2.
The soil is classified according to JSF M 111–1990 (Method of classification of soils for
engineering purposes), and the S-wave velocities were measured in borehole field tests.
The fines content signifies the percentage of soil with a grain size less than 0.075 mm,
whilst the shear strength cu and the friction angle f′ relate to undrained and drained
conditions, respectively. Although the N-values in the Ds-layer are higher than in the
Dc-layer (possibly caused by the difference in fines content), the position is reversed with
respect to shear wave velocity. Accordingly, the Young’s modulus of the Dc-layer is
higher than that of the Ds-layer. The consolidation yield stress for the Dc-layer is in the
range 0.8–1 MPa, the soil being overconsolidated by about 200 kPa. Because the weight
of the building (equivalent average applied pressure 250 kPa) is little different from the
weight of excavated soil, no consolidation settlement is anticipated in the Dc-layer.
Downloaded by [ York University] on [20/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
394 D ESIG N AP PLIC A TIO NS OF RA FT FOU N DA TIO N S
GL
0
Silt
Medium
10
sand
20 Fine
30 sand
e GL–36 m a
40
Sand
50 and
Depth: m
sandy
60 silt
f GL–66 m b
70
Silt
80
g GL–85 m c
90
Silty
100 clay
110 h GL–110 m d
Sand
120 and Settlement measurement
silt
locations
(vertical extensometers)
(a)
95·4 m
Low-rise
High-rise section
36·1 m
Low-rise section
(–15 m) (–19 m) (–15 m)

(–19 m)
Pile
(b)
Figure 14.1. Building complex in Niigata City, Japan: (a) longitudinal cross-section and
soil profile; (b) foundation plan
PIL ED RA FT FO R TA LL B UI LD IN G I N JA PA N 395
S-wave velocity Fines content Fc Consolidation yield Cohesion

Depth: Soil profile (× 100 m/s) Water content wn stress pc (MPa) cu (MPa)
m
1 2 3 4 20 40 60 80% 0·2 0·4 0·6 0·8 1 0·1 0·2 0·3 0·4
Silt pc
10 As Medium
Fc ρ
sand wn
Pile
20
Fine
Ds sand
30
Effective
overburden cu
40 pressure φ′
Sand
50 Dsc and
sandy
silt
60
70
80 Silt
Dc
90
Silty
100 clay
110
Sand
Sl 10 20 30 40 50 1·7 1·8 1·9 2·0 2·1 10 20 30 40
120 and Internal friction
SPT Wet density ρ(g/cm3)
silt angle φ′(º)
N -value
Figure 14.2. Soil properties at site of building complex in Niigata City, Japan
14.3. Field observations

Raft settlements were measured at 25 locations, 13 in the high-rise section and 12 in the
low-rise section; see Figure 14.3(a). A hydrostatic tube settlement system was installed,
with differences in water pressure measured using high accuracy pressure gauges. Two
anchor-type extensometers were used to measure vertical ground movements at intervals
of 4 m depth below the building, as indicated in Figure 14.1(a).
Groundwater pressures were measured by three gauges positioned 1 m below the base
of the raft, and raft bearing pressures were measured at five locations in the high-rise
section. Pile-head loads were measured at the centre and edges of the high-rise section,
with gauges set in the concrete and also attached to the main pile reinforcement; see
Figure 14.3(b). All load-measuring devices were based on electric resistance strain
gauges.
Based on the extensometer measurements, Figure 14.4(a) shows the time history of the
differential heave or rebound of the ground and the average excavation depth in the
high-rise section. Assuming the deepest anchors to be immovable, the heave on comple-
tion of the excavation was about 15 mm in the low-rise section and 28 mm in the
high-rise section, measured relative to the base of the raft. It was also observed that
rebound of the ground responded quickly to increases in excavation depth. Similarly for
1
8
20 No.1
4
7
21 10
9 6
(1)11 (3)
22 (5)
No.2 2
No.4
(2) (4)
5
No.3
14 15 16 5 17 18 19
4 12
23 1 2 3
13 3
24
6
25
Axial force at pile head No.1–No.4 Water pressure 1 – 6

Earth pressure (1)–(5) Raft settlement 1–25
Vertical extensometers near settlement stations 5 and 17
(a)
Main reinforcement
Concrete gauge
Steel bar gauge
Concrete gauge Steel bar gauge
Pile head
Plan Section
(b)
Figure 14.3. Instrumentation used in piled raft foundation for building complex in
Niigata City, Japan: (a) plan layout; (b) pile-head load measurement
the settlements measured during the subsequent construction, as shown in Figure

14.4(b), where some of the fluctuations were caused by changes in groundwater level.
Figure 14.5(a) shows profiles of settlement with depth on completion of the basement
(April 1992), on completion of the building (April 1993), and at the time of the last
measurements (February 1994). Because no data at the 36 m depth are available beyond
the 140th day, the differential settlement between the raft and the base of the piles is
unknown, but that between the raft and a depth of 65 m accounted for about 80% of the
total settlement. In contrast, the settlement in the silty layer at 65–105 m depth accounted
for less than 20% of the total settlement.
–30
GL–110 m
–20
Heave: mm
GL–85 m
–10
GL–66 m
0
Excavation depth: m
GL–36 m
10
June 1991
20
0 30 60 90 120 150
Time: days
(a)
0
GL–36 m
1993 1994
1992
4
Settlement: mm
Concreting raft GL–66 m

12
GL–85 m
Concreting basement
16
Steel frame construction
Completion
GL–110 m
(Apr. 1993)
20
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780
Time: days
(b)
Figure 14.4. Measured vertical ground movements below high-rise section of piled raft
foundation for building complex in Niigata City, Japan: (a) excavation stage; (b) main
construction stage
Measured raft settlement profiles in the longitudinal direction are shown in

Figure 14.5(b). The maximum recorded settlement was about 22 mm, with both total and
differential settlements continuing to increase after completion of the building. From the
last readings, the average angular distortion between stations 3 and 14 is 1/4150, and the
maximum gradient is 1/3250.
Depth: Soil SPT

m profile N - value
Settlement: mm
20 40
0 10 20 30
0
10 As
Raft
20
20 Ds
30
Depth below ground surface: m
Pile
40
40
50 Dsc
60
60
70
80
80
Apr. 1992
90 Dc
Apr. 1993
Feb. 1994 100
100
110
120
(a)
Apr. 1992
Apr. 1993
5
14 Feb. 1994
15 Location of vertical extensometers
16
17
Settlement: mm
18
10
19 8
7
1 5 6
2 3 4
15
20
25
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Distance: m
(b)
Figure 14.5. Measured settlement profiles for piled raft foundation for building complex
in Niigata City, Japan: (a) settlement with depth; (b) raft settlement in longitudinal
direction
200
2
3
160
Groundwater pressure: kPa
120
80
1993 1994
1992
40
Completion
1 (Apr. 1993)
0
(a)
80
1993 1994
1992
Effective raft contact pressure: kPa
60
(5)
40
(3)
20
(2)
Completion
(Apr. 1993)
0
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780
Time: days
(b)
Figure 14.6. Measured pressures beneath high-rise section of piled raft foundation for
building complex in Niigata City, Japan: (a) groundwater pressure; (b) effective raft
contact pressure
Measured groundwater pressures just below the base of the raft are shown in Figure
14.6(a), and depended on the number of pumps in operation. The pressure increase
between days 240 and 290 was aimed at controlling the settlement of the building
through buoyancy; this was reflected in a reduction in the rate of measured settlement,
despite the continuation of the steel frame construction. After completion of the building,
the measured pressures corresponded to a groundwater level at a depth of some 2 m
below the ground surface.
1·5
1993 1994
1992
1
No.3
Concrete stress: MPa
0·5
No.2
No.4
0
–0·5
Completion
(Apr. 1993)
–1
(a)
20
1993 1994
1992
15
Main reinforcement stress: MPa
No.3
10
0
No.4 No.2
–5
Completion
(Apr. 1993)
–10
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780
Time: days
(b)
Figure 14.7. Measured pile-head stresses below high-rise section of building complex in
Niigata City, Japan: (a) stress in concrete; (b) stress in main reinforcement
Figure 14.6(b) shows the variations in effective raft contact pressure, obtained by
reducing the measured (total) earth pressure by the corresponding measured groundwater
pressure. Here it is noted that the effective pressures dropped after stopping the pumps
on the 240th day, reaching a minimum value on around the 260th day, before increasing
again as construction advanced.
Measured axial stresses (compression positive) in the pile heads are shown in Figure
14.7. Corresponding axial pile loads at the centre of the high-rise section were about
2
1993 1994
1992
1·5
Load on piles
Vertical load: MN
Load on raft
0·5
Completion
(Apr. 1993)
0
(a)
100
1993 1994
1992
80
Pile-head load share: %
60
40
20
Completion
(Apr. 1993)
0
0 60 120 180 240 300 360 420 480 540 600 660 720 780
Time: days
(b)
Figure 14.8. Measured load share in piled raft foundation below high-rise section
of building complex in Niigata City, Japan: (a) pile-head and raft loads; (b) pile load
share
1.2 MN, and 2.1 MN at the corner, the latter value being about one-half of the design
load. Figure 14.8 shows the load share between piles 2 and 3 and the associated area of
raft. Thus the proportion of load carried by the piles remained fairly constant at around
65% until approaching the end of the main construction, after which it increased to about
80% when the last readings were taken.
P
Building loads
P P
P P
P P P
P P
P P
P
Soil springs
Beam elements
Figure 14.9. Modelling of piled raft foundation as beam grillage supported on springs
of variable stiffness
14.4. Foundation analysis

By assuming that the piles essentially transfer the building load to deeper strata, the piled
raft was analysed as a plain raft located at depth. In the case of nearly homogeneous soil,
the transfer depth was taken as two-thirds of the pile length; when pile load tests were
carried out, the depth was determined from the distribution of pile friction forces.
As indicated in Figure 14.9, the foundation was modelled by beam finite elements
supported on springs of varying stiffness, the latter based on the calculated settlements of
a layered elastic half-space. Unit vertical loads were applied to each node of the mesh on
the surface of the soil, to calculate the variation of displacement with depth and hence
obtain the soil flexibility matrix. These calculations were based on the classical Boussi-
nesq expressions [14.2] for a uniformly loaded circular area (diagonal terms) and a
vertical point load (off-diagonal terms), together with the appropriate soil stiffness
values, in a manner similar to the standard Steinbrenner approximation.
The effect of load distribution on the surface settlement (w) of a homogeneous
half-space (E, v) is shown in Figure 14.10. According to AIJ recommendations [14.3],
the centre-to-centre spacing of piles in a group should be greater than twice the pile
diameter. Evidently the two profiles of calculated settlement in this outer region are
almost identical for the same total applied load.
To establish the elastic parameters for the soil, Poisson’s ratio (v) was taken as
one-third, whilst the Young’s modulus (E) and the shear modulus (G) corresponding to
the applied building load were based on shear strain (c) in the following manner.
1. Calculate the dynamic values Gd and Ed from the S-wave velocity using standard
method.
2. Assume G0 = Gd and E0 = Ed, where G0 and E0 denote the initial moduli at small
shear strain (c = 10–6).
Circular uniformly distributed load
Concentrated load P = πa 2p
P
p
r
Young's modulus E
Poisson's ratio ν
z
R
z
∆σz
(a)
p
0
0·4
0·8
1·2
wπaE / P (1–ν2)
1·6
2·0
2·4
2·8 Surface settlement w

Circular uniformly distributed load p
3·2
Concentrated axial load P
3·6
P = πa 2p
4·0
0 a 2a 3a 4a 5a 6a
Distance from load centre: r
(b)
Figure 14.10. Effect of load distribution on surface settlement of homogeneous elastic

half-space: (a) notation; (b) comparative settlements
1
Normalised shear modulus λ
0·8
0·6
Average range
0·4
0·2
0
10–4 10–3 10–2 10–1 1
Shear strain γ: %
Figure 14.11. Typical relation between normalised shear modulus and shear strain
3. Calculate the vertical strain at the corner (e1) and centre (e3) of an equivalent
rectangular area using Steinbrenner’s method.
4. Set eave = (e1 + e3)/2.
5. Assume cave = (1 + v)eave, and obtain k1 from Figure 14.11.
6. Set G1 = k1G0 and E1 = k1E0.
7. Carry out steps 3–5 using E1.
8. Repeat steps 3–7 until the Ei-values converge (to within 1%).
In step 3, the building load Q is assumed to be uniformly distributed over a rectangle of
the same plan area as the foundation, and applied at the pile load transfer depth. Where
there is a buoyancy force Qb, then Q – Qb is used as the building load.
To take account of the stiffness of the structure above raft level, the moment of inertia
(I) of the beam elements representing the raft is increased to an appropriate level. This
equivalent value Ie is estimated as follows.
1. Calculate I for foundation beam only.
2. Using plane frame analysis, obtain deflection profile for foundation with super-
structure; Figure 14.12(a).
3. Obtain deflection profile for simple beam having moment of inertia nI; Figure
14.12(b).
4. Calculate n repeatedly until deflections in steps 2 and 3 are approximately equal.
5. Set nI = Ie.
The foundation was modelled using 220 beam elements, with Ie = 10I, as shown in
Figure 14.13. To simplify the analysis, there was only one pile at each node, an equiva-
lent pile diameter being used at the column locations with two piles. The load transfer
depth of each pile was taken as 32 m below ground level, equal to one-third of the pile
length above the pile base. Figure 14.14 shows the results of a pile load test carried out
on the site of the building, the pile diameter being 1.5 m. The axial load distribution is
Foundation beam
(a)
(b)
Figure 14.12. Estimation of equivalent moment of inertia: (a) building model; (b) simple
beam model
7
Pile
6
Beam
element 5
14 15 16 17 18 19
4
1 2
3
1–19: Settlement stations
Figure 14.13. Beam grillage modelling of piled raft foundation for building complex in
Niigata City, Japan
plotted for each increment of applied load, and the distribution of skin friction is shown
at 6 MN, which is similar to the design load. This latter result gives the equivalent load
transfer depth as 30.6 m, which is close to the assumed value. To calculate settlements,
the soil was divided into three sub-layers, and a rigid base was assumed to be located
105 m below the ground surface. Figure 14.15 shows the relation between the shear
modulus and shear strain for each sub-layer; these results were based on dynamic triaxial
tests, except for the first layer.
Depth: SPT Pile Load: MN Skin friction: kPa

m
N -value
20 40 0 5 10 15 20 0 50 100
1m
De-bonded P = 6 MN P = 6 MN
10
17 m
19 m
20
25 m
30 31 m
36 m
38·5 m
Figure 14.14. Results of pile load test at site of building complex in Niigata City, Japan
0·8
Layer 3
λ (=G /G0)
0·6
Layer 2
0·4
0·2
Layer 1
0
10–6 10–5 10–4 10–3 10–2
Shear strain γ
Figure 14.15. Relation between normalised shear modulus and shear strain used in
foundation analysis for building complex in Niigata City, Japan
Foundation analyses were carried out for the following cases.
Case 1. Calculation before construction.

The groundwater level was assumed to be 5 m below the ground surface; this is 3 m
lower than the level measured in the site investigation. Also Ie = 10I.
Case 2. Calculation after construction.

The groundwater level was assumed to be 2 m below the ground surface. Tables 14.1
and 14.2 give the buoyancy values and soil parameters used in the analyses. In Case 2(a),
Ie = 10I. In Case 2(b), Ie = 0 (no foundation structure). In Case 2(c), Ie = I (foundation
beam only).
Table 14.1. Assumed buoyancy values in foundation analysis for building complex in
Niigata City, Japan
Depth of foundation
Section (m) Case 1 (kN) Case 2 (kN)
Low-rise section 15.0 98.0 127.4

High-rise section 19.0 137.2 166.6
Table 14.2. Assumed soil parameters in foundation analysis for building complex in
Niigata City, Japan
Young’s modulus (MPa)
Thickness Poisson’s
Layer No. Depth (m) (m) Initial value Case 1 Case 2 ratio
1 32–38 6 343.0 75.5 87.2 0.33

2 38–65 27 431.0 117.0 129.0 0.33
3 65–105 40 480.0 227.0 245.0 0.33
Figure 14.16 shows the calculated raft settlements for Case 2(a), and gives the location
of the settlement measuring stations. Figure 14.17 shows the measured and calculated
raft settlement profiles for all four cases, while the principal values are given in
Table 14.3. Figure 14.18 compares the calculated variations of settlement with depth
below levelling station 5 with values observed in February 1994.
Table 14.3. Observed and calculated settlements of piled raft foundation for building
complex in Niigata City, Japan
Maximum settlement Differential settlement Average deformation

Case (mm) (mm) angle (rad)
Observed 21.8 10.9 1/4150

Case 1 33.7 8.2 1/5520
Case 2(a) 22.6 7.3 1/6190
Case 2(b) 31.5 21.2 1/2130
Case 2(c) 23.9 10.3 1/4390
Settlement
50 mm
8 0
Scale
7
6
5
4
3
19 2 -rise
17
18 Low
16 1
15
14
-rise
High
ise 1–19: Settlement stations

Low-r
Figure 14.16. Calculated settlements of piled raft foundation for building complex in
Niigata City, Japan
10 14
15
16
17 8
18
1 5 7
2 4 6
3
Settlement: mm
20
30
Case 1
40 Case 2(a)
Case 2(b)
Case 2(c)
Observed
50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Distance: m
Figure 14.17. Observed and calculated raft settlement profiles for building complex in
Niigata City, Japan
Settlement: mm
0 10 20 30 40
0
20
Depth below ground surface: m
40
60
80
Case 1
Case 2(a)
Observed
100
Figure 14.18. Observed and calculated settlement with depth below levelling station 5
(February 1994) for building complex in Niigata City, Japan
With regard to total settlements, the difference in the Case 1 and Case 2(a) results was
due to the different assumptions on buoyancy in the two analyses, the groundwater level
affecting both the stresses in the ground and the Young’s modulus of the soil. With
regard to differential settlements, both these analyses gave values smaller than those
observed. Possible reasons for this disparity are as follows.
1. The assumed equivalent moment of inertia of the structure was too large.
2. Young's modulus of the soil was not constant in any given horizontal plane, as
assumed in the analysis. In practice, the vertical stress in the ground beneath the
centre of the building is higher than at the sides, indicating that the soil stiffness
will be lower in the central region.
3. The settlement of the side of the building was affected by the basement wall, and
the depth of the foundation below ground level. In the former, edge loading on the
soil will be reduced by friction forces acting on the wall; in the latter, the
surrounding soil above foundation level will reduce settlements.
14.5. Summary
The main results of this investigation are as follows.
1. The maximum recorded raft settlement was 22 mm, including 4 mm during the
final nine months.
2. As settlements increased, the raft bearing pressures and pile-head loads were
redistributed.
3. With increasing groundwater pressure, the load share ratio between the pile heads
and the raft varied from 2:1 to 4:1.
4. The maximum settlement calculated in the pre-monitoring analysis was 60%
higher than the measured value, mainly as a result of assuming a groundwater
level well below the actual level.
14.6. References
14.1. MAJIMA, M., ENAMI, A., NAGAO, T. and WAKAME, Y. Settlement behaviour of a tall building
supported by friction piles. J. Struct. Constr. Engng, AIJ, 1995, 467, Jan., 83–92 (in Japanese).
14.2. POULOS, H. G. and DAVIS, E. H. Elastic solutions for soil and rock mechanics. Wiley, New
York, 1974.
14.3. ARCHITECTURAL INSTITUTE OF JAPAN. Recommendations for design of building foundations. AIJ,
Tokyo, 1988, 156–163 (in Japanese).

Behaviour of Piled Raft Foundation

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

Behaviour of Piled Raft Foundation

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

14.

Behaviour of piled raft foundation

14.2. Project details

(–15 m) (–19 m) (–15 m)

S-wave velocity Fines content Fc Consolidation yield Cohesion

14.3. Field observations

Axial force at pile head No.1–No.4 Water pressure 1 – 6

Vertical extensometers near settlement stations 5 and 17

Concrete gauge Steel bar gauge

the settlements measured during the subsequent construction, as shown in Figure

Concreting raft GL–66 m

Measured raft settlement profiles in the longitudinal direction are shown in

Depth: Soil SPT

14.4. Foundation analysis

Circular uniformly distributed load

2·8 Surface settlement w

Figure 14.10. Effect of load distribution on surface settlement of homogeneous elastic

1–19: Settlement stations

Depth: SPT Pile Load: MN Skin friction: kPa

Foundation analyses were carried out for the following cases.

Case 1. Calculation before construction.

Case 2. Calculation after construction.

Low-rise section 15.0 98.0 127.4

Young’s modulus (MPa)

1 32–38 6 343.0 75.5 87.2 0.33

Maximum settlement Differential settlement Average deformation

Observed 21.8 10.9 1/4150

ise 1–19: Settlement stations

You might also like