Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam

Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara Bypass Road,

District Khyber

Report
Prepared by:
Prof. Dr. Irshad
Ahmad
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Muhammad
Waseem

Department of Civil Engineering

University of Engineering and Technology
Peshawar, Pakistan

Report Prepared
For:
C&W Department, Highway Division Tribal District Khyber
October, 2021
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

CONTENTS

1. Introduction
......................................................................................... 4

2. Documents provided for review

.......................................................... 4

3.
Methodology....................................................................................
..... 5

4. Design Parameters Assumptions

......................................................... 6

5. Description of the bridge

..................................................................... 6

Geometry of the bridge 6

Materials properties and other information of bridge 7

6. Codes and Standards

........................................................................... 8

West Pakistan Bridge Code (1967) Live Load Model 8

Design Response Spectrum 10

6.2.1. Bridge Classification

........................................................................ 10
6.2.1. Site classification
.............................................................................. 10
6.2.2. Seismic parameters
........................................................................... 10

7. Structural assessment/vetting of bridge components ........................ 14

Deck Slab 14

Approach Slab 14

Diaphragm 15

Girder 15
1
Bearing Pad 16
Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

2
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Construction Joint 18

Shear Key 18

Bridge Drainage 18

Pile Cap 18

Pile Shaft 19

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

...................................................23

List of
Figures

Figure 1 Bridge section ..................................................................................................

4

Figure 2 Longitudinal view of Class AA Load (Military Tank).................................... 8

Figure 3 Transverse view of Class AA Load (Military Tank) .......................................

9

Figure 4 Longitudinal view of Class A Load (Train Load) ...........................................

9

Figure 5 Transverse view of Class A Load (Train Load) ..............................................

9

Figure 6 Design Response Spectrum (AASHTO LRFD 2012) ...................................

12

Figure 7 Design Response Spectrum for the bridge site ..............................................

12

Figure 8 Seismic Zones................................................................................................ 12

Figure 9 Response Modification Factors for Substructures......................................... 13

Figure 10 Site Factor for PGA .....................................................................................

13

Figure 11 Site Factors Based on Ss .............................................................................. 13

3
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
Figure 12 Site Factors Based on S1 ..............................................................................
13

Figure 13 PLAXIS 3D Model of Pile Foundation of the Bridge .................................

20

Figure 14 Deformed mesh of the PLAXIS 3D Model of the Bridge ...........................

21

Figure 15 Shear force profile of the piles in pile foundation of the Bridge .................
21

Figure 16 Bending moment profile of the piles in the pile foundation of the Bridge.. 22

4
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

List of Tables

Table 1 Required Vs Provided Documents.................................................................... 5

Table 2 Properties of the Bridge ....................................................................................

6

Table 3 Material Properties and other information of bridge ........................................

7

Table 4 PSHA results ...................................................................................................

11

Table 5 Deck Slab Observations ..................................................................................

14

Table 6 Approach Slab Observations .......................................................................... 15

Table 7 Diaphragm Observations ................................................................................ 15

Table 8 Girder Observations ........................................................................................

16

Table 9 Bearing Pad Observations............................................................................... 16

Table 10 Expansion Joint Observations....................................................................... 17

Table 11 Bent Beam Observations .............................................................................. 17

Table 12 Pier Observations ..........................................................................................

18

Table 13 Pile Cap Observations................................................................................... 18

Table 14 Pile Shaft Observations................................................................................. 19

Table 15 Summary of Observations ............................................................................ 24

5
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

1. Introduction
Sub divisional officer highway sub division Bara, vide his letter reference No. 306/I-
Lab dated 28/03/2021 requested Chairman, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of Engineering and Technology for the Structural Design vetting of bridge
project titled “Construction of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in
Bara Bypass (152-meter). The project site is located in district Khyber at Alam
Gouder Aka Khel, Bara. The mentioned bridge consists of 6 No. of span each 24m
long Figure 1.

This report includes complete assessment of all structural components of the above
mentioned bridge and review comments made thereof based on the documents
provided by the client.

Figure 1 Bridge section

2. Documents provided for review

The following is the list of documents available to assist in review/vetting of the
bridge.

6
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
Table 1 Required Vs Provided Documents
S. no Documents required Documents provided () remarks
for vetting Not available ()
1 Structure drawings

Design calculations The documents were

2
report requested vide our
Letter Ref. No
3 Computer model
227 A/CED-
Geotechnical UETP/C-2/Voll-III
4
investigation report dated 23/09/201

5 Pile load test

3. Methodology
The methodology adopted for the review/vetting of the structural design of Bara
Bridge is described below:

1. Studying of the provided structural drawings, geotechnical and the pile load
test reports and obtaining information on the parameters used for
design/vetting.
2. Fixation of missing data due to un-availability of the structural design
calculations.
3. Generation of Finite Element model of the bridge in CSI bridge software for
analysis.
4. Using West Pakistan code of Practice for Highway Bridge (1967) for live load
model as was used in the original design.
5. ASSHTO-LRFD (2012) for the design of bridge as was used in the original
design of bridge.
6. Carrying out Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis to find AASHTO based
seismic parameters as these parameters were not provided by the original
designer.
7. Developing PLAXIS-3D finite element model for pile group foundation
analysis.

7
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
8. Conclusions and recommendations based on numerical modeling/hand
calculations results.

4. Design Parameters Assumptions

Due to non-availability of the structural design calculations, the following
assumptions were made during vetting of structural design of the bridge.

1. Peak spectral accelerations corresponding to 0.2s and 1 sec for return periods
corresponding to the bridge classification.
2. Bridge classification AASHTO-LRFD (2012)
3. Site soil profile classification as by AASHTO-LRFD (2012).
4. Location and elevation of boreholes and pile load test
5. Geotechnical design parameters
6. Geotechnical parameters used for the geotechnical/structural design of the pile
foundation were assumed as design calculations were not provided and neither
the drawings have that information.
7. Scour depth
8. Maximum Flood were not provided for the bridge site

5. Description of the bridge

Geometric and material description of the bridge is provided in the section below.

Geometry of the bridge

The following properties of the Bridge have been obtained from structural drawings

Table 2 Properties of the Bridge

S.No Description of bridge element value
1 Bridge total length 143.45 m
2 Number of spans 6
3 Each span length 24 m
4 Total width of Bridge 9.9 m
5 Clear roadway 7.3 m
6 Number of girders 4.0

8
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Materials properties and other information of bridge

Table 3 provide material properties of bridge and other details as obtained from
provided drawings. Some missing information are assumed or recalculated to
complete the vetting of the bridge design.
Table 3 Material Properties and other information of bridge
S.No Description of bridge Obtained from Assumed/
element documents provided Recalculated
1 Concrete 6000 psi and 4000 psi -
2 Tendons 270 Ksi -
3 Reinforcement 60 Ksi -
4 Bearing pad 70 and 25 Duro -
Hardness
5 PSA Not available recalculated
PGA= 0.265g, Ss=
0.54g, S1 = 0.17g
6 Seismic Site Class Not available Soil profile D
7 Operational Classification Not available Essential
of the bridge
8 High Flood Level Not available -
9 Co-ordinates and Not available -
elevation of Borehole
10 Location of Pile test Not available -
11 Topographic survey Not available. It -
should be provided
attached with structure
drawings.
12 Steel plate thickness in Complete detail not
Bearing Pads provided in the
drawings to vet it
13 Clear cover Pile Cap Not available 75 mm top and
bottom
14 Compressive strength of Not available 4000 psi assumed
Pile cap

9
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

15 Corbels Not available

16 Drainage system Not provided
17 Approach slab thickness Not provided -
18 Pile coordinates Not provided -
19 Scour depth Not provided 2 m assumed

6. Codes and Standards

Live load model based on West Pakistan Bridge Code (1967). However, AASTHO-
LRFD (2012) is used to define combinations/limits states, permissible stresses in
concrete and tendon, deflection limits in girders. A brief description of the live load
models of West Pakistan Bridge Code (1967) is explained below.

West Pakistan Bridge Code (1967) Live Load Model

Two live load models of the West Pakistan Bridge Code (1967) are used. The Live
loads used in the structural design vetting consists of

1. Class AA Load, Military Tank (Figure 2 & Figure 3)

2. Class A Load, Train Load (Figure 4 & Figure 5)

Figure 2 Longitudinal view of Class AA Load (Military Tank)

10
Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Figure 3 Transverse view of Class AA Load (Military Tank)

Figure 4 Longitudinal view of Class A Load (Train Load)

Figure 5 Transverse view of Class A Load (Train Load)

11
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Design Response Spectrum

To develop design response spectrum bridge needs to be classified and seismic
parameters needs to be found out accordingly. These are explained below.

6.2.1. Bridge Classification

According to AASTHO-LRFD (2012) any bridge for seismic design needs to be
classified as one of the following class:
1. Critical Bridges
2. Essential Bridges
3. Other Bridges
Critical Bridges are considered those which are open to emergency vehicles and for
security and / defense purposes immediately after a large earthquake with return
period of 2500 years. Essential Bridges are those bridges which are open to
emergency vehicles and for security/ defense purposes immediately after the design
earthquake. Design earthquake according to AASHTO-LRFD (2012) is
corresponding to a return of period of 1000 years.

6.2.1. Site classification

Site classification is not provided in the geotechnical report, however, for the vetting
purpose site is classified as Soil profile type D, stiff soil profile, having SPT count in
the range of 15 to 50, averaged over a depth of 30m.
A site can be classified as class A to F based on information in Table 3.10.3.1-1 in
AASTHO-LRFD (2012). Seismic site class D is assigned to Bridge site based on SPT
counts given in Geotechnical Investigation report, however, no such classification is
available in the geotechnical report provided by the client.

6.2.2. Seismic parameters

The site of the bridge is placed in seismic zone 2B as per the building code of
Pakistan- seismic provision 2007 (BCP-2007). The peak ground acceleration (PGA)
for this zone varies from 0.16g to 0.24g for a return period of 475 years on rock site.
However, AASTHO-LRFD (2012) requires peak spectral acceleration (PSA) values at
0.2 sec and
1 sec time periods for a return period of 1000 years for bridges classified as
“essential”. These parameters are not available in BCP-2007). This requires
probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) to be carried out for the site. Therefore,
PSHA has been carried out for the site to obtain the required parameters as these were
1
0
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
not provided by the designer/client. Seismic hazard and risk package of OpenQuake
software has been used

1
1
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
to make numerical calculations for seismic hazard analysis based on standard Cornell
(1968) approach. These seismic parameters are described below.
Seismic parameters have been obtained for bridge reference site having 33.82oN and
71.08oE using Probabilistic Seismic Hazard approach for design earthquake defined as
ground motion corresponding to 1000 years return period. Apart from these
parameters PGA value corresponding to 1000 years return period have been also
obtained. These seismic parameters for bridge site using Probabilistic Seismic Hazard
Analysis approach as per AASTHO-LRFD (2012) requirements are S1 (long period
range) and Ss (short period range) corresponding to a return period of 1.0 and 0.2 sec
as shown in the Table 4 and Figure 6. The values of SDs and SD1 are also provided in
Table 4. These parameters as mentioned in Table 4 are not given in drawing or any
other document and computation of these parameters is out of the scope of this
project, however, they are additionally done.
According to Table 7, the site lies in Seismic zone 3 as per AASHTO-LRFD (2012).
Typical design spectrum as per AASHTO-LRFD (2012) is given in Figure 6, whereas
site specific design spectrum is developed and provided in Figure 7.

Table 4 PSHA results

S.No Description Acceleration (g) Return Period

1 Peak ground acceleration (PGA) at 0.267 1000 years

reference rock site class B

2 Short range acceleration (Ss) at 0.54 1000 years

reference rock site class B

3 Long range acceleration (S1) at 0.17 1000 years

reference rock site class B

4 SD1 0.34

5 SDS 0.7

1
2
Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Figure 6 Design Response Spectrum (AASHTO LRFD 2012)

Response Sectrum for the Bridge Site

0.25

0.2

0.15
R =3.5
S

0.1

0.05

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
T (sec)

Figure 7 Design Response Spectrum for the bridge site

Figure 8 Seismic Zones

1
2
Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Figure 9 Response Modification Factors for Substructures

Figure 10 Site Factor for PGA

Figure 11 Site Factors Based on Ss

Figure 12 Site Factors Based on S1

1
3
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

7. Structural assessment/vetting of bridge components

All bridge components were checked. Detail of all components are as below.

Deck Slab
Table 5 Deck Slab Observations
S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 Flexural ɸ22 mm @ 184 Adequate Finite Element
reinforcement No. model results
ɸ20 mm @ 184 were used in the
No. evaluation.

2 Thickness of slab 200mm Adequate -

3 Punching - Adequate 95 KN point
load applied on
600x300mm
deck area
4 Concrete cover 40 mm (from Not Not as per
top) Adequate AASTHO-
LRFD
specification.

Approach Slab
Thickness of the approach slab is missing and therefore cannot be verified. Moreover,
no Corbel details have been provided for resting of rigid pavement. Adequate
protection needs to be provided in order to ensure safety of vehicles and persons at the
ends of bridge. Detail is provided in Table below.

1
4
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
Table 6 Approach Slab Observations
S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 Waning Sign Not provided These details
Boards - needs to be
2 Cat-Eyes Not provided - provided in
detail drawings
3 Concrete cover 40 mm (from Not adequate Not as per
top) AASTHO-
LRFD
specification.

Diaphragm
The numbers of Diaphragm in drawings no BR# 1-1 and BR# 1-5 are not matching.
Connection of Bent beam and diaphragm is missing and it should be provided at each
span alternatively. Detail is provided in Table below.
Table 7 Diaphragm Observations
S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 Reinforcement ɸ16 and ɸ12 Adequate -
2 Thickness 200 mm Adequate -

Girder
Girder was checked against various requirements of strength and servicibility as
required by AASHTO-LRFD (2012). These are listed below.
 Minimum depth criteria
 Flexure, Shear and Deflection criteria
 Fatigue Limit State
 Permissible stresses in bottom and top fibers
Bursting reinforcement in the Girder of bridge have not been separately mentioned on
the drawings.

1
5
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
Table 8 Girder Observations
S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 Flexural ɸ 20 mm 4 Nos Adequate -
reinforcement
2 Shear reinforcement ɸ 12 mm @ Adequate -
200 mm
3 Depth 1600 mm Adequate -
4 Concrete cover 40 mm (from Adequate -
top)
25mm (bottom)
5 Deflection _ Adequate -
6 Bursting - - Not separately
reinforcement mentioned in
the drawings

Bearing Pad
Two bearing pads are provided and both having different properties. Complete
thickness details for both bearing pads are missing and hence cannot be vetted.
Table 9 Bearing Pad Observations
S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 500 mm x 500 mm 70 mm Not Adequate Steel plate thickness
have not been
provided, Hence
cannot be vetted
2 100 mm x 100 mm 25 mm Not Adequate Steel plate thickness
have not been
provided, Hence
cannot be vetted

1
6
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Expansion Joint
Leather imported expansion may be used to ensure smooth riding of vehicles
Table 10 Expansion Joint Observations
S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 Expansion joint Gap 100 mm Adequate -
2 Type Angle iron Not Adequate -

Bent Beam
Skin reinforcement has been not being provided in the beam. Moreover, capacity of
the beam is very high.

Table 11 Bent Beam Observations

S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 Flexural ɸ25mm-48 Nos Adequate Steel can be
reinforcement (Top reduced to
and Bottom) minimize cost
2 Shear reinforcement ɸ12mm 6 Adequate
legged @ 100
mm
4 Skin reinforcement No skin Inadequate Must be
reinforcement provided

Pier
Piers perform two functions (1) transfer the vertical load coming from superstructure
to foundation and resist the lateral (seismic) loads. The Piers of the bridge bent are
reinforced concrete and are of equal heights. There has no irregularity observed in
Piers. Moreover, each Pier bent consist of two piers having diameter of 1700 mm.
Piers flexure and shear capacities have been evaluated against the extreme event using
the bending moment and shear demand from the finite element model. Pier spirals
have not been adequate against shear demand. The embedment of pier spirals in the
bent beam and pile cap has not been shown in the drawings.

1
7
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
Table 12 Pier Observations
S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 Flexural ɸ32 60 No’s Adequate Maximum
reinforcement (max) and ɸ25 reinforcement
60 No’s (min) shall be
continued
throughout the
pier section
2 Shear reinforcement ɸ12 Helix @ Not Adequate Fails in shear.
80, 60 mm
3 Section 1700 mm Adequate -

Construction Joint
The construction joint details have not been provided.

Shear Key
The shear key provided between the girders on transom beam does not have
reinforcement embedded within the transom beam.

Bridge Drainage
Bridge drainage system has not been provided in the drawings.

Pile Cap
Table 13 Pile Cap Observations
S.No Item Description Status Remarks
1 Flexural ϕ32 mm@ Adequate
reinforcement 110mm c/c on,
Both direction
Top and Bottom

2 Thickness of 2000 mm Adequate Thickness is

Pile Cap enough to
prevent
punching shear
of column

1
8
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

3 Concrete Clear 75 mm (from Adequate Assumed as

cover top and per AASHTO
Bottom) Article 5.12.3,
however not
mentioned in
the drawings
4 Area and Single Bar ϕ20 Not Adequate Not As per
spacing of Skin mm in AASHTO
Reinforcement horizontal
direction on
Each side face

Pile Shaft
Full 3D finite element model of the bridge pile foundation was modeled in PLAXIS
3D software using the provided geometric and material details. Pile foundation under
the piers were modeled using pile group foundation. Pier loads were applied on the pile
cap of the pile group foundation and the response of the piles were observed. Figure
13 to Figure 16 shows various outputs of the PLAXIS 3D model of the pile group
foundation. Based on studying structural drawings and calculation results the following
observations were made.
Table 14 Pile Shaft Observations
S.No. Item Description Status Remarks
1 No of piles in Based on the load
Pier 20 No. - transferred to the
foundation foundation and the
2 Pile diameter 750 mm - geotechnical/structural
3 capacity of each pile,
the provided number
of piles in pier
Pile Length 28 m -
foundations are large in
number and can be
substantially reduced

1
9
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

4 Piles spacing are not

symmetrical, in pile
s/d ratio 2.5 Adequate
rows perpendicular to
the bridge direction
5 Pile material fc’ = 4000 psi.
Adequate
properties fy = 60000 psi.
6 Pile Flexural 26-25mm  &
Adequate
reinforcements 13-25mm 
7 12mm ɸ @ The embedment of

Pile shear 75mm c/c pile spirals in the pile

Adequate
reinforcements & 12mm ɸ @ cap has not been
150mm c/c shown in the drawings

8 Concrete cover 75mm Adequate

Figure 13 PLAXIS 3D Model of Pile Foundation of the Bridge

2
0
Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Figure 14 Deformed mesh of the PLAXIS 3D Model of the Bridge

Figure 15 Shear force profile of the piles in pile foundation of the Bridge

2
1
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

Figure 16 Bending moment profile of the piles in the pile foundation of the Bridge

2
2
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass

8. Conclusions and Recommendations

Detailed vetting of the design of the bridge to be built at Alam Gouder Kalanaga Aka
Khel in Bara Bypass Road is carried out. It is concluded that
 The bridge is overall safe, however, the bridge pier shear reinforcement is
inadequate and would fail during earthquake. The designer shall revise the shear
reinforcement of the pier.
 All bridge components are checked. A number of deficiencies in the design are
noted which are described in Table 15, provided below.
 Many information in the drawings are missing. The details of missing
information are provided in Table 3. The designer shall update his/her drawings
to include all missing information with detailed drawings.
 Pile group is grossly overdesigned by providing 20 number of piles in a pile
group.
The numbers of pile can be substantially reduced.
 Six number of bridge spans are provided, each 24m long. The number of spans
can be reduced to four with span lengths equal to 30m with the addition of end
abutments. This arrangement can lead to cost optimization.

2
3
 Structural Design Vetting of RCC Bridge at Alam Gouder Kalanga Aka Khel in Bara
Bypass
Table 15 Summary of Observations
S.No Component Remarks
1 Deck Slab The provided top Reinforcement Cover is 40mm which is less than the
required min deck top cover as per Table 5.12.3-1 of AASTHO-LRFD
(2012)
2 Approach Warning signs, Cat-eyes and thickness are missing. Top reinforcement top
Slab cover is not adequate.-
3 Girder The separate detail of bursting reinforcement shall be shown in the
drawings
4 Bearing Not enough information provided on drawings to vet.
Pads
5 Expansion Angle iron arrangement shall be replaced with leather imported expansion
Joint joint
6 Construction Details are missing in drawings
Joint
7 Drainage Details are missing in drawings
System
8 Shear Key Reinforcement of shear key not embedded in Cap Beam.
9 Bent Beam Skin reinforcement not provided.
The connection of bent beam with diaphragm is not provided
10 Piers 1- Shear reinforcement in the piers is not enough against shear demand
imposed by earthquake during extreme event.
2- Pier shear reinforcement has not been embedded in bent beam as well
as in the pile cap.
3- The maximum flexural reinforcement shall be provided throughout the
height of pier.
11 Bracing The skin reinforcement of bracing beam is much more than required.
beam
12 Pile cap Cylindrical compressive strength and concrete cover has not been shown
in general notes
13 Pile Shaft 1- Pile spacing is not uniform in the pile group.
2- The provided edge spacing of pile (distance from the out pile to the
edge of pile cap) is not enough as per AASHTO-LRFD minimum
criterion for drilled shaft.
3- Pile shear reinforcement is not continued into pile cap.
14 Pile group 1- The provided number of piles in the pile group are 20. The number of
pile can be reduced substantially.

2
4