ISSN 2319-8885

Vol.03,Issue.10
May-2014,
Pages:2089-2095
www.semargroup.org,
www.ijsetr.com

Parametric Study on Foundation of Regular High-Rise R.C Building under

Seismic Load
THU ZAR AUNG1, DR. KAY THWE TUN2
1
Dept of Civil Engineering, Mandalay Technological University, Mandalay, Myanmar, Email: loveangellay111@gmail.com.
2
Dept of Civil Engineering, Mandalay Technological University, Mandalay, Myanmar.

Abstract: This paper sets out the Parametric Study on Foundation of Regular High-Rise R.C Building Under Seismic Load.
The proposed building is situated in Mandalay area. At first, the general requirements about foundation are described. Seismic
Load is considered for the proposed building. Dynamic analysis is used to obtain the analysis results of proposed building in
Zone 4.From structural and economical point of view, the most suitable design of superstructure is first chosen. Next, structural
analysis is done by using Extended Three-dimensional Analysis of Building System (ETABS) software. Load consideration is
based on UBC-97 Design of structural elements are calculated by using the provision of American Concrete Institute (ACI 318-
02) code. Design results are checked for P- effect, sliding, storey drift, overturning and torsion irregularity. And then, the
required soil parameters are taken from soil report on Mandalay area. The allowable bearing capacity of soil is calculated by
using General equation, Hansens method, Tomlinson method and SPT method. The raft foundation is calculated by using
SAFE software and piled raft foundation is calculated by using STAAD-Pro software. In this study a parametric study on raft
thickness are considered. Raft thickness use 4 ft and 5 ft in a parametric study. It has been found that the maximum bending
moment, maximum shear, soil pressure in raft increasing with increase raft thickness. In design of raft foundation, the thickness
of raft foundation is 4 ft. In design of pile foundation, the required pile diameter is 2.5 ft and pile length is 40 ft, 50 ft, 60 ft
respectively. There are 3 groups of pile with different length which depends on their critical column loads.

Keywords: Bearing Capacity, Mat Foundation, Piled-Raft Foundation.

I. INTRODUCTION multistoried buildings situated in high-seismic-risk area, a

Nowadays, high-rise buildings are the symbols of a concentration of the total lateral force resistance in only one
modernized living standard because of the population or two structural walls is likely to introduce very large forces
growth. The various types of tall buildings are needed in to the foundation structure, so that special enlarged
Mandalay. Among them, earthquake disasters are not limited foundations may be required.
to structural damage and injury/death of people under
collapsed structures. Earthquake produces large magnitude II. EFFECT OF EARTHQUAKE ON BUILDING
forces of short duration and the magnitude of earthquake The primary effect of an earthquake is shaking of a
cannot be forecasted. Myanmar indeed is earthquake-prone building or infrastructure. Buildings as a whole and all their
as it lies in one of the two main earthquake belts of the world. components and contents are badly shaken in all possible
Myanmar has had frequent earthquakes and all earthquakes directions during serve earthquakes by the ground motion
in Myanmar are of shallow focus types which can cause great
damages and causalities. So, regions in moderate seismic risk
level can be affected by the magnitude of high seismic risk
level. A foundation, the lowest part of a structure, is in direct
contact with ground and located below the ground level. It
transmits all the loads from super-structure to the supporting
soil. So, foundation design for an earthquake resistance is one
of the most important parts to be considered in the structural
analysis and design. In general, foundation may be divided
into two major categories. They are shallow foundation and
deep foundation. Wall footings, combined footings, spread
footing and mat foundation are generally referred to as
shallow foundations. And then, pile, piers, caissons and
drilled shaft foundations are classified as deep foundation. In Figure1. Building movements due to ground shaking.

Copyright @ 2014 SEMAR GROUPS TECHNICAL SOCIETY. All rights reserved.

 THU ZAR AUNG, DR. KAY THWE TUN

(shown in Figure 1). The shaking loosens the joints of

different components of building that lead to subsequent
damage or collapse. The general philosophy of building
damage under earthquake is that:
For minor earthquakes there should be no damage.
For moderate earthquakes there may be minor,
repairable, structural damage and some nonstructural
damage.
For major earthquakes there may be major,
unrepairable, structural and nonstructural damage but
without collapse of the building.

III. PILED-RAFT FOUNDATION

In the construction of high-rise buildings, bridges and
marine structures, deep foundation especially pile
foundations, piled-raft foundations are generally used to Figure3. Typical beam plan.
transfer the heavy loadings to the soil. During the last few
years, there has been an increasing recognition that use of
piles to reduce raft settlements and differential settlements
can lead to considerable economy without compromising the
safety and performance of the foundation. The used of piled-
raft foundation is an effective way of minimizing both total
and differential settlements, of improving the bearing
capacity of a shallow foundation, and of reducing in an
economic way the internal stress levels and bending moments
within a raft. The piled-raft foundation is shown in fig.2.

Figure4. Three-dimensional view of the proposed

building.
B. Design Codes
Design codes applied for superstructure are based on ACI-
318-02 and loading considerations are based on UBC-97.
Figure2. Piled-raft foundation.
1. Material Properties
IV. PREPARATION FOR ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The material properties used for the proposed structure are
Information of structure and material properties is as follows:
prescribed as follows. Dead load, live load, wind load and Weight per unit volume of concrete = 150 pcf
earthquake loads are considered in proposed building. Modulus of elasticity = 3.122x106 psi
Poissons ratio = 0.2
A. Proposed Building Coefficient of thermal expansion = 5.5x10-6 in/in per
The proposed building is twenty-storeyed reinforced degree F
concrete building with basement. The overall height of the Reinforcing yield stress, fy = 50000 psi
building is 221 ft.The ground floor level and basement height Shear reinforcement yield stress, fys = 50000 psi
is 12 ft and other typical storey height is 10 ft. The height of Concrete strength, fc' = 3000 psi
roof floor is 7 ft. The building is rectangular shape and its
maximum length is 140 ft and 76 ft wide. The typical beam C. Loading Considerations
plan and 3D view of the proposed building from ETABS The applied loads are dead loads, live loads, earthquake
software are shown in Figures 3 and 4. load and wind load.

International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research

Volume.03, IssueNo.10, May-2014, Pages: 2089-2095
 Parametric Study on Foundation of Regular High-Rise R.C Building under Seismic Load
1. Gravity Loads concrete cross sectional area be within the ranges from 0.01
Data for dead loads which are used in structural analysis to 0.06 to acquire the seismic design specifications.
are as follows;
Unit weight of concrete = 150 pcf C. Stability Checking of the Superstructure
4 inches thick wall weight = 55 pcf The designed superstructure is checked for overturning,
9 inches thick wall weight = 100 pcf sliding, storey drift, torsion irregularity and P- effect. These
Weight of elevator = 2 ton results are described in the following tables.
Weight of slab = 25 psf
TABLE I: RESULTS OF STABILITY CHECK FOR
Data for live loads which are used in structural analysis are MODEL
as follows: Directio
Type Value Limit Remark
Live load on slab = 40 psf n
Live load on lift = 100 psf 0.2402
X 2.4 Satisfied
Live load on stairs = 100 psf 4
Story drift
Live load on roof = 20 psf 0.2383
Weight of water = 62.4 psf Y 2.4 Satisfied
2
2. Lateral Loads Overturnin X 8.105 1.5 Satisfied
Data for wind loads which are used in structural analysis g
moment Y 4.4497 1.5 Satisfied
are as follows;
Exposure Type =C X 3.85 1.5 Satisfied
Sliding
Basic wind velocity = 80 mph Y 3.82 1.5 Satisfied
Force Method = Normal Force Method 1.0376
X 1.2 Satisfied
Effective Height = 221 ft Torsion 9
Importance factor, Iw = 1.0 Y 1.058728 1.2 Satisfied
Pressure coefficient, Cq = 0.8 for windward X 0.002002 0.00235 Satisfied
= 0.5 for leeward P-
Y 0.001986 0.00235 Satisfied
Data for earthquake load are as follows:
Seismic zone = 4 (Mandalay)
Soil profile type = SD VI .SELECTION OF PILED RAFT FOUNDATION
Seismic zone factor = 0.4g The required soil parameters are taken from soil reports
Seismic source type =A of Mandalay area. The allowable bearing capacity is the
Importance factor, I =1 ultimate bearing capacity divided by a factor of safety. The
Response modification factor, R = 8.5 range of factor of safety (F.S) is between 2 and 3. The factor
Structure = Dual system of safety (F.S) is taken as 2.5 for this study. The allowable
Seismic Response Coefficient, Ca = 0.44 bearing capacity of soil is 1.623 ton/ft2. The required bearing
Seismic Response Coefficient, Cv = 0.64 capacity 1.9ton/ft2 is greater than the minimum allowable
Near Source Factor, Na = 1.0 bearing pressure of raft foundation. Therefore, shallow
Near Source Factor, Nv = 1.0 foundation is not suitable for the proposed building. So, piled
raft foundation should be used for this structure.
V. DESIGN RESULTS OF PROPOSED BUILDING
The design results of beam and column for proposed A. Preparation for Analysis and Design of Substructure
building are described. Data for the analysis and design of raft foundation are as
follows:
A. Design Results of Beams Modulus of elasticity = 3.122x106 psi
The beams used in these buildings are Poissons ratio = 0.2
10"14",10"18",12"16", 12"18", 12"20", 12"22", Weight per unit volume of concrete = 150 pcf
14"22",14"24", 16"24 and 18"24". It should be Thickness of raft = 4 ft
manually check whether the ratio of longitudinal steel area to Top cover for both X and Y = 4 inches
gross concrete cross sectional area be within the ranges from Bottom cover for both X and Y = 4 inches
the minimum steel ratio to the maximum steel ratio. Allowable bearing capacity = 1.623 ton/ft 2
Projection beyond main building = 5ft
B. Design Results of Columns Shear reinforcement yield stress,fys = 50000 psi
The columns used in these building are 14"x14", Concrete strength, fc' = 3000 psi
16"x16", 18"x18", 20"x20", 22"x22", 24"x24", 26"x26,
28"x28", 30"x30" and 32"x32". It should be manually VII. PARAMETRIC STUDY
checked whether the ratio of longitudinal steel area to gross The parametric study of thickness is carried out by
varying the raft thickness of 4ft and 5ft (from fig 5 to 8).

International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research

Volume.03, IssueNo.10, May-2014, Pages: 2089-2095
 THU ZAR AUNG, DR. KAY THWE TUN

Figure5. Effect of raft thickness on maximum settlement. Figure8. Effect of raft thickness on soil pressure.

VIII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Figure6. Effect of raft thickness on maximum bending
moment.
A. Effect of Raft Thickness
In this study, the maximum moment, maximum shear
and soil pressure in the raft increases with increasing raft
thickness. From the results presented herein, increasing the
raft thickness is very beneficial in resting the punching shear
from column loadings. Maximum punching shear ratio in raft
thickness of 4 ft is 0.929 and raft thickness of 5 ft is 0.633.
The resulted punching shear ratios are within allowable limit.
Then, max: settlement is not greatly affected by raft thickness
because max: settlement in raft thickness 4 ft is 0.0618times
less than the raft thickness 5 ft. Moreover, raft thickness 4 ft
is more economical than raft thickness 5 ft. Therefore, raft
thickness 4 ft is chosen for design of piled raft foundation.
B. Design Result of Raft Foundation
Raft foundation for proposed building is analyzed and
designed by using SAFE software. The required thickness for
raft foundation is 4 ft and No.8 bar is used. The punching
shear capacity ratio is shown in Figure 9. The resulted
punching shear ratio is less than 1, so which is satisfied for
this structure.

Figure9. Punching shear capacity ratio from SAFE

Figure7. Effect of raft thickness on maximum shear. software.
International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research
Volume.03, IssueNo.10, May-2014, Pages: 2089-2095
 Parametric Study on Foundation of Regular High-Rise R.C Building under Seismic Load
The required reinforcing steel distribution results for raft VII. DESIGN RESULT OF PILE FOUNDATION
foundation in X-strips and Y-strips are shown in Tables 1 and The required diameter of the drilled shaft can be calculated
2. by the following equations (Braja M.Das 1999).
TABLE II: REINFORCING STEEL DISTRIBUTION
RESULTS IN X-STRIPS DS = 2.257 Qw (1)
f c'
Strip
X-strip Top Bar Bottom Bar
Width (in) Qp A pCu Nc
(2)
CSX9 78 9#8 18 # 8
MSX8 36 5#8 8#8 L L1

(3)
CSX8 48 6#8 10# 8 Qs *Cu PL
L 0
MSX7 60 7#8 8# 8
CSX7 48 7#8 4#8 Q u Q p Qs
MSX6 36 5#8 3#8 (4)
CSX6 66 6#8 5#8 The diameter of pile is calculated by using above equation,
MSX5 96 9#8 23 # 8 the value of Qw (critical unfactored column load) is shown in
CSX5 96 9#8 5#8 table 4.The required number of pile is 42. And four groups of
MSX4 96 9#8 7#8 40 ft long pile with different diameter for this substructure is
CSX4 66 6#8 3#8 shown in Table5.
TABLE .IV: CRITICAL COLUMN UNFACTORED
MSX3 36 5#8 4#8
LOADS FOR GROUPS
CSX3 48 5#8 11# 8
MSX2 60 5#8 8#8
CSX2 48 5#8 10 # 8
MSX1 36 5#8 8#8
CSX1 78 9#8 18 # 8

TABLE III: REINFORCING STEEL DISTRIBUTION

RESULTS IN Y-STRIPS
Strip Width
Y-strip Top Bar Bottom Bar
(in)
CSY1 108 10 # 8 12 # 8
TABLE V: DIAMETER OF PILED FOUNDATION
MSY1 96 9#8 8#8
Group Diameter (in) Length of pile
CSY2 90 9#8 11 # 8
MSY2 84 8#8 5#8 1 2.5 40
CSY3 96 9#8 13 # 8
MSY3 108 10 # 8 10 # 8 2 2.5 50
CSY4 90 9#8 9#8
3 2.5 60
MSY4 72 7#8 5#8
CSY5 66 6#8 7#8
MSY5 60 6#8 6#8
CSY6 60 6#8 7#8
MSY6 60 6#8 4#8
CSY7 66 6#8 7#8
MSY7 72 7#8 4#8
CSY8 90 9#8 9#8
MSY8 108 10 # 8 10 # 8
CSY9 96 9#8 13 # 8
MSY9 84 8#8 8#8
CSY10 90 9#8 13 # 8
MSY10 96 9#8 5#8
CSY11 108 10 # 8 12 # 8 Figure10. Steel Arrangement of Drilled Shaft for Group I.
International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research
Volume.03, IssueNo.10, May-2014, Pages: 2089-2095
 THU ZAR AUNG, DR. KAY THWE TUN
In the design of piled raft foundation, 40 ft, 50 ft and 60 ft
long and 2.5 ft diameter drilled shaft is considered for the
proposed building. Design results of drilled shaft foundation
are shown in Table 6 and 7 (from fig 10).

TABLE VI: DESIGN RESULT OF DRILLED SHAFT

FOUNDATION
Axial compression
Steel Load (kips)
Group
Area
name Applied Allowable Remark
(in2)
(Qw) (Qall)

I 9#8 129.057 144.61 Satisfied

II 9#8 148.631 158.65 Satisfied

Figure 11. Base pressure diagram from STAAD.Pro.
III 9#8 190.616 201.92 Satisfied

TABLE VII: DESIGN RESULT OF DRILLED SHAFT

FOUNDATION
Pullout loading (kips)
Allowable Tensile Remark
Group
name Tensile Strength
Load (Pall) (Ps)
I 91.754 355.5 Satisfied

II 117.01 355.5 Satisfied

III 149.5 355.5 Satisfied

Figure 12. Arrangement of Piles under the Raft.

IX.SETTLEMENT CHECKING FOR DRILLED
SHAFT FOUNDATION DESIGN TABLE VIII: SETTLEMENT CHECKING FOR DRILLED
To calculate the settlement checking for drilled shaft SHAFT FOUNDATION
which is placed under the raft foundation, the following two
methods namely, semi-empirical method and empirical Settlement (in)
method are used (see fig 11 and 12). Grou Allowable
Semi-
p Emprica Settlement Remark
emprica
A. Semi-empirical Method name l (in)
l
Q wp Q ws L Method
Method
S1= ApEp
(5) Satisfie
I 0.342 0.328 1
d
S2 = C p Q wp (6) Satisfie
Dq p II 0.533 0.34 1
d
C s Q ws Satisfie
S3 = (7) III 0.367 0.362 1
Lq p
d
S = S1 + S2 + S3 (8) X. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
In this study, twenty storeyed reinforced concrete building
B. Empirical Method with basement is selected. The structure is analyzed and
The total settlement can be calculated by using the designed in seismic Zone 4. Wind and earthquake loads are
following Equation, based on UBC 97, and structural elements are designed in
accordance with ACI-318-02. The lateral loads and gravity
B Q ua L
St (9)
loads are considered and the designed superstructure is
100 A p E p checked for sliding resistance, overturning effect, storey drift,
torsion irregularity and P- effect. The required soil
International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research
Volume.03, IssueNo.10, May-2014, Pages: 2089-2095
 Parametric Study on Foundation of Regular High-Rise R.C Building under Seismic Load
parameters are obtained from the soil report on Mandalay
area. The allowable bearing capacity of the soil is calculated
by using General equation, Hansens method and Tomlinson
method. The sum of critical unfactored column loads from
superstructure is 58477.914 kips. The required bearing
pressure is 1.9ton/ft2 and the allowable bearing pressure is
1.623 ton/ft2. Therefore, shallow foundation is not suitable for
the proposed building. So, piled raft foundation is selected to
support the proposed building.

Raft foundation is analyzed by using SAFE software. In a

parametric study the maximum bending moment, maximum
shear, soil pressure in raft increasing with increase raft
thickness. Maximum settlement is not greatly affected on raft
thickness. The reinforcement spacing and strips spacing of
raft foundation is automatically divided by SAFE software.
In raft foundation, the thickness of the raft foundation is 4 ft
and No.8 bar is used. In design of pile foundation, drilled
shaft with free head condition is used. The required pile
diameter is 2.5ft and pile lengths are 40ft, 50ft and 60ft
respectively. There are 3groups of pile with different
diameter which depends on their critical column loads. For
pile foundation, settlement checking is considered by using
semi-empirical method and empirical method. Minimum
reinforcement, 1% of gross cross-sectional area of the pile is
used for the design of drilled shaft foundation.

XI. REFERENCES
[1] U NyiHlaNge, Reinforced Concrete Design.2010.
[2] S.K. Ghosh and David A. Fanella. 2003. Seismic and
Wind Design of Concrete Buildings.
[3] Das, Braja M. "Principles of Foundation Engineering",
Fourth Edition. U.S.A. PWS Publishing Company, 1999.
[4] J.A.Hemsley. "Design Applications of Raft Foundation",
1998.
[5] Bowles, Joseph E. Edition. New York: McGraw Hill Co,
1996. Edition. New York: McGraw Hill Co, 1996.
[6] M.J.Tomlinson. "Pile Design and Construction Practice",
Fourth edition, 1994.

International Journal of Scientific Engineering and Technology Research

Volume.03, IssueNo.10, May-2014, Pages: 2089-2095