CIEM 6000M Engineering Geology

and Rock Mechanics

Lecture 12: Rock Foundation

Prof. Gang Wang

Hong Kong University of Science and Technology

7 May 2018

Compared to soils, most rocks are strong and stiff and carrying a
Rock Foundation structural load down to rock usually assures a satisfactory bearing.

(a) Ideal condition for rock foundation (d) Interbedding of hard and soft layers
 strong layers – too
 The rock is strong and rigid and lack of
relatively free from fractures. flexibility
 Bedrock surface is smooth,  soft layers – too
horizontal and well defined. compressible and
lack of strength

(b) Weathered rock (e) Fault zone  Compressible gouge;

offset ground water
 Bedrock surface may be level
indefinable  Complicate
 Rock properties may vary interpretation of
widely over short distances depth to load-bearing
strata

(c) Kastic limestones/marbles (f) Highly fractured rock

 Reduce bearing
 Highly uneven bedrock surface capacity
 Sink holes  Appreciable
 Variable and unknown soil depths deformation; joint
 Cavities, channels closing and sliding
 Irregular groundwater levels  Seepage in fractures
 Rock of unpredictable quality
2
 Rock Foundation
(g) Other problem rocks

 Expansive or unstable minerals

o montmorillonitic clay shales
o nontronitic basalts
o rocks mineralized with pyrrhotite Fe(1-x)S , marcasite
FeS2, or certain other sulfides. (Sulfuric acid released
in the oxidation of the latter may attack concrete.)

 Highly soluble rocks like gypsum and salt

 Structures on the surface overlying abandoned mines

Ö Rock foundation investigation + engineering judgment !

Important references for Hong Kong practice

1. Code of Practice for Foundation, Building Department (BD 2017).
http://www.bd.gov.hk/english/documents/code/FoundationCode2017.pdf
2. Foundation Design and Construction, GEO Publication No. 1/2006
http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/geo/doc/ep1_2006.pdf
3

Type of Rock Foundation

(1) Shallow footing on rock (2) Driven piles (end-bearing piles on rock)

 Modest excavation through the
soil permits a footing to bear
directly against rock surface
 During construction, the
stability of the slope cut through
the soil and through the
weathered rock needs to be
assured
 The load – bearing surface must
be kept clean before concreting
 Driven from ground surface to carry loads down to
a satisfactory bearing layer.
 Driven until refusal (i.e. a specified number of
blows is required to penetrate a fixed distance)
 Difficult to guarantee pile seating in the case of an
irregular or inclined bedrock surface.
 Steel piles driven at inclined surface may be
damaged by bedding as they skidded off the rock.
 Case-in-place piles may be “socketed” into rock by
drilling some distance beyond the bedrock surface.
 Enlarged base on moderately weathered rock. 4
Type of Rock Foundation
(3) Piers in drilled shafts
 Large diameter drilled pier/ pile through
soil/weathered rocks into bearing layer.
 It is common practice to drill the shafts several
meters (1 to 2 m) into rock to form a “rock
socket”.
 Can carry very heavy load. The load is carried by a
combination of end bearing and peripheral shear
(bond or side friction)
 Very large vertical loads can be supported
 Rock can be found on Grades I, II, III, but never
on IV, V.
 Different grade of rock -> different bearing
capacity.

Other types of foundations in rock

 Caissons
 Grout columns
 Hold-down piers, tensioned rock anchors
5

Allowable Bearing Pressure in Design Codes

The values selected must have a margin of safety against loss of load-carrying capacity (bearing
“failure”) and must work without large deflections.
In routine work, these values are usually taken from building codes, which provide conservative safe
pressures and reflect regional experience.

Example: Provisions of the Building Code for Rochester, New York

Specify bearing pressures for each of the local rock formations and defines defects that are unacceptable in the foundation.

Rock is classified as:

Soft rock: Clinton and Queenston shale
Medium rock: Rochester shale
Hard rock: Lockport dolomite and Medina sandstone

If a hole below the bearing surface passes through at least 5 ft of rock, the bearing capacity shall be: 15 tons/ft2 (1.4 MPa) in soft rock; 25
tons/ft2 (2.4 MPa) in medium rock; and 50 tons/ft2 (4.8 MPa) in hard rock (providing that all 5 ft are in the same kind of rock). (10/13/33)

For buildings less than six stories or 75 ft high, the Director of Buildings may reduce the number of drill holes required to be as few as,
but not less than, one-fifth of the number of bearing areas, if in his or her opinion the nature and condition of the rock justify such
omission. ( 1/11/66)

Seamy Rock: (11 /29/60)

If seams of soil or soft rock having little or no bearing value occur within the 5-ft depth below a bearing area:
1. Seams less than ¼ in. thick (6 mm) may be ignored.
2. Seams ¼ to ½ in. thick (6 to 13 mm) occurring deeper than 3 ft may be ignored.
3. Seams thicker than ½ in. (13 mm) and deeper than 5 ft may be ignored depending upon the discretion of the building inspector.
4. Seams more than ½ in. (13 mm) thick occurring within a depth of 5 ft, or more than ¼ in. (6 mm) thick occurring within the
first 3 ft of depth are unsatisfactory. The bearing surface is to be lowered below the bottom of the lowest known seam of
thickness greater than 1 in. and further as required to meet these provisions. A new boring or borings shall then be required and
any seam occurring in the new borings will be examined as above.
5. The Building Director may order pressure grouting of seams and tests to establish bearing values of grouted foundations. 6
Allowable Bearing Pressure in Design Codes

Allowable Bearing Pressure in Design Codes

1) Allowable bearing pressure by USA Uniform Building Code

qa  K qu
where qa = allowable bearing stress
qu = uniaxial compressive strength of the intact rock material
K = a factor, usually 0.2 to take account of the nature of jointing of the rock

(2) Allowable bearing capacity by the Canadian Foundation Engineering Method (CGS, 1992)

qa  K sp qu d
where K sp is an empirical factor which depends upon spacing of discontinuities and includes
a factor of safety of 3.
qu is the average unconfined compressive strength of rock cores
Table – Classification of Rock Mass in Terms of
d is the depth factor given by Discontinuity Spacing and Empirical Coefficient, Ksp
Hs Term
d  1  0.4 3.4 Joint Spacing (m) Ksp
D Very Widely Jointed 3 0.4
where H s is the depth of socket in
Widely Jointed 1-3 0.25
rock, D is the diameter of socket.
Moderately Closely
0.3-1 0.1
Jointed 8
Allowable Bearing Pressure in Design Codes
(2) Allowable bearing capacity by the Canadian Foundation Engineering Method (CGS, 1992)

K sp can also be calculated by

3 c/ B
K sp 
10 1  300  / c
B
where
c: spacing of discontinuities

 : thickness of discontinuities
B: width of footing

c

Allowable Bearing Pressure in Design Codes

(3) Presumed allowable bearing pressure for Hong Kong granitic and volcanic rocks

In Hong Kong, granitic rocks are of common occurrence, and an increasing number of heavy
structures are being built on granitic rock foundations. Hong Kong volcanic rocks are
geologically very old deposits; ash and lava deposits have been welded together, hardened under
great pressure, slightly metamorphosed and transformed into very strong rocks (with strengths in
excess of 150 MPa) in the fresh state. However, these rocks have been weathered extensively by
dominantly chemical processes under Hong Kong’s sub-tropical climate over a very long period
of time. Weathering significantly reduces the strength and deformation properties of the rock.
In Hong Kong, the code of Practice for Foundation (BD, 2017) specified presumptive bearing
values for granitic and volcanic rocks, ranging from 3 MPa to 10 MPa for different degrees of
weathering.

10
Code of Practice for Foundations 2017, Buildings Department, Hong Kong
Table 2.1 Presumed Allowable Vertical Bearing Pressure under Foundations on Horizontal Ground/Bedrock

Presumed allowable
Category Description of rock or soil bearing pressure
(kPa)
Rock (granite and volcanic):
1(a) Fresh to slightly decomposed strong to very strong granite or volcanic 10,000
rock of material weathering grade II or better, with 100% TCR of the
designated grade which has a minimum UCS of rock material not less
than 75 MPa (or an equivalent point load index strength PLI50 not less
than 3 MPa)
Fresh to slightly decomposed strong granite or volcanic rock of material 7,500
1(b) weathering grade II or better, and with not less than 95% TCR of the
designated grade, which has a minimum UCS of rock material not less
than 50 MPa (or an equivalent point load index strength PLI50 not less
than 2 MPa)
Slightly to moderately decomposed moderately strong granite or 5,000
1(c) volcanic rock of material weathering grade III or better, and with not
less than 85% TCR of the designated grade, which has a minimum UCS
of rock material not less than 25 MPa (or an equivalent point load index
strength PLI50 not less than 1 MPa)
1(d) Moderately decomposed, moderately strong to moderately weak granite 3,000
or volcanic rock of material weathering grade III or better, and with not
less than 50% TCR of the designated grade.
11

Code of Practice for Foundations 2017, Buildings Department, Hong Kong

Table 2.1 Presumed Allowable Vertical Bearing Pressure under Foundations on Horizontal Ground/Bedrock
(Continued)

2 Meta-Sedimentary rock: Moderately decomposed, moderately 3,000

strong to moderately weak meta-sedimentary rock of material
weathering grade III or better, and with not less than 85% TCR
of the designated grade.
Intermediate soil (decomposed granite and decomposed
volcanic): Highly to completely decomposed, moderately
3 1,000
weak to weak rock of material weathering grade V or better,
with SPT N-value ≥ 200
Non-cohesive soil (sands and gravels): Dry Submerged
4(a) Very dense – SPT N-value >50 500 250
4(b) Dense – SPT N-value 30-50; requires pick for excavation; 50 300 150
mm peg hard to drive
4(c) Medium dense – SPT N-value 10-30 100 50
4(d) Loose – SPT N-value 4-10, can be excavated with spade; 50 <100 <50
mm peg easily driven
Cohesive soil (clays and silts):
5(a) Very stiff or hard – Undrained shear strength >150 kPa; can be 300
indented by thumbnail
5(b) Stiff – Undrained shear strength 75-150 kPa; can be indented 150
by thumb
5(c) Firm – Undrained shear strength 40-75 kPa; can be moulded 80
by strong finger pressure
12
 Code of Practice for Foundations 2017, Buildings Department, Hong Kong

TCR: Total Core Recovery

13

Notes:
(1) The presumed values for allowable bearing pressure given are for foundations with negligible lateral loads at bearing
level.
(2) The self weight of the length of pile embedded in soil or rock does not need to be included into the calculation of bearing
stresses.
(3) Minimum socket depth along the pile perimeter is 500 mm for categories 1(a) and 1(b), and 300 mm for categories 1(c),
1(d) and 2.
(4) TCR of the designated grade is defined in Figure 2.1.
(5) The TCR of the designated grade should be proved to a depth at least 5 m into the specified category of rock. This
requirement is deemed to be complied with if the rock underneath the minimum socket depth as mentioned in note (3) above
has a length of at least 5 m which can be divided into a number of segments (in consecutive manner) such that (a) each
segment is 1 m; and (b) the calculated TCR in accordance with Figure 2.1 of each segment should satisfy the required
percentage of TCR of the designated grade.
(6) The bearing surface of rock on which the foundation will be rested should be of the designated category and in an intact
condition for a depth not less than 600 mm.
(7) Weathering grades are defined in GEOGUIDE 3.
(8) The point load index strength of rock quoted in the table is the equivalent value for 50 mm diameter cores.
(9) The definition of Dry Condition and Submerged Condition are given in clause 1.2 (below)
Dry condition. For shallow foundations, dry condition means that the highest anticipated groundwater level is at a
depth of not less than 1m or the width of the shallow foundation, whichever is the greater, below the base of the
foundation. The width of the shallow foundation shall be the lesser dimension of a rectangular shallow foundation or
the largest inscribed rectangle of an irregular shallow foundation, or the diameter of a circular shallow foundation.

Submerged condition. For shallow foundations, submerged condition means that the design groundwater level is at or
above the base of the foundation.

(10) Where the ground is intermediate between dry and submerged, the presumed value may be obtained by linear
interpolation.
(11) The use of presumptive values does not preclude the requirement for consideration of settlement of the structure.
14
Failure Modes of Footings on Rocks
Fig. (a)-(c) shows the development of failure through
crack propagation and crushing beneath the footing with
increasing load.
 Initially, relatively unfractured
Cracking  Elastic load-deflection relationship
 Cracks initiate
 Cracks propagate

 Cracks extend
Crushing  Cracks coalesce and interfere
 rock slivers and wedges buckle and crush

Dilatancy along cracks

 Crushed rock expands outward
 Generation of radial network of cracks, one
of which may finally propagate to the free
Wedging surface
 Large settlement
15

Failure Modes of Footings on Rocks

• Occurs in poorly cemented rock, eg. chalks,

friable sandstones etc.
• Caused by destruction of the pore skeleton
• Cause vertical settlement (local failure) –
Punching
“punching”

• Soft and weak rocks

• Shale, weathered rocks
• Similar to soil mechanics

Shear

16
Failure Modes of Footings on Rocks
Remarks on Settlement of Foundations on Rocks

 For foundation on fresh rock, settlement is so small that it is hardly worth considering
except for special structures when total and differential settlement must be extremely
small.
 For large diameter caissons and piles on fresh granitic rocks, the bearing capacity of
the rock is no limitation since the rock is always stronger than the concrete.
 Foundation design in fresh rock is influenced by the nature and intensity of
discontinuities.
 In weathering rock, in addition to these parameters, the degree and type of weathering
control the design.

17

Allowable Bearing Pressure

(3) Presumed allowable bearing pressure for Hong Kong granitic and volcanic rocks

In Hong Kong, granitic rocks are of common occurrence, and an increasing number of heavy
structures are being built on granitic rock foundations. Hong Kong volcanic rocks are
geologically very old deposits; ash and lava deposits have been welded together, hardened under
great pressure, slightly metamorphosed and transformed into very strong rocks (with strengths in
excess of 150 MPa) in the fresh state. However, these rocks have been weathered extensively by
dominantly chemical processes under Hong Kong’s sub-tropical climate over a very long period
of time. Weathering significantly reduces the strength and deformation properties of the rock.
In Hong Kong, the code of Practice for Foundation (BD, 2017) specified presumptive bearing
values for granitic and volcanic rocks, ranging from 3 MPa to 10 MPa for different degrees of
weathering.

18
 (1) Theoretical analysis
Allowable Bearing Pressure (Revisited)
Mode of failure
“Allowable pressure” on a footing is the design pressure against the rock — laterally expanding zone of crushed rock under footing
surface consistent with — induce radial cracking of the rock to either side of footing

(1) deflection 
(2) stability  Factor of safety

(3) strength of concrete 

 deflection are usually more limiting than stability when dealing with
rock
 Tests in isotropic rock have shown that the limiting safe foundation
pressure often occurs at a settlement approximately equal to 4 to 6%
of the footing width.

 v  0  h  Ph  qu v  qf

Analysis of bearing capacity on rock

The lower bound solution: the bearing capacity of a homogenous,

discontinuous rock mass cannot be less than the unconfined compressive
strength of the rock mass around the footing, i.e.,
q f  qu (surrounding rock)

19
If  j = angle of friction of joints of the fractured rock under the footing, The design code is very conservative, why?
then q f  qu  N  1 i) Footing bearing on a thin rigid layer over softer layer
  
N  tan 2  45o  j 
 2

High tensile stress developed on the bottom of the rigid layer

stress transfer to the lower compressible layer -> reduction of qf

Example of bearing capacity analysis for highly fractured grey-wacke sandstone (After
Raphael and Goodman, 1979)

The above example, shows triaxial compression test results by Raphael and Goodman
(1979) on intact and broken core samples from a foundation in highly fractured
greywacke sandstone. The condition of the rock surrounding the footing can be
represented by the envelope corresponding to the peak strengths of core samples in
which all the fractures were carefully fitted together and held with tape before testing.
The condition of the rock under the footing can be described by the envelope
corresponding to residual strength of such specimens. With these strength properties
determined and a factor of safety of 5, the bearing capacity is estimated as 12 MPa. For
reference, the unconfined compressive strength of the intact rock is 180 MPa.
20
 iii) Scaling effect
ii) Footing resting on jointed rock
Open joint reduces the bearing capacity when S/B is in the range qu (field) ≤ qu (lab)
from 1 to 5.
Therefore, field q f is smaller than the results predicted based on
lab qu

iv) Proximity to a slope

Commonly build footing on sloping rock surface

q f (slope) ≤ q f (flat)

Therefore, the value recommended in design code is conservative.

Otherwise, detailed analysis is required to define the “allowable” bearing
capacity to be adopted in a design project.

The bearing capacity for an open-jointed rock mass in which there is no

lateral stress transfer:

1  
( N 1)/ N
 S 
q f  qu  N    1
N  1 
 B 


Compared with q f  qu  N  1 , the bearing capacity is reduced from

when S/B is in the range from 1 to 5.

21
  Observations:
Deep Foundation in Rocks
 Shaft shear resistance provided by soil – relatively low
(1) Load transfer mechanism of deep foundations in rock Pile displacement to fully mobilized – very large (>100mm)
 “Bond” strength – quite important
Pile displacement to fully mobilized – very small (~10 mm)
 “Bearing” capacity of rocks – very large, most important
Shaft
resistance Pile displacement to fully mobilized – about 40-60 mm
from soil
Therefore, if the pile displaces at the same displacement value along the
length, it cannot mobilize all the “strengths” at the same time.

Adhesion “bond”  Design strength

between concrete
and rock  Mainly based on the “bearing” capacity of rock
 Adhesive “bond” resistance usually ignored as this bond strength will
Bearing capacity be destroyed when pile displacement is larger than about 10 mm
provided by rock  Shear resistance of soil is ignored as it is vey small and it only
mobilized at pile displacement larger than 100 mm (much larger than
How these “strength” being mobilized? These “strengths” are mobilized the displacement mobilized by “bearing” capacity of rock)
at different strain levels (displacement levels)
Design strength = “bearing capacity” only
Load Bond Bearing capacity by rock
between But
concrete
and rock Bearing capacity ↑ as l ↑, because
additional work (energy) is required to
expand the failing region of rock against
Shaft resistance by soil
an increased rock pressure with depth.

10 40-60 >100 Disp (mm)

22
Elastic solution for circular baring plate on an isotropic, elastic half
space:
 
  pend (1  vr ) a
2

w base   
2
(eq. 11-1)
Er n

where wbase is the settlement of the lower end of a pier/pile

pend is the normal pressure at the lower end of the pier/pile
vr and Er are the Poisson’s ratio and elastic modulus of the rock.
a is the radius of the lower end of the pile/pier
n is an factor depending on relative depth l / a and vr values as
shown in the following table (e.g. n=2, if l / a =14, vr =0.3):

Assume full bonding

around rock socket

(2) Load Transfer Analysis

If a pier is socketed in rock even several radii deep, a considerable
portion of the load is transferred to the perimeter and Pend is significantly
less than Ptotal

Assume bond (adhesion) is maintained along the socket (i.e. pier is

not loaded beyond the limit of bond strength), the transfer can be
summarized in the next figure
l p 1
If  4 , then end  Load transfer in a socketed pier. (a) Terminology for the pier. (b) data on load
a p total 8 transfer (From Goodman)

23
Pile-load test observations: We can plot the load transfer assuming different frictions:

 The adhesion “bond” is typically developed with a deflection of

10 mm or less
 While mobilization of the full bearing capacity may require a
settlement of 20 to 40 mm or more
 Adhesion-stress-strain curves → brittle failure
 Bearing capacity-stress-strain curve → more ductile failure →
with strength hardening.

In the limit where all bond is broken along the sides of rock socket, it
is useful to analyze the case posed by a pile/pier with only frictional
contact along its sides. Assuming:
 = 70
 Side friction between soil and pile is neglected
 A constant coefficient of friction (  = tan ) between the
concrete and the rock along the wall of the socket in the rock

The vertical stress  y in the pier at depth y below the top of the rock
is

 y  ptotal e{[2v  /(1v (1v ) E

c c r c / Er )]( y / a )}
(eq. 11-2)

where c and r denotes concrete and rock.

Ptotal = pressure applied to the top of the pier

If set y = l , then  y = pend (the end-bearing pressure). Load transfer in

socketed rock pile can be expressed as:
 = 40

pend
 e {[2 vc  /(1vc (1vr ) Ec / Er )]( l / a )} (eq. 11-3)
ptotal Load distribution in rock socketed piles (assume vc=0.2, vr=0.3)
One may also refer to Figures 6.10, 6.11 (GEO 2006)
24
Estimate “bond” strength between rock and concrete along the rock In Hong Kong, GEO (2006) proposed the following relationship for
socket: design of rock sockets in a widely jointed rock.

 For soft, clay-rich rocks like weathered clay shale, which tend
to fail in shear rather than in compression, the bond strength is
determined in relation to the undraind shear strength Su
qu
 bond   Su or  bond  
2 tan(45   / 2)
Typical value of  from 0.3 to 0.9

qu
 For hard rock,  bond 
20
qu is the unconfined compressive strength of laboratory rock
samples or concrete, whichever is weaker. The allowable shear
stress must be less than  bond in both the concrete and the rock.

Mobilised Shaft Resistance in Piles Socketed in Rock (GEO 2006, Figure 6.12)

Strength of bond between concrete and rock for piers with radii greater than 200 mm
(Data from Horvath and Kenney (1979) load test, after Goodman.

25
Code of Practice for Foundations 2017, Bldgs Dept, HK Ladanyi (1977) proposed a method of design providing for full bond
strength developed over a socket length sufficient to reduce the end-
bearing pressures to acceptable values.
Table 2.2 Presumed Allowable Bond or Friction between Rock and
Concrete or Grout for Piles (BD 2017) The following iterative scheme will achieve this once the allowable
bearing pressure and the allowable shear stress have been established.
Presumed allowable bond or friction between
Category of rock rock and concrete or grout for piles (kPa)
Given the total vertical load Ftotal on the top of the pier:
as defined in Table 2.1 Under compression or Under permanent
transient tension tension 1. Assume a value for the allowable bond stress allow on the wall of
the rock socket.
1(c) or better 700 350 2. Select a radius a. This may be dictated by the allowable load in
the concrete.
1(d) or 2 300 150 3. Neglect end bearing and calculate the maximum length lmax of the
rock socket

Notes: Ftotal
lmax 
2 a allow
(1) Concrete or grout should have a minimum characteristic compressive
strength of 30 MPa.
4. Choose a value l1 less than lmax and corresponding to l1/a,
(2) The presumed value of transient tension is for design for transient load determine pend/ptotal.
such as wind load. pend
 e {[2 vc  /(1vc (1vr ) Ec / Er )]( l1 / a )}
ptotal
 F  P 
5. Calculate Pend   total2   end 
  a   Ptotal 
6. Compare Pend to the allowable bearing pressure qallow approporiate
for the material at depth l1 with relative embedment ratio l1/a.
 P  F 
7. Calculate    1  end   total 
 Ptotal   2 al1 
8. Compare  with  allow
9. Repeat with l2 and a until  =  allow and Pend  qallow .
26
(3) Total settlement of a pier on rock can be calculated as

w  w base  wp  w

where
w base = the settlement of the base under the action of p end

 
  pend (1  vr ) a
2

w base   
2
Er n
wp = the shortening of the pile itself under a uniform compressive stress
equal to ptotal ;
ptotal (l0  l )
wp  ,
Ec
where l0  l is the total length of the pile and l is the length embedded in
rock, and w = a correction accounting for the transfer of load through
adhesion along the side.

 p   y  dy
1 l0 l
w  total
Settlement of a pier socketed in rock
Ec l0

This term is not important for socketed piers if most of the length of the
pier is in soil. Important references for Hong Kong practice:

Code of Practice for Foundation, Building Department HK, 2017.

http://www.bd.gov.hk/english/documents/code/FoundationCode2017.pdf

Foundation Design and Construction, GEO Publication No. 1/2006

http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/publications/geo/doc/ep1_2006.pdf

27