Be very careful of

AS2870-2011
Scott Warner
1

OBJECTIVES:
Site Classification
Footing Selection

Part 1

Is it a soil classification?
Or
Is it a site classification?

SECTION 3 STANDARD DESIGNS

3.1 SELECTION OF FOOTING SYSTEMS
3.1.1 Selection procedure
Standard deemed-to-comply designs shall be in
accordance with Clauses 3.2 to 3.6. These
designs shall not apply to
a) Class E or Class P sites:
5

2.1.3 Classification of other sites

Sites with inadequate bearing strength
or where ground movement may be significantly
affected by factors other than reactive soil
movements due to normal moisture conditions
shall be classified as Class P.
Class P sites include ......... reactive sites
subjected to abnormal moisture conditions.....
6

2.1.3 Classification of other sites

A site shall be Class P if
a)

The bearing strength is less than that specified in Clause 2.4.5;

b)

Excessive foundation settlement may occur due to loading on the foundation;

c)

The site contains uncontrolled or controlled fill as identified in Clause 2.5.3;

d)

The site may be subject to mine subsidence, landslip, collapse activity or

coastal erosion;

e)

The site may be subject to moisture changes due to site conditions more
severe than the normal site conditions described in Clause 1.3.2; or

f)

The site may be subject to other factors resulting in foundation movement

beyond the reactive soil movements resulting from moisture changes due to
the normal site conditions described in Clause 1.3.2.

The basis for classification shall be recorded on the site classification report together
with recommendations for further geotechnical investigation.
7

1.3.2 Normal sites

Normal sites are those that are classified as one
of Classes A, S, M, H1, H2 and E in accordance
with Section 2 of this standard
and where foundation moisture variations are
those caused by seasonal and regular climatic
effects, effect of the building and subdivision,
and normal garden conditions without abnormal
moisture conditions.
8

1.3.3 Abnormal moisture

conditions
Abnormal moisture conditions are those that
result in foundation moisture variations
beyond those for normal sites.
Buildings constructed on sites subject to
abnormal moisture conditions have a higher
probability of damage than those described in
Clause 1.3.1.
9

1.3.3 Abnormal Moisture Conditions

Prior to Construction
During Construction
After Construction

10

Examples of abnormal moisture conditions existing prior

to construction include the following:
a) Removal of an existing building or structure likely to

have significantly modified the soil moisture conditions

under the footprint of the footing system of the
building.
b) Removal of trees prior to construction.
c) Presence of trees on the building site or adjacent site.
d) Unusual moisture conditions caused by drains,

channels, ponds, dams, swimming pools, effluent

disposal areas or tanks, which are to be maintained or
removed from the site.
11

Examples of abnormal moisture conditions

resulting from construction include the
following:
a) Failure to provide adequate site drainage.
b) Failure to detail or construct drainage in

accordance with this Standard.

12

Examples of abnormal moisture conditions developing

after construction include the following:
a) The effect of trees too close to a footing.
b) Excessive or irregular watering of gardens adjacent

to the building.
c) Failure to maintain site drainage.
d) Failure to repair plumbing leaks.
e) Loss of vegetation from near the building.
13

Page 5

6.2 SITE CLASSIFICATION

The results of laboratory testing indicate that the site soils have shrink/swell index
(Iss) values ranging from 1.1% to 5.6%. The laboratory test results indicate that
the materials encountered at the site are moderately to highly reactive.
On the basis of the soil profiles encountered during field investigations, laboratory
testing and preliminary calculations, the allotments in their current condition are
classified in accordance with AS2870-1996 as follows:
Lots
Lots
Lots
Lots

1 14 inclusive, Class H, Highly Reactive

15 19 inclusive, Class M, Moderately Reactive
20 25 inclusive, Class H, Highly Reactive
26 42 inclusive, Class M, Moderately Reactive

The effects of changes to the soil profile by additional cutting and filling and the
effects of past and future trees should be considered in the selection of the design
value for differential movement. Footings for the proposed development should be
designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of AS2870.
Where fill is to be placed to raise site levels, the affected allotments will require
reclassification once the depth and type of placed fill are known and the level of
earthwork control has been established.
14

The Geotech Engineerss Handover:

The effect of changes to the soil profile by
additional cutting and filling
and the effects of past and future trees
should be considered in the selection of the
design value for differential movement.

15

Which lot is yours?

Confirm the lot numbers in the
geotechnical report
are the same as the lot
numbers on the current DP.

16

Page 5

6.2 SITE CLASSIFICATION

The results of laboratory testing indicate that the site soils have
shrink/swell index (Iss) values ranging from 1.1% to 5.6%. The
laboratory test results indicate that the materials encountered at the
site are moderately to highly reactive.
On the basis of the soil profiles encountered during field investigations,
laboratory testing and preliminary calculations, the allotments in their
current condition are classified in accordance with AS2870-1996 as
follows:
Lots
Lots
Lots
Lots

1 14 inclusive, Class H, Highly Reactive

15 19 inclusive, Class M, Moderately Reactive
20 25 inclusive, Class H, Highly Reactive
26 42 inclusive, Class M, Moderately Reactive

The effects of changes to the soil profile by additional cutting and

filling and the effects of past and future trees should be considered in
the selection of the design value for differential movement. Footings
for the proposed development should be designed and constructed in
accordance with the requirements of AS2870.
Where fill is to be placed to raise site levels, the affected allotments
will require reclassification once the depth and type of placed fill are
known and the level of earthwork control has been established.

Please design slab system

for Lot 16.
The site is Class M.
17

18

Class P Site:

19

Class P Site:

20

Class P Site:

21

Class P Site:

22

Class P Site:

23

Class P Site:

24

Class P Site:

25

Class P Site:

26

Class P Site:

27

Class P Site:

28

Class P Site:

29

What is a Normal
site?

30

Normal Site (Maybe?):

31

Normal Site (Maybe?):

32

Site Classification:
The site classification should identify the site as either:
1. A Normal Site (& it will remain a Normal Site) or
2. A Class P Site.

A Normal Site, can be classified as Class A, S, M, H1, H2, or E.

The reasons for a Class P need to be stipulated.
For a Class P Site, either:
3. Provide advice for an equivalent level of reactivity to satisfy the reasons that

the site is Class P. The site is Class P (because) and we recommend Class H1
slabs and footings... Or,
4. Provide the technical information sufficient for the design engineer to select

or determine a suitable footing system.

33

Part 1 Summary:
Misleading simplicity of AS2870-2011.
Standard deemed-to-comply designs only

apply to Normal sites.

Most sites are not Normal, but are Class P.
Site Classification needs to recognize the

factors affecting the site.

34

Part 2

What have they done to

my slab design?

35

How much movement

do I design for?

36

Design Procedure
1. Calculate Ys.
2. Modify Ys to account for any cutting

and/or filling of the site.

3. Calculate Yt.
4. Either select a standard deemed-tocomply design, or
5. Use engineering principles.

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

Newcastle Site
Natural Site,

ys = 35 40mm

(Class M)

Cut & Controlled Fill

ys = 35 60mm

(Class H1)

Cut & Uncontrolled Fill

ys = 25 60mm

(Class H1)
45

46

47

Geographical Effects:
Newcastle Site

Cut & Controlled Fill, ys = 25-60mm

Class H1

Maitland Site

Cut & Controlled Fill, ys = 50-80mm

Class E

Muswellbrook Site

Cut & Controlled Fill, ys = 55-100mm Class ED

48

Changes to AS28702011:
Hs values have increased and vary

with location
Cutting and Filling will increase ys
Calculate ys as part of every design

49

Effect of Trees
AS2870-2011 Appendix H
New requirements

50

51

52

H4 DESIGN PROCEDURE
(b) In the absence of advice on mature
tree heights, the ratio Dt/HT may be
taken to be 0.5
In the absence of advice on mature tree
heights, single trees with Dt greater than
25m and groups of trees with Dt greater
than 50m may be ignored.
53

If Dt / HT <= 0.5, Then yt = ytmax

54

Trees to Remain
Appendix H requires:
Centre Heave Mound Height: ym = ( 0.7 ys + yt )
Mu for centre heave case should not be less than
1.5Mcr, as calculated for centre heave bending,
and
Mu for edge heave should not be less than
1.5Mcr, as calculated for edge heave bending.
55

56

Trees Removed
Before Construction
Appendix H requires:
Centre Heave Mound Height: ym = ( 0.7 ys + yt )

The Commentary recommends yt may be additive

to either the centre heave or edge heave cases.
However Appendix H has no such requirement
for yt & edge heave case.
Equivalent bending strengths.
57

Trees Removed
Before Construction
STRENGTH LIMITS:
Mu for centre heave should not be less than
1.5Mcr, as calculated for centre heave
bending, and
Mu for edge heave bending should not be
less than the moment resistance Mu for
centre heaves.
58

Trees Removed Before Construction

Mu for edge heave bending should not be less
than the moment resistance Mu for centre
heaves.
Mu (Edge Heave) >= Mu (Centre Heave)
i.e. Equal Strength

59

60

61

Newcastle Site
Tree to
Remain
From our calculations:
ys = 50 to 58 mm, Use ys = 55 mm
yt = 12 to 15 mm, Use yt = 14 mm
Centre Heave: ym = 0.7x55 + 14 = 53 mm
Edge Heave:
ym = 0.5x55
= 28 mm
62

Yst = Ys +
Yt/0.7

63

64

I
req
M*
1.5Mcr

I
req
M*
1.5Mcr

I eff
Mu

I
req
M*

Mu

Mu

1.5Mcr

Mu

I eff
Mu
Mu

I
req
M*
1.5Mcr

I eff

I eff
Mu
Mu

65

If the tree remains:

Newcastle site, with natural ys = 35 to 40mm.
The site will be cut & filled 600mm;
A tree is going to remain near the slab;
CORD analysis
indicates we need:
Class H1 slab
specification
66

Newcastle Site
Tree is Removed
From our calculations:
ys = 50 to 58 mm, Use ys = 55 mm
yt = 12 to 15 mm, Use yt = 14 mm
Centre Heave: ym = 0.7x55 + 14 = 53 mm
Edge Heave:
ym = 0.5x55
= 28 mm
67

68

69

70

If the tree
is removed:
Newcastle site, with natural ys = 35 to 40mm.
The site will be cut & filled 600mm;
A tree is going to be removed;
CORD analysis
indicates we need:
Heavier than
Class H2 slab
specification
71

Summary of Tree Designs

Newcastle Site: Hs = 1500 mm
Natural Movement: ys = 35 to 40 mm
600mm Cut, modified ys = 55 mm
Tree Movement: yt = 14 mm, Ht = 2.5 m

If Tree Remains:
385 mm deep waffle
pod slab with N12 reo.

If Tree is removed:
410 mm deep waffle
pod slab with N16 reo.

Class H1 Slab

Heavy Class H2 Slab

72

Commentary:
C2.3.2 Instability Index

73

Commentary:
CH4 Design Procedure

74

Conclusion & Comments

But its a Class M Site
New requirements of AS2870-2011
Tree design method originated in SA
Building Code of Australia

75