RESEARCH PAPER International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering, Vol. 1, No.

6, May 2009

Response of Raft Foundation on Varying Stratum

Kumar Venkatesh1, N.K. Samadhiya2, and A.D. Pandey2
Department of Civil Engineering, MNNIT, Allahabad, India Email: venkatesh@mnnit.ac.in 2 Department of Civil Engineering & Earthquake Engineering, IIT Roorkee, India Email: {nksamfce, adpanfeq}@iitr.ernet.in
1

Abstract The effect on raft foundation of a barrage due to varying stratum has been examined using finite element analysis. The raft foundation is completely resting on soil media and surrounded by soil and rock media. Eight noded brick elements have been used for three-dimensional modeling and meshing of the rock, soil, cut-off, pier, beam and abutment but raft foundation has been meshed using plate element. The relevant amount of soil and rock around and bottom of the raft foundation has been modeled to simulate the in-situ conditions. The raft foundation of a typical barrage has been analyzed using the representative load cases. Analysis of the barrage raft foundation has been carried out and the influence of soil properties has been studied at the region of transverse sections, which exhibited the response in terms of moments and deformation with significant difference. Index Termsraft foundation, finite element method, barrage

variation of elastic modulus of alluvial soils. II. FINITE ELEMENT METHOD The finite element method is a numerical procedure for analyzing structures and continua. It is a powerful tool in structural analysis of simple to complicated geometries. In the recent years with the advent of compact and powerful computers, the analyses performed by finite element method have become more acceptable. Three dimensional finite element program has been employed in the present study. The basic steps involved in the finite element method are as mentioned below. i. Discretization of the continuum. ii. Calculation of the element stiffness matrices. iii. Assembling the element stiffness matrices. iv. Calculation of the element load vectors. v. Assembling the element load vectors. vi. Imposition of boundary conditions. vii. Imposition of external forces. viii. Calculation of the displacement vectors. ix. Calculation of the strains and stress field. A detailed discussion on the finite element method is beyond the scope of this paper but well documented in standard literatures [4,5]. III. IDEALIZATION OF BAYS Raft foundation of a typical barrage bays 3-4 resting on varying foundation media has been considered for analysis by finite element method under representative loading condition. The raft foundation of bays 3-4 is separated by expansion joints from rest of the bays. The plan of bays 3-4 (Fig. 1) with three sections of the barrage raft floor in transverse direction (across the flow) i.e. upstream section (A-A), ogee section (B-B) and downstream section (C-C) at different distances from upstream edge has been chosen for the comparison. The barrage raft foundation with cut-off of bays 3-4 are completely resting on alluvial soil with single and double pier but suddenly at the edge of bay 4 towards bay 5 there is discontinuity in soil media due to presence of hard rock as shown in typical transverse section of the bays 3-4 (Fig. 2). The longitudinal section with variation in the height of pier from upstream (25 m) to downstream (3.5 m) along with raft foundation and cut-offs are as shown in Fig. 3.

I. INTRODUCTION A barrage is a diversion headwork, which is employed to divert water into the canal from the river. In a barrage the crest is kept at low level and heading up of water is affected by the gates. During the floods, the gates are raised to pass the high flood flow, with afflux. When the flood recedes, the gates are lowered and the flow is obstructed, thus maintaining required pond level at the upstream of the barrage. Barrages may be made of masonry, plain cement concrete or reinforced concrete, depending on the nature of foundation encountered, availability of construction material, dewatering problems, economy of construction, etc. In recent years, the hydraulic and structural engineers are seized upon in the important task of evolving safe and economic design of raft foundation. A number of analytical methods are available for design of raft foundation, viz., conventional method [1], Bakers method [2] , Hetenyis method [3] and numerical methods [4,5]. Out of the above Hetenyi,s method is adopted for analysis and design of barrage raft foundation in India as recommended by IS 11130-1984 [6]. The finite element analysis of barrages has been carried out by Sasidhar [7]. A comparative analysis of a barrage raft floor has been carried by Venkatesh et al [8]. This paper is an attempt to examine the response of raft foundation using three dimensional finite element analyses resting on varying foundation media and effects on that due to

16
2009 ACADEMY PUBLISHER

RESEARCH PAPER International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 6, May 2009
SOIL 4.5 m Upstream Section 2.25 m 11 m 13.8 m 49.526 m Bay 3 Double Pier SOIL Bay 4 Ogee Section Single Pier Double Pier ROCK A 4 11 m 2.25 m A

IV. PHYSICAL MODELING AND ANALYSIS Eight noded isoparametric brick elements have been used for the three-dimensional modeling of soil and rock media. The cut-off, pier, abutment wall and beam have been also modeled using eight noded isoparametric brick elements. The four noded three-dimensional isoparametric shell elements have been used for barrage raft floor modeling to simulate the behaviour of raft foundation as plate bending element having six degrees of freedom per node capable of taking loads normal to the plane [9]. In this model the depth of the soil and rock media considered is 80m from the crest level. The extent of surrounding soil and rock up to 35m on both sides of the transverse section of the raft and 50m on both in upstream and downstream side equivalent to the length of the raft floor along the flow has been considered. Several iterations were made for refining the mesh of the models from coarser to finer till the values of moments at the same section under study in the two consecutive models converged under gravity load. The material properties of various components of barrage are as given in Table1. The adopted model with finite element mesh consisting of the pier and beam structure with the supporting raft foundation is shown in Fig. 4. The finite element mesh for the entire structure-raftfoundation soil and rock system has been presented in Fig. 5. The dark grey portion in the figure resembles the rock portion. The total number of elements used for the adopted finite element model is 18744, which resulted in 21204 nodes in the model. The boundary condition imposed on the finite element models consist of restraining the limiting boundary of the foundation soil and rock in such manner that displacement normal to the boundary surface are restrained i.e. the base of the foundation media at the depth of 80 m is restrained against vertical displacement and at the ends along and across the direction of flow, foundation media is restrained against the horizontal displacement. Assumptions and Condition of Analysis It has been assumed that within the entire soil and rock media, elastic modulus and Poissons ratio remain the same. Instead of soil and rock mass only stiffness of the soil and rock have been considered, as it has been assumed that it has already been settled due to its own weight. Analysis have been carried out with values of modulus of elasticity, Es of surrounding soil taken as 25000 kN/m2, 50000 kN/m2, 100000 kN/m2 and 200000 kN/m2 for constant Poissons ratio 0.3, whereas the modulus of elasticity and Poissons ratio for rock stratum has been considered constant through out the analysis as 1 x 107 kN/m2 and 0.25 respectively. Methodology Except properties of soil all the material properties remained constant and possessed linear behavior. Finite element analysis for each material properties of the surrounding soil, for the model bays 3-4 have been carried out, which involves determination of moments and deformation of the raft foundation.

24.6 m

Downstream Section C 30.5 m SOIL Figure 1. Plan of barrage bays 3-4 C

Double Pier

Raft Side Cut-off Expansion joint Soil Expansion joint Rock

Figure 2. Transverse section of barrage bays 3-4

49.526 m

Pier 25 m Raft Foundation 1 3m 7.5 m Upstream Cut-off Downstream Cut-off 3 Side Cut-off 4 1 3.5 m 3m 5m

Figure 3. Longitudinal section along the pier, raft foundation and cut-off of the barrage bay

Double Pier

Single Pier

17
2009 ACADEMY PUBLISHER

RESEARCH PAPER International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 6, May 2009
Single pier

Double pier

Double pier

Raft

Upstream Cut-off

Side Cut-off

Downstream Cut-off

Figure 4. 3D-finite element discretization of the pier and raft floor with cut-off of the bays 3-4

have decreased due to increase in elastic modulus of soil and the abrupt changes in moments can be observed towards the rock end. This behavior may be contributed to increased stiffness of the soil which is appreciably depicted in upstream and downstream sections. Figs. 9 to 11 show the deformations at upstream section (A-A), ogee section (B-B) and downstream section (C-C) for flow condition under gravity, hydrostatic and uplift load. It has been observed that with the increase in the stiffness of foundation soil, the differential settlement has reduced. In case of deformations it is clear that there is a significant change at the same sections due to variation of modulus of elasticity of surrounding soil and the magnitude of deformation at different sections are also changing. It shows that the behaviour of the raft foundation resting on soil media affected by the varying soil properties in presence of rock media present at the edge of raft foundation.
3000

ROCK

2000

Es = 25000 kPa Es = 50000 kPa Es= 100000 kPa Es= 200000 kPa

Moments (kNm)

1000

0 0 -1000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Soil

Soil

-2000

-3000 Distance (m) from Bay3 Bay4 Distance (m) from Bay to 3 to Bay 4

Figure 6. Moments 'Mz' at upstream section (A-A) for flow condition considering gravity, hydrostatic and uplift load

Figure 5. 3D-Finite element discretization of the pier, raft, soil and rock system of bays 3-4 TABLE I. MATERIAL PROPERTIES OF BAYS 3-4 MODEL COMPONENTS
Pier/Abutment Raft Floor Cut-off
3000
Es = 25000 kPa Es = 50000 kPa
Es= 100000 kPa Es= 200000 kPa

2000

Moments (kNm)

Modulus of Elasticity (E) (kN/m2) 2.5 x 107 2.5 x 107 2.4 x 107

Unit Weight () (kN/m3) 25 25 25

Poissons Ratio () 0.15 0.16 0.18

1000

0 0 -1000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

V. BEHAVIOUR OF RAFT FOUNDATION The trend of moments and deformation profile at various sections of raft foundation is similar irrespective of the variation of modulus of elasticity of surrounding soil. The results of the moments at upstream section (AA), ogee section (B-B) and downstream section (C-C) have been presented in Fig. 6 to Fig. 8 for flow condition under gravity, hydrostatic and uplift load. It may be observed in the transverse sections that positive moments
18
2009 ACADEMY PUBLISHER

-2000

-3000

Distance (m)(m) from Bay Bay 4 Distance from Bay33 toto Bay4

Figure 7. Moments 'Mz' at ogee section (B-B) for flow condition considering gravity, hydrostatic and uplift load

RESEARCH PAPER International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 6, May 2009
8000
Es = 25000 kPa Es = 50000 kPa Es= 100000 kPa Es= 200000 kPa

Distance (m) from Bay 3 to Bay 4 Distance (m) f rom Bay3 to Bay4
0 0 -10 -20 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

6000

4000

Moments (kNm)

2000

Deformation (mm)

-30 -40
Es = 25000 kPa

0 0 -2000 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

-50 -60

Es = 50000 kPa

Es= 100000 kPa

-4000 Distance (m) from Bay3 Distance (m) from Bay 3 to toBay4 Bay 4

Es= 200000 kPa

-70

Figure 8. Moments 'Mz' at downstream section (C-C) for flow condition considering gravity, hydrostatic and uplift load

Figure 11. Deformation at downstream section (C-C) for flow condition considering gravity, hydrostatic and uplift load

VI. CONCLUSIONS
Distance (m) from Bay 3 to Bay 4 Distance (m) from Bay3 to Bay4
0 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

On the basis of the study carried out, the following conclusions may be drawn: (i) The variation of elastic modulus of soil and presence of rock media plays a significant role and affects the moments and deformations of raft foundation. (ii) The trend of moments and deformations of the raft foundation are similar at individual sections, with variation in the modulus of elasticity of soil media but a significant qualitative difference has been observed in moments and deformations at individual sections.

Deformation (mm)

Es = 25000 kPa
Es = 50000 kPa
Es= 100000 kPa
Es= 200000 kPa

Figure 9. Deformation at upstream section (A-A) for flow condition considering gravity, hydrostatic and uplift load

REFERENCES
[1] J.E. Bowles, Foundation Analysis and Design. McGraw Hill, New York, 1982. [2] A.L.L. Baker, Raft Foundations, the Soil Line Method of Design. Concrete Publications Limited, London, 1948. [3] M. Hetenyi, Beams on Elastic Foundations. The University of Michigan Press, USA,1964. [4] C.S. Desai and J.F. Abel, 2000, Introduction to the Finite Element Method. CBS Publisher and Distributors, New Delhi, 2000. [5] C.S. Krishnamoorthy, Finite Element Analysis, Theory and Programming. Tata McGraw Hill Publishing Company Limited, New Delhi, 2002. [6] IS: 11130, Criteria for Structural Design of Barrages and Weirs. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 1984. [7] T. Sasidhar, 3-D Finite Element Analysis of a Barrage. M. Tech. Dissertation, Department of Earthquake Engineering, IIT Roorkee, 2002. [8] K. Venkatesh, A.D. Pandey and N.K. Samadhiya, Comparative analysis of raft foundation for a barrage in India Proc. International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering, Sharjah UAE, pp.468-473, October 2005. [9] G.J.W. King, An introduction to superstructure/ raft/soil interaction, Int. symposium on soil-structure interaction, University of Roorkee, India, pp. 453-466, 1977.

Distance (m) from Bay3 Distance Ba to Bay4 Bay 4 (m) from y 3 to 0 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Deformation (mm)

Es = 25000 kPa

Es = 50000 kPa
Es= 100000 kPa
Es= 200000 kPa

Figure 10. Deformation at ogee section (B-B) for flow condition considering gravity, hydrostatic and uplift load

19
2009 ACADEMY PUBLISHER