50th INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL CONFERENCE

50th
IGC
17th 19th DECEMBER 2015, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Venue: College of Engineering (Estd. 1854), Pune, India

PERFORMANCE OF PILED RAFT WITH VARYING PILE LENGTH

Angelin Savio 1, Sreekumar.N.R, 2, V.Balakumar 3

ABSTRACT

A piled raft foundation is fairly a new concept in which the total load coming from the superstructure is
partly shared by the raft through contact with soil and the remaining load is shared by piles through skin
friction. Due to the three dimensional nature of the load transfer, piled-raft foundations are regarded as
very complex systems involving many interaction factors such as pile-to-pile, pile-to-raft, raft-to-soil and
pile-to-soil. The economy of the foundation system for heavily loaded and settlement sensitive
structures like tall slender buildings and storage tanks depends upon the method adopted to reduce the
settlements to the permissible level rather than eliminating it completely. As a matter of fact when the
serviceability requirements are satisfied from the point of view of permissible settlement there is no need
to eliminate the settlement completely. The combined piled raft system has proved to be an ideal
foundation system to satisfy the above requirement under certain favorable circumstances, namely when
the bearing capacity is not a problem but settlement would be beyond the permissible requirements.

Although the combined piledraft system was developed with over consolidated clay in mind, its
applicability in sand also becomes important as the permissible settlement for the foundation is less than
that of foundation resting on clay. Therefore the applicability of piled raft to support moderately loaded
buildings and storage tanks on sand and predominantly sandy soils gains importance, further more
understanding of load sharing between piles and raft is very much important for the piled raft in sand
particularly when the piles are driven because the driving of piles improves the state of compaction of the
sand. As the piled raft foundation system transfers the load through a complicated interaction process the
effect of the parameters associated with the constituent elements, namely the piles, raft and the soil on the
settlement reduction and load sharing behavior becomes very important and needs a detailed study.
Although a number of published literatures are available on the effect of various parameters, they all have
piles of equal lengths. In case of plaza like structures wherein the raft thickness as well as the pile length
can be varied depending upon the capacity requirements, it becomes necessary to understand the effect of
variation in pile length on settlement reduction and load sharing behavior of piled raft.

The present work is based on the results of small scale 1g model tests conducted on piled raft models with
varying configurations of varying pile length. A square raft of 150mm with 33 configuration and the pile

1
Angelin Savio, M.Tech Student, IES College of Engineering, Thrissur, India, angelinsavio@gmail.com
2
Sreekumar.N.R, Asst Professor, IES College of Engineering, Thrisur, India, sreekumar.nedumpurath@gmail.com
3
V.Balakumar, Senior Consultant, Simplex Infrastructures Ltd, Chennai, India, vb_kumar2002@yahoo.com
Angelin Savio, Sreekumar.N.R, and V.Balakumar

lengths of 0.8,1 and 1.25 times the raft width are used for the study. Tests were conducted by changing
the pile configuration by varying the locations of the short piles and long piles in a strategic manner.
Considering the high wind or seismic loads that may act on the high rise buildings, the effect of small and
large eccentric load acting on the piled raft is also studied. The load configurations are provided in such a
manner to stimulate axial load and bending. From the results it was found that connecting piles of even
short length has greater improvement in the raft behavior. Not much change in the raft behavior was
observed with small eccentricity when compared with piled raft subjected to large eccentricity. The load
settlement response was also studied and this paper discusses the result. In a specific combination of piled
raft with varying pile length, it was found that the settlement profile was almost the same for the load
applied vertically and for load applied with small eccentricity. Thus using dissimilar piles below a raft can
optimize the design of a piled raft and is economically an innovative concept and has a further scope of
study.

Keywords: Differential settlement, Eccentric load, Load sharing ratio, Piled raft, Raft, Settlement,
Settlement reduction ratio, Sand, Varying pile length.
 50th INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL CONFERENCE
50th
IGC
17th 19th DECEMBER 2015, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Venue: College of Engineering (Estd. 1854), Pune, India

PERFORMANCE OF PILED RAFT WITH VARYING PILE LENGTH

Angelin Savio, M.Tech Student, IES College of Engineering, Thrissur, angelinsavio@gmail.com

Sreekumar.N.R, Asst Professor, IES College of Engineering, sreekumar.nedumpurath@gmail.com
V.Balakumar, Senior Consultant, Simplex Infrastructures Ltd, Chennai. vb_kumar2002@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT: The combined piled raft system has proved to be an ideal foundation system to satisfy the above
requirement under certain favourable circumstances, namely when the bearing capacity is not a problem but
settlement would be beyond the permissible requirements. Although a number of published literatures are available
on the behavior of piled raft foundation system, they all have piles of equal lengths. In most of the conventional
designs, piles in the foundation have uniform lengths. The present work is based on the results of small scale 1g
model tests conducted on piled raft models in sand with configurations of varying pile length at varied load
eccentricity. Studying the settlement response and load sharing behaviour it was found that using dissimilar piles
below a raft can optimize the design of a piled raft and is economically an innovative concept and has a further
scope of study.

INTRODUCTION The small scale studies included 1g model tests and

In designing raft foundations, engineers frequently centrifuge tests. In order to solve this complex
encounter situations in which the bearing capacity problem of piled raft, several methods such as
of the raft is quite adequate, but the settlements are numerical and analytical model studies were done.
estimated to be excessive. In such cases, the With an advancement of the computer, more
combined use of a raft, along with a limited rigorous methods such as Finite Element Method
number of piles, could be an economical counter (FEM) are also used in some of recent researches
measure in which the piles are used to reduce the (Chow et. al, (2005), Liu et. al., (2009), Joy et. al,
settlements to an acceptable level. The present state (2014)). Some researchers conducted both small
of knowledge on the behaviour of piled raft is scale model studies and analytical model studies
mostly centred on the piled raft seated on deep for more accurate results (Baziar et. al, (2009),
deposits of over consolidated clay, However it is Jeyapriya and Venkateshwaran (2013), Balakumar
quite possible that this system can be adopted to et. al., (2013)).
support structures sensitive for settlement and are
to be supported on loose to medium dense sand. From the literature, it was found that a 1g model
Although majority of the piled raft and pile test on piled raft foundation in sand deposit is very
supported raft have piles of uniform length it has limited. But in the case of sand the permissible
observed that peripheral piles take higher load settlement is lesser than clay. Further more
based on the tributary area of the raft settlement understanding of load sharing between piles and
profile remains more or less uniform depending on raft is very much important for the piled raft in
the nature of the raft. medium or loose sand particularly when the piles
are driven because the driving of piles can improve
The behavior of the piledraft with sand as bed the state of compaction of the sand. In the
material has been studied by researchers like traditional design of group piles or piled rafts, the
Balakumar and Ilamparuthi (2009), Sahu and piles are often arranged uniformly (i.e., using the
Bajad (2009) and so on. Extensive parametric same pile diameter length, and spacing). However,
studies have also been carried out by many research showed that peripheral piles either carry a
researchers using 1g model studies (Balakumar greater proportion of loads than the central piles
2008) and centrifuge models (Horikoshi,1995). under a rigid cap, or suffer larger differential
Angelin Savio, Sreekumar.N.R, and V.Balakumar

settlements under a flexible cap, as a result of pile- which was fixed on the bottom of jack and the rigid
soil-raft interaction. Therefore, the traditional loading platen was connected to the proving ring
design often does not result in the best performance through an extension rod. The schematic view of
in overall stiffness or differential settlement. To the experimental set up is given in Fig. 1.
overcome these aforementioned problems, the use
of piles with different lengths or positions below a
raft can optimize the design of a piled raft. Using a
piled raft in areas subjected to high wind or seismic
loading, may increase the stability of the building
and may reduce the tilt of the raft foundations that
are subjected to eccentric loading.

This paper focus on the behaviour of piled raft with

varying pile length located in a strategic manner
subjected to small and large eccentricity. A series
of 1g tests were conducted at various eccentricities,
on unpiled raft (plain raft) and on piled raft. The Fig. 1 General arrangement of experimental set up
purpose was to compare load settlement response
of unpiled raft with piled raft with uniform and Test Box
varying pile length. The Messeturm tower in A rectangular rigid steel test box of inner
Frankfurt is a standard example (Leung et. al., dimensions 0.75m0.75m0.5m with 10mm wall
2010) for the piled raft with varying pile length. thickness was fabricated and used for conducting
Further it may also become necessary to add the experiments on the model piled raft in the
certain short piles when the foundation has to be laboratory. With a wall thickness of 10mm and
reused or due to loading changes. Hence this study several stiffeners on the outer side, the box is
has gained considerable importance. considered to be rigid. The inside face of the tank
was graduated at every 50mm depth intervals to aid
EXPERIMENTAL WORK preparation of sand bed in layers by sand raining
A model scale of 1/100 was used in all the tests. It technique.
should be noted that the models selected for the
present work were not intended to simulate Raft and Pile Models
behaviour of a specific prototype foundation at a A square piled raft model was chosen for the study.
specific location. The results from the 1g model This represented the behaviour of foundation of a
tests are analysed to understand the role of various square raft of multi-storied building.
pile parameters in reducing settlement of the raft
and in sharing the applied load. Model raft
Raft modelled to prototype scale of 1/100 were
Test Setup fabricated from a single Perspex sheet. The size of
The test facility developed in this study consists of the model was chosen to represent the prototype
a loading frame, a steel box, sand raining and foundation of 15m wide for square raft. The
controlled tamping device, piled raft and raft thickness of model raft was maintained uniform,
models and loading arrangement. The vertical though thickness of raft of real size piled raft
compressive load was applied to pile raft model foundations were in general varied from the edge
through a screw jack of 20kN capacity, which was to centre. The model of sides 150mm150mm and
supported centrally at the bottom flange of the steel with thickness 8mm was used in the study.
girder made of channel sections. It was operated
manually by rotating the lever. The load was Model Piles
transferred to the model through a proving ring, The model piles were of circular shaped Perspex
rods. The pile diameter was kept constant to
 50th INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL CONFERENCE
50th
IGC
17th 19th DECEMBER 2015, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Venue: College of Engineering (Estd. 1854), Pune, India

represent pile diameter of 1000mm. Perspex rod of basis of e/B ratios. B is the raft width and e
10mm diameter was used as model piles. The corresponds to eccentric distance from the centre
length of piles tested were 187.5mm (1.25 B), of raft. For small eccentricity case e/B= 0.05 is
150mm (B) and 120mm (0.8 B), representing the considered and for large eccentricity case e/B =
tip of pile below pressure bulb, at pressure bulb 0.15 is considered.
and above pressure bulb respectively. Here after
we can call it as long (L), medium (M) and short
piles (S). The length of the piles were chosen in
such a way that the depth of the bed below the tip
was sufficiently thick so that, bottom rigidity does
not affect the pile behaviour and pile functions
purely as friction pile. Threads were provided at
the top end of piles to facilitate the proper
connection and to generate monolithic action
between the piles and the raft.

Piled Raft Models

Raft and pile models of required diameter and
length were assembled by fitting the piles in the
holes of the raft and connecting them together with
stainless steel screws. A total of 9 piles are
arranged in 33 grid pattern with spacing 5 times
the diameter of the pile.
Piled raft models were tested for different
arrangements of varying lengths of piles. The
purpose was to examine the influence of pile length Fig. 2 Piled raft with different combinations of pile
configuration of piles on load sharing and arrangement
settlement reduction. Various pile configurations
tried in this study for the square raft are shown in Table 1 Index properties of sand
Fig. 2. The various combinations are named as
Parameter Value
combination 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 respectively.
Effective size (D10 mm) 0.27
D 30 (mm) 0.43
Test Medium
D 60 (mm) 0.78
Uniformly graded clean river sand was used in all
Uniformity coefficient (Cu) 2.87
the experiments as a test medium. The index
Coefficient of curvature (Cc) 0.86
properties obtained are presented in Table 1 and
Type of soil SP
the sand is classified as poorly graded sand (SP).
Specific gravity G 2.67
Maximum dry density( k N/m3) 18.11
Load Eccentricity
Minimum dry density( k N/m3) 15.27
The presence of certain amount of eccentricity of
Specimen Dry Sand
loading in the footing can induce moments in the
Relative Density 82%
building. In case of tall structures the effect of load
Dry density (k N/m3) 17.53
eccentricity may arise due to horizontal load acting
Undrained cohesion (C) 0
on it. In the present study two cases of eccentricity
Angle of internal friction () 43.5o
has been considered namely small eccentricity, and
large eccentricity. Eccentricity is provided on the
Angelin Savio, Sreekumar.N.R, and V.Balakumar

In accordance with the provision IS 2911, relating more rapid. This indicates that when there is an
to pile foundation, the possible deviation of the pile eccentricity of loading, a larger eccentricity can
permitted is 60-75mm on a smaller diameter of a induce distress in the raft. Fig. 3 presents the load
pile thus works out to 13.3%, considering 450mm settlement response of the plain raft of 150mm
as the diameter of the pile. If 75mm is permitted on square and 8mm thick tested in dense sand bed,
a 500mm diameter pile, the eccentricity works out under three loading conditions.
to 15%. However on a larger diameter pile, say 1m,
the permissible eccentricity works out to 7.5%. As Load (kN)
a parameter of study we have considered 15% for 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
the present. No eccentricity case is also studied for 0
comparison. Each combination of pile arrangement 2
is subjected to all the three loading conditions.

Settlement (mm)
4
e/B = 0

The density of sand bed was achieved by the 6 e/B = 0.05

combination of sand raining and compaction. Pre- 8 e/B = 0.15
weighed sand was rained in layers and controlled
10
compaction was adopted to achieve the required
density. The installation of pile was planned in 12
such a way that represents a real time pile 14
installation. Piles were connected to the raft with Fig. 3 Load settlement response of plain raft
suitable arrangement to ensure monolithic action.
The foundation was vertically loaded using a screw Effect of Pile Groups with Equal Pile Length
jack fitted to a loading frame and the load applied
was monitored using a proving ring of 50 kN Pile Length Shorter than Raft Width
capacity. Settlement of piled raft was measured In all the three cases of loading namely no
using dial gauges having travel of 25 mm and least eccentricity case, small eccentricity case and large
count of 0.01 mm. eccentricity condition the behaviour is identical as
seen from the load settlement response of plain
RESULT ANALYSES & DISCUSSION raft. As the load increases in the case of small
In order to study the load sharing behaviour of the eccentricity and large eccentricity the loss of the
pile group with varying pile length seven foundation stiffness is very rapid, this is perhaps in
combinations of pile configuration have been the first case of no eccentricity the applied load is
studied. As a basic data the load settlement resisted by the shaft friction since the pile group
response of plain raft has also been studied so that and the soil prism in between acts as a single pier.
the effect of piles of varying length on the Further the enhancement of confining pressure
behaviour of the composite system can be around the pile is uniform and the system takes a
quantified. Further the effect of load eccentricity much higher load; but when the load increases
has also been studied. Since the present study further to overcome the frictional resistance the
mainly concentrates on the load sharing response, system loses its stiffness more rapidly.
much concentration is not shown on the settlement Pile Length Equal to Raft Width
reduction behaviour of the composite system. It is seen from the Fig. 4 that the behaviour is
regular in the sense that the loss of stiffness is more
Behaviour of Plain Raft or less at the same settlement level namely 8mm to
It is seen that in the initial stages of loading the 10mm.This is mainly because the pile group is
behaviour does not show any appreciable variation, subjected to a uniform confining pressure for the
but as the loading increases the variation in the entire length of the pile and also the enhancement
settlement increases. In the case of large of the confining pressure around the piles is also
eccentricity condition the loss of raft stiffness is uniform. This is mainly due the reason that the pile
 50th INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL CONFERENCE
50th
IGC
17th 19th DECEMBER 2015, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Venue: College of Engineering (Estd. 1854), Pune, India

tip coincides with the tip of the pressure bulb. It is within the pressure bulb and so increasing the pile
also seen that the increase in the load between the length does not produce any distinct advantage and
case of small eccentricity and no eccentricity is that increasing pile length beyond pressure bulb
smaller than the difference between large does not produce any distinct advantage.
eccentricity and small eccentricity.
Combination 4 and 5
Load (kN) Various combinations by varying the pile lengths
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 have been studied by keeping the long pile at the
0
centre. In the combination 5, where the long pile at
2 the centre is surrounded by medium length piles,
4 e/B = 0 the load at failure is 10.13 kN for no eccentricity
Settlement (mm)

6 case. This is marginally more than combination 4

e/B = 0.05
8 (9.89 kN), where the long pile at the centre is
10 e/B = 0.15 surrounded by short length piles. This marginal
difference is mainly due to the increase in the pile
12
length. And the influence of the pile soil
14 interaction through the short piles and the soil. The
16 load settlement curves showed similar trend as in
Fig. 4 Load settlement response of piled raft with previous cases.
combination 2
Combination 6 and 7
Pile length larger than the raft width Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 show the load settlement response
One very important observation is to be made here. of piled raft with combination 6 and 7 respectively.
In combination 7 the smaller piles are provided at
Load (kN) the corners and in combination 6 medium length
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 piles are given at the corners. In these two cases it
0
is peculiar to see that there is no much difference in
2 the load taken at any given settlement level in the
Settlement (mm)

4
e/B = 0
case of no eccentricity and small eccentricity.
6 e/B = 0.05
However the load at failure is higher for no
8
eccentricity case. This means that so long as the
e/B = 0.15
longer pile remains in the centre, the location of the
10
smaller pile does not affect the behaviour of piled
12
raft with smaller eccentricity compared to the piled
14 raft of no eccentricity. But in the case of larger
16 eccentricity combination 6 showed better results
Fig. 5 Load settlement response of piled raft with than combination 7. This means that with the small
combination 3 piles in the corner the performance of the
foundation system is not satisfactory. It is also seen
It is seen from the load settlement response shown that the fall of stiffness is at relatively smaller load
in Fig. 5 that the load taken by the group with level compared to the previous cases. Hence when
larger pile is only marginally more than the the eccentricity is higher the location of smaller
previous case namely the pile group with length piles affects the performance of the piled raft.
equal to the raft width. This clearly indicates that
the enhancement of the confining pressure due to
the applied load through the raft takes place only
Angelin Savio, Sreekumar.N.R, and V.Balakumar

ratio at corresponding settlement is given by:

Load (kN)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
(1)
0
2 Where = Load sharing ratio; = Load
e/B = 0
Settlement (mm)

4 carried by piled raft; = Load carried by raft

6 e/B = 0.05

8 e/B = 0.15
0.50
10 0.45

Load Sharing Ratio

12 0.40
1
0.35
14 2
0.30
16 0.25 3
Fig. 6 Load settlement response of piled raft with 0.20 4
combination 6 0.15
0.10 5
0.05 6
0.00 7
Load (kN) 2mm 4mm 6mm 8mm 10mm
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Settlement
0
2 Fig. 8 Load sharing ratio for various combinations
in no eccentricity case
Settlement (mm)

4 e/B = 0
6 e/B = 0.05
8 It is seen that from 10mm settlement level as the
e/B = 0.15
10
settlement increases the load sharing ratio
decreases gradually indicating that the pile group
12
essentially functions as settlement reducer. In the
14
case of no eccentricity the combination 3 and 7 has
16
established a better performance.
Fig. 7 Load settlement response of piled raft with
combination 7 0.60

0.50
1
Load Sharing Ratio

Considering all the combinations in various

0.40 2
loading conditions we can say that combination 6
3
is most effective. Even though the load taken was 0.30
marginally lower than combination 3 with all long 4
0.20
piles, it look more load than combination 2 with all 5
medium length piles for all loading conditions 0.10 6
except in the case of large eccentricity. But this 7
0.00
reduction in the case of large eccentricity is also 2mm 4mm 6mm 8mm 10mm
marginal. Since we are using a combination of Settlement
small, medium and long length piles in the piled Fig. 9 Load sharing ratio for various combinations
raft system this can effectively reduce the cost of in small eccentricity case
construction.
Fig. 9 showes that when there is small eccentricity
Generalised Load Sharing Behaviour the combination 3, 6 and 7 performs better as the
The load sharing behaviour of the pile group of load increases. However we can see that as load
piled raft under on eccentric load is presented in increases the combination 6 shows good result than
the form of a bar chart in Fig. 8. The load sharing combination 7. This indicates that when there is
 50th INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL CONFERENCE
50th
IGC
17th 19th DECEMBER 2015, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Venue: College of Engineering (Estd. 1854), Pune, India

eccentricity in the loading the position of smaller did not show any appreciable results. From the
pile influences the performance of the foundation load settlement behaviour of various combinations
system. it was found that in no eccentricity case, the piled
raft with varying length can be used effectively.
The load sharing ratio in the case of large When eccentric load was at minimum, position of
eccentricity is given by Fig 10. It is seen that at smaller pile had no appreciable effect. The
higher loading eccentricity, the pile group has to combination 6 showed better results than all other
take higher load. When the e/B ratio is 0.15 at any cases. This was because the position of short pile
given settlement level the load sharing ratio is plays an important role under eccentricity loading.
higher than the other two cases. Also where there is Therefore, in case of large eccentric loads it is
no load eccentricity the pile group functions more preferable not to have any variation in pile length.
as a settlement reducer as the load sharing ratio is
smaller. When there is loading eccentricity the pile The study establishes that for practical problems
group is more stressed and its efficiency as load piled raft can have piles of varying length provided
sharing element reduces. they are placed strategically depending on
requirement. Thus we can reduce the cost of
0.60 construction by limiting the length of the piles in
0.50
an effective manner. As a further study numerical
modelling can be done as a validation of the thesis.
Load Sharing Ratio

1
0.40 2 Further, the effect of varying pile length can be
0.30
3 studied on raft thickness, spacing, pile diameter
4 and size of raft. As an extension to this thesis, the
0.20
5 interaction effect of superstructure stiffness can
0.10 6
also be analysed.
7
0.00 REFERENCES
2mm 4mm 6mm 8mm 10mm
1. Balakumar, V. (2008), Experimental Studies of
Settlement
Model Piled Rafts on Sand and Field Study of
Fig.10 Load sharing ratio for various combinations
Proto Type Behaviour, Ph.D. Thesis, Anna
in large eccentricity case
University, Chennai
2. Balakumar, V., and Anirudhan, I.V. (2011),
CONCLUSIONS
Piled raft behaviour model studies and field
From the results obtained it was observed that, at
performance, Proceedings of IGC, Kochi, pp
any given settlement the load taken by piled raft is
947- 950.
greater than plain raft. When the piled raft was
3. Balakumar, V., and Ilamparuthi, K. (2009),
subjected to eccentric loads, not much change in
Effect of pile layout on the behaviour of
raft behaviour was observed between small
circular piled raft on sand, IGC, Guntur, India,
eccentricity and no eccentricity case when
pp 673-677.
compared with large eccentricity case. Connecting
4. El Sawwaf, M. (2009), Experimental and
piles of even shorter length showed greater
numerical study of eccenrically loaded strip
improvement in the raft behaviour. It was observed
footing resting on reinforced sand, Jl. of
that connecting a long pile in middle can reduce
Geotech. and Geoenv. Engineering, ASCE, vol
settlement considerably provided no much
135, pp 1509-1518.
eccentricity acts on the system. For a given area
5. El Sawwaf. M. (2010), Experimental Study
ratio and density of sand, the stiffness of piled raft
of Eccentrically Loaded Raft with Connected
is higher for longer piles. However, pile lengths
and Unconnected Short Piles, Jl. of Geotech.
more than 80% of the lateral dimension of the raft
Angelin Savio, Sreekumar.N.R, and V.Balakumar

and Geoenv. Engineering,, ASCE, vol 136, pp

1394-1402 .
6. Garg, P., Singh, H., and Jha,J. (2011),
Optimisation of piled-raft foundation, UKIERI
Concrete Congress - Innovations in Concrete
Construction. pp 1724-1735.
7. Liang, F., Li, J., and Chen, L. (2006),
Optimization of Composite Piled Raft
Foundation with Varied Rigidity of Cushion,
Foundation analysis and design, ASCE
proceedings, pp 29-34.
8. Sahu, R.B., and Bajad, S.P. (2012), An
Experimental Investigation on Interference
of Piled Rafts in Soft Soil, Civil and
Environmental Research, vol 2(2), pp 49-58
9. Singh, A.K., and Singh, A.N. (2013), Study of
piled raft foundation, Proceeding of Indian
Geotechnical Conference, Roorkee, pp 1-4.
10. Singh, A.K., and Singh, A.N. (2011),
Experimental study of piled raft foundation,
Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical
Conference, Kochi, pp 237-240.
11. Singh, B., and Singh, N.T. (2011), Influence of
piles on load settlement behavior of raft
foundation, International Journal of
Engineering Science and Technology, vol 3, pp
8385-8394
12. Venkateshwaran,N., and Jeyapriya, S.P.(2013),
Experimental Observations and Parametric
Study of Piled Raft Foundation Using Plaxis,
Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical
Conference, pp 747- 752 .