IRC i45-1972

RFCOMMENDATIONS FOR ESTIMATING

THE RESISTANCE OF SOIL BELOW
THE MAXIMUM SCOUR LEVEL
IN THE DESIGN OF WELL
FOUNDATIONS
OF
BRIDGES
THE INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS
1996
<<
tIC: sun
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ESTIMATING
THE RESiSTANCE OF SOIL BELOW
THE MAXIMUM SCOUR LEVEL
IN THE DESIGN OF WELL
FOUNDATiONS
OF
BRIDGES
Pub!( sh e d &v
THE INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS
Janinagar House, Shahjaban Road
New DeH,i-H
1996
Pri~cR
(1tus I~acki ig ~
<<
IIC: rn-an
First Published
Repdnted
Reprinted
Reprinted
Reprinted
October, 1972
March, 1984
July, 1987
March, 1992
As 1996
Octobei~2000
(RIghts of ?WblIntk# adV flasbtkn ON NUtS)
Printed at Dee Kay Printers, New Dcliii
(500 copies)
<<
IRC: 451972
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ESTIMATING THE RESISTANCE
OF SOIL BELOW THE MAXIMUM SCOUR LEVEL IN
THE DESIGN OF WELL FOUNDATIONS OF BRiEGEh
1. INtRODUCTION
ii. The draft recommendations fur estimating the resistance
of soil below the maximum scour level in the design of well founda-
tions of bridges we~efinalised by a Subcommittee consisting of the
following personnel at their meeting held on the lst March 1971.
Shri B . Balwarn R ao ci.wwenor
2. Shri 5. Seetharaman Member-Secretary
Memkn
3, SM S. B . iSu 7 . Shri N~S. Ramaswamy
4. Dr. K. K. Katti 5. Dr. K, S. Sankaran
5, Sttri S. M. Kaul 9. SM Shitala Sharan
6. Dr. P. Ray Chowdhury 10. SM S. N. Sinha
I.!. Shri T. N. Subba Lw
This draft was approved by the Bridges Committee in their
meetings held on the 17 th November, 19 7 1 and 14th April, 1972. It
was later approved by the Executive Committee in their meeting held
on the 26th and 27 th April, 19 7 2 and by the Council in their 7 8th
meeting held in Nainital on the 10th July, 19 7 2.
1.2. The recommendations given in this Standard I~avebeen
lormuiated on the basis of the observed behaviour of models of well
foundations and also the wo:k done by many workers in this held.
The basic a~surnptionsare ghen in Appendices.
1.3 . These studies have indicated that
(i) sharing oF the moment between sides and base is conti-
nuously changing with the increase in delhrmation of the
soil and
(ii) the weciranics of sharing ul ihe moment between the sides
and the base is entirely different for the initial stages of
loading ot a well as compared to its eltirnate failun~
<<
1.4. Elastic theory method iives the soil pressures at the side
and the base under design loads, but to determine the actual factor of
safety against failure, it will be necessary to calculate the ultimate
soil resistance, 1 herefore, the design of well foundations shall be
checked by both these methods.
2. SCOPE
2.1. The procedure given is applicable to the design of wdl
foundations of bridges resting on non-cohesive soil like sand and
surrounded by the same soil below maximum scour level. The
provisions of these recommendations will not apply if the depth of
embedment is less than 0.5 times the width of foundation in the
direction of lateral forces.
3. PROCEDURE FOR CALCULATING THE SOIL R ESISTANCE
The resistance of the soil surrounding the well foundation shall
be checked:
(i) for calculation of base pressures by the elastic theory with
the use of subgrade moduli; and
(ii) by computing the ultimate soil resistance with appropriate
factor of safety.
4. Y wThTIIOD OF CALCULATION
I. E!astic Theory (vide Annexure I)
Step 1: Determine the values of W, H and M under combina-
tion of normal loads without wind and seismic loads assuming the
minimum grip length below maximum scour level as required under
iR C 5l970
where
W total downward load acting at the base of well,
including the self weight of well.
*St md a SpLm ifi~0 tot ~ rnd CL dt ot Pt k t c~for R LMd 8t dgms Sccr ~n
(i~nciat F eat utis of Deogn.
2
<<
IRC : 451972
H external horizontal fo:ce acting on the well at scour
level.
M :: total applied external moment about the base of
well, including those due to tilts and shifts.
Step 2: Compute l~and
1v and I
where
I - . Ia 4- ml~(1 i 2 ,.m~)
Is moment of inertia of base about th. axis normul to
direction oh horizontal forces passing through its
CO.
lv = moment of inertia of the projected area in elevation
LD~
of the sotl mass offering resistance r
where
L = projected width of the soil mass offering resistance
multiplied by appropriate value of shape tactor.
Nose: The value of shape factor for circular wells shall be
taken as 0.9. For square or rectangular wells where the resultant
horizontal force acts parallel to a principal axis, the shape factor
shall be unity and where the fotces are inclined to the princtpab axis,
a suitable shape factor shall be based on experimental results.
= depth of well below scour level.
m = Ks/K: Ratio of horizontal to vertical coefficient
of subgrade reaction at base, in the absence of
values for K
11 and K determined by field tests m
shall generally be assumed as unity.
p = coefficient of friction between sides and the soil =
tan 8, where 8 is the angle of wall friction between
well and soil.
3
<<
IRC: 451972
for rectangular well
diameter
for circular well
rD
Step 3 : Ensure the following
M
H> .-. (1 4- rut)-- ~W
and H czM(l jup) + ~W
where
r D/2. l/mlv
coefficient of friction between the base and the soil.
It shall be taken as tan ~.
= angle of internal friction of soil.
Step 4 : Check the elastic state
mM/I > y (Kp
if mM/f is > y (Kp K.~),find out the grip required by putting the
limiting value mM/I = y (Kp K4
where
= density of the soil (submerged density to be taken
when under water or below water table).
K, & K,~ passive Led actve pressure coefficients to he, c~.lcu-
laced usingCoult mbs theory, assuming 8 ,.the angle
of wall friction between well and soil equal to j ~
but limited to a value of 224.
Step 5 : Calcula:e
4
<<
IRC: 451972
where
~H~and ~ : : ; : r. maximum and minimum base pressure respectively.
A area of the base of well,
B wid th of the base of well in the direction of forces
and moments.
P = Mfr
Step 6: Check r~(0, i.e., no tension
j> allowable bearing capacity of soil,
Step 7: If any of the conditions in Steps3. 4 and 6 or all do
not satisfy, redesign the well accordingly.
Step S: Repeat the sante steps for combination with wind and
with seismic case separately.
U.. ULTZMATE kESlSTAfl~EMtTHOD (Ylde Annenirr 2)
Step 1: Check that W/A> oj2
W total downward load acting at the base of well,
including the self weight of well, enhanced by a
suitable load factor given vide Step 6.
A = area of the base of well.
= ultimate bearing capacity of the soil below the base
of well.
Step 2: Calculate the base resisting moment Mb at the plane
of rotation by the following rormula:
Mb = QWB tan 4~
B = width in case of square and rectangular wells
parallel to direction of forces and diameter for
circulac wells,
5
<<
IRC: 451972
Q - a constant asgiven in Table I below for square or
rectartguiaf base. Ashape factor of 0.6 is to be
multiplied for wells with circular base,
= angle of internal friction of soil.
TABLE l
D/H 0.5 1.0 1,5 2.0 2.5
Q 0.41 0.45 0.50 0.56 044
Note : The values of Q for intermediate D/.3 values in the
above range may be linearly interpolated.
M
5 = 0.10 v D~(K, KA) L
where
y . = density of soil (submerged density to be taken for
soils under water or below water table)
L ~. projec:ed width of the soil mass offering resistance. In
case of circular wells. it sholl be 0,9 diameter to account
for the shape~
D = depth of grip below maximum scour level,
K,, .KA passive and active pressure ectefficient to be calculated
using Coulombs theory assuming 8 angle of wall
iriction between well and soil equal to 3 * but limited
to a value of 221,
Step 3 : Calculate the resisting moment due to friction at front
and back faces (Mg) about the plane of rotation by following
formulae:
(i) For rectangular well
M,=0.l8y(K, X~)LtDsin)
6
<<
IRC : 45~~l972
(ii) for circaIn r well
iS1~ oH
7IK KA) B~Vsin 3
step 4 Tie total resistancL moment M~about the plane of
rotation shall be
M1 : : ~,7 (M~+ Ms +- M~1
Step 5 : Check M~4: M
where
M .:: total applied external moment about the plane of
rotation, viz., located at O2D above the base, taking
appropriate load factors as per combinations given
below
111) ,.. (I)
liD -fB ~ l.4(Wc 4 Ep +WorS) ... (2)
lID + l.6L (3)
lID f B F i4(L + Wc~ F Er) .. (4)
i.ID+B j 125(L+Wcj Ep+WorS) .,. (5)
where
D : ,: dead load
L.: live load including braking, etc.
9 ~: ~ buoyancy
Wc;~water current fo~cc
Ep = earth pressure
W wind lhrce
S sci~n~ic force
For horizontal force due to frictional resistance of
beanng d tie To dead and live loads, appropi iate fact ors shall be taken.
But effect of defocnaat ion due to temperature, shrinkage and creep
mq be neglected for normal structures,,
7
<<
INC: 45-1972
Nose (ii) Moment due to shirt and alt of welts and piers and
direct loads, if any, shall also be considered ahout the plane or
rotation.
Step 6 : If the conditions in Steps i and 5 are not satisfied~
redesign the well.
ELASTIC THEORY METHOD ( Anne .vure t)
I INTRODUCTION
The following assuntpt ions are made in deriving the equations
based on elastic theory:
(i) The soil surrounding the well and below the base is perfectly
elastc!, homogensus and followr Hookes Law.
(ii) Under design working leads, the lateral. deflections are so
small that the urtit soil ~eact ion p iricre.a ~eslinearly with increasing
lateral deflection j as expressed by p Zr Ku z where Kn is the
caefhc~enLof ho,rizont.:d ~uhgade reaction at the base,
(~hi)The coefficient of hothor,tal subgrade reaction increases
linearly with depth in. the case of cohesioniess soils.
(iv) The well is assumed .o he a rigid body su~ectedto an
erj,ter~a~ unidirectional horizontal force. H and a moment Mo at scour
level,,.
2. SY MBOLS
A area of base of the well.
a =m width of the base parallel to the direction of the
external horizontal force.
D ~ depth of well below scour level.
B
<<
IRC : 45 1972
II external horizontal force acting on the well at scour
level.
moment of inertia of the base about an axis passing
through C.. G.. and perpendicular to horizontal
resultant force.
moment of inertia about the horizontal axis passing
through the CCI.. of the projected area in elevation ol
ID
the soil mass offering resistance
K coefficient of vertical suhgrade reaction at the base..
K
1 coefficient of horizontal subgrade reaction at the hose.
KA., Kr . active and passive pressure coefficients for cohesion~~
less soils as pei Coulomtds theory.
1. projected width of the soil mass offering resistance.
Note : .A shape factor of 0,9 may be applied for circular wells.
in =r , i.e., ratio of the horizontal to the vertical co-
efficient of suhgrade reactions at the base.
hi total applied external moment at the base = ~Mc .4.
H.D)
M0 =. moment of the external forces at scour level,
Mp : : : r: : : : moment of P about the base.
M5 .. resisting moment at the base.
p ; rr horizontal :soil reaction.
p. Zr.: coefficient of friction between the base and the soil.
p. .=.: coefficient .of friction between sides and the soil.
a density of soil . (submerged density to be ned win
under water)
angle of internal friction of soil.
9
<<
1F(C : 45~~l972
S a angle of friction between the sides of well and soil
taken equal to 3 ~ limited to a value of 22r,
o : = angular rotation of the well as a rigid body.
: : : horizontal soil reaction at depth y from scour level,
vertical soil reaction at distance X from C.O. of
base.
( T~ = maximum and minimum base pressures.
~ P . distance from the axis passing the CO. of base at
which the resultant vertical frictional force on. .~ide
acts normal to the direct ion of horizontal fb mce : 13/2
in case of rectangular welis or, 0.318 diameter in
circular wells.
3. EQUATIONS FOR BASE PRESSURES
In the most general case, the centre of rotation can be above the
base atC
1, at the base C, or below the base at Ca. It can be easily
visualised that the base moves towards the centre F rotanon, if the
latter lies above the base so that the horizontal frictional force at the
ha.se acts in the direction of H. lf the point of rotation lies below
the base by a similar argument.:! it is seen that horizontal frictional
force. at base must be in the opposite sense to H. The maximum.
frictional force which can develop at the base is ~zW, At any parti-
cialar instant only a fraction of it would be acting. 1.. et it he denoted
by flpW Where $ 3 is a factor always less than one.. ii is, therefore,
clear that before movemem tak s place /3 must he between I and i
resp.c.tively so that we can write that for point of rotation at the
base $ 3 must be... between. the lithits I to 1 In the p~.rticularcase
of heavy wells met with in actual practice, the point of rotation shall
l:ie .atoiu.rn:i::i to ~ at the base. Let the ~rell rotate about a. point C
at a hor~i.ontaldistance Xc from the centre of the well shown in
Fig.. I
P total horizontal soit reaction from the sides.
resisting moment .at the base.
lQ
<<
IRC; 454972
-7
D i
k
(t~S /
C
3 j Lfl AI9HOcWttL
H~I
PLAW OF WELL
,eiP~TM~t
SCo%* LtVtL 34
PRESSURE
DISTRISUTION
Al SIDE
!?lEitCTlOtl
F ig I
The total deflection at depth y from wour level
= (D y~9
Horizontal soil react ion K11 y X ii) y) u
Key
~ ~ (D y)
Total horizontal Soil rC2c tion acting on the sides of the s~t
P
1! <<
IRC: 431972
KeL D
LD
Putting =
~,. _2mKoh
(I)
Let M, be the moment of P about base level
M, (D -~ y) dy L
= m ~eL (D y) dy
mKeLf y 2Dy~dy
4!, L
a mKoL (2)
Now consider the soil reaction acting at the base. Vertical
JeA*xtion at distanot (IX 4 Xc) frwn centrc of rotation (Xc ..~. IX) o
K(Xc ~l
4.H12
M~_fvTydA.X...:Ko~(Xc ~X)XdA
+1/2 +1/2
KOJXIJAiKOXc5XSJA
.1/2 -H/I
d A being a function ot IX
<<
IRC:
As the reference coordinates are at co. or ban
fxd A= 0 and l~ fxtd A whence
KB
1 a (3)
1 or ciuilit~~ will ~ 11 0
pP) P
or H -i -.. P (1 .+ fifl,)
H 1 flp\V
or P (4~
Taking moments about base
M.
0 .j.. H. D = .M1 M, t
or Ni = ~ -F M, -3- ~ilP~D (5)
Substituting equations (1), (2) and (3)
N. ... K O
tu in K~l,.~3 /4d, . 2mK~l.~
K . (3 ~ ,.: n~L (I -~
K (j . NI/[t~:, nt l~(I 2~/~)3
(6)
where I ... In: in t (I I-
From equation (.4~
H ..t /3H~\~ M I
P 2inK ft h/I) 2w
.1 1 L f)
1) 1
wltcic r , --
r 2 ml~
11 + Pp W H -3
fl~(W M -~ H
t3
<<
IRC: 451972
p= r t7)
,~(w P 7 )
Equation (7) is sLtisfied only it ~ i whence we obtain
M
7
> ~ZW~PP
or H > (1 ~zp)
~qil)+ p W
The vertical soil reaction isgwen by
7 , Ke(X~+ IX)
W_~ilP=f5dA~Kef.(X~+ )QdA
= KofLdA+KofXdA
= KeX~.A
whence X~K e =.(W
K9X~4-Ko.X
= + K a. Bf2
K a. 13/2
As Ku =
14
<<
IRC: 451972
e
1 A 21
~H..J. ~L.! 9
~ A 2) U
4. CONDITtONS OF STABILITY
fi) The maximum soil reaction from the sides cannot exceed
the mixim.um passive pressure at any depth, if the ~oil remains in an
elastic state., This amounts to the condition that at a ay depth y
7(Kp K~)y or
ytK~ -KA)y
orm !~(D.y)~ Y(KpKA)
(at y =-. o L.H.S. is maximum)
ormKo}y(Kp--KA)
orm~>y(KpKA)
(ii) The maximum coil pressure a~ha..,c O~ shall not exceed
.aliowable pressure on soil, similarly the mi n mum soil pressure
shall not he less than 0, i.e., no tension,
ULTIMATE SOIL RESISTANCE METHOD (Anmxurc 2)
I. INfRODtJCTtON
Th.e elastic theory described in .lnnexure I approximatel>
determines the stresses in the so.il mass hut does not indicate the safety
against ultimate failure of the 11w nl!at ion. For this it will be neces-
sary to know h.e modc of fail arc of well foundations.
15
2
<<
~IC: 451972
2 OBSERStD FAILURE OF TIlE WElLFOUNDATtON
UNDER ULTIMAfl CM. NDtTtONS
The pattern of failure of the soil muss under the application of
r;hnsversLt II ~rces to large and snia II dept lis of embedment is depleted
in F:Hc, 2.
~
1t~L~ ~.r...n ~:~ ,... ~ ~ 0
S. . ,_ ~.d a
Fig 2
Thor si I around he base in either case slides over a circular e\lindrftcal
pat h with centre of rot at ion soni~wheue above the base, The plastic
t~~owat the side follows I h~r tNt al concept as in the case of rigid
hulkhcitl at failure. Failure hay beer observed to occur at abcut 3~
rotat ton of t he well in case of no n-cohesive soils.
3 . Q UANTUM OF RESISTANCE
The obscrved variation of the total alt note icsislancc of the soul
noisy, i.e., both at the base and thu siles under sat ying dii cut loads is
given in Fig. 3.
rhis study indicates that the total resisting moment incleases with the
increase in the ratio of the direct load to the nIt mate bearang capacity
of the soil up to 0 5 to fl.7. After that it reduces. It is, therefore,
necessary to ensure that the bearing poressure adopted has a factor of
safety of twsa or more on ultimate bearing capacity of Ibe soil
cakutatc*l by any rational formula,
16
<<
IR C: 1t7 2
hi
4 POINT OF ROTAUON AT FAILURE
(i Movement of the pohet of rotation or the vertiod ails
~a)fleet of geometry and horIzontal l oads
The geometry of the toundat ion, viz., the ratio of the width of
ftamndation to the depth of embedment in the sofl and the magnitude
of the horizontal loads hae no effect in sF ifting the po~nt of rotation
along the vertical axis as could be seen from Fig. 4.
K
V
~
F oundot~,nsof iftqr.nl w~Jfln
St ~b2Ocyn
a *4~3 0Cm
WI
Position of the ce ntre of rotation as a function of relative depth
Fig. 4
7
Fig 3
~1
14
<<
IRC: 454972
(h) Effect of direct loads
The point of rotation has a relatIon to the ratio o~the super
impostd vertical loads to the ultimate hearingcapacity of the soi as
seen from Fig 5 ~
where
*
0 P~actual vcrtcal pnsuro ochn
1
~ ultimata ~corQnc~cop~dtty
0* 10 & oa cia p;ar
Fig. 5
The actual variation is confined to a narrow range beti~en0.7 5
and 08 times the depth of embedment below the scour level. Taking
into account normally expected vertical loads on well foundations1
a fixed value of 0.2 times depth above the base of the foundation
has been adopted for working out the soil resistance.
(ii) Shift of the point of rotation al ong the horizontal axis
The point of rotat ion undergoes a change in the horizontal
direction depending upon the geometry of the foundation and the
extent of defo~nationof the foundation. Under ultimate conditions
the magnitude of horizootal shift of the point as function of D/B
ratio is given in F ig. 6.
This shift in position of the point of rotation in the horizontal
direction will cause variation in the share of the moments between
the sides and the base.
~5
18
<<
TRC : 45 19 7 2
02
0~4
03
A
0
05
F ound at ions of d ittrent widths
p
AB-BoCm
4~~-4 ,~
t.0 t5 acs as s~
Position
0f the centre of rotation as a function of relativedepth
Fig. 6
Note: F or the purpose of this analysis the shift or the point
of ro~ationalong the horizontal axis has been ignored, in view of
other related indeterminate factors.
5. METHOD OF CALCULAT1ON
5,1. Base R esisting Momert (Mb)
The base resisting moment is the moment of the frictional force
snobilised al ong the surface of rupture which is assknd to be
cylindrical passing through the corners of the base for a square nIl
as shown in F ig. 7 .F or circular wells, the surfaee of rupture corres-
ponds to that of a part of sphere with its centre at the point of
rotation and passing through the periphery of the base.
if W is the total vert ~cal load au~mutedby appropriate load
factors given in suppara 5 .5 below, the lo*d per unit width will
be WfB , s~thich will also be equal to the upnrd peusure as shown
in F ig. 8.
(1) F or a rec*a~*Iarbase
Ctnsider the small aft of length td~ at an angle of 4 from
the verticalanis..
19
<<
<<
IRC: 4~-.1972
It ~ holi7t11 id I c tp~neiu~ R , d J. . ctps cL
Vert ka 1~rcc~it the clc~nent
Rd~cosJ.WB
T)uc to t Ii s ~crt ka force the norniaI loice dc~dopedat the
ekment k 8 F~
where ~ R. d ~. coc ~ c~~L
= cos~d.L!~L
-~ ~
2WR 1 (I + COS 2cL)
B j ~--~-.d~
0
RW
B~ (0 + Sm & COS 9~
B B /B t+4ntDz
sin8=~-, cosO=rn~~~,LanO=~
2_-b ;R==A~f~__.4_~_~~
W / ~ 4n~D~ I B 2nBD
F~ 2 \/ + ~ I. ~ nD +
Moment of resistance of the base about the point of rotation
Mb=Fflcan#R (1)
(ii) For a circular base
Amul tipl ication factor of 0.6 is to be applied for the above
expression of Mb in order to acc~untfor the surface of rupture
being part of a sphere~
For both cases substituting the value n equa to 0.2D f~r
the point of rotation in formula (I) above, the bas~resistance c~n
be siinpli~edand expressed in tetrns of B.
MD = Q WB tan ~
<<
TRC: 45 --1~7 2
where
13 . wiil t h in the case of square and rectangular
wells parallel to the direction of forces and
diameter for circular wells.
Q a con~tant,which depends upon the shape of
well as welt as the DB ratio. Its values are
given in Table 2 below for square or rectangular
wells. A shape factor of 0.6 is to be multiplied
for wellswith circular base.
TABLE 2
DB 0.5 1.0 t.5 2.0 2.5
- Q 0.41 0.45 050 0.56 044
Note The valuesofQ for interrnedi;itc DRvalues in the above
range may be linearly interpolated.
52. Side Resisting Moment (Mi)
The ultimate soil pressure distiihutIon at the frunt and back
facesof the well f~u~dat~on is indicated in Fig. 9.
Fig. 9
22
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
<<
mc: 972
The point of rotition is loctited at O,2D above the )~ he
side resistance moment will then biS calculated asfolk~~s
Let,
7D(Kp K~j2-:::XrrBC; BF=Y
j~3 , DEF
O,2~ ~ 0,2D
x:Y x Y
D 5D1D
or ~r .. (I)
From AsABC and CEF
D 2)
~ ~
Equating (I) and (2)
511DD--D1
Y Y
or 6 D1 = 2D:
where
= 1/3D ... (3)
Moment of side resistance about O~isthe algebraic momentsof
AsABC and DEC
4D,X. 1D+1~, 2,X.~
XD + ~. D
15 135
13 /13 5 XD
t
= O.096D.X
Say = O.1DX
SubstItuting for X
Ms 0.1 yl) (K~ K.) per unit width of well;
FOE a wtdth of L, Mi 0.1
1D (Kp K4,L
23
<<
IRC: 45-4972
5.3. ResistIng moment due to McIlee en
front .5 beck faces (Mr)
Due to the passive pressure of soil as shown in Fig. 9, the
fri:tional rorces on the front and back races of ~tll will be acting in
the vertical direction and will also produce resisting moment Mr.
For the purpose of thiscode, the effect of the active earth pressure
perpendicular to the directions of applied forces is neglected. The
resisting moment Mf is calculated asfollows:
The vertical pressure due to friction at any level issin S times the
pressure at that level whate 8 isthe ang4e of wall friction,
Total friction force/unit width (AAOE + ABOD) sin S
D
1=D13
pressure at F -~} yD (Kp.K* )
ArcaofAAOE 4. yD(K,K,~q
~ ~ D (Kr IL)
Area of AROD yD (K, K4)
= 0.1 yDiK,- IL)
Total friction ft~rce/uni~t width
(K,IL) sinS
Moment abnut centre of rotation
(i) in case of rectangular wells rot width L
Mf:J2?yDt (KpKA). ~sia8xL
(K,K,). B. sin8xi.
O.183v(KpK~OLB.D
3 sinS
say 0.180 y(K, K,.) LBD sin 8
24
<<
IRC: 45-1972
(ii) In case of circular wells
B
LevLr arm =
Therefere M
1 = yD (Kp KA). ~ 1.. sin S
Since 1. (IS 13 in case of circular wcll
0.33 2 -
= y(KpKA). BD s.n ~
0.105 y (Kp K~)B D sin 8
say 0.lly(KpK4,)BD sinS.
5.4. Total resisting moment of soil
Total resisting moment of soil Mr is given by
Mr = (M5 + M1 4- Mr)
5.5. Factor of safety
A suitable safety factor has to be ensured takiMg into account the
probable variation of different loads and their combinations. The
variation of strength characteristic of the soil sbowld also be
accounted for in calculating the resisting moment given by the above
expression. Putting it mathematically
~ 11 (applied load or moment)
A(soil resisting moment~ 0)
where
load factor for a particular load
A = strength factor for the resistance of soil.
The passive resistance of the soil depends on the angle of internal
friction for variation of which a reduclion factor of 1.25 may be
applied. Further to take into account the special nature of risk of
ftilure of roundation, which is most imj~rtantpart of the bridge,
another reduction factor of 1.15 may be applied. Hence the total
coefficient applicable to the Right Hand Side of the abcve expres~
sion (1) will come to 0.7.
Asregardsthe Left Hand Side of the expression, the variation of
loads is described below:
25
<<
IRC: 451972
(i) Dead loS : The dead load bcing more or lessa permanent
load, a factor 1.1 would be sufficient for the variationsin densitiesof
materialsand computational errors, etc.
(ii) Live load: Considering the effect of variation in IRC load
ing met with in bridges, it isadequate to adopt a factor of 1.6 for
probable overloading with the combination of dead load only and
l.4 with other combinations except with wind or seismic. With
either wind or seismic due to reduced probability of occurrence of
maximum live load, a factor of 1.25 is considered adequate.
(iii) Braking force, etc. : These longitudinal loads will cor-
respond to the coefficient adopted for live load.
Notes:
(1) The forces due to characteristic imposed deformations
should be added, e.g., the horizontal load due to frictional resistance
oIthe bearings may include the increase in dead and live load.
(2) For normal structures imposed temperature deformations
of climatic origin and deformations due to creep and shrinkage can
generally be neglected for the ultimate analysis. However, for
statically indeterminate structures, the forces due to above causes
should be considered. Similarly, the forces due to settlement of
support have also to be taken into consideration.
(iv) Water current force: Due to possible error of 20 per cent
in estimating the velocity, a factor of 1.4 may be adopted.
(v) Buoyancy: The effect of buoyancy in reducing the density
of submerged massesis more or lessa constant and can be taken as
unity.
(vi) Wind or seismic forces: When the bridge is not coveted
by live load, a factor of 1.4 isconsidered adequate for wind or seismic
forces. Due to lessprobability of combination with maximum live
load, a reduced factor of 1.25 isadequate.
(vii) Earth presare on abutments: To account for increased
earth pressure resulting from either the density af soil being higher or
26
<<
tRC: 451972
the angle of internal friction being lower than determined by tests ror
various reasons, a factor of 1.4 is considered adequate for tomputa~
tion of earth pressure.
Accordingly, the following combinations of load factors are
oltained:
LID (I)
i.ID+B+l,4(Wc +Ep +WorS) ...~.... (2)
l.1D+l.6L (3)
1.1D+B+l.4(L+Wc +E~) (4)
1.ID+B+l.25(L+W~+Ep +WorS) ........ (5)
where
D =dead load
L = live load including braking, etc.
B = buoyancy
Wc = water current force
Es = earth pressure
W = wind force
S = seismic force
(viii) Tilt and shift : In the computation of applicd momcnrs,
effects of moments due to tilt and shift of weDs, if any, about tie
plane of rotation shall also be considered.
6. In order to ensure the factor of safety for ultimate resistanet
according to above concept, the total resistance niomcnt (Ma red need
by strength factor thouId he not less than t hi iota! applied manic at
(M) about the point ui rotation for the appropriate conib flu t ions a
applied loads enhanced by the taetors gi sen ahovc, i.e., tosay
0.7 (Mb f M
3 -[ M1) ~ M
<<