Anda di halaman 1dari 16

Comparison On Actual Case StudyPile Foundation v/s Well foundation

OBJECTIVE:
Comparative study of pile foundation and well foundation, in terms of
cost & time b y collecting data from the field to help in decision making
regarding appropriate type of deep foundation for b ridges. The b ridges with
pile foundation and well foundation under construction in NW Railway with
same loading standard, span arrangement and depth of foundation have
been selected for the study.

1. GENERAL
In fairly good soils having sufficient bearing capacities, such as dense sand,
hard moorum, soft and hard rocks, it is normally possible to construct bridge
foundations as open foundations and this does not create any problems
except the protections works in case the piers are founded in the river bed.
However, at sites where suitable soil strata for constructing the open
foundations are not available, it becomes necessary to go in for pile
foundations or well foundations.
Well foundations had their origin in India and have been used for providing
deep foundations for buildings and bridges. The technique of sinking
masonry well for water is very old and even today small water wells are
constructed using the same methods as were prevalent centuries ago. Due
to availability of the e xpertise and skill for the sinking and construction of
wells the well type foundation has been more popular in India. Well
continues to be most important type of foundation for bridges in all type of
strata, particularly in scourable river beds.
Use of pile foundation till recently has not been a popular choice for bridges
in India. In the bridges constructed recently, particularly on the Railways,
one can find large number of cast iron/steel screw piles, been driven in to
ground and even extended above bed level up to the girder bearing level.
With the increased loading and horizontal forces caused by newer
locomotives, these are being replaced by well foundation and cast-in-situ
R.C.C. bored piles. Pile foundation can be used quite economically,
particularly, where foundations have to be built very deep or taken through
deep layers of soil subjected to a minimum of scour.

2.

Well Foundation
Well foundations are commonly used for transferring heavy loads to deep
strata in river or sea bed for bridges, transmission towers and harbour
structures. The situation where well foundation are resorted are as belowa) Wherever consideration of scour or bearing capacity require
foundation to be taken to a depth of more than 5 M below ground
level open foundation becomes uneconomical. Heavy e xcavation and
dewatering problem coupled with effort involve in retaining the soil
makes the open foundation costlier in comparison to other type of
foundation.
b) Soil becomes loose due to excavation around the open foundation
and hence susceptible to scouring. This is avoided in well foundation
which is sunk by dredging inside of the well.
c) From bearing pressure considerations, a well foundation can always
be left hollow thereby considerably reducing bearing pressure
transmitted to the foundation material. This is very important in soils
of poor bearing capacity, particularly in clayey soils. In other type of
foundation, the soil displaced is occupied by solid masonry/concrete
which are heavier than the soil displaced and hence this does not
give any relief in respect of adjusting bearing capacity. However in
case of well foundation this is easily achieved because of cellular
space left inside the well.

3.

Pile Foundation
Depending upon the type of soil, foundation piles are used in following ways:
a. Bearing piles
b. Friction piles
c. Friction cum bearing piles
The bearing piles are designed as those which transmit the load to
foundation strata directly without taking in to account the frictional resistance
offered by enclosing soil. The passive earth pressure resistance is taken in
to account only for the purpose of determining its resistance against the
horizontal force. Such bearing piles are generally taken up to or in to the
hard strata, such as mooram, soft or hard rock, hard consolidated sandy or
gravelly soil.
Friction piles are those in which the load is transmitted by the pile through
friction offered by surrounding soil. Such piles can be provided in cohesive
soils not subjected to heavy scour. Friction cum bearing piles designed in
such a way that the load is transmitted both by friction of the surrounding
soil and the bearing resistance of the founding soil at the tip of pile.
2

4.

Pile Classification By Construction Method


a. Precast Driven Piles These are usually of RCC or pre-stressed
concrete and generally small in size for ease in handling. The main
advantage of this type of pile is that its quality, in terms of dimension,
use of reinforcement and concrete, can be ensured as the piles are
cast in a yard under controlled conditions. However care is needed
while handling, transporting and driving the pile to avoid damages.
More to it, the limitation of length depending upon the capacity of the
driving equipment is a disadvantage as these cannot be taken very
deep except by joining. Generally, the depth over which these are
used is restricted to 36 mt.
b. Driven Cast-in-Situ Piles- A steel casing pile with a shoe at the
bottom is driven first to the required depth. The reinforcement cage
for the pile is then lowered inside the casing and the pile is concreted.
As the concreting of the pile proceeds upwards, the casing is
withdrawn keeping a suitable overlapping length. When such piles
are driven in soft soil and the tube is withdrawn while concreting, it
affects resistance and changes the property of the soil and this also
affects the capacity of individual piles. These are not suitable for use
in soft soils, in greater depths or where keying with the rock is
required.
c. Bored cast-in-situ piles In the bored cast-in-situ process, a larger
diameter casing is used. A casing of 3 to 4 m in length is provided on
top of the bore hole which is driven with the help of a bailor. Boring
further below this casing is carried out by chiselling and the side walls
are kept stable by circulating bentonite slurry inside the bore hole.
The boring is continued up to the layer decided for founding the
structure. After reaching the desired founding level, the chisel is
removed, bore-hole flushed, reinforcement cage lowered into the
hole, and held in position by tack welding it to the support bars at the
top of the casing.
After this, concreting is carried out by using tremie, keeping its end
always below the top level of rising concrete. The concreting is
continued till a good quality concrete is seen at the top of the bore
hole. After this, the tremie is removed and when the concrete has
reached the top, the casing pipe on the top is also removed. The
bentonite mix should be periodically checked for its specific gravity
and changed as, due to constant use, it can get mixed with the soil
and deteriorate in quality. This type of pile can be used even where
the pile is keyed into the rock as chiselling in the rock can be carried
out more easily. These piles serve as bearing-cum-friction piles. The
diameters of such piles are generally more than 1.0m and can go up
to 3.6m or more. They can be used singly or in group and are good
3

replacements for well foundations required for bridge piers in rivers


with clayey and mixed soils.
d. Bored pre-cast piles In this, as the name itself suggests, a hole is
bored using a casing and a pre-cast pile is inserted into it. After
securing it in position, the casing is withdrawn. A particular process
used for bored pre-cast piles is the Benoto process which involves a
steel tube being pushed into the soil, turned and reversed using
compressed air. The tube is in the form of a casing and is driven for
the entire depth after the soil is progressively grabbed from the tube.
The process is continued till the tube reaches the pre-determined
level. Then the pre-cast pile is lowered inside and held in position.
The tube is lifted gradually after filling the annular gap between the
pre-cast pile and the soil by grouting.
e. Driven steel piles Steel piles can be circular or in other structural
shapes. The circular ones are made in the form of either welded or
seamless piles. Usually steel or cast iron piles used earlier for bridge
structures are of longer diameter and screw type. These were used in
past when loading was less. These piles are suitable for being driven
through cohesive soil to reach up to the hard strata and to serve as
bearing piles. They are not suitable where heavy scour is expected
and for foundation for bridges when foundations are situated wide
apart.
f. Driven timer piles Timber piles have been extensively used in
America. These have been used in India on the railways and
highways, for temporary bridges. Timber piles are of hard wood, and
used in natural form with thin end cut or suitably sized. They are used
mostly as end-bearing piles in clusters. They are normally used in
lengths of 12m and extended by splicing for use in deeper channels.
The piles protruding above bed/low water level are suitably braced in
cluster.

5.

Pile Foundation V/S Well Foundation


a. Well foundations provide a solid and massive foundation for heavy
loads as against a cluster of piles which are slender and weak
individually and are liable to get damaged when hit by floating trees
or boulder rolling in river bed.
b. Wells provide a large section modulus with the minimum cross
sectional area and hence efficient in taking large vertical and
horizontal loads even when the unsupported length is large.
c. Concreting of well steining is done under dry and controlled
conditions and hence quality of work is assured, however same
cannot hold good in case of cast-in-situ bored piles where concreting
4

is to be done under water or below ground level. Even in case of


precast piles, the concrete is subjected of heavy stresses during
driving operation and consequent damages cannot be ruled out.
d. When scour takes place, the piles act as long struts and have to be
designed for buckling stresses, which are quite heavy due to the
bending moments contributed by the longitudinal forces on the bridge
deck due to tractive effort and braking forces.
e. It is difficult to drive the piles through the strata having boulders and
tree logs which are frequently encountered in alluvial soil, whereas in
the case of a well foundation there is sufficiently access to remove
the obstruction. Quite often the skin friction developed is of much
magnitude as to prevent further driving of a pile although a firm
stratum has not been reached.
f. The adoption of pile foundations is advantageous over well
foundations where the soil characteristics and conditions of water
table are such that the phenomenon of blow occurs during
dewatering of the well.
g. Increased mechanization and advent of new machinery have brought
down the cost of foundation with piles considerably low in comparison
to well. New testing techniques for checking the integrity of piles and
information about strata through piles have passed or resting have
removed the uncertainty of load carrying capacity of piles to large
extent.
h. Pile foundations have a clear advantage over well foundations in
terms of speedy construction. Wherever time is the criterion, the pile
foundation is the natural choice.

6.

Pile Foundation on N. W. Railway


a. The use of large diameter bored piles for Railway bridges is a recent
development. These piles were first extensively used on Apta-Roha
and Pen-Thal B.G. Railway projects. Foundation with cast-in-situ
R.C.C. bored piles were adopted for most of the bridges in Konkan
Railway Project. This type of foundation was found suitable and used
for bridging even for perennial rivers and creeks on this alignment
barring foundations for few navigational spans. Speedy construction
and commissioning of the Konkan Railway project could be possible
due adoption of pile as first choice for foundations.
b. In North Western Railway cast-in-situ bored piles have been adopted
as foundation for most of the bridges in projects which are in
progress. As the soil is predominantly sandy, mixed gravel and hard
clayey strata and rivers being seasonal in nature foundation of most
5

of the bridges constructed earlier have been open foundation or well


foundation. In gauge conversion projects foundations of most of the
bridges have been retained by doing the strengthening by jacketing of
foundations and piers as the governing criterion has been cost
consideration and overall economy. However in all the new projects
of doubling and new lines most of the foundations are either open
foundation or pile foundation. Details of the doubling and new line
projects and foundation adopted are summarized belowSr.
No.
1
2
3
4
5

Project
Alwar-Harsauli
Doubling
Bandikui-Dausa
Doubling
Dausa-Jaipur
Doubling
Jaipur-Phulera
Doubling
DausaGangapur New
Line

No. of
Major/ Imp.
Bridges

Br. on Pile
Foundation

Br. on
Open
Foundation

Br. on Well
Foundation

Nil

Nil

Nil

Nil

Nil

12

12

Nil

Nil

Details of bridges and foundation adopted is enclosed as Annexure-B


From the above details, it can be clearly observed that except one bridge
the foundations of rest of the bridges are either on pile or open. As
explained earlier, there are very few perennial rivers in NW railway and most
of the drainage system is seasonal in nature. Heavy discharge to the tune of
high flood level occurs occasionally after the interval of many years and that
too is confined to few days period. Discharge pattern is different for rivers
flowing in North and Central India where heavy floods for a long duration is a
regular feature.

7.

Case Study- Pile v/s Well Foundation


Dausa-Gangapur City new line projects the Delhi-Jaipur main line to DelhiMumbai route. The alignment passes through mainly flat terrain and
encounters the hilly terrain of Aravalli range near Lalsot. Strata is mainly
silty/claye y sand. The rock is lying at a varying depth from 30 to 35 mt.
Dausa-Gangapur City alignment is located in same geographical area as
that of Dausa-Jaipur doubling project and hence sub-soil strata of both the
projects are similar. The depth of water table is about 12-15 mt. in both the
cases.

A. Dausa-Gangapur City New Line


i. (a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)

Route Kilometre 92.76 KM (Single Line)


Standard of Loading MBG with 25 T a xle load
Block station 08 No
Flag station 05
Length of Tunnel 2120 M
Important Bridge Nil
Major Bridge 12
Minor Bridges 77

ii. Bridge span in this project has been standardised to 18.3 M and all
the 12 Major Bridges have been designed with the same span. Super
structures consist of 2 no. PSC girder for the MBG 25 T axle load with
RCC deck slabs. Adoption of one span (i.e. 18.3 M) has led to ease
in construction and development of expertise due to repetitive nature
of job. Similarly 1200 mm dia. cast in situ RCC bored pile has been
adopted for foundation for all the major bridges.
iii. To assess the soil characteristic bore hole were drilled at location of
all the major bridges and it was observed that strata is predominantly
made of silty sand/Clayey sand up to an average depth of 14 M.
Thereafter the sub-soil consist of sandy silty clay of medium
compressibility General ground water table varies from 12-15 M
depth from the ground surface. Ground water table has been
recorded during pre-monsoon periods. The post monsoon water table
has been observed 8-10m depth from bed level of stream.
Preliminary bore logs were done up to a depth of 24-26 m and no
rock was encountered. However bore well which were dug for water
purpose it is observer that rock is laying at a depth of about 30 -35 m
below ground level. Bore log details at Bridge no. 21 at Km 18.40 is
enclosed as Annexure-C. Foundation details of Major Bridges are
tabulated belowSr. Br.
No. No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

12
21
28
29
32
34
35
38
39
40
68
79

Chainage

13.407
18.414
23.350
24.043
28.125
28.615
30.080
32.222
32.600
34.030
65.450
79.795

Span

Super
Structure

3x18.3 M
3x18.3 M
5x18.3 M
2x18.3 M
2x18.3 M
2x18.3 M
5x18.3 M
2x18.3 M
5x18.3 M
2x18.3 M
3x18.3 M
2x18.3 M

PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder
PSC Girder

Foundation Details
Type Depth No. of pile per
(M)
Abutment Pier
Pile
20
12
6
Pile
20
12
6
Pile
23
16
6
Pile
23
16
6
Pile
21
12
6
Pile
22
12
6
Pile
22
16
6
Pile
24
12
6
Pile
23
16
6
Pile
20
9
6
Pile
20
12
6
Pile
20
12
6
7

iv. COST ANALYSIS OF PILE FOUNDATION


(a) For Pier Pile Gr oup With Pile CapNo. of Pile per Pier
Depth of Pile
Ht. from founding level to top of pier
Dia. of pile
Concrete Mix in Pile
Concrete Mix in pile cap
Quantity of concrete per pile
Quantity of concrete in pile cap

- 06
- 20 M
-27.15 M
-1200 mm
- M-35
- M-35
- 22.62 Cum
- 79.87 Cum

Quantity of Reinforcement per pile

- 2242 Kg

Quantity of reinforcement in pile cap

- 4946 Kg

Length of 8mm steel liner per pile

- 1530 mm

Schedule of Quantity and RateS.


No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Description
Earthwork in excavation
1200 Dia RCC cast in situ Pile
RCC M-35
Structural Steel
Reinforcement
Cement
Integrity test of pile
TOTAL

Quantity
124.24
120.00
79.87
2.00
18.40
2017.00
6.00

Unit Rate
Amount
Cum
89.90
10175.00
RM
6363.0
763560.00
Cum
2491.0
198956.00
MT
50250.0
100500.00
MT
41235.0
758642.00
Bags
274.0
552658.00
No
2052.0
12312.00
Rs. 23,96,803.00

(b) For Abutment Pile Group with Pile CapNo. of Pile per Abutment

- 12

Depth of Pile

- 20 M

Ht. from founding level to top of abutment

-27.15 M

Dia. of pile

-1200 mm

Concrete Mix in Pile

- M-35

Concrete Mix in pile cap

- M-35

Quantity of concrete per pile

- 22.62 Cum
8

Quantity of concrete in pile cap

- 192.62Cum

Quantity of Reinforcement per pile

- 2644 Kg

Quantity of reinforcement in pile cap

- 18569 Kg

Length of 8mm steel liner per pile

- 1530 mm

Schedule of Quantity and RateS.


No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Description
Earthwork in excavation
1200 Dia RCC cast in situ Pile
RCC M-35
Structural Steel
Reinforcement
Cement
Integrity test of pile
TOTAL

Quantity
299.63
240
192.62
4
50.297
4323
12.0

Unit Rate
Amount
Cum
89.90
24540.00
RM
6363.0
1527120.00
Cum
2491.0
479816.00
MT
50250.0
201000.00
MT
41235.0
2073997.00
Bags
274.0
1184502.00
No
2052.0
24624.00
Rs. 55,15,599.00

v. Time Analysis of Pile FoundationTime for each group of pile for pier as well as abutment has been
worked out after considering the total time taken in piling work
including pile cap for each Bridge individually. As detailed above
there are total 458 piles out of which 393 piles have been completed.
For piling work at a bridge location 2-3 rigs and total 8 rigs were
deployed. The works at 3 bridge locations were taken up
simultaneously. The details of starting the piling work and the
progress achieved bridge wise is enclosed as Annexure-D
First Piling was started at Bridge no. 34 on 18-March-2008. In time
span of 62 months a progress of 393 pile have been achieved which
includes the intervening monsoon period, progress of work was also
badly affected for 20 days due to Gurjer andolan in this part of
country. After e xcluding the andolan period and its consequent effect
which spanned for about a month the progress of 393 pile can be
safely assumed to have been achieved in a 52 months which gives
an average progress of 72 pile per month. A peak progress of 110
piles in the month of May-2008 has been achieved.
(a) Average time taken in drilling of pile
up to 20m depth from cut off level
(b) Av. Time taken in Cage lowering
(c) Av. Time taken in lowering of trimmy pipe
(d) Av. Time taken in Washing of Borehole

18-24 Hrs
2.0
Hrs
1.0
Hrs
2.0
Hrs
9

(e) Av. Time taken in concreting of one pile


(f) Av. Time taken in excavation & chipping of
pile up to cut off level
(i)
For group of 6 Piles
(ii)
For group of 12 piles
(iii)
For group of 16 piles
(g) Av. Time taken in placement of reinforcement
and concreting of pile cap
(i)
(ii)
(iii)

For group of 6 Piles


For group of 12 piles
For group of 16 piles

3.0

Hrs

7 days
12 days
15 days

7 days
10 days
12days

Piling work has been completed at all the bridges except Br.No.12, 68
& 79 and casting of pile cap is also completed at Bridge no. 32
(2x18.3m) and Bridge No. 35 (5 x18.3 m). Piling and pile cap work,
took about 4 months for Br.No.32 while it took about 6 months for
Br.35. Br. No 32 which is having 2 abutments & 1 pier foundation,
average time per foundation (pile group plus pile cap) works out to be
1.33 months while for Br.No.35 which is having 2 abutments and 4
pier foundations, average time per foundation works out to be one
month only.
B. Dausa Jaipur Doubling projecti. (a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)

Route Kilometre 61.28 KM (Single Line)


Standard of Loading MBG with 25 T a xle load
Block station 10 No
Flag station 01
Important Bridge Nil
Major Bridge 07
Minor Bridges 53

ii. As detailed above there are 7 major bridges. The pile foundation has
been adopted on all the bridges except bridge No. 198 (10x18.3 M)
situated at Km 219/1-2 in Bassi-Kanauta block section, this bridge is
spanning over Dhoond River and in terms of water way it is the
biggest bridge in this section. This project is a doubling project
running parallel to existing Rewari-Jaipur BG track. Span
arrangements are similar to existing bridges. PSC slab has been
adopted for span of 12.2 M while PSC Girder with RCC deck slab has
been adopted for 18.3 M span. Pile foundation is with 1200 mm dia.
bored cast-in-situ RCC piles while circular well has been adopted at
bridge No 198.

10

iii. To assess the soil characteristic bore hole were drilled at location of
all the major bridges and it was observed that strata are
predominantly made of Clayey silty sand up to an average depth of
14 M. Thereafter the sub-soil consists of silty sand mixed with gravel
& bounders. General ground water table varies from 13-16 M depth
from the ground surface. Preliminary bore logs were done up to a
depth of 30 m and no rock was encountered. Bore log details at
Bridge no. 198 at Km 219/1-2 is enclosed as Annexure-E. Foundation
details of major bridges are tabulated belowSr. Br.
No. No

Chainage

Span

Super
Structure

178

192.028

4x12.2 M

PSC Slab

195

213.720

4x18.3 M

197

215.620

2X12.2 M

PSC
Girder
PSC Slab

198

219.200

10X18.3 M

200

221.090

3X18.3 M

212

233.905

215

237.953

Foundation Details
Type Depth
No. of pile
(M)
Abutment Pier
Pile
20
15
8
Pile

20

16

Pile

20

12

Well

20

Pile

20

12

2X12.2 M

PSC
Girder
PSC
Girder
PSC Slab

Pile

20

12

3X12.2 M

PSC Slab

Pile

20

12

iv. COST ANALYSIS OF WELL FOUNDATION


(a) For Pier Type of well
Depth of Well
Ht. from founding level to top of Pier
Dia. of well
Thickness of wall
Depth of well curb
Concrete Mix in well curb & cap
Concrete Mix in well staining
Quantity of concrete per well
M-25
Quantity of concrete per well
M-35
Quantity of concrete in well capM-35
Quantity of Reinforcement per Well
Quantity of reinforcement in Well cap
Quantity of structural steel per well

- Circular
- 19.07 M
-26.82 M
- 7.3 M
- 1.5 M
- 2.5 M
- M-35
- M-25
- 550.00 Cum
- 100.00 Cum
- 99.90 Cum
- 11022 Kg
- 11890 Kg
- 10000 Kg
11

Schedule of Quantity and RateS. No.

Description

Quantity

Earthwork in excavation

155.41 Cum

81.90

12728.00

Sinking of Well

3213.00 Cum

813.50

2613775.00

RCC M-25

550.00 Cum

2330.00

1281500.00

RCC M-35

199.90 Cum

2491.00

497951.00

Structural Steel

10.00

MT

50250.00

502500.00

Reinforcement

22.912

MT

41235.00

944776.00

Cement

274.00

1747298.00

Rs.

76,00,529.00

Unit

6377.00 Bags

TOTAL
(b) For Abutment Type of well
Depth of Well
Ht. from founding level to top of abutment
Dia. of well
Thickness of wall
Depth of well curb
Concrete Mix in well curb & cap
Concrete Mix in well staining
Quantity of concrete per well
M-25
Quantity of concrete per well
M-35
Quantity of concrete in well capM-35
Quantity of Reinforcement per Well
Quantity of reinforcement in Well cap
Quantity of structural steel per well

Rate

Amount

- Circular
- 19.07 M
-25.82 M
- 8.5 M
- 1.6 M
- 2.5 M
- M-35
- M-25
- 666.00 Cum
- 146.00Cum
- 139.40 Cum
- 12072 Kg
- 20910 Kg
- 11000 Kg

Schedule of Quantity and RateS. Description


No.
1
Earthwork in excavation

Quantity

216.83 Cum

81.90

17758.00

Sinking of Well

4356.00 Cum

813.50

3543606.00

RCC M-25

666.00 Cum

2330.00

1551780.00

RCC M-35

285.40 Cum

2491.00

710931.00

Structural Steel

11.00 MT

50250.00

552750.00

Reinforcement

32.982 MT

41235.00

1360013.00

Cement

274.00

2219400.00

Rs.

99,56,239.00

TOTAL

Unit

8100.00 Bags

Rate

Amount

12

V. Time Analysis Of Well FoundationThe work on first abutment was started in the month of January-2008
and well curb was placed on 31-January-2008. Subsequently work on
other abutments and piers were also taken up by deploying total 6 no.
of Diesel engine driven winches and other equipments. Sinking of
wells on one abutment and 4 no of piers have been completed. The
detail progress of sinking of wells are tabulated belowS.
No.

Abut
Concrete
ment
Quantity
/ Pier Well
Bottom Started
No. steining Plug
M-25
M-35

Well staining
completed

Remarks
Total
duration

A-1

666

146

31.01.2008

WIP /60%

A-2

666

146

13.02.2008 05.08.2008

P-1

550

100

10.06.2008

WIP / 50%

P-2

550

100

07.06.2008

WIP / 80%

P-3

550

100

05.06.2008

WIP / 80%

P-4

550

100

11.05.2008

WIP / 65%

P-5

550

100

24.02.2008 01.09.2008

P-6

550

100

06.03.2008

P-7

550

100

24.03.2008 24.08.2008

5 Month

10

P-8

550

100

06.04.2008 12.09.2008

5 Month

11

P-9

550

100

04.05.2008 27.09.2008

5 Month

6 Month

Bottom
plugging not
started

6 Month

Bottom
plugging not
started

WIP / 65%
Bottom
plugging not
started
Bottom
plugging not
started
Bottom
plugging not
started

13

Average time taken in various activities connected with sinking of well


foundation has been worked out from progress register maintained at
site. The details of time taken on an average on various activities are
as belowSr.
No.

Acti vity

Av. Time Taken

Well Curb 3.0 M


Placing of cutting edge
Structural steel fabrication

3 days
5 days

Reinforcement cutting, bending & placing


Welding of outer Plate

6 days
3 days

Concreting of one Lift of 1.5 meter

1
2
3

without Pump

2 days

with Pump

1 day
8 days

Casting of Next 1.5 m complete

Sinking in sandy soil @ 0.5 m/day (0-3M)


Total time

6 days
34 days

Well Steining 17.0 M

Casting of 2 lift (1.35 x2=2.70m) complete


Sinking in sandy soil @ 0.3 m/day (3-5.7M)

6 days
9 days

Casting of Next 2 lift (1.35 x2=2.70m) complete


Sinking in sandy soil @ 0.3 m/day (5.7-7.0M)

6 days
4 days

Sinking in sandy soil @ 0.2 m/day (7.0-8.4M)


Casting of 2 next lift (1.35 x2=2.70m) complete

7 days
6 days

Sinking in sandy soil @ 0.2 m/day (8.4-11.1M)


Casting of 2 next lift (1.35 x2=2.70m) complete

14 days
6 days

Sinking in sandy soil @ 0.12 m/day (11.1-13.8M)


Casting of 2 next lift (1.35 x2=2.70m) complete

22 days
6 days

Sinking in sandy soil @ 0.1 m/day (13.8-16.5M)


Casting of 2 next lift (1.35x2=2.7m) complete

27 days
6 days

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Sinking in sandy soil @ 0.1 m/day (16.5-19.07M)


Total time

27 days
146 days

14

The bottom plugging, filling with sand and well cap have not been
done on any of the wells whose sinking have been completed hence
therefore data of actual time for these activities are not available.
However considering the quantity of concreting involved in bottom
plug and well cap the probable time for these activities can be as
belowC

Bottom Plugging & sand filling

Exca vation in bottom plug

20 days

Concreting

2 days

Sand filling

2 days
Total time

24 days

Well Cap

Exca vation

3 days

Reinforcement cutting, bending & placing

6 days

Concreting

1 day
Total time

10 days

Total time taken in sinking of one well including bottom plugging and
well cap comes to 214 days (Approx. 7 Months). From the progress
chart of well sinking given above a total of 6 month has taken place for
sinking of well of A-2 & P-5 while 5 month period has taken in case of
P-7,P-8&P-9.

8.

OBSERVATIONS
(a) Cost of well for pier is observed to be more than three times the cost
of pile group for pier. On an average, time of construction for pile
group including pile cap works out to be one month while for well it
comes to 6 months.
(b) Cost of well for abutment is observed to be more than 1.8 times the
cost of pile group for abutment. On an average, time of construction
for pile group including pile cap works out to be 1.5 month while for
well it comes to 7 months.

15

9.

CONCLUSION
Worldwide there is an increasing trend for adopting piles for bridge
foundations. With the help of pile foundation, the construction of bridges is
much faster. As per a study conducted, typical Indian bridges cost about
40% more than bridges being constructed in US and Europe. Main reason
for higher cost is the time overrun in Indian Scenario due to uncertainty
associated with the well foundation mainly adopted for river bridges. Pile
foundations on the other hand require less time for construction.
The larger diameter bored piles which are being adopted in the construction
of bridges are reaching the dividing line between piles and small wells. With
the help of state-of-the-art equipments and technique available, pile
foundations are proving economical even for large span bridges. Though it
is true, selection of foundation does not depend solely on economics but
criteria of serviceability, durability and importance of link particularly in
context of Railways are also governing factors.
Foundation systems for bridges are usually selected based on its ability to
carry the load, on the anticipated structural integrity of the foundation during
its service life, and on economics. Techno-economics of deep foundation
depends on depth of foundation, span configuration, scour depth and sub
soil conditions etc. Hence well and pile foundation is not to be viewed as
competing but complementing technologies for bridge foundation.

*****************************
*********************

16