~~~[L

REPORT 82-14

US Army Corps
of Engineers
Cold Regions Research &
Engineering Laboratory

Comparative analysis of the USSR Construction

Codes and the US Army Technical Manual for
design of foundations on permafrost

CRREL Report 82-14

May 1982

Comparative analysis of the USSR Construction

Codes and the US Army Technical Manual for
design of foundations on permafrost
Anatoly M. Fish

repared lor

.S. ARMY RESEA RC H OFFICE

pproved lor public release; distribution unlimited.

I nc; assifi,.
SECURITY CL.ASSII" ICATION 01' THIS "AGIl "", .... D ...

~._d)

READ INSTRUcnONS
BEFORE COMPLETING FORM

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

1'te:"ORT IOIUM81!R

2. GOVY ACCE5SIOI\I 1\10

RI[CIPIENT'S CATAL.OG NUM81!"

CRREl RepOl't 8214

... TITL.E (_II' SublIIl.)

TyPI! 01' RI!PORT" PI:AIOO C:OYI!AI!O

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE U.s.S.R. CONSTRUCT ION

CODES AND THE U.S. ARMY TECHNICAL MANUAL FOR DESIGN

OF FOUNDATIONS ON PERMAFROST

,.

AUTHO"(. )

PEAI'OAMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

CONTRACT OR GI'tANT NUM8E"(.)

Anatory M, Fish

DAAG 2977'()()16

".

, . PE""OI'VllING ORGANIZATION 1'01 ..... 1[ "NO ADDRESS

PROGRAM I!L.I!MI!NT, PROJECT , TASK

AREA" WORK UI\IIT NUMB!:RS

U.S. Army Cold Regions ReseMch and Engineering laboratory

Hanover, New Hampshire 03755

".
".

II. CONTROLLING OI''' IC NAMII!: AND AOORESS

U.S. Army Research OffICe

. MONITORI NG AGI!:NCY N AIIIE. ADORUS(II rill ,...... ' Ire. Con/toll,.,. Ollie.)

".

RI!PO " T OAT Ii

May 1982
NU MBER 01' PAGES

28
SECURITY CL.ASS. (.,UlI. "'"IPO"f)

Unclassified
h.

OECL.A5S1'ICATION ooWNG"" OI"'O

SCH!:DuL.E

I D!STfU B UTION ST AT I!.MI!N T (0 ' rIol. R."..,."

Approved for pubIc release; distribution unlimited.

17.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMII!:MT (.f tho U-el _ , _ , .. Bloe. 2'0, " dill..... ,

SU ~ L. t:M!.MT " "Y

R.-q

NOTI!,

II. Kt:y WOI'tOS (C_II..... _

........ . .1. "nH ..,. fn4 111' ... "". .., ..h.d: maw)

SeMina ~acity
Design criteria
Foundations (strucrures)
Permafrost
20.. "' _"ACT ~ _

Safety factors
Settlement analysis
USSR

.. _ _ .... It . _ ..,. . . t I~I"'''' b loc.lr _ _,

A comparative 5tudy was made of design criteria and analytical methods for footings and pile foundations on perma.
frost employed in U.S5.R. Design Code SNiP 111876 (T977) and U.S. Army Cold Regions Re5e:Mch and Engineering
Laboratory Special Report 8Q.34 developed in the early 1970's by the U.S. Army Corps of Enaineers and pubUshed in
1980. The absence of adequate constitutive equations for frozen soils and of rigorous solutions of the boundary pro/).
ems has made it necessary to incorporate (explicitJy or implicitJy) various safety factors in the foundation analy~s.
From the review it is concluded that the principal difference between these practices is in the assessment and iPplication
f iPpropriate values of safety factors, which leads to a substantial discrepancy in the dimensions and cost of footings
nd pile foundations in permafrost.

DO

,i:-." M73

~DtnOM 0 "

, NOV . 5 IS OIl$OL E T t:.

U'

.,-- ---

PREFACE

This report was prepared by Anatoly M. Fish, Research Associate, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology. Funding was provided by contract no. DAAG 29-77-0016 between the Civil Engineering Department of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the U.S. Army Research
Office.
This report was technically reviewed by T.C. Johnson, F .H. Sayles, W.F. Quinn and E.F. lobacl,
all from the U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Special appre<:iation
is extended to T.C. Johnson and Dr. A. Assur, without whose conslJ'\Jctf'le participation this ....ork
could not have been written in such a form. Many colleagues at CRREL are also acknowledged for
their careful editing and critical review of the manuscript.

ii

CONTENTS

Abstract ............................................................................................................................. .
Preface ................................................................................................................................

Introduction ....................................................................................................................... .
U.S.S.R. system of 5I.andards ........................................................................... ................... .
U.S.S.R. Design Code SNiP 111876 (1977) ~b50ils and founda tions on permafrost ...........
General regulations.........................................................................................................
ClassifiCiition of soils .................................................................. ....................................
Basic regu lations for foundation design ..........................................................................
Analysis of subsoils and foundations ..............................................................................
Design of foundations f()( special soil condit ions, and appendices ..................................
SR 80-34 (1980) design and construction of foundations in areas of deep seasonal frost
and permafrost ..................................................................................................................
Genetill information ...................... .................................................................................
Foundiltion design .........................................................................................................
Conclusions .......................... .... .......... .. ... ...................... .... ........................ .........................
Literature ciled ................ ................... ... .. ...........................................................................

ii

2
2

2
3
3
10
10
10
11

19
19

ILL USTRATIONS
Fi~ur e

1.

2.
3.
4.

s.
6.
7.

8.
9.
10.

Diagram for analysis of foundations ..................................................................... .

Creep curves of frOlen soil at constant stresses .....................................................
Possible errors in determining foundation sell lemenls ......................................... ..
Diagram fOf determination of foundation settlements ........................................ ..
Creep curves in logarithmic coordinates................................................................
T ime dependen t failure of frozen soil ................................................................... .
Detet m in~ion of pile beating capacity .................................................................
Determination of the pile bearing capiu:ity accOl"ding to recommended Sov iet
practice .............................. ...................................................................................
Diagram for detcrm ining pile bearing c<lpacitV (rom two tcsts with various rates
of loading .............................................................................................................
Diagram of long term pile bearing capacities at various loading regimes ............... .

18
18

Ralio of allowable pile loads for br idge foundations .. ..........................................

17

8
9
9
14
14
16
17

TABLE
Table
I.

iii

CONVERSION FACTORS , US. CUSTOMARY TO METRIC (5 1)

UNITS OF MEASUREMENT
These conversion factors include all the significant d igi ts gillen in
the conversion lables in the ASTM Metric Practice Guide (E 380),
which has been approved for use by the Department of Defense.
Converted values should be rou nded to have lhe same precision
as the original (see E 380).
By

Multiply

inch
inch 2

root
pound
pound force
ton
degrees Fahrenheit

-Exact

0.02540.000645160.30480.4535924
4.448222
0.02916667

t. c ;

(~c-32)/l.8

To obloln

metre
metre2

meue
ki logram

newton
kilogram

degrees Celsius

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE USSR CONSTRUCTION

CODES AND THE US TECHNICAL MANUAL FOR
DESIGN OF FOUNDATIONS ON PERMAFROST
Anatoly M. Fish

INTRODUCTION
This paper is princi/>illy a discussion, from the
viewpoint of frozen soil mechilOics, of foundation
analytiQI and design methods employed in tlle
U.S.S.R. Design Code SNiP 11-18-76 3 (1977) and
U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering
Laboratory Special Report (SR) 80-34 22 (1980)t.
ThermophysiCilI problems of frozen soils as well as
the design of foundations on thawing soils are nOI
considered in this review. In the present work, the
author does not pretend 10 undertake a detailed and
comprehensive critical review of the theoretiul bases
of analyse~ used in the U.S. and U.S.S.R. design
practices. It is obvious that any accepted theory or
analytical method, no k:u than ilny s~ndard test
procedure for determining soil properties, has both
positive ilnd nega.live features, and can be the subject
of 5e/>irate discussion . The author pilrticipated in
the prcp.1ration of the former edition of the SNip4,
a Design Manual! and other documents. As a consequence of this familiarity with the details of the
development of standards governing Soviet design
practice, Ome of the commenury will extend beyond
a mere exposition of the Gontents of the current
Yersion of the SNiP. The purpose of the author's
leview is to identify both the strong and weak aspects
of the latest edition of the Soviet SNiP and of SR
80-34 as a whole, and to discun needed research to
milke design of foundations on permafrost more
reliable and onomical .

U.s.s.R. SYSTEM OF STANDARDS

In the U.S.S.R. all design and construction of
buildings, and strUCtures, and aho the tening of con
tSped.IJ Report 80-14 wu prep~red wIth the

fin~J

01 public"kwl .s ~n offkJ,J.J cnlinee,,", m~"u~l :

obj IC live

O~rlmenl

of the Army Trehnkoll M~nuolll 1M 5-152-4 .lind Oepvlment

of ttle AI' ForGe M~ujI88t9 . OIjpltf", Arctie <lind Sub-

1[(lle Con)ltu("tion,

FOIJnd<lllion ~

'Of" Slruetul'H.

struction m.lterials MId soils, are carried out according

to the requirements contained In the following documents:
I. Construction Standards and Codes (SNiPs).
2. Instructions, Recommendnions, Guidelinn
and Manuals for design, analysis, and conslfUClion of specinc types or projects.
3. State Standards (GOST~) on the requirements
as to ttMl Quality of construction materials,
equipment, methods and procedufts of tests,

''''.

These documents are prepared by the leading design and research institutes and are called "standard
documents." Official editions of SNiPs, GOSTs, etc.
arc issued by the govemmcnt departments and have
the force of law; compliMlu is obligatory. Minor
variance is permitted only with special written pe"
mission of the institute that prepotred the document,
Olnd only in those cases where there is sound technical and economic justific.;ation.
Publication of the standard documents Is planned
and financed by the S~te Committoo for Construc
tion (GOSSTROYl , and by vartous ministries and
govemment departments. The main standard docu
ments on construc tion are SNiPs. There are about
200 chapters of SNiP and hundreds of the items men
tioned in 2 and 3 above. According to existing practice the SNiPs ilre revised ilbout once every 10 years.
Mutriills IIIhtch for some reason were nOI included
in a chapter or were developed during the interval between tWO editions are published in Guidelines,
Instructions, or Recommendations. Some of these
arc Issued by GOSSTROY or the other government
depvunents, and serve ~ ~ supplement to the appropriate chapter of SNiP. Besides these there are many
semiofficial documents such as Guidances and Hand
books. As a rule, after publication of a revised docu
ment the previous one loses its legal status. Therefore,
each year GOSSTROY publishes a special list of the
do<;uments that are currently in dfect 1,2.

Since the American reader is not familiar with

their cootent, the various iCc-tions will be considered
briefly.

U.s.s.R. DESIGN CODE SNiP 111876 (1977) SUBSO ilS AND FOUNDATIONS ON PERMAFROST

The main su.ndatd document on design of found3,lions on permafrost is SNiP 11 -18-76 3 whic;;h is prepared by NllOSP (Scientific Research Instiwte of

General reguLllions
In this section the following basic requirements
are formulated:
1. Scope of SNiP 11-18-76.
2. Meeting the State Standards and Codes.
3. Scope of geocryological sur'leys, the amount of
in situ data needed and labO!"atory testing of soils.
4. Monitoring of subsoil conditions during GOO
suuction and use of a structure.
On ly general requiremenh for the scope of cngj
neerlng surveys of frozcn soils are Included in this
SNiP. Their scope corresponds approximately to
Figure 4- 1 of SR S0-34 22 . More deLliled infOl'mation
On this question is contai ned in State Standards and
Special Instructions 1 0,1 t .
The most importan t regUlations of [he section
concern the following:
I . Design of structures, taking into account possible changes In the tempcrotture-moiSlure regime
of subsoils during the period of their usc.
2. Com pilation (before construction begins) of
special programs of observations of found;ulon
and subsoil conditions during construction and
usc of the structure.
3. Development of measures for environmental
protection.
An
Ucft"thll m.tlna lhI! fnl lWO ....
tulllJom involves romendOOiI (:Old rq.ions OfIlinccr
~ ."..:Uco II'Id AlItn no exmordhwy difficulties,
Su, -tfna the dtrrd would require .lfeloprnent of

FoundatiOtls and Underground Structures), Moscow,

with the

~rticipation

of design and research insti-

tutes such as lENZNIIEP (Leninyad). FUNDAMENT

PROYEKT (Mo5Gow), TSNIIIS (Moscow) and PROM

STROYPROYEKT (Krasnoyank). The current Yer
sian went into effect on 1 January 1978. The chapter was developed mainly on the basis of six refercnces 4 -9 and ,"overs foundation design for civil and
Industrial buildings, It docs not rover design of

special structures such as roads, railroads, bridges

(except some speCifics of foundation design), lonnels,
or dams. The requirements of thi~ chapter a'~o do
not apply to subsoil i nd foundation design fO( hydro
tet:hnieal structures, airfield pavements, machinc-s
with dynamic loads, and buildings and structu res in
areas of subsidence caused by COil mining, eiC. Dc
sign of these structures is covered by the regulations
in special chapters of the SNiPl o.
SNiP 111876 consists of the following sections :
1. General regulations.
2. ctassirlcation of soils.
3. Basic regulations of foundation design.
4. Analysis of subsoils and foundations.
S. Specifics of design of foundations on ice-rich
soils and ground icc.
6. Specifics of design of foundations on saline
soils.
7. Specifics of design of foundations on frozen
OI'ganic soils and peat.
8. Specifics of design of foundations in seismic
permafros t regions.
9. Specifics of design of foundations for bridges
and culverts.
Appondix 1. Design values of th~rmophyslcar
characteristics of unfrozen and
frozen soi Is.
Apptndix 2. Temperature regime of winterventilated crawl spaces.
Appendix 3. Depth of thawed ground under
buildings and Slfuctures.
Appendix 4. Depth of seasonal freeze-thaw of
soil.
Appendix 5. Analysis of stability .nd strength
of foundations on frostheaving

_In _. . .

I melhod for IHllmltins the 1COffOmk: OMteqUOnCfl

bf chanpJ in the temperatut'e rwtimI of the frozen
~ St>ocIaI _kal salu'lano. _wlnl
i<Jondfk
_lei be required
IO

ttnd WlVll0 IacaJlze and Ilmlt &heso ~

ys!WCfl solwtiom An be round will'l GOnfl.
.. only In .... wIrore lIIo _ _ IIllllc '"~
loll b
For dur.... 10ib oudo solUtions
WI not been deY,loped. It b quilt olmous \hat
attemptilO Ulldy lhll reqLlfmnent in \he abtence
Of on ....'1".1. ~ bole mlp,l_ ID '"'l'
serlo'" _ _ In daIp. A_lIy.lh~ ro
quifcmenl 'IQ5 Included in the SNlP mlJnly CO "It
lht lltendon or ~ 10 tho probkm of "'''Ironmental prmecdon.

~-*.

Classification of soils
The b.ulc classification of frozen soils according

5011.

Appendix 6. Design values of strength charac

tcristks of frolCn soils.
Appendix 7. Analysis of foun dation settlements
on icc-rich soils and ground ice.

lSlu.:Ied lexl l~ ...utlor's commtnu on tlthel me SNIP 01' the

SR ~nd mOlY tOnt~jn InfOfm~IJon not found In elthel doeLlmt nt.

Bui<: regulations fOf foondatton design

to their granulomeuic com~hlon adopted in the

SNiP does not differ substantially from that of unfrolen soils9 . However, frozen soil( are fu rther
clauified acco.-ding to :
I. Oyogenic structure.
2. Degree of ice-Gemcnling and rheological
properties.
3. Ice content.
4. Organic content.
S. S.h content.
Fraun soils are subdivided according to cryo
genic strucllue. lntO tWO categories: " msivc"
(fused) structu re and reticuLite-layered (laminar
cellulilr) structure.
According to the degree of ice-Gemcnting and
rheological properties, (rolen soils are divided into
three groups :
1. Solidly frOZt'l1-soils cemented by ice with a
compmsibility COfffidenl of Q < 0.001 cm 21

Th is section contains recommendations for 5(It.-Cling the method of using frozen ground as a subsoil for struct ures and technical instructions for
foundation design, depending on tho construc tion
method chosen.
Two principles of design for building on frozcn
groond are SQted :
I. Pte~rvation of the frOlen statr of the subsoil.
II. Precon)truction tlu.wing of the subsoil or
allowing subsoil thawing during construction
01 use of a structure,
For subsoils Ihat are kept In the frozen state
(principle I) , recommend.il.tions ate made (Of pre
serving the ,uloll therma l regime or dcx:rusing the
tempetature of plastic frozen !.Oils by providing
winter-ventilated air (cr3wl) spaces, pij)C) and chan
nels, thermopiles, etc. Precast concrete pllr founda
tions are proposed as the ma in type of foundation
for construct.on under principle I. Methods for pite
imtaltation are selected according 10 the type of
frozen soil.
Thaw prior to, during, or after constructlon Is
permitted ~ither when the: bolldlna is founded on
bedrOck or when deformation of thawing ground
doe~ nOI exceed the value~ given by SNiP 11.15-749 .
io rrduce the expected sclticmenl or damage due to
thawing of soils the followina measures are rccom
mended :
1. Improvements in the construction propertles
of soils by preconstruction th.loW, compaction
and stabilization of thawing soils, ctc.
2. lnercuing the- general rigidity of.lo structure
to per mil only uniform settlements as a unit,
or increasing the flexibility of a structure to
permit deformations without struclural damage.
It is emphasized th.lot the prinCiple (basis of de
sign) must be selected from technical and economic
COO'IP.lorison of designs. C:OI"Isideralions of the future
servieeability of the suucture5 if large deformations
are txpected, .lond meMures CQnnC(ted with silt work,
gr.Iding, dr.til\il.ge, and protection of the environment.

kgfand various temperatures (depending on

granulometric oomposition) lower than -l.~C.
2. PlastIC frozent-sandy and clay ~ils cemented
by Ice with (J > 0.001 cm 2JI(gf, degree of saluration G > 0.8 and with temperature (depending on gr1Inulomeuic compo5ition) from
to -1.SoC.
3. Loosely froLen--nt}e-gtained soils and sands
not cemen ted by ice, with Willer conttnt
w .. 0.03.
SpeGial de~ign provi~ons apply If lhe (rozen )Oil
belongs to one of the follow'"g cWS('S :
1. /cHiCh solis - when the fraction of ice inclusiom 'I > 0.4.
2. hOly frolen soilS- When the orpnic content
g> 3% of the mineral parts for sandy soils
and 5% for clayey soils.
3. Sofine frozen SOils-when the salt content
(depending upon granulometric composition)
is greattr than 109i of the dry soil weighL
Pe;aty and s,aline frozen 5Oil~ can also be clanias solidly frOlCO or plutic frozen soils, depend
ing upon their temperature and organic. and ~h
conlCnt. The Importance of such a cLissificatJon
will be shown later; here we merely note that the
classifiea.tion is the basis (or selection of I) the scope
o( field and laboratory tests of $OU, 2) the effective
types of foundations, 3) the methods of roundation
analysis.
Relationshi ps 12 among the simplest physical
characteristics of frozen solis and some or their
properties are also giV1m in this section.

ned

An.lolysis or subsoils .lond founlbtiom

In general, the analysis of subsoils and foundations involves separate consideration of two topics :
bearing capacity of footings and piles, and foundation se ttlements.

DrsJr;n "It~rlo
Suboil analyses and foundation de5igns;ue based
on various assumptions. Safety (-actors are used to
decrcase the unc.eruinty of the analyses. SNiP
11 -18-76 docs not include a !oCparate sec;tion on
safe ty factors in design. Information on this quettion

tPIUII( Is a con\lentlon~1 Wm used In Ihe SNiP LO refer

to "o~en sons that un derio subst~nllal ddorm~tlon unGeI
modehte toad,.

is scattered in various SNiPs, However, since the

construction cost depends substantially upon the
safety fa(.tQrs that are chosen, this problem Is v.'Orthy
of discussion in the framework of the present anal
ysis.
One of the most Important requirements of SNiP
11 .18-76 3, compared with the previous edition., is
the increased reliability (more conservative desigll)
of stru(.lUres ()(\ frozen ground that is achieved by
incorporating the following safety factors:
1. Overload safety coefflclents.
2. Soil safety factors ,
3. Reliability coefficients.
averlaod safety coefficients are used in analyzing
the bearing capacity, stability, and settlements of
foundations. Their absolute valUes, which are tabu
lated in a special chapter of the SNiPl), depend on
the statistiC<lI probability of the coincidence of var
ious liVe and dead loads,
Soil sofely fuctors are selected on the basis of
statistical analysis of the results of field and labora
tory soil tests. In ali analyses of subsoils, the rkslgn
vOilues of soil characteristics A are used, which are
determined by the formula

A"
k,

A =-

where Nd=Nn'kO'V=designload
No = nominal load: dead and live loads
Hov = overload safety coefficient
Oil. = Olk f = design (allowable) bearing capacity
Q = Ultimate (nominal) bearing capacity of
subsoil
k, = reliability coefficienL
The value of k ov generally vari~ from 1 to 2, txu
it can be 0.9, for example, in the analysis of founda .
tion stability with respect to frost heave. The values
of Ifr are between 1,1 and 1.2 for all types of found,!lions except thoie for bridges, For bridge pile foundations
varies from 1.4 to 1.75, depending upon
the number of piles in the foundation.
Bearing capacity analyses are performed for all
types of frolen SOil$, includ ing SOlidl y frozen, loosely
frozen, and plastic frozen solis, iccrich soils, ind
ground ice.
Analysis of doformatlon~ consis~ of satisfying
two criteria:
1. Average design bearing pressure p under the
foundation mUst not exceed the allowable
bearing pressure Q., i.e.,

*,

p < q<P

(1 )

(3)

wherep = NdIF, q. = OIF, and F Is the foun

dation area.
2. Foundation deformation S (total settlement,
tilt, differential movement, etc.) must not ex
ceed the permissible ultimate value S. i.e .

where An is a nomiff(1lt soil characteristic, i.e., ~

hesion 'n' a (riction angle ~n ' bulk unit weight 1'n.
etc.; ks is a soil safety factor,
Soil safety factors are selected in accordance with
1) the variability of the characteristics of the soil,
2) the number of te~ts, and 3) the applicable value
of the probability confidence limit, which is 0.85 in
analysis of bearing capacity and deformations, 0.9
for foundations of bridges and 0.99 in certain special
cases.
Rellobility coefficients, stdnd"rdized by the SNiP,
are values established for each design principle, category (class) of structure, and method of foundation
analysis. They are used for analysiS of foundation
bearing capacity Of stability with respect to frost
heave, but not for set.tlemcnt analysis.
The introduction of these safety factors is the
most important change in the new SNiP, making it
possible to apply statistics in fou ndation design. ThUS,
according to SNiP 111 g. 76, analysis of bearing ca
pacity consists of satisfying the criterion

s < S.

(4)

Settlement analy~ are performed only for found

ations on plastic frOlen soils, ice-rich soils and ground
icc. The accepted values of 5" are the same a, the
maximum deformations customarily allowed for
structures on un frozen 5Oil59 without any alteration
to account for the severe climatic conditions of
northern regions.
The SNiP requires the use of soil safety factors
in all types of foundation analyses and the use of
reliability coefficients in analyses of bearing capacities
and stabilities. The SNiP does not require that a
special safety coefficient be applied in the analY"ils of
foundation settlements. tt
1"_ _ _...,... poIiiblC _ror iUCIi ...lily

_-.as'"
an donIIafnI
ralNn HI'UcIurer

!..,IOr,1t h - . . ....
senlemen1s and, in IOlItI

(2)

,t Howev",. II will be !'hown mIl Ihl'- OI.n.1Yli,~1 mdhods of

the SNIP (.nd SR8034 u well) ,onuin cefu1n sa.ftty fKIOfs

tA nomlnll chvute,inl... U',ordinl to the SNiP's tcrmln

oiOIY. mnns ~n ~ver~ Vlllile of I propeny obu.lned from
fltld or '.boulory tests..

implicitly ,

_'' _Il00--.. __10-

hue.., ........laIecl 12 In many ta5II .... CIJftSieo

al'lt.sev clution for a square foundation on an ideally

conesive meditJm (lgle of internal friction tP = 0) :

tN, thI COle of l'ICOnIUucdon far tJlCIIlIded winl d a / _ " " ...... "_lhotdwlNl~
roundlaian NtdernDnClIhoukf lib mID ICCOUnI
Ihe economic GIIftIOCIUIIICI at UCWIfye tealelDents,
_ _ _ ... _Ior ........ in"'.....

R = S.7c+'Yh

where

c ::;: design value of the loog term cohesive

_,n

......... _ _.... 11",11""'"",_

til
III _ _ Ie 5I/oIy
dw
ysif of WUkmenu. l'II.. oq 4 would bIooInI

1111 b,._

...

S'
Sc-

trength, determined from unconfined com

pression tests (usuming after Mohr thal
c. 0.5 0 , where 0 is the long term com
pressive strength), or by the ball plunger
testing method
.,.:: design bulk unit weight of the frozen soil
h foundation depth.
The solution Is based on the assumed complete
formation of a zooc of plastic equilibrium under the
foundalion.
The design values of Rand R,d!i) ubulated in
the SNiP depend on the soil type, temperature, and
sail, peat, and ice contents. In addition, the ubulated
values of R,d(l) depend 0f1 the type of adfreezing
~rface . The subsoil temperature is estimated by
conducting a thermal analysis. Formulas and the
thermophysiul characteristics of soil necessary for
$UGh an analysis are liven in the SNiP. For ihort term
and repeated loading, the tabulated values of Rare
increased by up to 1~, depending on the duration
of the load. For repeated I~ds of 24 hr or more in
dtntion. the correction (actor is 1.05.
The SNiP proposes a very intcresting method of
temperature corrections for determining pile founda
tion bearing capacity from the results of field experi
ments. The nominal bearing capacity Q of a singlc
pile is determined by the formula :

(S)

whIR 1' ~ 1 III ecvnomk tlfl" fKtor.

SUd! a..ruy _

~'II

could_"oIa n_oI

"'.c , 2)1 _ ....An), IICh

dw.....-ordw ....... _
..dIoncool
_ d w _ " ' ... _
..... 01
_on_In>IL Thoycould ......latod
_dl........ Iypeof_............., ond

-_............""-.._

""""",ed",,

dlnad, _ _ _.. "" _II of

mateNIt. ..... 1QnIp1:IId-.tlC.

As~

...

mlild .'.:SSRry.
Ita ... kncNn drat . . . . . . . . mGt _~
iCil &ypI of .......... I COIIlIIItl1lld PfQbIMI,
a......... of nrIouI founcktion Iype&

NqUlrlni

..............,--1ImpIIIYJllimllJulillo.J
.........
ond dotaIloII ..............n...._

atan

~ ........1IrIy In "" <010 off

8~rlng capoclty analysis of footfngs

ond pile foundations
The nominal bearing capacity Q of Ufltrically
loaded footings or single piles is estimated by the
following formula:

Q ::

ku~ ~IRF +,-,

I R'd (1) F(I~'l

(7)

Po

Q- k , k.

(6)

(8)

where

Po " nominal bearing capacity of a single pile

where

obtaIned from field tests

If, :: soil safety factor
k, :::I Qd/Qu, & temperature correction coeffics
ient.
Qd and Qex 1ft theoretical values of pile bearing
capacity estimated by eq 6 for the design temperature
of the structure subsoil (Qd) and for the test tempera
ture (Qu).
For instance, if the tests were performed in the
period of maximum ground lemperature (wmmer)
and the design temperature of the structure's subsoil,
determined by the thermal analysis, WilS tower, the
buring capacity of the pile Po obuined from the
fie ld tests can be raised. The reverse is atso true. The
method for determining Pn does not differ substans

Hue " uniformity (nonhomogeneity) coefs

f'lGient '" 1.4, depending upon soil
temperature, type of foundation, etc.
F :: tross-secttorud area of pile or footing
F(I) ::;: shear area
R:: long term resistance of frozen soils
to normal pressure
R .. d{l) ::; frozen soil long lerm adfreezing
strength
m :: number of soil laytfS.
The bearing capacity of a footing 00 frozen soils
depends mainly on the soil resistance R to the applied
normal pressure. In lieu of the tabulated values, R
can also be obtaincd from laboratory teSts. In the
latter case the R valucs are talculited by the Berez

tially from that given in SR. 8()'34.

The bearing capacity of piles in permafrost in the

case of partial thawing of frozen ground is determined
by taking into account the negative friction of the
soils caused by settlement of the thawing layer (provided drainage takes place). The magnitudes of
friction forces are taken to be equal to those of unfrozen soils 9

Settlement analysis of foundations

on plastic frozen salls
As noted above the SNiP requires that settlements
be estimated only for foundations on plastIc frozen
soils, tacitly implying that deformation of solidly
frozen soils may be negl~ted.
The analysis of settlements of footings on plastic
frozen soils can be divided into two stages: determin
ation of the allowable bearing pressure on the subsoil
q", and calculation of foundation settlement S.
The allowable bearing pressure on the subsoil is
determined by an analysis of bearing capacity. Settlements of footings are c:alculated 9 by the commonly
known semj~piriQI method of summing the ver
tical "elastic" deformation of individual layers of
the subsoil along the center line of the foundation
(Fig. 1). The latter are calculated from the solutjons
of the boundary problem of the linear theory of
elasticity. In the general case the ultimate foundation
settlement is estimated by the formula:

One conc;liiIii ltat tfiilOtIOWihj an: 1:iiit( premhe$ of 1ho SNIP In - " to _III

_'ty ...

Iy>~.

1. Frozen soUls. COMIdnd as An Ideally cohesive

medium (e.,. oJnd, 0).
2. Froan _ ... _
to _iona ",m
......... _
..... clffenl .....Wocondy
from _
24-111.,,-,,"
In merer'lClt 10 point 1, It ilnotdear why, for the
arne soil, the fticdon ...... need not be abn Into
account when Ihe toi I jl frozen, ewen thou., KCDI'&
Inl to the sNIP',...,.. of the lhlwed or Ihawint;
lOll boar"'I-'IV"'" lib Into ICCOUftt bodl
coheiIon and Medon of the soli, no matter how
...." dIey .... 11Ie _ _ ..... dI. frozen
IOII~ 24-Iw -.... _
<Illy .....Uy from the

iona .... -.... ~ .......ftrmod by

Iho_"

(9)

......,_, . "-dy",~tlmpllfyllll_"'"
,lion IIInIrOduced In In ataw, 10 '.illute Ihc

where
Pi

dosIF .... ",. - . . - .

-na"".des"" ...

_.",......-IS

From an .......... YiI..,oInt JUdI a.umplions

... """,bIo.
of 1ho SNIP

of",. _ I _ l e a l

not stricti

=w,{P-po)' an average pressure in the Ilh

layer of the subsoil along the central axis
of a foundatioo
total average design unit load under the
foundation

""'.

..
N,

O"c

P-Po

Loyer

Adhesion R
Soil

''rnn~~~~-i

Resistance

Stre sses

R ( ~' l

Active

Overburde n
Pressure

Load limit
of Compressible Layer

I- R:0
2P.0
,
Figure 1. Diagtam for anolys;s of foundations.

Po
wI

large buildings and structures on subsoils containing

iu-rich solis and ground icc.
Settlements of foundations on ground ice and icerich soils are estimated by the formula

-rh, overburden pressure

stress distribution coefficient in the flh
~yer of the subsoil depending upon the
depth of the ~yer and the foundation
shape, eU:.
hi := height of the fit! lIyer
tJ:= 0.8, a dimensionless coefficieflt
E\ '" deformation modulus of flh liyer
m := number of layers.
Either the deformation modulus E\, determined in
silU, or the ~boratory determined compressibility
coefficient a\ for eilch layer is used in the analysis,
taking into account neither the time factor nOf the
annual temper.tture change of frozen soiL The SNiP
also a1l0ws the settlements to be calculated on the
bisis of the solution of the nonlinear problem.
:=

:=

(10)
Yt'hcre
51 := immediate settlement doe to the soil

(ice) consolidation as a result of chanFS

in its air porosity
53'" settlement due to the viSGoos flow of

ice.
11 is asstlmed that settlement S 1 occurs rapidly

after application of the load. Its absolute value is

insiJ1ifica.ntj however, the formula for estimation of
51 is given in SNiP. ThcsettlementS 3 iseslimared
on the basis of an approximate solution of the boundary
problem of a nonlinear visro-elastic ~If spau with a
variable temper.tture regime 6 , 16 i.e.,

"'' '-1Yi&

SoIcII .. _ _ ..

0/ _ _ ,.... ".,.. ......... 1'oI1ow1ni

_If . .

1. F_ ............ oflloonoodliinlo:ooflOlidI,
1IWIIooo_.... _1OIdIy _
.... pIoodo:_ ...........

_......-......-_......

nac_
.........

...... cu ............. n..tolft,ka.

iiIIi\' pIoodo: " - ... 11"'_~

I;

.... IoI .... ~

(",,+"'l+l)(WI+l- W,)

(11)

/=1

. . . . . ." ....OWIty .... _

2. "II ..b....." dlrRadt .,1IIIIn1aIn .........

P :: total avenge design unit load under the

foundation
Po:: overburden pressure
n'" strain twdening puameter
b :: foundation width
t >:: dUr.J.tion of use of structure (suucturc's
lifetime)
K := parameter of defofmability, the reciprocal of the "viscosity" coefficient
of Ice determined by the linear segment
of lhe rheologiuJ curve
k,t"+1 :: temperature distribution coeffiCients
in the /Ih layer of the subsoil, depending
upon the subsoil temperature and the
depth of the layer
(,,)1' WI+ 1 =: stress distribution coefficient in the
fltIlayer of the subsoil, depending upon
the foundation ma.pe, the layer depth
and the value of parameter n
m := numbH of layers.

...... "'. _ _ MII_ ..

o'C, ........,"..... _ _
1... . . -. . . , - _

"'_I0Il.

.......

_l1li-.
.
,
.
.
.
_ _ .... SN"........._

.......... 10 . . . .aIiI . . . ar to hlOlldly

r_ _ Fartolldly_ ..... no ....

....tlllOlylls ............ Far .....tIor...~ tile 5NII'
Il00.1 . _ ....,. ... _
...tin

................_l/IpuIalld In ... 10....

foI' .. _
far "'lPICII1ooof _
...L

_
.
.
.
"_""'_,.22"'''_''

. . . . " ........ toI1dofar

_
_
,,.,_t1o,.._
......
_ _ ...... _ ...'11................

'- hll".U.... _

t_~_

............ ' c:ansIdInWe IIMcatI:III.

The SNIP recommends determining pile foundilion settlement by USing data from field tests of piles
under s~tic loads. HowevCf, the SNiP does not rev
ommend a specific method of calculation.

",1+"

Graphs of the values of "".

Wj and "'1+,
are given in two works 6 ,t6. For the c.ase when the
patilmeter n := 1, these values are also given in tables
in the SNIP] . Equation 11 is recommended by SNiP
11 18-76 only fOf'" settlement analysis of foundations
on ground ice, but it can also be applied to settJement
,tnalyscs for foundations on ice-tiro soils6 .

SettlemVlt anolysls of foun(/otl(){ls on

ground k~ and kNkh solis
This section is the most important auomplishment
of the SNiP. For the first time in construction pr.tc
lice an official regulation allows the construction of

The method of seulement analysis for foundations on icc-fich soils employed in the current issue
of the SNiP is based on the same assumptions as
those stated above (Of ground ice, but in somewhat
Simplified form. The SNiP gives the formulas (or
determining the design allowable load q* on iu-riGh
soils and ground ice, depending on the foundatiOfl
shape, the ratio of the foundation's sides, and the
temperature.
...... l1li !hi
compu.... by iIii pro-

...:/(>-:"'==

(I .....

""'"'i
In uniuIII
"...,.... ..............
n snln hIRtIairC ..........
cnep linin rail

at empIrtcaI .......,

_ma. . ;

I( dIformIIIIUtv .......
' mm.,
The_Manual" _
... ......,..,. ....

It is

Ho) b t I!WI'

dof_n..,_/CIIId .... _
. . ......
PII'ameIII''' tram short ..... unIuIII CD ..... .
cnop ...... It" _1I1Il dIo

.,.,II1II'{ .... .

..... " d I o ' _ o f _

bo _
_
_
_
0.005
m:n/IIr
I".
2). In
.._
. - .1bIf
II1II.
. .L Oodlo _ _ _ _ " . " , _

(12)

_IIn1,- _""Ih&!ii'i
_... -.-..
..IIOiIC_.

y_1t d I o _....... ___........

........., . . _"'_... any-

_1n . . . .

Equot/onIlll11d 12 . .b It ___ .. ISII.....

__
-=
i"'" ...,." ......

... Ieo _

,nI..

_ .... ......,.wy ......

Ity , /C. All _In ill ....

....Inod... nay....,.rv _

....... -"_Ieoflow ........., ......

...y ... -~.,..."' . ."'

dIo ....... "' ....

1IltIIi.l6I'Il ...........

i It) )I('".~

___
"'' 'nc:nII:_
..
, . . _ . - dIo flow
In .... __
~
Eq:aIIo::II11114112 _

- . . . . ....... bas.
tIc;

leo

....

~
dill prl ., . . . . . . . tAlGI . . . . . . . . . . .

cbflll 11M of 1M ........ tlowver, the lOIudoI

a:GIPIId. btGnItY

,,' _,-Uo+"121 /C

""" _ _ Ion. for .... ~_a

.............._
aI _
...... 1IId _""''''',
- " " "' .... _
wltII dopdI,. well .....
temperature c:hInII with dIM. and repment eq 11
In .... simple form ":

S,(" -

ClDIIIII'I81an

, -_In"C_dIolIF

...

_al .... SNIP wfU be-.wly

rtIIOftI fot dill wi. be aamlned fwdter.

(13)

- 0:

(1 ... .,.

law

1I.1i

0' ~ COIIII.

tntl,. C' .. p

a,

a,

,
m
I

-p;j;Gr;-

Ie,..,
,

I,Tim.

Figure 2. Creep curves of frozen roll at constant streSSts

(m-Inflectlon {fallureJ points, tm -time to faIlure).

(14)

an since under hi..... loads. npedaJly in the

upper lIyer, of subtoils.lhe I'fiatlomhip between
'trAin rAle Ifld applied slre$5 can be nonline.u. Now
lhetes.s, me SNIP, usi.. 1he lfnN/' IIw, illows ..,IU;
lim of I detip SIms considerably II,..,. than 1
krI/un 2. ~tly, chi, rnakn It poulb.. to ct.
puse. 10 A cer~n extent. the lbIoIute walue of uJ
wilted ICIUMment ind the ~ble error teSl*tivcl
The iddItJonaIufety fleton InheNnt in the SNIP
melhod. whlch ..e implied by the OYtmtimitJon of
~... nay ... ..,.Iainod ....... IK.....'thb
~ ... fh' d... an analydcoI molhocl "' _ _
~
wound lcewilh _ .

\iwttore SS1 Utd S'2 ~ the tetUemenb due to viKOUS

/""" of ice ..tinaled ......... dolann.bUlIy _
.ents ~ mel K'2 In eq 1311 timeJ" and'2 rapeclively
For eumptt. Ie, us i55Umt chlllM deformatHlfty

toeffJclent

...,"'_dons ...

1HIna InIO _ _ _, dIo..... '" Wound

Ki hid been determined at time '1 co 24

. .per&1UN and -wlm of templnture willi dtp

\v,. dovoloped and Included In th. offl,1al cIosI...

.......
A""" -",,"d...
UI cia..
......IIinod ................, .... _ , _
wi'" ame Sltl _
41

r MId dlt sec:ondary creep itl. 'IIrts It tlme'2

20 days att. initiation of the at. If she settlement

of .... _ _

..dmoled ..... "'.......... "',. ,.. _lu..

...... _
... _ d _ (accordl", lOeq 15
....'" 6 0.31 by. _
N. 4. """""'"" wi'" ....
lenlcment..umaWd ...."1 K'2 dtt.mlned for the
,.... , ,. Fl_ 3 ".., ................demon. "".
don trrorN VInUI 1M rado of'2 ind'1 II dlf
ercnt VII. . of 5. If it
dull the sec:oncwy
_'.,.~t'2
clip or ani year,lhe error
flmov ..... up 10 20. ~lnl""" .... va'ue of

365

"'---..

(Fit-

dan .._ ,

.... ....

5(",

"_1'Md

S, S,(', I. S,('-" I

lor'

>I,

of

(161

Whore

'1 ckndon of the prfnwy creep , _

, ItnldUrO's lif.time.
ttlemenuS I and S, can be estimated by the prosiaM of the SNiP. Foundadon sttdemenb durilll
\he prj""" .......... S, can .....................

The MiI1ull 17 requirlei tM. the derormlbilit~

(vlKOlilyl coofflcJ... of Ice ... do..-m'ned by"'.

..11_......lofche~curw. Howeer.

_",_lot

~1

is well known dial strain rate .. 1ft IPP'OXlmately

~ f'uIIctian 111 . . . only tot smalllDWtIeL This
~ procedure is tNIOfIrIbIy 'MIld only If
load on the surfKe don not excerdo. 1

S,("

I' 2" "'"".1" bK ~

% (.til .11"

I (""., - ""I

(171

'0r---~--~--~--~--'

,.

z"
!

Tim.

.. .!oJ.
(!.<)'
Su
I,

~o
}-

+-_

____~,~.__________

I, 2 4 ~' s..
II' 120 daY I (0)
3I!o'a,ltbl

"

",

S,

ot:~~~,:::o:.,~~o~.,~-o~.~-Jo. ,

s ----------

Figure 3. Possible errors N In deler

mIning foundalion settlements.

Figure 4. Diagrom for determination

of foundOlion seulements.
til is .lSsumed Ihe parameters"

~nd ~

do nOI change with dep lh.

Eqn.1lOa 1. _I0Il_ oIIIiIIIIOoP' II\' ... --'"

SIooJo-" ....
s-Iblt

1Ion Ito!,. _

DIlon of

parts: that cau~d by thawing of excess iGe or pha5e

tnnsitions and that ca.u.sed by soil consolidation. The
SNiP recommends dcl.erminin& c:oefficients of soil
consolidation and thaw from field tests using he.ucd
loading plates or from laboratory tests using oedom
etcrs. The SNiP requires that the allowable load on
the subsoil surface be determined in the same mallner
as (Of unfrozen 5Oi1 9
For tentative estimates, settlements of foundations
on thawing soils are allowed to be detcrmined using
simple empirical formulas and c;ustomary physiG.l1
ch;uacteristics of frozen soils. However, errors in such
eStimatjons may be 100% or morelS. For estimates
or the depth of thawing in frozen ground under muc-tures, and also the movement of thawing boundaries
with limc, iPCcial tables and graphs afe giYen in the
SNiP, depending on the ground tempcrawre ~d
simple physiCiilI c;hanclerislics of the solis. The
cufrent edition of the SNiP giYes a Gertain latilude
to the designer in selecting an analytical f'l'Wlhod of
c:alculating deformations of thawing soils.

I<

10 CIlIa fIda ~11

I.

CNnto"' ... -

"'""-

.... durIfta ... ~

a..,.. 01 .........1 1 _ with dop1/!

ondwllll ......
1. _ l Y o f t l l e ' - n .."'-p.
Ifl.lo_II1I.... _ _...... _
2.

_~

... 17""""'_

S2(.,,-(P-P.Ib I+~i ~.

(18)

1IIo ...1yoh of lIo&yOkov\ """'"""V data2" _

lI1I.rho ...._ ' ..... Of_........ on .....,
IJ'OUAd ice.,.. In ..... r I ~t willi ... 1hIoretkaI
"' .... _
.... byoql .. tho ............ .......
. . . 0I1ot0ll _ _ 1o ItIu _ 11\' ...... .,.

.... ...,.In
.............. ,..,.wlA
...
5R 110-304

below, _

CQIIIIdorJIIon of
,
~ 18con .... 110 ....lIodto ... . . - _ offoullda-

be _

.....111_" on aIltvIIOS of.fnIUn.JOll.,_ __

Oesign of foundations f
md ippendioes

The final

sectlon~

spec~1

_ ........iiiIi1Iiii. "' .... hlilofloo

iJon':Ios,'"
_I_on of SNIP '''''11076 ~ ...........
V... _ _I I o I _ d _....

soil conditions,

of 1_ _ .. "",.."""pabllsloodla lito

.._ _

\J55.R.~IO_

of the SNiP ate devoted to

recommended design methods for founduions on

salioe and peaty frozen soils, for foundations in seismic:
regions, and for foundations o n thawing soils. The
SNiP gives numerous data on the design resistance of

SR SQ.34 (1980) DES'GN AND CONSTRUCTION

OF FOUNDATIONS IN AREAS OF DEEP SEASONAL
FROST AND PERMAFROST"

frozen saline and peaty soils to normal pressun:: and'

shear along adfreezing surfaces, depending on the
soil type, the temperature, and the mineral, salt, and
peilt content.. Analysis of subsoils is performed by
the method discussed above.
The coefficients of the decrease in bearing capacity
for footings and pile foundations in seismic regions.
depending on th e type and temperature of the frozen
soil and on the region's seismic aClivity, are of great
intereSL However. the basic requirements for founda
tion de-.ign in ~ismic regions are not inclUded in SNiP
1118-76, but in other SNiPs.
Foundation stability and strength under the action
of frost heave forces are also anal yzed by known
methods 12. The design values of frost heave forces
given in the SNiP depend upon the type of soil, the
degree of water S<llUration, and the depth of seasonal
freezing and thawing. The appendic:es contain form
ulas for thermal analyses of subsoils and numerous
tabl6 of thermal soil characteristics.
Analysis of foundations on thawing soil~ is per
formed by known empirical comolidation formulas 12 .
In the general case, the settlement resulting from
thawing of the subsoil will consist of the sum of two

General informa.tion
This report c:ontains a large amount of information
on various aspecLS of design and construction in arctic
and subarctic regions, from environmental con,Sldera
lions through inspection and monitoring. It com
prises the following chapters:
1. Introduction
2. Basic; considerations affecting foundation design
3. Site inY1:stigations
4. Foundation design
5. Survey data points
6. Construction considerations
7. Monitoring performance.
Strictly speaking, SR 80-34 taMOt be compared
with SNiP 111876 as to ei ther its tontent or its form.
Most of the jtems discussed in SR 8~34. except
"foundation design," Me ~atlefed throughout dif
ferent sections of the SN1Pl.tO and numerous semi
official documents. Some topics, including numerous
design examples, have never been included in SoYiet
Standard literature.

10

Special Report so.34 pro~jdes guicb.nce to tnt

engineer, bot since it does not prescribe.a spt(;i(j,
course of action, it lea~es the engineer rcsponsible
for any design decisions. For Instance, the report
abounds with references to other publications; how
c~tr, It is well known that authors sometlmcs el uci
date the same questions differently. Such references
expose.an engineer to the constantly chilnging state
of the construction an. and the latest achievements
of 5clence, but increase the likelihood of his ,haasing
. something other than the optimum solution to a
particular problem. AppMently, its purpose! is to
throw light 00 the most important problems con
nected with the design and conwuctlon of buildings
and str uctures, especially fo undations on permafrost,
and to set examples fOf their solutions.
In contrast, SN iP 11 18-76 is an official state docu
ment, kavlng the force of law for all institutions and
organlutions throughout the U.S.S.R. The SNiP
docs not permit variance from its basic regulations.
and II exempts itn engineer from responsibility fO(
his de,kions. In the SNiP references are permiued
on ly 10 Other SNiPs, the number of which is limited.
It probably makes design more conservative, and in
some QSes It makes II. dimeull 10 adopt nonstandard
solutions. It is written in language that does not
allow variousln terPl'eQlion~ Many questions are
omitted under the assumption th~t the answers are
known, One of the purposes of the SNiP 11 -1876 is
to prollJde the comprehensillC information nec.euary
to simplify dnign procedures for foondations on
permafrost.

(19)

where an (t m) is the time-dependent frolen soil strength

in uniaxial compression; 1m Is time to failure. Spec.ial
Rcport 80-34 recommends that the par.meters (J and
Bin eq 19 be determined by the f'C)ul ls of at lust
two laboratory t~LS on undlsturb<!d Jamplc5 ot each
toundition soil; the tests arc to be performed near
Ihe estimated tempcr.llure of the n,Uur~1 foundalion
soil. The nominal toog term frozen soil SLrength on
is calculated by eXlrapolation over a very IonS period
of time-the structure's lifetime t "" 1m ' The bearing
capacity of fooncl.uions for all type~ uf soil~ is calculated by Tcrz~l\ fOrmula whith, for shallow square
footings on Ideally cohesive soil and neglectfnglnternal fric tion, has the form;

q. co

1
SF

(20)

(1.3 x 5.7 'n + 'Yn h )

where iI s i . safety factor SF::: 2 j) 4dded. Notice

thai the recommended safe ly factor deptnds upon
neither the number of lesl'l nor variations in the soil
char.ilCler isties.
SNlPll'..,...
... = tNt frozen tolls un be

=....

~Mdend II

ideally oahMive media, but adfreetfnl

DftllS arr .. ken InlO ~nl (loC'C eq 6,_ The minimum
r.umber of reQund 1:eJtS It "he. The soil,,'ety faelOf'
het eq I) don dtpmd on Iht num_ of telb or on
~.6atJon.ln

1M ddrmlnod pltlmflClt wish teSC*l to

For the CIM of idultatt dill., when
bft . . no Ydtions In dt.nrurisdct. the toU
ftty baar wi" ~ e~ to UllJry. In other words,
meorttic:ally.... burlna capacity of foundatJont. on
rroun solls ."thN.ted by tha SNiP ~Id t.. (tHina
into ilCCOU,1l !he awrKtion c:oefflclenu) up 10 so.
bo.. .... Ify, OIdm ...d by SR 81).34. Howewr.ln

1.ts lver. viJue.

FourKbtion delign
Sped.ll Report 80-34 and the Soviet SNiP arc substantially different from each other, whic:h makcs
comp~rl50n dlfficult. However, their main ~ctioos
both dealing with the design of foundations- arc com
panblc. The~ c:onsiSt of three parts: foundation
bearing capacity, settlement analyst'S, and determin
ation of pile bearing capacity,

1o_ _
e

.dI_ . . . .-wd_

iI. C*'tIIn tatter in II.xperlm.nut duJ..

iIe_., -..
~ikl5R 1(1.34,

on-...

.... SNIP _1010 _ , ....

"",,,,-c.1PKi1Y

fOlea The Wluence of the litter on the founcbdon

t.....1,. - ' I Y .... lie slpln..n' ...., .... dHqree-

Antilysis of foundtltion bttlrlng capoclty

In SR 80-34 one method for analyzing the ultimate
bearinl upacity is ba~d on the hypothesis that fro
zen soil 15 pure ly II cohesive m,lIerial, a con servative
assumption becallse internal friction and adfreeze
fO(us arc negltedt _ It is a.s~umed that the long
term strength limit is lero (0_ ::: 0) and that the de
crease In soil strength with time is described by
Vyalov's equation

,....t

btl.,,,, sa 10-)4 .nd SNIP in the .nluation

01 f001lnl bNr1f1ll3P&ity Is thereby m.aanifled Tile
rwa.1ed idfreui,. (or", and &h~ inlom.ti friction
01 the .011 eM lhut be. Inllll'p,UId ~.In oIddhJon&I
ufrty fac:1OI fmpJkitJy iMOrpORlCd in SR 80-3...

AI was rrtentloned Ibcwt .In Important future

01

me SHIP that ft nollnduded in SR JO..14 ;, iI:

JOup of l:J.blft show"" lite rctkWtc:e of frozen soH

of QllQUf types ro normal presue Ind shelf ...Ione

tin 'Om' cues Intun~ (rlctlon un ~Ito be t;attn IntoiICcount;

I'Iowhtrj the c"curn~Wlm undu ...hld! li'Ie Incorpor~tiotl Of
In lunill frluion 1\ pos,jjblc 1ft nOt uprcued durly in SR
81).34.

adftalina ~f~. For prwlimlNf'y dNl", Md ewer.

II

...... - . ...... 1ho lOll _ ond I"~

the number or tall, the _I proGadunI. _Ie. ~
of desi.,. ....... Iood 10 _
of 1 1 1 0 _ '

for flAi:1 . . . . of _lmpotWn IotrlKWl't'I, dieM

nib_ offer an opportunity to dec:teae the 'Oil of

JOII tadn .. whidl ts c.onsiderJbae,.and to sirnpllf'l

the desil" proc:edure.
The c:onwenteme and ilmplldty of the SNIP
method of c:akulitina
c:apity can be demon
stuted by lPPlylnl It "" an ex.ample: in SR 8().34

ronal

eII_.

""Ich ... be _ , I . __ _
Ihose "dma1lOd by ""I burtna ~ty. Ia 1110 __

bear"-

side"'d ............ _ _ . . dwi .....

12.llIi lit. . _ '''Iul/od by SR 80034 for PlY
f;a,tor of 2. It a not dlffkull til show IhIt In ...
example the Ions term .tren..... of the froan toll.

(p.I66-170). lntheSReumpte.thedimensions
a.lwla1ed for .a foo"nl on frozen inorpnlc: wwly
sill with" temperature of 3CtF (. -1.1OC) are 4.5
~ U It 20.21 It' (18.813 om'). The deW.,. 100d
f'J d = ISO tom. Foundidon depth is 7 ft. Th.
appuenl yfet} fxl'Ot SF ... 2.25. The lifetime or
the struc:&ure iI 2S ycm.
A,c:a,rdina to the SNIP table of ~Iowable burin,
c:aPKitin, for thk type of soilf And this ,,",pet
wr., the nomiRiI reslttance, wilhout .. larp 'rror,
un be uken as R .. 9.4 .,/",,2, Tht nomln.1
burin, ~c:ity of the foundation, by eq 6, wUl be

Cillc:ullted by c.kinllnto KCOUnl chI,tructure'l

lifetime of 100 years, dlflws from that caIcuIIIecI
250year IInICIIn llfelfme by only
I........
is_lO .... -..cyof ....

'0' ,

_.1!1,

eII_

rneuuremenll.

Fin.alIV, if an adequase cornlilion betwIn Iht

soil d.,wfk;alJom of the SNIP and SR.80-34 WD'II
developed. the walues of fro,.. "'" . . ._
R
"'" R. d _lolled in die SNIPo,iI/!'

In wntern desl.,. pracdce.

be_

"",,110
Creep thformotion

Q & ltucRF z 1.1 ~ 9.4 ~ 18,813 .. 194,526

Analysis of deformation (settlement) is the most

important part of foundation design. Most reported
foundation failures have been caused by nonuniform
settlement rather (him inadequate bearing c:apacity.
According to SR ~34 the imalysis of settlement
of footings on all types of frozen soils is based on the
following principles:
1. Allowable load on the subsoil surface is de
termined by a bearing capacity an;alysis.
2. Analysis of deformation is nec:essary for all
types of soils except solid rock formations;
allowable limits of settlements are not given.t t
3, Total settlement is estimated by summarizing
settlements ofiginating in the separate layers
using the formula"

kif or 194.S tom.

Auotdin. to eq 2 ... deIII" Ioid on the suMolI,
even wUhout IIki", Into I(;C.OUnt ~zJns form,

"""

Q. ;: J1 = l!!J
It,
1.2

162 tons,. 1SO 10M.

Thk comparison demoMtn.leI the uwanYp of

.........Iolled ...1 _for pnIImlrwy ....
sl.. proc:eduRl when the moil lICGIIomlal constrUCtion ..._
(principlo) '" _
of f_don I.
belnllliKled.
The values of Iho froan wli dwxwl,tlcl ubullllld in the SNIP . . called Ion& term . .i&t&nce5
!hoy __ ~ by "I 19...kl......
1IUdIn:'t 1ft-time til be SQ.l00 yars. For preimln.ary ClkuladoN It is not IftIP(II1Int .dw the

SIr) '" 2:

/-,

e]

(t) h ]

(21)

where
EI{t) '" subsoll/1h.layer creep strain at il given

lllion irt for 25 yus 01100 yun. since:

1. _
., ..............don!ram tIqIOrimenlll
dati an un~1n for periods of dint I - - .
2. y.,.10_ of die tInaJ dl........... of die
_
... poooIble cUina die ~,..,.
cedIn.
AclulIIy......,...._., .... oxporimenlll do"
for toni periods of lin . , . nol, J5 ~ rule, ....
sw. """Ib. The nominal dwacttristk values.
with 1"OIpect. to time can wary u mud! OIl 1CIOt6 Of

temperature
hi'" thickness of the layer
m = number of layers.
4. The stresHtr~n relationship is nonlinear and
is described by Vy;aloy's eqUation 16. The
latter can be represented in ;a form tNt is
similar to eq 14

ttln IoOme cases the y are limited by loe~1 constf\lctiofl Wltes.

"'n floCl three different methods ~re presented In SR 10.34.
Of the three. In Ihe luthor's opinion, the method of settle
ment analvsb ronsldefcd below Is preferlble.

tThis b I very IOU." approxlmalion since Ills impcmib~

to nUbll$h litf~t correSPOndence between Amer~n and
Soviet soli dusifiatlons without hiving I comp]ue de
wiptu,n of me soil

12

(22)

where
E,(t) '" average creep main in the (lh layer
along the central ax is of Ihc fou ndation.
The magnitude and distri bution of uress under the
founda tion is ca lculated by usi ng the elastic theory.

COinparinIIhe SNIP's JPPI'OICh to settlement

.....ysh "'lNt of the SR. .... WI _ d o INt.
)n lllill' of IhI fKl m..t both memocb are based on
thl' IimI IheorItlaI premkes, .. wtain dkacPMCY
'" the final ........iII 0Uf. Speci..1 Report 80-34
don hOI,...".1he calaalaUon of Ittll,merus of
roundldons on loUdly frozen tolls, but "'11Mb
Ihll be cans..... and, followins die practice Jdop
throup,uc: &hi
lAves Ihe dedlion whether to
cak:t_ diem or not to .... _ ..
/u

sa..

"'Met.

_ _ _ _ ........ "'IN SNIP IN

inaIyds of cWoIftllldonl is neer!!" only for foun-

_t

dltlOftI an .....lIe frozen and .hI"n, soIlio SeU'"

~II of ~ on solidly froun toils Me not
_1aIIII ...11. lItI. ~ ... 01 .... nYln dlffefen...
bet_lito SNIP and SR 81U4 ....,di,. ..

1naIysh..

r. From dwflnpofnt Dfuslna 1M lime fEtor In

... onaIYIIo " ' _ d o n . _ I I . the SR
DICIt uems &0 be more .Iuac:tlvt. II makes il
~ to IIdmlle the _dement atlnY moment
~ the SItIIc&Urt:'IIffedme. It &alee .... IO.uount
the ........ tIir4IninIlffK1Il11d the lem.....
~ 01 JlrJin. II ~kI be mote Q)f'fto
te _In the Imlll 01 lite -'""" -""'"
lito . ._ _ In", canJldoradon IN oubooIl
ml*llUN chan.. with 1.Ime It well u the DYef'.
&urd.n prIIIWt of the soli. However, the innuence
of the I I . faaon upon the flnal rMUlli fNV not
...,. ........daI.
A Il'MN'lIUbiClntMt tIscrepIncy in the multi of
coIctda_ from the SNiP and SR 10034 b .......
by IN lactlltol lite deI.....tion characteristic>
Used In Iht~Y58I iI'C ctct.mlnecl by different

..-

f ...

In "" SNIPtdemenl of fguncgbOM 00 plutic

0011 deformadon
1 or compIoHIblfity ~fficienls. (~eq
,. This melhod does not permit dte fidmatlon of
accumulation of IlInlanents with time. Nevet~, from In enJineerlnl viewpoint It could live

"..u..........,.

N--., _h i l . _ metIIodololY for

de""""" lito '""'" SDII'-'U of dolormation

Of die c:offtpfMIbIlil'f coeffk6ontl had been dew1~

SpecIal ~ 81).34 r _ tNt the do(see eq 22) be determined

rormabltl~ parameter I(

from unconfined CGmprflSion Ielti. The besl corre

spondence between the rnults of oslimations and
the dati of f;eid obserntiom of structure senlements
will be ob~ined if soil defouNlion moduli E, determined from fkoId tests with bearin, pYles, art
used in the .analysii. If die compressibility coeffic;eng,. IhI used In the analysis, the expectod )Oulomcf1' rni'f' be overestimated by f"tor of 2 to S
c:ornp.red with the field observations. It is obvious
Nt usinl dlfonnabilily parametcB obtained from
unconflMd c:ampression tests Mil take inlO .c:count
1M time fKuw m.ly ,ane sentcment to be overe5b
mated 10" even ..._ dearce. Heru, as farlS
settlement lnalysis Ii c:oncemod, the fe(;OftImond.
[ions of SR 8().34 Im'n 10 be more conservative than

Ihe provlsto"s of the SNiP.

Note.t IN btmt d.itl on me tons term (up to
17 yars) IIfIHcalc""""""" to>b of Vv.a.,.2'
ihowed that ,hno-dependenl5eUlomenll of beatlnl
plo" on .....tic IT.... ooIh con be
by the

_bed

'eqladon

S(r) (1

.......

(23)

d;: diMnew of a pllte

~

U, n

.'1 d{f,)"'" '"

lind

~ ..

Poi~'s filtio
paramelarS

w c:oeffidenl dependl"" upon the

Wpc .1 the looti,.
AI:: dtfonnabilily coeflk:ienl of me
frozen soil.
,EqlA.tion 2l was obUlined by ~ modlfk.uion of
'shleic:her's solution ind coincides reasonably well
w!lh eq 18. However, tho problem Is how to de
termlne !he pararneUlf1 of these eqUitlon) under
Qborl;lOty conditions durol willaiw 5ettiemenlS cJoJc
to those tNt will be experlenucl under (iekj c.ondl

.....

This probWn IS dmely connec:Led with a very

,rnWlml qlM5tion, which should be emphasized In
this comparhlon of the lWO dcxumenu: ,",w to
rTYIthemllically dna'ibe Ihc (;~p curYCt and cit
mint me paro.neters In eq 13, 14,.md 22. This
lion is (undimenu:l, and all the .an.tlysel of
rlnl up.aclty or foundation Hulernenl depend
on its lO4utlon.
11 is well known wt the suiln hardeni", IWam

etcr" dependi sfanificanlly on suess. chmain. from

rtqtjvelv hlp values (for 10me types of froan soils
=8--10) at hip SU'eS5elIO about un.ity for smAil
slrmcs. In SR 80-34 it is aumed thai the snin
hirdeninlPUMneIer lNy differ from unity, while
n the SNIP it is accepted .u unUy in all c:.ueI. The
t me hardening parilmelef A also depends upon weu,
PI

and both n iIld AQr'j wary with lime.nd tcmper~

Uft. Hence, &lIthe arYIytiQl methods mentioned
abow. which employ constJnt WlIues for these IInns,
ta.YC Mt lPf)rOXimllII charKta'. Note that dcforrn.l

E i/;tivation erwJY - - - - - - - - ,
R - lIS consunt

T -- ib50Iute cempera...... k
1m equation (ai_ion) of the IonJ term
1lr'qIh, i.e. Ihe time In..... from ...
initi.ation of the .... untillhe inflection
pain. of. cnop cune (F" 2. 5, 6).
SubsUWU.. oq 25 into oq 24, .... 10_ ......
the form:

lion or froun tOil Mtd r.lilure comtitut.e ~ uniftcd

physiQl process. Thm:1""' .... " ' - . . 01 ....
wly,;is of founcktion setdements QMOt be ~
fully solved ..... til ~ unified c:omtitutiYO equation is
established which desa'ibes thelonl term f.lihn
iIId deformation of the soil. Equations or this twe

.
,(/)--,or',

A unified ~titudve eqlMtion derived by this

of the rate prcxess
theory hu the form (for a llyon temperature):

.......

~ar
~m~'
u p6,0
I
'm

.. :r O'PVr)

'm = '. ~:t;,

=Pl.1nck', constinl

It

(26)

dance to test dal&.

(25)

5.,..", .,.."
n. strain r . reaches a minimum i' ...........
the ti.... , . 'm' In dlil CIII", 24 bIc:omIs:

'0).

.
C ~111"'-

'm

~ C2

Frenkel', relaxadon time

")"

(.\G;

(24)

.uwJ C, n, '" and 6 Me dimension" pvameten

00 K "lnsunt:aneoUS" $trtnJ1:h of the soil
10 "

'

t .. the initial wain r~te at 1h11imI t --,.

1 min,C,-C/'o.",mdnl" n+m ... mI. From
a malhernatieal viewpoint, the t1rUd&n of eq 26
corrnponch. to equl.tionl derived In some of this
author'!. other workslO,27. HOMMf.OII 24 and 26
YO better dimensions that II" more flexibility In
machen'IAI UVlsfomwlons Mtd better correspon.

author202].24 ,~,l6 on the b;Isi$

I",

"'; 'o'"'C

\WheN

Enlln CIWIp (II consltInl stras

.
C
e(/)"-

""

were . . . .ted in two worts20, 27 and W8"e verified

for vulGus typetof frozen and unfrozen soils ~t~
pie and complex ~trJtn suta

00

=(AI/to'

..

-e2 ~r.)
.0

....

(27)

Takll'lllnlO accounteq 25. eq

27 an be ................. loIiowIn&:

Boltzmann', consum
(28)

i,

....

Pt'IIIO',,_-,,>:
Cr p -

G,

I
I
I

t., - - - - - - - -

"

t,IOQ Tlln'

'.

J'.

Fl9ur~

t"" Tnn. 10 roillir.

6. Time depentknl (ollun of frozen

soli (0 -instontoneous strength, to -relax-

Figure 5. Creep curves In logqrlrhmic coordinates

(m-lnfJeclion points, Eo -Initio! strain rote, EmminImum strain rate).

ation time).
14

An approxim.ue equatibn ror de-r-orm.lfionio

~y

basis for selecting the t y~ of fOlindalions and con

trol measures is outlmed. Since the methods o f
computation for thaw s.cttlement and for the stability of foundations subjected 10 the action of frost
heave are not prctcmcd in the SR, no comparative
;malysis with the SNiP is possible on these topic~.

be ~ted in Ute following form :

t_ (o.So", , ...~ , ,.,/t m

(29)

whore to is the In~tantaneou, strain. B:; ell! 0:' ),

and ), .. 1-6. EqUiUon 28 eJlprtSM$ the tempeUlure

{)efermlnaflon of pile bearing capacity

dependendft of the defornutlon proceu at the

SKonduy c;recp.nd makn it pcmible 10 aUnlIle
(he ICliQhon enerlY of frozen soil 1111 U1n. point.
to dHuibc the entirt creep In ac:c;orcbnoe wilh cq
29.utd to del.mine all six plrlmeletS (C, n, m. 6,
10 ;and .,o) three toW ue netded: tWO creep teSIS
and ~ I~I fOf 00'
Illhould be noted th.at the. tUolin ra~ on Ute
prinwy, ICCOndM.,.and tert"r.,. creop depend upon
~ ritl<K of lollm and 111m. In pr.actice found ..
liOM Me
to tralkfy the rcquiretnmt\ of
~ 7 or 20 and eq 19 or 25. The time to failure of
rho upptf llyer of Iht wbsoil beneath the founcU'
lion is iIfItic:ip.LDd to be cqu.I to the urucwre life-.
lime 111 $ 1m ' Thb mufti thai the tU'iin rale of this
lavtr ruchM. its minimum withan thi' time. On Ihe
other hind. the
deli:rUMI rapidly with the
dcpllt (fla. .,. n.c time\of lallul't: Iml of die IOU
~yJ below the upper ta.,..r .uc ilways LarJrr than
tt.: Idocted
lifetime, i.e, '.., f :> Ilf. Thert
fon!: die ,vain rlUlS of thew layers will nol red
lheir minillNllm within IN, time. Thus, the tubJoil
of !he foundadon will deform is 11\ entire unit with
I dec:realinl wain rile (primary creep) dwl can be
Ipproxlmattd bv cq 14, 17, 18, 2'l;and 23; eq 26
.Iso _ I........ prlnwy " .... (Fia. 5) wIlonlhc
uponentillwm It natl (t ~ 0) ;and (,III be neslected..
Henc" eq 24 ~ tJrne-dependenl deform.
bon ror .. 11 convendonaJly dellned lUp or aeep
avor tho ,"\Ira rlnae of 1PPilid stresses. It contains
Iho cqultion of the Ion. term ~tn:np .Jnd comequenlly c.t be tJlulpo!ated Into the ranp of vnall
w.Ma. II islba valld. roth complex ,tJeu s~
of IGU. A renarklble propel"'" of thb cquadon II
th.al it ..... "'celllni dknenslom ind I docp physiQl
ICfI& Thll ....'ian can Like qriout .~ytic.al
forms, and th. proc:eu fib "" 10 lISi dall.. Il is
INI .... ...tytJcaI .."'.... of .... bounda<y
problem utJns thlt equ;ldon wlllaNe calculated

Piles are the mosl widely used type of foundation

in nonhern regions. Therefore, the determin.uioo
of pUe bearing capacity can greatly infiuc nce coostruction C0515, and also can strongly affect the
reliability of a structUre. The bearing capaci ty of
single piles, considering skin friction, is determined
by an empirica l formula similar to eq 6, with tho
difference that in the SNiP the poinl bearing resis
tance of the pile is also taken into account. This
provides an opportunity to increue the theoretical
pile beilring cilpacity by 10-20%. bul on ly in those
cases when it i~ calculated using tabulated soil char
acteristics. The latter ate given only in the SNiP_ At
the SOIme lime both the SNiP and SR 80-34 allow
bearing tapacity to be determined by field test dati..
Thi~ circumstance offer~ a chance 10 compare both
documen15 on lhe basis of an analysis of experimental
dar.!.
o perform such I ~ 1i:l1it UK tN R

_.Iid

"reHCt

"""tuft

1IO-34 .......1e of an 0>11..... of _ .. copodty

of. ~11Iie pile (Fla. 7). AccordlnalO the ..._
of ...tpl> 01 field ...1 do.. a<oepted In the SR, the
nomlMJ burlnlupKllyt or thto pile is Ln c 147,(100

lb. The IIlowUk . . . . _ ; , t 45.000 lb.

~ .pparent safety factor liSF s LalL, K. 147,000/
95,000 3.27.
LII '" determine the pile -1111 ~ty by ....
SNIP ...thod. In F.... 8, .... .....,;m.ntll ......
oIFIpn 711 pr...nted an _ k """". Tho
nominal burlnl..,...lty, determined by the In..
lettion 01 tht snilhtli"", it p. -145,000" The
dooi., burl.. ..,...lIy 0- or die II_Ie ....
ad Nd, .ccordllll lOeq 2 and 8, will bI

..

_bIo

settlement vllue:s "Which 1ft closer to field

........

.,.,Jt.

N.sn. _ _ P'

(lUI

Whert Ittr ~I ufcly 1x1Of'1f. = 1.1, the reliability

Nf_tv coefflcien , '" 1.2 101 foundadons of buHdJnp
(I... pilo I............, 0/ brlcftos, .. pmiou!/y ......

~e

tioned. VlllUh

Spcdill Report 80-34 does not present iI method

for compu ting the amount of ~ttlement due to lhc
thawing of soil 001 Sldtes that " ... thaw settlement
problems shou ld be avoided by adopting the proper
foundation design approach for the conditions MId
by ttignlng for full stability control .. 22" The

or., vary rrom I." to 1.75), i1nd.,

11 I IIDmpcraQlre correlAtion coefftCienL

ThuI, lhc rltio of the- .allowable desWI to.dt of
the SNIP and 5R 11).34 is _mined by the 101.......
expression :
I Failure

IS

to~d

In SR 80-34 term inology.

A.... rQ.Q. Adfr re 80nd Sir ... in F'tIrmofto.1 (Ibllln!)

~9

____~'~,____J'~PC-__J'f~____1'~pC-__l'f,'____~~~oC-__~~~'----='?
40

80

Lood (!G.)
120

160

20011 10'

~ 0.20

-.

Of FoUl/t. Load

c 0.40

0.600!--~-!!---'----'!' --'----:,1::'.--'---:,I::.L-,---::.o
Tim. (day.'

5011 profile: 0-1 ft peat, 1-10.4 ft (bottom of pile) silt

Pile type: 8-ln. pipe, 36 fb/ft
Backfill around pJle: s1it-'NCI(er slurry
Pile II!f1gth: 10.9 fr
Avg
temp of frozen sol/: 19.ZOF
Length below surface: 2a4 ft
Embedment In frozen S1)1f: 16.1 ft
Looding Schedule: lQOfXJ Jb increments appl/UJ at 24-hr Intervals. The deflecllon sho....", for an Increment
Is that observed j ust prior to application of next Increment.
Note: Plk not ;sobted from soil in thaw zone.

COMPUTATION OF ALLOWABLE OESIGN LOAO

Failure fODd ~ 147,000 Ib
SiJrface artO of pile In permafrost - 5230 In. 2
Average adfreeze bond stress at failure: 147,000/5230- 28.1Ibf/ln. 1
Adjusting for 10,000 Ib/doy rote of loading (by Interpolation) average adfreeze bond stress at failure ~ 21.5
Assuming failure stress is 4{J1)6 ,eater than overage sustalnoble stress, overo~ sustalnoble adfreeze
strength - 21.5/1.4 z 15.3lbf/in. 1
Sustolnoble pile lood capoClty - 15.3 )( 5230" 80,000 Ib
Using a factor of safety - 25, al/o'tWble design lood - adjusted failure lood/FS .. 21.5 )( 5230/2.5 = 45,(}()() fb

Figure 7. Determlnotion o f pile bearing capacity. (From SR 80-34, Chop. 4, Fig. 4-80.) A and 8 are addltlonol
points.

16

and 1 SO% (or fo undations of buildings. The differ

ence mily be less if the different procedures used in
obtaining the experimenul curves ilre uke.n into

l 'L

O'r-__~'~__;'~-c6~~8
1" r:,:

account.

p". '4~.ooo lOt;

In the SR 80-34 example, the itatic load, applied

bV m'LaU Increments of t:J'1 10,000 lb .11 24-tlr intervals, constilUtes a step loading regime with the
rale of loadina C!qtQllo p ." 10,000 Ib/24 ht . It is
known !hat the failure load depends subsuntiaUv
upon the loading regime. A family of load-deformation curves (similar 10 Fig. 7) Cl therefore be ob~ined for the same soil conditions by varying the
rale of loading. Strictly speilking, none of the curves
produced by this type of experiment WIn be used to
determine the pile hearina cilpuitV since the mults
of tests under the step loading regime ClnOt be
directly lrilnsferred to the creep regime (the real
conditions under which piles are used).
On the othc:r hand, accordi", to the Soviet priCuce 7, me load is applied 10 I tesl pile by the increments ~I 0.2 to O.S Q, but the: durOlition of each
increment of loadina is Vl(jed. The nextl~ 41',+ I
Is applied if the lenlement (disp~menl) rate of
the Pile under the previous step load ~ nOI exceed
the conventionalllloWilble value 0 ... 0.2 mm/24 hr.
The test is stopped _hen the va-tical displacement
",Ie ilCCetcfates rapidly. 'The vollues of Q art determined approximately by cq 6. ThK test proc:edure7
Is probably ck>ser to the creep regime and therefore
the atKolutt values of nominil beMlng tap.)Cities of
piles determined by the SNiP may be less tha.n those
determined by the provisions of SR 80-34. However,
it ~o,,1d be IlOted that the. SNiP method also annat
be repufed as ytlsf.u:toty because it admits Yifia
!jon of the loacHteformation curves, d(!JJeoolng on
the allowu.le lim/( of the displ.u:emenl rolle of the
pile. Nellher method takes Into account lhe Struclure's lifetime, even though II is in essential variable
In the dermninition of be,uing cap.u:ity of footings
under both the SNiP,and SR ~34. Methods for
pile seulementanalYlis are not developed in either.
II would be olPPfopriate. inste-ad or perfOfming
one pile test, to perform tVlrO short ttnn tHts In
st(!JJ loading with different rales of loading

~D':'

____ _

''''0

Figure 8. Determ ination of the pile

Moring capacity according ( 0 rec

ommended Soviet practlce 7, A and

B are additional points.

p.

(311

. -- ' SF

L.

If ills.ueumod tholl' me sb'Ucture In question is a brid,e

founcbdon. and Ihe subwiltemperawre equak the
test temperature '., "' l), lhr oomfNrison of the
allowable toH, wUl be detennined by the rllio:

N" 145,000 x 3.27 . ~ .. 2.93

LII

147,000)( 1.1

Itr

kr

and lIIus it will depend upon Ihe number of piles

in the founct.tion (Toilble 1),

T..... I. RodoofaJl_pllololdsf...
_ _ - . ...... by the SNIP
SR 10-)4
(The _
..I.
ratio N4IL~ for huIIdtnJ foundltions with
""" _
of pO.. 112.44 lot k, 1.2.'
~

IN., ....

(L.,.

dP

P :. -

N_bl'ot'....
'" IN foundlttDn

> 20

20-11

10-6

'-I

.1110 N,.Jt"

2."

I.U

1.71

1.67

dr

=- Constant

The ~Iues of lo.d increments AP un be the same,

while the intervals of 41, _hid! arc constant for NCh
lest, musl be different (FiJ. 9 and 10). If it is assumed
for the firsl appro)ljlNhon, that the t01a1 piSe: foundation W!t1lement would eqtQl the \etlkmetU of the
single pile. eq 4 ukcs the form

Thtse raUos c:onwy the impression tholl' me

'fference btcweon the iPPfOIchct of the SNiP m
me SR WI be up to 100% for bridge (oundollions

17

0'

-------------

------

I
6P... _r :

<

.0

I
I
I
I
I

<>P,

"P,

I
I

'n

I"

Tim. 10 Foilur "

Figure 9. Diagram for tk termlning pile bearing capacity from

two tests with various rates of loading: P ,(0) and P2(b).

lonlltrm bcann, ujm:ity for step I~ctinl will be

siwn by the formula

."
,;

'.I=(1+n)B 1 Pi" fOf' P1 .. P1tJl

." .
i
z

where', is time to fillure KCOfdi.. tocq 32.

The ~meters B I and n gn be usily determined.
havin, (rom field lett dati. two nlues of fail. . . . . .

P,

(33)

0:

'" 'nTil",

and two times 10 failure

10 Foil",., t.

Figure 10. Diagram of long term pile bearing

copacltles at variOUS loading regimes: Constant !ood-P = Constant (a); Step Ioodlng-

where m .. the number of stepl. The value of nomlN.!

burin, gpacity of 01 pUo can be estbnated. dependna
pm tho ,truet'"" lifetime I is

P, " P,'-s,(b).

11,1 ".
Tt

p.(t) (

Comp.ulnc eq 32 mel 33, one can _ that for tho

..... flllu.. times .... bwlnl-'IY of .... plio
In """P c:ondItJons wi" be .... by. ,..".. of

..... S the penniaiIM ullimice value of founlb

tkln .,dement dependlns upon the type of struewre

land O. is the,.,.. ..... uldmale vwtkaI displace-

(1 +n)l/nthanitislnsteplodn... If .........
thit puame1lBr n,. 1.5 - 2, lite actual rado of allowollie _
on piles de_ned by SR 110-34 .... the
SNIP ...y In ......... be dose 10 ,.,Ity. '1110 pro.,.,... method CiII be oppIIed '" piles o f _
""""' .... _
..Il00 01 ................ the
dlmenslom do not differ . . .~y"""
of ....
tes. pile- Settlemen. 01 ...... piles ....... be de.....ined uoI,.lnformllion _ned".,., """ """
All Iht5e questions l/IO ,Iosety c;on..." wlttI tho

ment of .... pile.

The pile dilplacanent thit corre5POOck to the
inflecllon poIn. of .... _lion I".n - .
creep 10 terdlry tnIIIP on the list step of Ioadina un
&110 be ICC:eP1ed I llil.... giterion.
I. Is not dllt1cult to - ' 0 ..... 11. lor .....pIe.
plio Iona ..... boorina - , t y is _bed for con_.Ioodbyl _ _
'.-', p-n forP-Constant

(34)

(l2)

'8

- ;-

-_..................
"'...-"'"!i_-.N
- ...........
fIO",;Jii<ijjiiilliiilW<..-

LITERATURE CITED

and ,.. an criklria

In UIc _~ _ ...a.....
... _ " .... ~_I_.SR~34
d "'" _ _ doc-

1. Cnnstruction standards oind codes. Part I.

Gent'ral regulat ions. Chapter I. The sy)tem of
stand4(ds. SNiP 1 174, Stroyizdat, Moscow, 1975
(in Russian) .
2. List of the oIl1union tonSlructioo standard~ to
be in effcc:\ on August 1, 1978. Su oyizdat, Moscow,
1978 (In Russian).
3. Subsoil~ ,Ind foundations on pcrmafrosL Design
todc~. SNiP 11 1876. Stroyizda t, MosCOW, 1977
(in Ruuian) ,
4. Subsoil~ and foundations of buildings and muc
turCl on permafrost. Design codes. SNiP II B. 666.
Stroy1zdal, Mo~ow, 1967 (i n Ru ~si an) .
5. Design manwl. Subsojl~ and found.ltion~ on
permafro st. Stroyizdal, Moscow, 1969 (in Russian)
6. InStructions on design of founduions on wllne
and iccofich )Oils. SN 450-72. Sifoyizd<lt, MOM:ow,
1974 (In Russi ..n) .
7. Rec;ommcndcd practice for desIgn and construc
uon of pile fou nd alion~ in pl,jl~tlc frozen grounds.
RSN 41-72. Stroyizdal, MOSCOW, 1972 (In Russian).
8. Instr uct ions on design of n.- sidtntiallocations,
enterprises, buildlngs and structures In the Northern
Construction Zone . SN 353-66. Stroyizd3t, MO)tQw.
1967 (in Russian).
9. Subsoils of buildings and SlTUttures. Design
codes. SNiP \1 1574. Stroyizdal, Mosc;ow, 1975
(in Russian) .
10. Collecllon o f )tandards and rule) on design ,m d
construction of enterprises. buildings and structures
in the Northern Climate Zone, on permafrost and
under subfrerzing tempera tures. E)(tracti~ from
allunion standards. SUOyildiit. Moscow, 1978 (in

~...., . . . . _t.III: ... .-.afA

. ._Ios>,

_",..

1!I~

CONCLUSIONS

I. SR 8034 and the U.S.S.R. SNi P 111876

present methods of foundation dl.osign on permafros t
~sed on reeem knowledge of frozen $oil mechanics
d.nd engineering geocryology. AI thc silme time the
documents.He nol equivAlent. T hey differ in the
p urpo~cs

they pursue, Inc )COPC of the prob l c m ~

discussed, and thc methods of prcscntatioo of tho

m<lterial.
2. Adequate unified romlitutjvc equations for
frOlen ~il nave not bt.-cn establIshed, nor have thc
boun<bry problems been solved, so the prt!o(.nt state
or settlement 6nalyses of foundatIons on frozcn
srouncJ, exemplified in bolh SR 80-34 and the SNIP,
can be regarded as uruatls(ilclory. Hence, fun her
research is nceded In th is area and the accumulation
of daw from neld obscrvdtions should alX) be high
priority research.
3. Within thc contcxt of the dynamic and dc
vcloping state of thc ~rt, it may be concluded that
the approach to bearing capacity and settlrmcm
analy)c;, of foundat/Q ns cmployed in SR 80-34 is
morc conservativc than that of \.he SNiP.
4. The princi pal diffcrcnce between SR 80-34
And the SNiP Is in d e~ign methods and in a~sc~smcnt
and application of ap propriate val ues of the safety
(OiCtors. This c ircum ~ tan C(l lead~ to a substantial
di~crepancy in the dcterminatlon of dimensions of
footing fou nd"l;orIS and of bcarin&capacity o f pilc~.
In fd(;l neither of the mcthod~ employed for deter
m in ing pile bearing c:apaciti~ from field sta tic loading
tesb Ciln be reprded as s'Hbf4!CIOfY. MethodS for
pile setllcmen l 'lna ly5i~ arc nOl developed either.
S. Neither the SNiP nor the SR 80-34 method
for se ttlement .&nalysis contain identifiable ~fely
fOKtorS. They;arc contained in both codes, however,
in the form of variou$ unccrtlin assu mptio ns. It
would be appropriate to include a single economic
!oaf ely factor appHcable to settlcment .. na lysis, Such
a coc(r"icnt could Uike in to consideration thc econ
omic consequences of excessive se ltlrment of subsoils th .. t tould leold LO large c~1S for repair and rc'
cvnstruct10n of struc tures on permafrost.

Ru~siA n ).

11. Engincering survey for construction. Ua~ic regulalions. SNIP If -A 1369. Suoyizdat, Moscow.
1969 (in Russian) .
1'2. T.sytovich, N.A . (1975) The mcch~niGS of frozen
wound. New York : McGraw-Hili, Co.
13. Loads ilnd actions. Design cod~. SNiP 11-6-76.
Suoyiroa t, Moscow, 1976 (in Russia n).
14. s,yJes, F.H. (1968) Oeep o f frozen Qnds. U.S.
Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Lab
or;nory Teehttlul R~port 190.
IS. K.Jrlov, V.D. (1978) Determination orrelativc
(:ulcmmt of thawing frozen (lilY soils (ltanslatrd
from Russian). 5011 Mechanic!. and roundol/oo
EnginttJ'lng, vol. IS , no. 4.
16. Vy..lov, S.S., V.V. DokuchJyev .lind D.R.
Shcynkman (1976) Ground icc and iu.,icn soils as

19

zen soils. Research Proposal, contrac;l no. DAAR

2977.Q016. Part B. Cambridge: Massachusetts
Institute of Technology.
24. Fish, A.M. (1980) Kinetic nature of the long-term
strength of frOlen soils. Proceedings, 2nd Interna-

nruc;ture foundations. CRREL Draft T ranslation

737.
17. Manual for the dctermination of physical,
lhermophysical and mechanical properties of frozen
ground. Stroyizdat, Moscow, 1973 (in Russian).
18. Voytkovskiy, K.F. (1960) The mechanical
properties of ic;c. Moscow: U.S.S.R. Academy of
Sdenc;cs Publishing House (in Russian).
19. Votyakoy, tN. (1975) Frozen and thawing soil
physical and mechanical properties of Yakutiya.
Izdyo Nauka, Novosibirsk (in Russian).
20. Fish, A.M . (1976) Aroustic and pressuremeter
method of inyestigation of the rheological proper
ties of ice. Ph.D. thesis, Arctic and Antarc;tic; Scien
tifk Researc;h Institute, Leningrad, U.S.S.R. (Translated version being prepared as a CRREL publication.)
21. Vyalov, 5.5. (1980) Settlements of bearing
plates on plastic frOlen soils (translated from Russian).
Soli Mechanics and Foundotion EngineerIng, vol. 14,
no. 6.
22. LineH, K.A. and E.F. Lobacz (Eds.) (1980) De
sign and c;onstruc;tion of foundations in areas of deep
seasonal frost and permafrost. CRREL Special Report 80-34.
23. Fish, A.M. (1979) Mechanical properties of fro

tional Symposium on Ground Freezing, Norwegian

Institute of Technology, June 24-26, Trondhelm, p.
95-108.
25. Fish, A.M. OlInd F.H . SOliyles (1981) Acoustic;
emissions during crcep of frozen soils. In Acoustic
emissions in geotechnical engineering practice (V.P.
Drncvich and R.E. Gray, Eds.). A5TM STP 750.
American Society for Testing and Materials, p. 194205.
26. Fish, A.M. (1982) Deformation and failure
of frOlcn soils and ice at constant and steadily increasing stresses. In Proceedings of the Fourth

umodion Permafrost Conference, March 2-6, 1981,

Colgory, Canada. National Reseanh Council of
Canada.
27. Vyalov, 5.5., Yu.K. Zaretskiy, R.V. MilXimyOlik
and N.K. Pek<lrsbya (1973) Kinetics of structural
deformati on and failure of clays. In Proceedings of
the Eighth International Conference on Soil MechanIcs and Foundation Engineering, vol. 1, Moscow,

p.2.

20