See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/318745635

Estimation of Hydrostatic Force: A Review for Realistic Approach

Conference Paper · January 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 63

2 authors:

Prabhakar Gundlapalli Rajiv Ranjan

Nuclear Power Corporation of India ltd. 5 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   
13 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Indian Classical Music and Dance View project

Energy Conservation and Alternative Source View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Prabhakar Gundlapalli on 28 July 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (I), Mangalore Centre
A3C – 12: AWARDS, CONVENTION & CONSULTANTS COLLOQUIUM
January 11-12, 2013, Mangalore, India

Estimation of Hydrostatic Force: A Review for Realistic Approach

Prabhakar Gundlapalli, Rajiv Ranjan

Addl. Chief Engineer, Dy. Chief Engineer,
Fellow-IEI,
Email: gprabhkar@npcil.co.in
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited, Mumbai - India. PIN 400094
Abstract

Estimation of hydrostatic force on underground structures is one of the important loads to be

considered for detailed design, and play a major role on the overall economy of the structure.
Present practice of taking full hydrostatic pressure under large rafts may lead to uneconomical
design. Hence, realistic estimation of ground water table, pressure due to hydrostatic head, and
the force acting on the structures is of significance. Combination of ground water table at
finished ground level, combined with other critical loads, say, severe / extreme earthquake may
lead to unrealistic forces, though such condition may not arise during the life of the structures.

1. Introduction: Buildings with basements are normally provided with raft foundation of
adequate thickness. When the basement itself is in multiple floors, depth of foundation will
be in the order of 6 to 10 meters. Typical example is, underground multi-level basement
parking for mega shopping complexes. Traditional design approach is to consider
hydrostatic uplift due to the ground water present at the site under normal conditions, as
observed during the entire year, with it’s variation to envelope the uncertainties involved in
estimating the depth of water table from natural ground level.

For important structures, some of the designers consider ground water upto finished ground
level, to meet any kind of uncertainty, and make the design conservative. However, there is
no codal provision for such consideration, and thus is solely depends on the designer’s
prerogative.

2. Hydrostatic Pressure: The pressure under the raft solely depends on a couple of factors, viz.,
density of the water, and depth of ground water table. Mathematically,

: density of water
h: depth of ground water table from natural ground level.
H: Total hydrostatic force
l&b: Length and width of the building in plan.
W: Total downward loads due to dead load, live load, other incidental loads
 Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (I), Mangalore Centre
A3C – 12: AWARDS, CONVENTION & CONSULTANTS COLLOQUIUM
January 11-12, 2013, Mangalore, India

Thus, conventionally, the force is estimated as, H = * h * l * b …………….. (1)

However, certain conservative assumptions lead to overestimation of hydrostatic force,

and thus making the design of the building or structure as uneconomical.

Firstly, the above equation (1) is valid, only when the structure is floating in water, such
as, floating restaurants in lakes, and only water is present all around the structure below the
free water surface. There will not be any support from the bottom of the lake, to keep the
structure in floating condition. In such a case, entire self weight of the structure, live load
and other loads due to any equipment, or incidental loads are balanced, entirely by
hydrostatic uplift. In other words, H > W, which keeps the building in floating condition. All
the rules of fluid mechanics are valid in such case, and the assumptions thus are applicable in
-toto.

3. Design of Nuclear Power Plant Structures: Normal structures are founded on competent
strata below ground, and after the structure is fully constructed, the area around the building
is backfilled. In such a condition, the rules of fluid mechanics are not applicable, hence
cannot be applied for soil founding media to estimate the hydrostatic pressure, even under
fully saturated soil condition.

All the safety related structures of Nuclear Power Plant are analyzed and designed for
various normal, severe and extreme environmental loads and their possible load
combinations. The analysis and design is being carried out as per various applicable codes,
such as AERB, ASME etc.

Out of the considered load combinations for such detailed analysis and design, some of
the combination includes Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) / Operating Basis Earthquake
(OBE) and Ground Water Table (GWT) at Finished Ground Level (FGL). This assumption
leads to full hydrostatic below the raft at founding level. This assumption is quite
conservative, thus penalizing the structures, specially the large rafts of various safety related
structures, viz., Nuclear Building, Control Building, Station Auxiliary Buildings, Waste
Management Plant, various safety related pump houses and electrical houses. Rafts of these
structures are founded at depth, varying
from 5 to 12 meters below FGL, and thus
leading to a hydrostatic pressure of 5 to 12
ton/sq.m, acting upwards, on the raft.

4. Design Conditions: When the structure is

founded on rock, three of the design
conditions need to be considered to keep
the structure in safe conditions. These are
explained in detail further.

a) When W >> H, i.e the total vertical

downward weight is very large and there is no risk of floatation of the building under any
condition during it’s service life. This is shown in Figure-1.
 Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (I), Mangalore Centre
A3C – 12: AWARDS, CONVENTION & CONSULTANTS COLLOQUIUM
January 11-12, 2013, Mangalore, India

b) When W and H are comparable, i.e., the balancing hydrostatic pressure is nearing the
vertical downward force, there could be a risk due to flotation, when W <= H. In such
case, theoretically, floatation should take place, and the vertical displacement can be
estimated by u = (H-W)/(l*b). At such displacement, the building should be stable, and
floating above a water layer of thickness ‘u’.

c) When soil is fully saturated: In such situation, the pore water pressure develop in the
voids of the soil, and due to the nature of incompressible nature of water at this pressure,
water present in the pores try to dissipate the pressure through lateral movement through
inter-connected pores, till the excess pore water pressure reduces to zero

d) However, in routine buildings, which are founded on soil, additional factors of safety
exist, due to a) friction between backfilled soil around basement walls, b) resistance from
soil wedge failure surface, due to uplift of building, and c) contact pull out resistance
between soil and PCC or PCC and Foundation mat. Considering these forces for stability
check, will enhance the available factor of safety and keep the structure in safe condition,

Loose sands and cohesionless soils may have voids, whose volume depends on the
gradation of the soil, and in-situ void ratio below the foundation raft. With progressive
construction, the void ratio will decrease further from the virgin soil condition, and over the
time, consolidation takes place and settlement occurs.

5. Realistic Scenario: When the vertical downward force is more than the hydrostatic uplift
force, the difference of these two forces is resisted at the contact are of foundation mat and
sub-base strata. Even with adequate voids in the soils, the net area of soil solids (gross area –
void area) will share the vertical load.

In absence of in-situ void ratio values, a conservative estimate of void cross section area
(as a percentage of gross area of foundation) at the bottom of the foundation may be taken
for design calculations. Hydrostatic pressure due to water table will act only on the area of
voids, and thus reduces the uplift pressure significantly. This force can be considered to act
on the bottom of the raft for detailed structural response calculations (in terms of shear force
and bending moment in the base raft).

6. Modified Design Methodology: With the above realistic assumptions, structures and their
foundations are subjected to lesser forces due to hydrostatic forces. This will lead to
economical design of the foundation raft also. However, these assumptions need to be
proved with adequate experimental measurements, and supported by analytical calculations.
Till such time, present conservative methodology can be used for day to day design purpose.

7. Probabilistic Safety Assessment: Assuming ground water table (GWT) at ground level is a
highly conservative assumption, and hence to be used cautiously. Designers are at their
liberty to use most probable level of GWT in place of GWT at ground level. A detailed PSA
can also be carried out to assess the probability of exceedance of GWT level above the
average GWT level, based on the past history.
 Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (I), Mangalore Centre
A3C – 12: AWARDS, CONVENTION & CONSULTANTS COLLOQUIUM
January 11-12, 2013, Mangalore, India

This can be projected for a return period of 500 to 1000 years, when the design life is taken
as 50 years. Thus, the return period is 10 to 20 times more than the design life of the
structures.

8. Case Study of Nuclear Power Plant: Conservatively, assuming that the site is fully flooded
for a period of one day in a year, due to extreme rains, on the sloping ground and storm
water drainage is not possible, and ground water table is at FGL, the probability of
occurrence of such extreme hydrological event being considered in the design is 2.7*E-3.

The probability of occurrence of SSE is once in 10,000 years, or around 2.7*E-7 per day.
This earthquake may last about 30 to 40 seconds, with peak acceleration occurring for about
4 to 5 seconds only. Thus the combined probability of occurrence of SSE together with
GWT at FGL works out to be 7.29*E-10.

The probability of occurrence of OBE is once in 100 years, or around 2.7*E-5. This
earthquake may last about 30 to 50 seconds, with peak acceleration occurring for about 4 to
5 seconds only. Thus the combined probability of occurrence of OBE together with GWT at
FGL works out to be less than 0.729*E-7.

The peak ground motion occurs for about 4 to 5 seconds, thus generating loss of contact
of raft (which is limited to 33%) with the founding media for a very short time of about a
couple seconds. Ground water gushing into the wedge shaped gap of 1.0mm to 2.0mm for
this 33% portion of the total area of raft, and thus generating full hydrostatic pressure within
this short time to destabilize by overturning or floatation or loss of contact, seems to be
unrealistic and highly conservative, hence needs a re-look.
Combining two such extreme environmental events, i.e. GWT at FGL with SSE / OBE,
with very low probability of combined occurrence as indicated above, seems to be quite
unrealistic situation, particularly in the case of arid zones.

9. Design Solutions: Various design options are in practices by consulting engineers, based on
the sub-surface geotechnical conditions, safety margins needed for the structure under
consideration, functional requirement, economy etc. Some of them are indicated below,

a) Use of projection beyond the structure boundary. This will help in taking the weight of
soil backfill above this projection. The water pressure is 1.0 t/sq.m per meter depth,
whereas, the soil is in the range of 2.0 t/sq.m. However, this has one disadvantage, as, the
projection need to be designed for full vertical shear force, and may prove uneconomical
when the depth of foundation is large.

b) Use of mass concrete to mobilize self weight. This may, at best, add additional 1.5 t/sq.m
per meter of extra thickness of raft at the basement. Economics need to be worked out
carefully, before designing such additional thickness, to ensure safety of structure against
flotation under a hypothetical condition, which may not be seen by the structure during
it’s life time.
 Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (I), Mangalore Centre
A3C – 12: AWARDS, CONVENTION & CONSULTANTS COLLOQUIUM
January 11-12, 2013, Mangalore, India

c) Use of Rock Anchors. When the structural configuration is such, that, additional
thickness of raft cannot be provided, design of raft with rock-anchors become
mandatory. This may be uneconomical, considering the overall cost of the scheme.

The holes drilled in the founding medium (rock) need to be grouted appropriately to
avoid ingress of water into the voids. In addition, corrosion of rock anchor may become
an issue, even after grouting the hole drilled for the anchors, as the grouting operation is
totally blind in the founding media, and may not be 100% fool-proof.

10. Conclusions: Based on the above, the following conclusions can be drawn.

a) Hydrostatic force estimation cannot be neglected for the detailed design of

underground structures, subjected to saturation / submergence condition due to
ground water table and / or external flooding (due to various reasons).
b) Estimation of most probable ground water table level play a key role in estimating
the hydrostatic force on the underground portion of the structures.
c) Considering ground water table at finished ground level appears to an unrealistic
assumption, and may lead to uneconomical design
d) Precise estimation of hydrostatic pressure and the uplift force based on in-situ void
ratio of founding medium may lead to realistic design
e) For the structures having fragmented or highly weathered rock as founding medium,
the full hydrostatic force may not get mobilizes, as there will be only seepage
pressure on certain portion of the raft.
f) Various design solutions can be worked out based on the functional and system
requirements, economics and in-situ conditions of founding strata.

g) Detailed experimental programmed will certainly help in estimating the hydrostatic

force in realistic manner, thus leading to economic designs.

View publication stats