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

net/publication/284586240

BEARING CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT OF SOIL USING BAMBOO MICROPILES

Article  in  International Journal of Plasma Science and Engineering · November 2010

CITATIONS READS
5 2,322

3 authors:

J. N. Jha Anil KUMAR Choudhary

Muzaffarpur Institute of Technology National Institute of Technology, Jamshedpur
57 PUBLICATIONS   617 CITATIONS    37 PUBLICATIONS   401 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Kulbir S Gill
Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College
32 PUBLICATIONS   456 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

PG thesis View project

Effect of moisture on in situ CBR of subgrade soil View project

All content following this page was uploaded by J. N. Jha on 25 November 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

BEARING CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT OF SOIL

USING BAMBOO MICROPILES

J.N.JHA1, A.K.CHOUDHARY2 and K.S.GILL3

1
Department of Civil Engineering, GNDEC, Ludhiana, Punjab, India
[email protected]
2
Department of Civil Engineering, NIT, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, India
[email protected]
3
Department of Civil Engineering, GNDEC, Ludhiana,Punjab, India ,
[email protected]

ABSTRACT: Load tests were conducted for three dimensional model footing in a
sand box using unreinforced sand subgrade and also after reinforcing the sand with
bamboo pile as vertical reinforcing elements. Reinforcements were placed laterally
around the footing only thus without disturbing the subgrade directly below the
footing base. The effect of length, spacing and lateral extent of reinforcement on
bearing capacity ratio has been discussed in the paper. A method has also been
suggested if bamboo is used as reinforcement in the field.

Keywords: Model tests; Soil confinement; Vertical reinforcement; Bearing capacity

ratio; Settlement ratio; square footing;

Introduction In recent years major research effort

has been applied on use of geotextile
The concept of reinforced earth for and geogrid soil improvements. Hence
increasing the bearing capacity of it appears possible to use semi-flexible
subgrade soil or to increase the nonhorizontal reinforcement in soil to
resistance for retaining structures by improve its load bearing capacity for
means of thin metal strips placed supporting shallow foundation. Basset
horizontally in layers held together by and Last (1978) investigated the
internal friction between the possibility of using non-horizontal
reinforcing strips and the material has reinforcing elements. The reinforcing
been confirmed both theoretically and tendons were introduced in the
experimentally by many investigators foundation soil itself but suggested
(Binquet and Lee 1975, Akinmusuru further work in this direction. Verma
and Akinbolade 1981). The biggest and Char (1986) evaluated the
disadvantage with horizontal efficiency of vertical reinforcing
alignment of reinforcement is that it elements in improving the sand
cannot be used in „In-Situ‟ subgrade and concluded that for a
construction. Such system requires given type of reinforcement the
large scale excavation below footing bearing capacity increases with the
which destroys the strength of soil increasing density of reinforcement,
developed with age. Further but the reinforcements were provided
compaction becomes essential after throughout the soil even below the
placing the reinforcing elements, which base of footing. Mahmoud and
may be costly both in terms of time Abdrabbo (1989) reported that the
and money. placement of one row of vertical non
extensible reinforcement (aluminum
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

strips) on either side of strip footing vertical form of reinforcements is more

resulted in improving the bearing indirect as compared to horizontal
capacity of subgrade and modified the form of reinforcement.
load displacement behaviour of Due to shortage of energy and
footing. Puri et al. (2005) also material and high cost of construction
reported significant improvements in operations, there is a need to search
the ultimate bearing capacity of lose for alternate or low cost materials.
and medium sand when flexible Among the many available
vertical reinforcements were placed construction materials, the fast
throughout the soil including the base growing replenishable biological
of footing. materials such as bamboo, if used for
In 1927 during the construction of a reinforcement, seems to be quite
subway in Japan arrow plates were attractive. Datye (1981) presented a
placed around the foundation to comparative evaluation of different
improve resistance and prevent lateral reinforcing materials (Table-1) and
displacements (Rao 1993). Sawwaf concluded that bamboo is the most
and Nazer (2005) reported that soil economical material and enormous
confinement by circular cylinder saving of energy is possible if used as
appreciably increased the bearing reinforcing material. Bamboo is found
capacity of circular footing. Due to in many parts of the world especially
decreasing availability of good in tropical and subtropical regions but
construction site and increasing civil very few information is available in the
engineering activities it has now literature regarding the application of
become an essential requirement to bamboo in geotechnical engineering.
make soil suitable to project and not In 1978 the first and perhaps only
the project to the soil and soil reported application of bamboo strip
confinement can be one possible for soil reinforcement in India for the
option of „In-Situ‟ ground improvement floor ore of a yard in Goa was reported
in such cases. The restraining effects by Datye (1981). Considering the cost
in the subgrade under the footing can and energy saving which can be
be provided by different methods derived by using bamboo as a
using different materials. Placing the reinforcing material, a series three
vertical reinforcing elements beyond dimensional model footing tests were
the footing or laterally around the conducted using bamboo pile as
footing is one such method for vertical reinforcements in sand to
strengthening the existing foundation know the beneficial effects of this
and if found effective may prove to be particular material on ultimate bearing
very beneficial for existing footing capacity of shallow square foundation.
where improvement is necessary due The vertical reinforcements were
to the apprehension of danger to the placed around the footing without
footing. Verma and Jha (1992) and Jha disturbing the subgrade directly below
(2007) based on their laboratory study the footing base. Spacing, length and
reported encouraging results when extent of reinforcing elements were
vertical reinforcing elements of GI wire considered as the variables in the
were placed beyond the footing base investigation. The primary objectives
without disturbing the subgrade just of these experiments were to examine
below the footing. Tatsuoka and Miki the effects of the variables on bearing
(1982) reported that the quantity of capacity and load settlement behavior
reinforcement required for vertical of reinforced sand.
form of reinforcement system is much Laboratory Model Tests
more than the horizontal form of Model Box, Footing and Test
system. This may be due to the fact materials
that the restraining of subgrade by
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

Three- dimensional model- footing this technique are 56 % and

tests were performed in a well 18.08kN/m3 respectively. The accuracy
stiffened square wooden box 1000 mm of sand placement and consistency of
x 1000 mm x 1000 mm. The sides of placement density during the raining
the box were braced with stiffeners to process in the tests were checked by
avoid lateral yielding during soil placing small cans of known volume at
placement and loading of the model three different locations in the box.
foundation. The loading system is After pouring, each can was carefully
mounted by a horizontal I steel beam excavated and density of the sample
supported on two columns which calculated. The results show that the
consists of a hand operated hydraulic obtained densities from the three
jack and precalibrated load ring. Since samples did not depend on the
the sand raining technique is used to position of the canes. The global
deposit the sand inside the tank, the density of the sand was also calculated
beam was designed to swing about by weighing the total sand used for
one end. Therefore the beam can be preparing the test bed in the box. The
swung out during deposition of the accepted soil beds satisfied the
sand from the sand raining box and following two conditions: the
returned back to the original loading difference in densities at three
position above the tank once the sand measured location was less than 1%
deposition is complete. The sand and the difference between global
raining box is made from wood and is density of the soil bed and the average
850 mm x 850 mm in plan and 100 density of the three measured values
mm in depth. The sand particles rain was less than 1.5 %. In most of the
from the box through a square grid of experiments reported earlier, strip
holes in the base plate. The height of footings were used, despite the fact
fall of sand raining can be changed up that rectangular and square footings
or down by using a manual winch. are used far more in practice.
The sand used in the study is medium Therefore a 15 mm thick square
to coarse sand, washed dried and footing of mild steel of size 125 mm x
sorted by particle size. It is composed 125 mm was selected for the
of rounded-to-subrounded particles. investigation. To avoid the boundary
The specific gravity of the soil particle effects during the tests, the ratio of
was determined by the pycnometer the size of box and size of footing was
method. Three tests were carried out kept as 8.0. The ratio of depth of soil
producing an average value of 2.671. and size of footing was also kept as
The maximum and minimum dry 8.0, which is in conformity with the
densities of the sand were found to be earlier reports available in literature.
19.87 and 16.26 kN/m3 and the Moreover square footing will minimize
corresponding values of the minimum the dimensional effects. Base of the
and maximum void ratios are 0.344 footing was made rough by gluing
and 0.641 respectively. The particle sand grains to the base. After
size distribution was determined by completion of the backfilling operation,
dry sieving method and the results are the sand on the top surface was
shown in Figure 1. The effective size levelled. The footing was placed on a
(D10), uniformity coefficient (Cu), and predefined alignment such that the
coefficient of curvature (Cc) for sand load from the jack and loading frame
were 0.16 mm, 3.875 and 0.735 would be transferred concentrically to
respectively. Test beds were prepared the footing. The load is transferred to
using raining technique at constant the footing through a circular ball,
height of fall 150 mm from top which was placed between the footing
surface. Relative density and unit and proving ring. Such an
weight of soil obtained by adopting arrangement produced a hinge which
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

allowed the footing to rotate freely as Ohashi (1983) suggested that the
it approached failure and eliminated simpler, perpendicular fiber
any potential moment transfer from reinforcement model is a satisfactory
the loading fixtures. mean approximation for predicting
Bamboo in the form of bamboo pile shear strength increase along a shear
has been used as a reinforcing surface crossed by randomly oriented
material though some difficulty was fibers (e.g.) a shear surface in a root
experienced in splicing the bamboos. permeated soils. Mahmoud and
Seasoned bamboo was procured from Abdrabbo (1989) studied the effect of
market and due care was taken during reinforcing element inclination with
splicing the bamboo so that the respect to vertical direction on bearing
diameter of the bamboo piles remains capacity ratio and reported a
uniform throughout the length. Skilled significant decrease in BCR with the
labourer involved in bamboo trade was increasing inclination of reinforcing
used for making bamboo piles. Since element. Therefore, it was decided
the durability of reinforcing material is that bamboo pile of required length
beyond the scope of present and diameter will be pushed vertically
investigation, no attempt was made to directly into the sand bed. Grids of a
apply any type of preservative thin sheet having different sizes and
treatment on bamboo pile. The required grid spacing were made. The
average diameter of the bamboo pile size of the sheet indicated extent of
(d) was kept as 12.5mm, thus keeping reinforcement. The sheets of different
d/B =10 throughout the investigation, sizes in the form of grid were placed
where B is the width of foundation. laterally around the square footing on
Three sets of bamboo pile having the leveled ground and bamboo piles
lengths (L) 100 mm, 150mm and were inserted into the subgrade
200mm were used during the study through the grid. Utmost care was
thus varying the L/B ratio as 0.8, 1.2 taken while pushing the piles so as to
and 1.6. For each set of pile length, maintain its verticality and was also
spacing of reinforcement (S) was ensured that the top of each
selected as 50 mm, 75 mm, and 100 reinforcements remain at the same
mm c/c thus making the S/B ratio as level. After placing the reinforcements,
0.4, 0.6 and 0.8. For each set of pile the sand was again leveled and
length and spacing four sets of extent checked with spirit level before placing
of reinforcement were selected. For the model footing. Placement of
example when L/B ratio was 0.8 and reinforcement in position became
S/B equal to 0.4, the extent of difficult once the length exceeds 200
reinforcement (R) chosen was 100 mm therefore the maximum length of
mm, 150 mm, 200 mm and 250 mm reinforcement considered in the study
respectively thus making the R/B ratio was up to 200 mm. For ordinary
as 0.8, 1.2, 1.6 and 2.0. R/B ratio for footings (without confinement)
other values of L/B and S/B ratios increasing the footing depth results in
have also been selected in the similar increasing the overburden pressure
manner and is given in Table-2 as test and hence increasing the bearing
variables. capacity. But under confined condition
Experimental Setup and Test when the footing is loaded, it settles
programme and the plastic state will be developed
Bassett and Last (1978) suggested until the point at which the system
that orientation of reinforcement starts behaving as one unit. Therefore
should be in the direction of principal increasing the embedment depth will
tensile strain in order to mobilize as affect only the initial part of the
much tensile resistance in the behaviour and after that ultimate load
reinforcement as possible. Grey and depends on surface area of soil
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

reinforcement system. Sawwaf and Apart from BCR another non-

Nazer (2005) also reported that the dimensional term bearing pressure
embedded depth of circular footing in ratio (BPR) has also been used and
a confined granular soil had no effect has been defined as the ratio of
on the response of footing cell system. bearing pressure at a given settlement
Therefore no attempt has been made for reinforced case (qa) to that of un-
in the present investigation to study reinforced case at the same settlement
the effect of embedded depth of (qao) The settlement value selected for
footing under confinement of vertical the present investigation is 0.025B i.e.
reinforcements. The loading 3 mm.
arrangement and reinforcement BPR = qa/qao
pattern have been shown in Figure 2 Again the footing settlement has been
and 3 respectively. Load was applied expressed by a non-dimensional term
carefully to the footing through known as settlement ratio (SR) and
hydraulic jack and recorded by a has been defined as
proving ring installed between the jack SR = Se/So
and the test footing. The footing was Where Se is the settlement of footing
loaded at constant rate of 1mm/min corresponding to the allowable bearing
until an ultimate state was reached. pressure, (calculated from ultimate
The ultimate state was defined as that bearing capacity of reinforced case
state at which settlement continued to after taking the factor of safety as 3)
increase without any further increase and So represents the settlement for
in load or where there was an abrupt un-reinforced case.
change in load-settlement relationship. The measured ultimate bearing
The settlement of the footing was capacity for the plain sand of 125 mm
recorded by dial gauge fixed with footing width is 47 kN/m2. This has
adapter and resting on either side of been used as a base value for
the footing. The settlement reported comparison with the other cases
are the average of the two dial gauge considered in the investigation.
readings, which were nearly identical It can be seen from the Table-3 that
until the ultimate state was reached. the installation of bamboo piles as
vertical reinforcements appreciably
Results and Discussion improved the bearing capacity of the
footing. Comparing the results of
Table-3 shows the test results for the Table-3 it can be seen that soil
different variables considered in the confinement by vertical reinforcements
investigation. Plots between pressure improved the bearing pressure of un-
and settlement were drawn for reinforced case from 47 kN/m2 to 97
different cases and the ultimate loads kN/m2 for reinforced case, when S/B,
at failure were determined using R/B and L/B ratios of the vertical
double tangent method. The bearing reinforcements are 0.40, 1.2 and 0.8
capacity improvement of soil due to respectively, whereas the
vertical reinforcement is represented corresponding settlement ratios (SR)
by a non-dimensional factor, called the for the un-reinforced and reinforced
bearing capacity ratio (BCR). This cases are 1.0 to 0.73. Therefore it can
factor is defined as the ratio of the be concluded that, in cases where
footing ultimate load with vertical excessive settlement is controlling
reinforcement (q) to the footing factor in determining the allowable
ultimate load in tests without bearing capacity, vertical
reinforcement (qo). reinforcement around footing may
BCR = q/qo significantly reduce the settlement
ratio for the same level of bearing
load.
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

plotted against another non

Effect of Spacing of Reinforcing dimensional parameter L/B. The length
Element of reinforcing elements (L) has been
Figure 4 shows the effect of spacing of varied from 0.8B to 1.6B and the
reinforcing elements (S/B) on BCR for spacing/footing width (S/B) ratio of
different value of extent of reinforcement is also varied from 0.40
reinforcements (R/B) when the to 0.80 but the R/B ratio is maintained
normalized length of reinforcing constant and is equal to 0.8. It can be
elements (L/B) is kept constant and is observed from the curve that for a
equal to 1.6 in the present case. It can given value of S/B increase in the
be observed from the curves that BCR length of reinforcement increases the
decreases with the increase in spacing BCR. At R/B =0.8 and S/B = 0.40 if
of reinforcing elements and vice versa. normalized length (L/B) changes from
The increase in BCR is 3.0 times as 0.8 to 1.6 then the value of BCR also
compared to the un-reinforced case if increases from 1.38 to 1.74. Similar
the soil is being confined by vertical effect of length of reinforcing elements
reinforcement with R/B ratio of 2.0 on bearing capacity ratio was observed
and S/B ratio of 0.40 respectively in other tests. Increasing the length of
(Table-3). Again if the normalized reinforcing element results in
value of extent of reinforcements (R/B increasing the embedded part of
= 1.6) is kept same and when S/B reinforcements in the stable
ratio is increased from 0.40 to 0.80 underlying soil , leading to greater
then the BCR decreases from 2.72 to resistance to the lateral movement of
1.89 (Table-3). The increase in bearing soil under the footing. In the present
capacity of footing is due to the investigation the maximum
interruption of the reinforcing improvement in bearing capacity of
elements to the failure plane and may subgrade occurs when the length of
be explained for the following two reinforcement is 1.6 times footing
reasons. The first is that when spacing width. Installation of reinforcing
of the reinforcing elements is elements longer than 1.6B poses
increased, the number of reinforcing problem during placement like
elements per unit length of footing maintaining the verticality of
width decreases thus the clear reinforcing elements, therefore no
distance between the reinforcement attempts were taken to increase the
increases allowing more soil to migrate length of reinforcement beyond this
between the reinforcing elements and length in the present investigation.
larger movement of soil occur under Puri et al. (2005) advocated that the
the footing. Again for a smaller preferable length of reinforcement
spacing of reinforcing elements the should be 1.5 times the footing width.
components of reinforcement
resistance to lateral movement Effect of Extent of Reinforcing
attributed to arching effect is greater Rows from the Edge of Footing
leading to a decrease in lateral Figure 6 shows that for a given
movement of soil and hence increase normalized length (L/B = 1.6) and
in the bearing capacity. spacing of reinforcing element (S/B)
BCR increases with the increase of
Effect of Length of Reinforcing extent of reinforcement (R/B). When
Element R/B increases from 0.8 to 2.0, BCR
A typical plot showing the effect of increases from 1.74 to 3.02 for S/B =
length of reinforcing elements on 0.4 and L/B = 1.6. It appears that
bearing capacity ratio (BCR) is shown when lateral extent of reinforcements
in Figure 5 in which BCR a non- increases these reinforcing elements
dimensional parameter has been offer larger resistance against the
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

lateral displacement of soil underneath tests in the laboratory. Based upon the
the footing and an arching effect of experimental test results following
soil is developed between the conclusions can be drawn:
reinforcements and consequently a 1. Soil confinement by bamboo
complete sand confinement situation is piles in the form of vertical
achieved. But it is also important to reinforcement has a significant
realize that merely doubling the effect on improving the
normalized value of extent of behaviour of square footing.
reinforcement does not increase the The bearing capacity ratio was
BCR in same proportion. found to increase by a factor of
3.0 times as compared to the
Suggested Procedure if Bamboo un-reinforced case.
used as Reinforcement in the field: 2. In cases where structures are
The following considerations should be very sensitive to settlements,
borne in mind while using bamboo as a soil confinements by vertical
reinforcing material or for any other reinforcements laterally around
engineering applications: the footing can be used to
1. All bamboo used for engineering obtain the same allowable
purpose should be seasoned attaining bearing pressure at a much
an age of approximately 3 to 6 years. lower settlement.
If possible use the bottom part of the 3. Bearing capacity ratio (BCR) is
seasoned bamboo culm because it dependent on spacing, length
gives higher strength. and extent of reinforcing
2. The best time for harvest of a elements and based upon the
bamboo is from late summer to mid- experimental results following
autumn, because at that time the combination of reinforcement is
natural moisture content of bamboo is suggested for deriving
low, and therefore the swelling- substantial improvement in
shrinkage potential is low. bearing capacity.
3. Sulphur-sand treatment technique (i) Spacing of vertical
of bamboo is low cost and simple to reinforcement used
apply and will give higher strength and should be about 0.40
low water absorption potential. times the width of
4. In using bamboo for existing footing.
structures, a vertical arrangement is (ii) The length of
desirable. In the field, a hole should be reinforcement used
drilled slightly larger than the bamboo should be 1.6 times
and filled with lime or bentonite width of footing.
around the bamboo strips or poles, (iii) The extent of
thereby forming lime-bamboo pile reinforcement should
foundations. The materials be 2.4 to 3.0 times
surrounding the bamboo should be width of footing.
well compacted to minimize the voids 4. The ratio of diameter of
and reduce possible decay. reinforcing rods to the particles
for a field installation is likely to
be different, further studies on
Conclusions bigger model or numerical
analysis is necessary to
The beneficial effect of using bamboo quantify the parameters for
pile as vertical reinforcing elements in actual design conditions.
improving the bearing capacity of sand
subgrades have been demonstrated
through a series of small scale footing
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

References subgrades,” Candian Geotechnical

Journal, Vol.26, pp 154-159
[9] Puri, V.K., Hsiao, J.K. & Chai, J.A.
[1] Akinmusuru, J.O.,and Akinbolade, J.A.,
(2005) “Effect of vertical reinforcement
(1981) “Stability of loaded footings on
on ultimate bearing capacity of sand
reinforced soil,” Journal of the
subgrades” EJGE, 10G
Geotechnical Engineering Division,
[10] Rao, B.G. (1993) “Behavioural
ASCE, Vol. 107, No. GT6, pp 819-827
prediction and performance of
[2] Bassett, R.H. and Last, N.C., (1978)
structures on improved ground and
“Reinforcing earth below footing and
search for new technologies” Indian
embankments,” Proceedings,
Geotechnical Journal, 23(1), pp 1-194
Symposium on Earth Reinforcement,
[11] Sawwaf, M.E. and Nazer, A. (2005)
ASCE, Pittsburg, pp 202-231
“Behaviour of circular footings resting
[3] Binquet, J. and Lee, K.L. (1975)
on confined granular soil” Journal of
“Bearing capacity tests on reinforced
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
earth slab” Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering, Vol. 131, No.3, pp 359-
Engineering Division, ASCE, 101(12),
366
pp 1241-1255
[12] Tatsuoka, F. and Mikki, G. (1982)
[4] Datye, K.R. (1981) “Simpler technique
“Fundamental experiments on earth
for ground improvements” Geotechnical
reinforcement and practical uses of
Engineering- Indian Experiences, A
root pile method in Japan,”
Compilation of IGS Annual
Proceedings, Symposium on Rock and
Lectures:1978-1992, IGS, New Delhi,
Soil Improvement including Geotextile
pp 97-156
Reinforced Earth and Modern Piling
[5] Gray, D.H. and Ohashi, H. (1983)
Method, Bangkok, pp D-2-1-D2-28
“Mechanics of fibre reinforcement in
[13] Verma, B.P. and Char, A.N.R. (1986)
sand,” Journal of Geotechnical
“Bearing capacity tests on reinforced
Engineering, ASCE, Vol.109, No.3, pp
sand subgrade,” Journal of
335-353
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCe,
[6] Jha, J.N. (2007) “Effect of vertical
Vol.112, pp 701-706
reinforcement on bearing capacity of
[14] Verma, B.P. and Jha, J.N. (1992)
footing on sand” Indian
“Three dimensional model footing tests
[7] Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 37, No.1, pp
for improving subgrades below existing
64-78
footings,” Proceedings, International
[8] Mahmoud, M.A. and Abdrabbo, F.M.
Symposium on Earth Reinforcement
(1989) “Bearing capacity tests on strip
Practice, Fukuoka, pp 707-711
footing resting on reinforced sand
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

Table-1 Comparative Evaluation of Reinforcing Materials (Datye, 1981)

(a) Characteristics
Characteristics Bamboo Polypropylene Polyethylene
Poor Good High Low High Low P.V.C.rigid
variety variety density density density density
Specific - 0.7 0.9 - 0.97 - 1.35-1.50
Gravity
U.T.S. Kg/cm2 1000 2000 21000 1000 260 150 470-710
Elongation at - - 20 - 500 600 -
break

(b) Costs
Bamboo Polypropylene Mild High
steel tensile
bars steel
2
UTS Kg/cm 1500 6000 5200 -
Yield Kg/m2 1200 - 3000* 12000
2
Allowable stress Kg/cm 600 3000 1400 9000
Cost/liter Rs. 3 60 28 60
**Equivalent Sectional area cm2 2.5 0.5 1 0.16
Cost of 1000cm length with equivalent 7.5 30 30 9.6
area
Cost ratio 0.25 1 1 0.32
**Area of a member having strength equal to a mild steel section with an area of
1cm2
*Average value of a commercial grade

Table-2 Variable of Study

B = Width of footing, L = Length of reinforcement, S = Spacing of reinforcement,
R = Extent of reinforcement

B (mm) L/B S/B R/B

125 0.8 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 0.8, 1.2, 1.6, 2.0
1.2 0.6, 1.2, 1.8, 2.4
1.6 0.8, 1.6, 2.4, 3.2
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

Table- 3 Test Results

Sr. L/B S/B R/B Ultimat BCR Bearing BPR Settlement S.R.
no. e (q/qo pressure (qa/qao at allowable (Se/
bearing ) at ) load with So)
capacity 0.025B F.O.S. =
(kN/m2) settleme 3.0
nt (at 3
mm)
Un-reinforced
1. 47 1.0 12.0 1.0 4.5 1.0
Reinforced
2. 0.8 0.4 0.8 65 1.38 20 1.67 3.5 0.7
7
3. 0.8 0.4 1.2 97 2.06 28 2.37 3.3 0.7
3
4. 0.8 0.4 1.6 116 2.47 40 3.33 3.0 0.6
7
5 0.8 0.4 2.0 126 2.68 55 4.58 2.5 0.5
5
6. 0.8 0.6 0.6 58 1.23 24 2.0 2.8 0.6
2
7. 0.8 0.6 1.2 80 1.70 32 2.67 2.7 0.6
0
8. 0.8 0.6 1.8 106.5 2.26 42 3.5 2.65 0.5
9
9. 0.8 0.6 2.4 113 2.40 52 4.33 2.55 0.5
7
10. 0.8 0.8 0.8 53 1.13 23 1.92 2.85 0.6
3
11. 0.8 0.8 1.6 76 1.62 33 2.75 240 0.5
3
12. 0.8 0.8 2.4 89 1.89 40 3.33 2.35 0.5
2
13. 0.8 0.8 3.2 101 2.15 46 3.84 2.25 0.5
0
14. 1.2 0.4 0.8 70 1.49 22 1.83 3.3 0.7
3
15. 1.2 0.4 1.2 103 2.19 29.5 2.46 3.1 0.6
9
16. 1.2 0.4 1.6 119 2.53 42 3.5 2.9 0.6
4
17. 1.2 0.4 2.0 131 2.78 47 3.92 2.4 0.5
3
18. 1.2 0.6 0.6 67.5 1.44 29 2.42 2.7 0.6
19. 1.2 0.6 1.2 96.5 2.05 37 3.08 2.6 0.5
8
20. 1.2 0.6 1.8 106 2.25 46 3.83 2.2 0.4
9
21. 1.2 0.6 2.4 123 2.62 58 4.83 1.85 0.4
1
22. 1.2 0.8 0.8 66 1.40 28 2.33 2.0 0.4
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

4
23. 1.2 0.8 1.6 79 1.68 36 3.0 1.8 0.4
4
24. 1.2 0.8 2.4 100 2.13 48 4.0 1.6 0.3
5
25. 1.2 0.8 3.2 107 2.27 56 4.67 1.5 0.3
3
26. 1.6 0.4 0.8 82 1.74 28.5 2.37 2.9 0.6
4
27. 1.6 0.4 1.2 115 2.45 42 3.5 2.5 0.5
5
28. 1.6 0.4 1.6 128 2.72 50 4.16 2 0.4
4
29. 1.6 0.4 2.0 142 3.02 64 5.33 1.5 0.3
3
30. 1.6 0.6 0.6 74 1.57 31 2.58 2.7 0.6
31. 1.6 0.6 1.2 107 2.27 41 3.42 2.2 0.4
9
32 1.6 0.6 1.8 123 2.62 50 4.16 2.0 0.4
4
33. 1.6 0.6 2.4 133 2.83 63 5.25 1.6 0.3
5
34. 1.6 0.8 0.8 67 1.42 24.5 2.04 2.4 0.5
3
35. 1.6 0.8 1.6 89 1.89 38 3.17 2.2 0.4
8
36. 1.6 0.8 2.4 107 2.27 50 4.17 1.7 0.3
8
37. 1.6 0.8 3.2 121 2.57 58 4.83 1.6 0.3
5
 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

Winch
120 Wire

100 Raining Box

Model
Footing
Percent finer (%)

80

Model Hydraulic
60 Footing Jack Dial
Gauge
40 Manunal
Winch
20
Soil
Test Tank
0
0.1 1 10 Loading
Grain size (mm) Frame

Base Plate

Fig. 1: Grain Size distribution of sand

3.5
B= 125 mm
L/B=1.6
LOAD 3
FOOTING
B R
2.5
R/B=0.8
2
L

R/B=1.2
BCR

R/B=1.6
1.5
RENFORCEEMENT
R/B=2.4
LEGEND FOR RENFORCEEMENT 1
R-EXTENT
L-LENGTH
SAND S-SPACING 0.5

(SECTIONAL ELEVATION) 0
0 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
S/B

Fig. 4: BCR vs S/B ratio

S

2
B=125 mm
1.8 R/B= 0.8
1.6

1.4
1.2
R S/B=0.4
BCR

1
PLAN S/B=0.8
0.8
(THREE DIMENSIONAL CASE)
0.6

0.4
0.2
Fig. 3:Reinforcement pattern
0
0 0.8 1.2 1.6
L/B

Fig, 5: BCR vs L/B ratio

Fig. 2: Experimental set-up

 ACSGE-2009, Oct 25-27, BITS Pilani, India

3.5 B=125 mm
L/B=1.6
3

2.5

2 S/B=0.4
BCR

S/B=0.6
1.5 S/B=0.8

0.5

0
0 0.6 0.8 1.2 1.6 1.8 2 2.4 3.2
R/B

Fig. 6: BCR vs R/B ratio

View publication stats