THE INDIAN ROADS CONGRESS

Paper No. 238

CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DESIGN AND

SINKING OF WELL FOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIDGE PIERS

BY
B Balwant Rao 8 C. Muthuswamv

(Reprint from the Journal of the Indian Roads Congress.

Volume XXYII-3, August, 7963 end Volume XXVIIS.
July. 1965)

(Plus Packing B Postage)

Pubfished in :1963
F;-I reprint incorporating discussion published in : 1966
Reprinted in July. 1970
Reprinted in September, 1974
Reprinted in September, I982
Reprirtted :~ u ~ u i1996
t,

The Indian Roads Congress as a body does not hold

itself responsible for ltatements made, or for opinions expressed.
in the Paper and the Discussion thereon.

The Rights of Publication and of Translation are reserved.

 Paper No. 238'
"CONSIDERATIONS IN THE DESIGN AND SINKING OF
WELL FOUNDATIONS FOR BRIDGE PIERS''
BY
B. RALWANTRAO, t B.e.
and
tt YB.E,.,
C. M ~ J ~ J S W A M M.S. (WISCONSIN)

CONTENTS

Introduction
Forces Acting on Well Foundations
Scour Around Wells
Property of Materials in which a
Well is likely to rest
Well Shapes
Evaluation of Lateral Earth Support to
Well Foundations
Design of Well Steining
Design of Well Curb and Cutting Edge
Design of a Well Cap
Materials for Construction of Wells
Sinking of Wells and Its Problems
Testing of Well Foundations
Conclusions
SYNOPSS
Collecting information fr?m different sou- and giving the e-cl~p Of
the Authors in this Paper, it I S s m e d to focus anentlon of the E n m a r s On
the procedure for design and sinking of wells for foundation of bridges.
Tho Paper deals with the subject both from considerations of d e d m .ad
d d requirements and includes suggestiona of the Authors.
This Paper docs not represent the views of the Cwaulcial Engfne8r
(Road Development). Ministry of Transport, Roads Wing.
A u v s of th&Pepcr were awarded e Indian Roads CoaensMcdal;
epuly ridges ccr. Addl. ~ircctorfeeneral(Bridges) (Rctd.) M l n b l n
of Shippin &Transport (Roads Win ) Government of India.
t)~ivisiooa? Enginem. Consultant. !dads Wine. Government oflqdb
[now Director of Designs (Ports), Ministry of Transport & Avhtron.
Transport Wing, Ncw Delhi].
1
2 BALWANTRAO & MUTHUSWAMY
ON

I . INTRODUCTION

1.1. By far the most common type of bridge foundations in

India is the well foundations.
1.2. In India, most types of river beds, known t o geology.
ranging f r o s the bare basalt rock t o the apparently bottomless
depths of silt, clay and sand are met with. The foundation wells ho-ve
t o be carried down to suitable bed and to such depths which cannot
be scoured out.
1.3. In the design of well foundation, it is therefore, necessary
to correctly know the following :
(i) maximum likely scour depth,
(ii) minimum grip length required.
(iii) base pressure, and
(ivj stresses in the steining.
1.4. The design of wells and their shapes are governed by their
mas3iveness and ability to resist vibrations, vertical and lateral
loads.
1.5. In the days when materials were cheap, the accent was on
designing robust and heavy ells which made their sinking easy. To
effect economy, refinen~ents are now being introduced through the
application of the principles of soil mechanics and quality control.

2. FORCES ACTING ON WELL FOUNDATIONS

2.1. The I.R.C. Standard Specifications & Code of Practice for
Road Bridges, Section 11, stipulates the magnitude of forces and the
loads on the bridge foundations.
2 2 . The well foundations have to withstand the effects of the
direct loads, which include the dead loads, the live loads (and the
moments caused by their eccentric location with respect to both the
longitudinal and the transverse directions, direct loads actiug a t the
tips of cantilevei of a T-shaped pier, through the bearings of sus-
pended spans either in their collapsed condition or due t o the live load
being on one side of a pier), forces caused by braking of vehicles, wind,
variation in temperature and the seismic forces.
2.3. Some of the direct forces cause pressure-on the foundation
which is partly relieved by the skin friction of the welland buoyancy.
During the higbest flood, buoyancy is critical for minimum stresses
and it is critical for the maximum stresses when the river is dry. For
 D~SIGN OF WBLLFOUNDATIONS
AND SINKING BRIDGES AR 3
checking stresses at any section of the well steining above the base it
is presumed that the water gets an edge to cause buoyancy equal to
I5 per cent of the volume representing the pore pressure. In the case
of wells resting on clay or rock strata, the effective buoyancy will bc
less than LOO per cent and will vary. Usually, for the wells resting on
rock, 50 per cent buoyancy is assumed and for the wells resting on
stiff clay strata, 80 per cent.
2.4. Longit~ldinaland Transverse Forces
In non-seismic zones, forces caused by the braking of vehicles and
temperature are assumed to act simultaneously at fixed bearing and
only temperature force at the movable bearing.
In the case of flexible piers (when the height of pier divided byits
radius of gyration is greater than fifty) only braking force be catered
for at the fixed end bearings.
In the case of balanced cantilever type of superstructure, a t the
fixed bearing end braking force of vehicle and at the roller bearing end
only the temperature force need be catered to.
In the seismic zones, seismic and braking forces are assumed to
act simultaneously at the fixed bearing and only the temperature force
at the movable bearing.
Opinions differ regarding combining these forces for design
purposes. Some favour their algebraic addition. In view of the fact
that the time lag required for the elantic waves to transmit seismic,
brakitlg and temperature forces to the fixed bearings does not a d m ~ t
of their simultaneous action, taking the combined forces as algebraic
addition is thus questionable.
2.5. Water Pressure
(i) Flowing water exerts pressure on the pier and portion of
the well above the maximum scour level. The I.R.C.
Bridge Code requires that allowance is to bemade for the
possible effect of change in the direction of flow u p to
20 deg. to the normal even in case of piers aligned parallel
to the flow of the stream.
(ii) The pressure exerted by. the stream is given by the
equation:

where P=total pressure on surface in lh per sq. fLi

K=shape constant, given in the I.R.C. Bridges Code
Section 11,
4 BALWANTRAO & MUTHUSWAMY
ON

wzweight of water in lb per cu. ft..

a x a r e a of wetted surface in sq, ft.,
V=velocity of current in feet per second, and
g=acceleration due to gravity equal to 32.20 ft per
sec. per sec.
(iii) The velocity of the current is maximum at a depth little
below the surface, its effective value V, as per I.R.C.
Bridge Code, is d f t i m e s the mean velocity and is pre-
sumed to vary uniformly from the maximum at surface to
the minimum at the scour level.

PRECSUSC
OIAGRAH

Fig. 2.1
For practical purposes, the pressure curve is assumed to vary
linearly with maximum value of ~ ' - 2 p at H.F.L., vide Fig. 2.1.
The pressure and moment between any two sections yy and zz are
as given below :

Total pressure P - ZK%?

z I'
x.dx (2.2).

J
Centre of pressure 5 =-- Y
P -r

where H - Y
length of pier in ft in the direction of Bow, and
Z = depth of water in ft between maximum scour level and
'free surface of water
 D ~ I GAND
N SINKINGOQ WELL FOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIWES 5
fiv) According to I.R.C. Bridge Code, if the bed is rocky
water pressure acting simultaneourly on all the piers
between their opposite faces equivalent to pressure caused
by a differential head of 0.75 ft of water should also be
considered. Greater of the two forces given in (iii) and
(iv) above shall govern the design.
2.6. Wind and Seismic Forces
26.1 Wind force8
(i) The relationship between wind and seismic forces for
design purposes is well rccogniscd. The ampted design
practice is to consider one of these in combination with
other forces and take the combination causing most
severe stresses. Wind and seismic forces are not considered
as acting together or simultaneously.
(ii) Magnitude of the horizontal wind pressure on a bridge
depends on the area ejtposed and the location of the
bridge ;it is determined according to the provisions made
in the I.R.C. Bridge Code.
(iii) Wind blowing at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the
bridge produces longitudinal and transverse wind forces.
its effect cannot be resolved into simple trigonometric
components, Lateral and longitudinal load co-efficient
factors for various angles of skew of the direction of wind
for girder bridges are given iu Table 2. I.
TABLE
2.1

Skew angle of wind Lateral load Longitudiil l a d

( d c ~ ~ ) co-efficient cozmc~cnt

2.6.2. Seismic forces

(i) An earthquake is perceptible motion of the ground, it is
irregular and random both inmagnitude and direction.
Motion of ground in form of vibration can be horizontal
 and vertical in all cardinal directions. The horizontal
motion is usually greater than the vertical. Vertical
acceleration is generally assumed to vary from l/lOth lo
115th of the horizontal acceleration.
(ii) The seismic map of India given in the I.R.C. Bridge Code
Section 11 divides India into several zones and gives the
gravity coefficient for acceleration of each zone.
(iii) Only the weight of the structure with its load above the
maximum scour level should be considered in calculating
the seismic force.
The seismic forces are assumed to act at the centre of gravity of
each member or mass. As the seismic force can occur in any direction
for calculating its worst effects, i t should be added to the longitudinal
and transverse forces both in the direction of their resultant or to
the individual direction.
(iv) In the case of foundation wells partially filled with water
instead of sand, etc., for computing the seismic forces,
the horizontal component of the weight of the water need
not be taken.
2.7. Esrlh Pressure
(i) Scour patterns around the piers show that when the flow
i5 skewed or not parallel to the pier, the scour on the
side tiit is comparatively very much greater than on the
other side. In such cases, the moment due to the active
pressure exerted by the soil on one side above the
maximum scour level should be considered in design of
the well foundation.
(ii) When computing moments on wells supporting ahut-
ments the moment due to earth pressure should be worked
on the assumption that scour level is at 1.27 D below
H.F.L. where D is the Lacey's normal scour depth.

3. SCOUR AROUND WELLS

3.1. The scour pattern of iodivid.al stream depends on the

discharge, bed slope, direction of Bow, bed material, alignment of
piers, their shape and size. The correlation of these diverse factors
in predicting the likely scour is a problem indeed.
The formulae developed by Lacey for alluvial stream bed are
well known. The normal depth of scour below H.F.L. in a regime
 DESIGNAND SJNKINGOF WELL FOUNDATIONS FOR BRIDGB 7
channel is :

where,
f -
Q = discharge in cubic feet per second, and
silt factor, varying from 0.4 for very fine d1ts to
2.00 For very heavy sand.
If the waterway is contracted from the regime width, tacey's
modification for such a condition is given by-

where L = actual waterway, and

W= regime waterway as calculated from ~ace~;s
formula, w -$ Q+
In the case of streams with flow parallel to the piers, maximum
scour for design purposes is taken as twice tht nonnal depth of
scour.
Some bridge authorities, in the case of single span bridges, take
maximum scour for design purposes equal to 1.5 D. Perusal o f the
scour pattern around abutments, with piers in between them and
without any pier between them, given in Fig. 3.1, will show the
incorrectness of this assumption.

Fig. 3.1
It is. therefore. recommended that for design purposes even in
the care of sin& span bridges, the maximum scour should also be
taken equal to 2 D.
An important point is that the maximum scour in the case of
abutments occurs a t the upstream corner and not a t the downstream
end while in the case of a pier, the maximum scour occurs at the
downstream end.
3.2. Researches conducted recently by the Iowa Research
Laboratory on models and proto-types on sandy bed bring out that
the scour changes with time. The depth of flow depends on the
adjustment of bed and silt carrying capacity of the water current a t
different sections. As the scour hole increases in size, its rate of for-
mation decreases. the maximum depth of scour takes place before the
first mass of sediment settles in thLscour depression tb induce condi-
tion of eauilibrium. Coming to this condi:ion of eauilibrium though
takes tinie, will not last h e t o the discharge i n the stream being
rarely constant for a su5ciently long period. This is illustrated by
the scour depth-time relationship curve given in Fig. 3.2.

----
Pig. 3.2
3.3. The s o u r pattern around piers set a t different angles t o the
direction of flow are indicated in Fig. 3.3 which shows the effect of
the angle of flow o r attack on scour depth With the increase in the
angle of flow, a greater length of the pier obstructs the flow causing
wider and deeper scour. In every case, scour is deepest on the
downstream side of the pier.
lo* so* 30'

Scour patterns around piers with strearnrflow at different

.ngles to its aligmacnr. Depth of flow as unity
Fig. 3.3
3.4. Construction of piers and abutments in the cross section of
a stream reduces the area of flow. This tends to lower the bed
level of the stream which has to be taken into account while calcula-
ting the maximum depth of scour. The solution for scour below bed
level caused by contraction is generally as per the formula given
hrlnw 1

where, d, = general increase in bed depth,

y =
p - depth of unrestricted stream flow, and
percentage reduction in the area of flow.
 DE3lON AND SINKING OF WBLL FOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIWBI 9

The value of d,
- for various values of p can also be picked from
Y
Fig. 3.4.

T'
%
Y

I *'
1 n
nsnu or SCOUI AROUND PIEIS

Fig. 3.4
An example to illustrate the effect of reduction of waterway in
lowering the bed level of the stream is given below :
ExampIe 1 :
The cross section of stream with 10 feet depth of flow from
H.F.L.is reduced by 20 per cent due to approaches and the pler
blocking the effective waterway as shown in Fig. 3.5. It is required
to Bod the general increase in bed deepening :
ROAD LEVEL

Fig. 3.5
y-I0 feet
830.20
From graph in Fig. 3.4. for p-0.20,

.- ,
.. d, = 0 . 2 5 ~10=2.5say 3 feet :
i.e., total depth of flow will increase from 10 feet to 13 feet.
3.5. The scour below bed level for a rectangular pier, obtained
from the experiments carried out by the Iowa Research Laboratory
for a zero angle of attack and plotted non-dimensionally as equili-
brium depth of scour against depth of flow with the width of pier at
bed level used as the common variable, is given in Fig. 3.6 which
may be used for determining the scour around a pier.

"rroE.la* CUlMlo. c.n*..rb"i

..DD.rnt .
I
"
.
* .OR II.D.*',, o
.n
.
"

Fig. 3.6
3.6. If the pier is at an angle t o the flow of the currept, the
normal scour depth obtained from Fig. 3.6 has to be multipl~ed by
a factor K (based on

*'
L
0
55
z
-
0
z
t
2

E 3
2I
1

I
1.20 10. A M 75 PO
ANGLE OF ATTACK IN DEGREES
Dmign factor for piers not aligned in the d~rectinnof ROW
Fig. 3.7
.While designing the bridge piers, it is always desirable to assume
the direction cf flow at 20 degrees even in those cases where the
angle of flow is less than 20 degrees to the direct~onof the pler to
provide for a possible variation of flow in the river.
3.7. Scour depths in excess of equilibrium depth of the scour
can occur. This is associated with unsteady flow condition and is
 DBSlGN AND S I ~ I NOF
G WBLL FOUNDATIONSPOR BRIDGES 11
given in Fig.. 3.2. The predicted depth of scour in such cases should
be increased to account for flash floods by a t least fifty per cent for
rivers with catchments subjected to sudden downpour like cyclonic
storms. An example illustrating the use of these curves is given
blow :
Example 2 :
A cross section of the bridge pier which collapsed due to scour
(Photo 1) is given in Fig. 3.8. The width of pier at the bed levd of
the stream is 6.5 feet and depth of flow 17.88 feet. With an observed
scour of 18.5 feet below the bed level, the pier was undermined.
The probable scour depth that could be anticipated below the bed
level is given below :
".I., ,I*

.... -
.I
.
: i
2-!
Fig. 3.8
Depth of flow, y 17.88 ft 17.88 ft
Dep!h of flowlbreadth of pier, 17.8816.5 2.70

Y
d~/b,from Fig. 3.6 f o r 7 =2.7 - 2.10
Angle of attack of flow, a 20 dfg .
I
Ratio, -b
32/65 5

I
K, from Fig. 3.7 for--5 and a =20°. about 2
b
da. scour below bed level 2.1 x 6.5 x 2 27.3 feet, say 28 ft
This indicates that the scour could be expected to extend upto
28 ft below bed level. If the foundation had been taken 28 ft below the
bed, the failure would not have occurred. The actual scour of 18.5 ft
observed or measured below the bed level occurred in over 25 years
and is due to the resistance offered by hard clay strata in which the
pier was founded.
This shows that the total depth of scour in clay will be reached
after a time whm the resistance to r o u r by cohesion of clay is
overcome.
 3.8. The effect of velocity and cohesion on the scour is not
included in the experiments referred to in the preceding sections
Rivers with bed consistine of large sized shingle usually have high
velocity during floods. Water with such high velocity will acqnire
higher load carrying capacity flowing past a pier causing scour in the
same manner.
If V. is the velocity in the stream and r. the radius of a circular
pier and V. the velocity on the sides of a pier a t a distance x from
the centre of the pier, then the velocity a t the side of the pier
will be :

Fig. 3.9

It would be seen from the expression (3.4) that the maximum

velocity around the piers (where x=rJ may be as high as twice the
velccity in the stream. If the river bed is composed of shingle or
boulders which are moved by the normal velocity v. in the river,
then the expected scour can be determined based on the method
described for sandy strata. The 6apacity of the water current to mpvc
shingle and boulders worked out by the Challey's formula (assunling
the specific gravity of boulders as 2.65) is given below :

Average velocity of
stream in feet per
second

Size of stones moved

(dia. in inches)
I i
f

1/28 117
2

518
3

If
4 ..1 -- 5

21 3t
~-

7
I
1 / 1 0

14

4. PROPERTY OF MATERIALS IN WHICH

A WELL IS LIKZLY TO REST
4.1. After. determining thc scour depth, the next step would be
to find out the properties of material in and on which the well will be
founded. I t will be seen from Table 4.1 that the compressive strength
of various types rocks vary very much.
 DESION FOR B R I ~ ~13
AND SINKIN0 OF WELLFOUNDATIONS S

Range of compressive strength of various

t m e s of rocks
~-
I
~ - 7 ~ ~

(Ib oer su. in.)

~ ~~~

- --

From To
1. Granite 2.500 38.W
2. Sandstone 1.200 25.000
3. Limestone 3,'30'3 30,000
4. Marble 11,000 25.W
5. Trap 10.000 24.000
6. Slate 14,000 U),ooO

The significant point to note is that the ratio of maximum and

minimum compressive strength of limestone is 10, granite more
than 15, and of sandstone just over 20. The compressive strength
of rock varies according to the kind of the rock and is not uniform in
each kind. In spite of the above, the rock in place can support
very great loads provided it is (i) sound, (ii) whole or integral. and
(iii) adequately supported.

4.2. Doubt regarding the supporting capacity of rock in place is

increased when it has little thickness and overlies a soft or sloping
and slippery stratum (Photo 2). Under these conditions, it is best
to find out the deformation of the average rock bed by a load test
and restrict the load to the bearing capacity allowing for a factor of
safety.

4.3. In the case of rock bed like the one shown in Fig. 4.1 it is
extremely difficult to determine the safe bearing strength.

Fig. 4.1

4.4. In the case of one bridge, the rock at bed level consisted of
hard and soft rock laminations. Plate bearing test conducted with
12 in. x 12 in. x I? in. plate under 22 ton load applied by hydraulic
14 BALWANT RAO & MIJTI~WAMY
ON

jack gave rcaults shown in Table 4.2 below :

TABLE
4.2

S. No. Load in tons Total settlement in inches

The same test was repeated under 24 ton load on the bed two
feet away from the first site. The results of the second test are
given in Table 4.3.

TABLE4.3

S. No. Load in tons Total settlancnt in inches

1. 5.00 0.0573
2. 7.50 0.0873
3. 10.00 0.1140
4. 12.50 0.1455
5. 15.00 0.1925
6. 17.50 0.2435
7. 20.00 0.3075
8. 22.00 0.3410
9. 24.0 0.3675

From Table 4.2 it is seen that the settlement under 15 ton load
waa 0.5 in. and under 22 tons 1.32 in. while in Table 4.3, the
settlement under 15 ton was 0.1925 inch, under 22 tons 0.3410 inch
and even under 24 ton load it did not exceed 0.37 inch.
4.5. Tbtrc being no dcfinitc yield point and total settlement not
exceeding half an inch in the second test, tbe load of 15 tons in
 Di!SlON AND SINKING OF FOR BRIDGES 15
WELL FOUNDAT~ONS
the first test causing half inch settlement may be taken as the failure
load. In the type of cases discussed, safe permissible load is usually
taken as half the load causing 4 in, settlement, as such 7f tons per
sq. ft. appears to be the safe load for this foundation.
In similar test on granite bed in case of another bridge, only
0.015 in. settlement was observed under 12 ton per sq. ft. load, which
shows that the whole rock without any laniinations can support a
very much greater load.
4.6. The wells resting on rock, due to difficulties in cutting
into the rock, need not be taken deep into it. Cutting 6 in. to 9 in.
into the rock or stepping would he adequate. Wells founded on rock
are invariably anchored into it with mild steel dowels. Test on
one in. diameter dowel bars with 3 ft length inserted in a 1& in.
diameter hole and grouted with cement sand mortar has shown that
the anchor bar developed bond strength exceeding 75 lb per sq. in.
These, when embedded 3 ft in rock, can be relied upon to develop
sufficient bond to resist the pull. As the concrete in plug is compara-
tively more porous for developing full bond, the length of bond rods
in the plug should be at least six feet.
4.7. The number of anchor bars t o be provided depends on the
nature of the rock profiles and the base pressure. If there is tension
devdoping over any portion of the base, anchor rods should be pro-
vided to take the full tension. If the rock is sloping. the base should
be stepped and anchor rods provided at every step to prevent slipping.
In any case, a mioimum spacing of 3 ft along the internal periphery
of the well is desirable, vide Fig. 4.2.

Fig. 4.2

4.8. Submerged Weight

The length of the well below the maximum scour level is
considered t o be embedded in soil. Below this level, the soil is in
a state of equilibrium and the voids in the soil are filled with
water. This soil is said t o be in submerged condition and its weight
16 BALWAMRAO& M ~ S W A M
ONY

as the submerged weight. The properties of the submerged soil

manifest themselves by exerting pressure or offering resistance. If
the soil is submerged under hydrostatic pressure, its weight is reduced
by the weight of water displaced.
For clay of specific gravity 2.71 and moisture content 0.33, the
void ratio is 0.875 and the submerged weight will be about 60 Ib per
cu. ft. Similarly, for sand of specific gravity of 2.65 and void ratio
0-5,thesubmerged weight will be about 65 lb per cu. ft. These values
can be taken to be 55 and 60 ib per cu. ft. respectively for purposes
of design.
49. Bearing Capacity
The wells serve to transfer the whole weight to the bed.
For arriving at the safe bearing pressure on the bed, it is essen-
tial to know the safe permissible settlement. In case of non-
cohesive soil, the load causing one inch settlement and in case of
cohesive soils 116th the load causing shear failure may be taken as
safe permissible loads. The latter will give factor of safety of 3
that is a reduction factor of 0.33.
4.10. In the case of wells resting in and on cohesive soils. like
clay, in course of time the entire load of the structure will be trans-
ferred to the base of the well. This is due to the skin friction
in due course of time getting eliminated by the shrinkage of soil
round the well by the variation in its water content unde: dry and
full conditiom in the river. Therefore, in the case of wells in and
on relatively clay soils, no allowance be made for skin Friction for
determining the maximum load on the bed.
In the case of wells embedded in sand, which has relatively low
compressibility, the bed to some extent is relieved of the load
supported by the skin friction.
4.1 1. It has been noted by load tests that if the depth of the
well below bed level exceeds four times its diameter, the state of
stress in sand near the bottom of the well is practically independent
of the depth. Jt is, therefore, to be expected that in all scch cases,
the influence of the depth of the foundation on the settlement of the
well will he relatively small, compared to its influence on the ultimate
bearing capacity.
4.12. Various observations made by Terzaghi and othen
indicated that settlement of a well founded on sand at any depth
below the bed is not lesc than about half of the settlement of an
equally loaded footing caveriag the same area on sand of the same
characteristics. This illustrates that the maximum allowance for
assessing the bearing value for wells on sand, in the design stage,
 DESiQN AND SINKINGOF WELL FOUNDATIONS M R BRIDQBS 17
can be most equal twice the normal value. As the base of the
well will be resting on saturated sand, the bearing capacity should
be further reduced in the ratio of submerged weight to dry weight
of the sand in question.
The bearing capacity
of sand below well
normal bearing submerged weight
=" ( capacity
The results of a bearing plate test conducted at the base of a
well are given in Fig. 4.3.

fig. 4.3

Considering that the value of the bearing capacities given in

this graph applied to a well sunk to a depth ID' and of
breadth 'B' and having D/B ratio of 5, these values can be
modified for a well having D / B ratio less than 5 by using the
modulation graph given in Fig. 4.4. For DIE ratios more than 5,
the values given in Fig. 4.3 could be used as such. Fig. 4.3 shows

i '*F
:tl
2 0 1 / 1 1 1

the bearing capacity depending on the extent of the finer sand

below coarse sandy bed. If the strata penetrated consists of
coarse and right through, the bearing capacity given in Fig. 4.3 can
after applying the above mentioned reduction factor, be increased
by 20 per cent and if it is mostly of finer variety mixed with silt, it
may be reduced by 20 per cent or more.
4.13. For wells resting on clay, bearing capacity is adopted a s
if i t were a footing on clay regardless of the depth a t which the base
of the well is located. The net bearing capacity given in
Table 4.4 below allows for a factor of safetyof 3.

Typ of clay
Safe bearing capacity
itoo ner sa. ft.1

Very soft clay Less than 0.30

Soft clay Between 0.30 to 0.60
Medium clay Between 0.60 to 1.20
Stiff Clay Between 1.20 to 2.40
Very stiff clay Between 2.40 to 4.80
Hard clay Over 4.80
4.14. In case of well foundation resting on hard soil with soft
strata immediately below it and designed only to bear on the hard
strata, the well is likely to break through the hard strata if the
layer of the hard strata below the well base is of insufficier~tthick-
ness. In such cases. the size of the base needs to he designed on
considerations of the safe load c a r r y i ~ ~capacity
g of the soft soil
below, assuming dispersion of load at 60° with the horizontal
through the hard overlying strata.
4.1 5. C d c i e n t of Internal Friction snd,Values of Cohesion
The property of soil which has a bearing on the design of
foundationsis the coefficient of internal friction usually designated
+
by + i n degrees. The value of for saturated soil may be taken
to be the same as that for the dry soil. Values given in Table 4.5
are most commonly used. Typical mechanical properties of clay
are given in Table 4.6.
TABLE4.5

Angular grains
(4 in degrees well graded
i (4 in degrees!

1. Loose 28.5
2. Dense 35.0
 Typical mechanical proporties of clay

Type of clay Cohesion (c)

Ib per sq. it.
I q3 in degrees

1. Almost liquid 100

2. Very soft 200
3. Soft 400
4. Fairly Riff IMM
5. Sliff 1500
6. Very stiff 20M)
7. \Vet silt -

4.16. Well Friction

Well friction (represented by 8 ) is used to calculate the
horizontal force caused by active and passive earth pressure. Its value
lies between 17" to 30" and is generally taken to be equal to 4 6.
4.17. The skin friction between the well surface and the soil
has a bearing on the economic design of well foundations. The
skin friction between concrete or masonry wells and the soil may be
taken from Table 4.7.

Type of soil Skin friction

Ib per sq. it.
--

I. Silt and soft clay

2. Very stiff clay
3. Loose sand
4. Dense sand
5. Dense gravel

E.S. Blaine, writing in the Feb. 6, 1941 Issue of 'Engineering

News-Record' gives more detailed and explicit values for skin
friction experienced on the Baton Rouge Bridge. These valttes are
given below in Table 4.8 :

TABLB4.8

Material I Skin friction

I Ib pr sq. fr.

Watu tight atifTclay 8M)

Tight clay grading to sandy clay 850
Same as above lubricated by jets 647
35% sand. 25% gravel, 40% stiff clay 845
50% sand and 50% clay 736
20% silt sand 80% fine sand 1120
jet tin^ reduced the skin friction by about 200

The skin friction observed for wells sunk in strata, like

alluvium of Bihar rivers, taken from Gales article on 'Curzon
Bridge' is reproduced below in Fig. 4.5. From this it is seen that
the skin friction increases with depth.

o . I I I m . x Y
(-11 1.1010" I* L. Pl" ss n

Fig. 4.5
4.18. It could, therefore, be concluded that for the wells in
sandy soils the skin friction can be taken to vary from 100 Ib per
sq. ft. to 300 lb per sq. ft. depending on the depth.
For wells in clayey strata, it is desirable that no allowance
should be made for skin friction while calculating maximum bearing
pressure but it should be taken into account for calculating the
minimum pressure.
4.19. "Bentonite" solution injected on the external surface of
the well considerably reduces its skin friction.
 DESIGN FOUNDATIONS FOR BRIWES 21
AND SINKINGOF WELL

5. WELL SHAPES

5.1. Single circular, t o separate circular wells, dumb-bell and

double D-shaped wells are most commonly used. In some cases,
elliptical wells and combination of two o r more rectangular wells with
D-shaped ends have also been used. If the depth of sinking is small.
from the point of view of easy handling, either single, two or t h n
independent rectangular or circular wells are adopted. The choice of
the shape of well depends on :
(i) c a n of sinking and the cost of sinking,
(ii) extent of control over tilts and shifts, during sinking,
(iii) loads to be carried, and
(iv) magnitude of the horizontal forces.
5.2. Frofn consideration of the effort needed for ainking, a
circular well has the least perimeter for a given area bf the well base,
its steining being either in boop compression o r trnsion. The points
against circular wells are the size causing obstruction t o the flow and
difficulty in sinking it plumb.

The piers being mostly longer than their widths, it is sometimes

not possible t o found a pier on one square, rectangular, circular o r
hexagonal well. In order to get required length, generally two and
rarely three wells of various shapes are used severally or combined t o
make a dumb-bell or a rectangle or rectangles with D-shaped ends.
So long as the ratio of the total width to total length of well made up
of these combinations is kept near about 1 : 2, the effort required for
sinking will be reasonable.

5.3. Having selected a suitable size and shape of well from

considerations of sinking effort, the bearing capacity of the soil on
which it will rest and forces it is required to withstand, are t o be
reviewed from considerations of accommodating the pier. For ex-
ample, if the length of the base of the pier is 20 ft and the area of
foundation required is about 160 sq. ft., the following sizes of wells,
all satisfying the bearing capacity, could suit :
(i) A rectangular well of 8 ft x 20 ft.
(ii) Two rectangular wells of 8 ft x 10 ft each,
(iii) A single mcular well of 15 ft diameter, and
(iv) Two circular wells of 10 ft diameter each.

The properties of these wells aregiven in Table 5.1.

 Modulus of
Size of well Ares at base Perimeter ration along
in sq. it. in ft. the long
axis in (it)'

(i) 1 No. 8 ft x 20 ft 160 56 213

-
(ii) 2 No. 8 ft x 10 ft each 160 72 213
(iii) I No. I5 i t dia. IM) 47 331
(iv) 2 No, 10 ft dm. each 157 63 1%

From the above, it would be seen that from the consideration

of sinking effort and the modulus of section of the well to resist :he
horizontal forces in the longitudinal direction, the 15 ft diameter
single well in this case is the most auitable. Pier can be accommo-
dated by cantilevering the cap slab 2 ft 6 in. at each end. If for
any reason, the leogth of pier is greater than 20 ft and the wells are
to be spaced farther apart, then the arrangement of two separate
circular wells joined so as to make a dumb-bell shape may be
desirable.
5.4. When two adjacent wells are too close to each other, during
sinking, the earth, in between loses its capacity for resistance and the
wells join.
In order t o avoid the wells joining during the sinking operations,
the clear distance between the two wells should not be less than two
times the thickness of the steining.
5.5. Tilting of wells during sinking operations may take p l a n
in every conceivable direction. Some of the causes for tilting are
given below :
(i) Uneven bearing capacity of strata being penetrated.
(ii) Unequal dredging. and
(iii) Meeting of obstructions like logs, boulders, etc. under a
part of the well.
If adequate precautions are not taken to rectify the t i l t at the
time the tilt starts, they get aggravated and pull or partial rectification
necessitates adjustment in the location of pier, when-the tilt is in the
transverse direction. If the tilt is in the longitudinal direction, its
rectification usually necessitates redesigning of spans, adjustment of
well caps and pier positions. Usually upto about 25 ft depth of sink-
ing tilts and shifts can be controlled and rectified, beyond this depth
rectification presents serious difficulties.
 D m m ~AND SINKING FOR B~nn;m 23
OF WELLFOUNDATIONS

5.6. For eliminating relative tilt between individual wells, tied

wells of the shapes shown in Fig. 5.1 are used. The thickness of the
neck portion of these tied wells should be minimum but sufficient to
allow efficient grabbing and accommodate the width of pier. The
bottom level of the cutting edge of the middle stem of the two wells
should be kept slightly higher (say 12 inches) than that of the cutting
edge of the outer walls so as to avoid rocking and tilting of the well
above the middle stem as a fi~lcrurnduring sinking operations.

.-, ,a

Fig. 5.1

5.7. If the well is to sink under its own weight overcoming the
skin friction, i t must have sufficiently thick steining. Taking the
limiting condition when weight of steining is equal to skin friction, for
a circular well, the following relationship can be obtained :

7
4 D * - ( D - Z ~ ) ¶ ] w = n Df
-
or Dwf- wt2=Df

where. D = external diameter of well in f n t ,

r = thickness of well steining in feet,
Ir = weight per cu. It. of steining matrrial
in pounds, and
,f = skin friction in pounds per sq. ft. of
outside surface of well.

The weight required to overcome the skin frictton for any

particular diameter ,D' rapidly increases with the increased inten-
sity of skin friction. The extent to which the thickness of steining
could be increased is however limited by the minimum size of dredge
hole, say 5 Tt which is considered to be the minimum convenient size
for sinker or a grab t o work. The relation between the diameter 4
and the thickness 'I' for wells of diameters 10 ft, 20 ft and 30 ft
respectively worked out for different values of the skin friction f,
using equation 5.1, a n given in Table 5.2.

TABLE5.2
Steining thickness t o overcome friction
( w=140 l b per cu. ft.)

Value of 'f' in lb
per sq. ft.
- -

Steining
thickness
0.75 1.70 3.00 5.00 - -
10 ft ex- (ft)
tcrnal
din. wells Size of E.50 6.60 4.00 0.00 -

20 fl ex- (ft)
tcrnal
din. wells Sin of 18.60 16.80 15 20 13.20 10.40 7.40
dredge
hole (it)
Sfeining 0.75 0 2.25 3.15 4.20 5.10
thickness
30 it ex- (It)
ternal
din. wells Size of 28.50 27.00 25.50 23.70 21.60 19.80
dredge
hole :ft)
Note : Buoyancy not considered.
It would be seen from Table 5.2 that the weight of a 10-ft exter-
nal diameterwell with 1.70 ft thick steining will balance the total skin
friction caused at the rate of 200 ib per sq. ft. and it will need some
additional kentledge for sinking the well. Similarly, in case of a 20 ft
external diameter well with 4.6 ft thick steining in soils with skin
friction of 500 lb per sq. ft. will need some additional kcntledge for
sinking.
However, for economic and other considerations, the minimum
thicknesr of the steining may be 118 of the external diameter of the
well with a minimum of I + ft for masonry wells. For cement con-
crete wells the thickness of the well steining is kept 1/10 of the
external diameter with minimum thickness of 12 inches. This thick-
ness for the whole length of the masonry wells should, however, be
 Detro~AND SINKING
OF WELL FOUNDA~ONS
POR BRIWES 25
increased by 4 inches after 10 ft for every 10 ft depth thereafter.
In case of ckment concrete wells, this increase shall be 6 in. after
20 ft depth and for every additional 20 ft depth thereafter.

6. EVALUATION OF LATERAL EARTH SUPPORT

TO WELL FOUNDATIONS

6.1. After determining the nature of strata in and on which

the well foundations will rest, the extent of maximum scour and
knowing the magnitude of the vertical and the horizontal forces,
the size and the section of the well should be so selected as to be
capable of safely withstanding the effect of these forces. The
momeots caused by the external horizontal forces at the base increase
with increase in depth of well it is necessary to consider the role
of the passive resistance of the soil in relieving this moment.'
6.2. Resistance to overturning and sliding of a well is offered
by the soil surrounding it below the maximum scour level. The two
common varieties of soils that represent the extreme cases are the
cohesive soils like clay and non-cohesive soils like sand, granular
material, etc. Depending on the geological formation of the soils,
the following conditions may exist :
(1) the wet1 may rest on sand and be surrounded by similar
strata,
(2) the well may rest on clay and also be surrounded by
clayey strata.
(3) the well may rest on sand but be surrounded by clayey
strata, and
(4) the well may rest on sand or clay or a fnixture of sand
and clay, gravel etc., and be surrounded by various com-
binations of sand, clay, silt, gravel, etc.
The nature and extent of resistance offered by these combina-
tions against overturning and sliding will be different for different
soil conditions, and requires different approach in the analysis.
6.3. Tilting of wells by horizontal forces, during sinking oper-
ations or later. is opposed by the passive resistance from the soil or
in other words the total passive earth pressure from side and the
friction, if any, a t the base relieves the well of the external forces.
I t is not possible within practical limits to get the conditions in
which the resultant moment at the base is zero due to the fact that
the base has first to yield differentially thereby producing moments.
 Sometimes a well has to be taken down deeper than the depth
required for minimum grip length in order to rest it on a suitable
bed. Even in such cases, it will have a definite point of fixity
irrespective of the extra length of embedment. The increased depth
of embedment of the well will only reduce the overall deflection. I t
has been observed in tests on piles that the excess depth of embed-
ment does not change the position of the.point a t which maximum
bending moment occurs and that the point of fixity is at a higher
level due to the flexibility of the pile. Rigid wells get less passive
resistance per unit length due to their restricted deflection. There-
fore, the poaition of maximum moment will belower. Thus the
maximum moment in the section of a well will be greater than in a pile.

6.4. To determine the minimum depth of embedment of a well,

the normal procedure is to select the minimum depth of foundation
as lard down in the I.R.C. Standard Specifications and Code of
Practice for Road Bridges.

Adequacy of thia depth of the well should be further checked

from consideration of the passive resistance that the soil surround-
ing tt can offer in order to keep the bearing pressure at the base of
a well caused hy moments and loads within safe limits. Passive
resistance is also an important factor in keeping the wells in position
even if the well is held up wholly or partially by skin friction
greater than expected.

6.5. I f 'M'is the total applied moment at the base of well

for any depth below the maximum scour level, then the relieving
moment Af, offered by the surrounding soil in order to keep the
bearing capacity within the safe limits can be expressed by
M,= ( M - M R ) (6.1)

where, M R ~the~ sresultant base moment. This assumption has

been made as the relation between the vertical and the horizontal
subgrade reactions that actually occurs under loads is difficult to
assess. As the soil is not fully elastic at any stage, and the shape
of the sides and base being different, it cannot be considered as
such for working out the. relative magnitude of stresses taken by the
soil below the base of well and that on its side.

6.6. Total dead and live load upto the maximum scour level
of the bridge pair being known, the self-weight of the portion of the
well below the maximum scour level after allowing for buoyancy is
added to get the total direct load coming over the foundation. This
will give the uniform normal pressure on the soil. Knowing the safe
bearing capacity of the soil below the foundation, the additional
 N SINKINGOF WELL
D ~ I GAND FOVNDA~OM
FOR BRIWPS 27

pressure that the soil can take to withstand effects of the resultant
overturning moment can be worked out. The following expressions
give the maximum pressure that the soil at the base of well has t o
bear without exceeding its safe bearing capacity (see Fig. 6.1).

-. I. l* I..".
,., I
.,
".
.-
Fig. 6.1

or, M B = ( P ~ - ~ ~ ) Z E
where p,=safe bearing capacity of the foundation soil
assumed or known.
I.--=IY
A
-- normal intensity of pressure
IY,+Wz,
A
W=(W,+ W;), net direct load coming on the well
base,
W,=total weight of the well less buoyancy for the
portion above maximum scour level,
W,=self weight of well less buoyancy below the
maximum scour level,
A=arca of well base,
h=s,
ZB
bending stress
ME =maximum moment at the base that can be safely
carried by the soil within its bearing capacity
without developing tension, and
ZE =section modulus of the well at its base.
If M R = M E , then the base pressures are within the limits a s
in Fig. 6.1 (a) and (b) and the base pressures exceed the limits
when MR >ME as in Fig. 6.1 (c), whrre.f ', =-? MR. The pattern
-8
of pressure distribution under a well is not exactly trapezoidal hut
it will be in the shape of a bulb. The slight variation in pressure
due to the tilt of the well will neither materially affect nor increase
the bearing pressure. The distribution of pressure indicated in
Fig. 6.1 (b) is acceptable in practice.
 6.7. The well subjected to the horizontal forces presses against
the soil in front compressing it and causing cleavage between the well
and soil on the opposite side. The cleavage or gap may get closed if
the well is surrounded by an ideal non-cohesive soil. If the surround-
ing soil is cohesive then the gap, once formed, may remain and get
filled with water and silt or sand and thus destroy any relief by way
of adhesion that a clayey soil could be capable of. It is very likely
that on the removal of the horizontal force, the well of its own wiU
not completely regain its normal position.

6.8. Wells ix Noo-cohesive Strata

Nature of the variation of the horizontal soil reaction assumed
for non-cohesive soil as equivalent to the passive-pressure, whether
it is constant a t any depth or varies with the depth, has been a sub.
ject greatly debated and has been variously assumed as :
(i) constant a t any depth,

(ii) having linear variation with depth, or

(iii) having a power relation with depth.
The reaction has been found approximately to be proportional t o
I,'
for a non-cohesive soil, where ' p ' is the net soil reaction per
I
unit length at a particular depth and ' y ' is the deflection at that
level.
A weightless pile under a lateral load will deflect elastically very
much more and will experience greater passive resistance per unit
length in a non-cohesive soil compared to a free rigid well. A free
rigid bulkhead will deflect more compared t o a heavily loaded well
under an equal horizontal force and experience a greata passive
resistance.
l a case of heavily loaded well under a bridge pier,,the deflec-
tion under a horizontal rorce will be much less and lim~tedt o the
maximum movement at the bearing level and the passive resistance
mobilized per unit length will therefore be very much smaller. The
point, below the maximum scour level, at which the applied
horizontal forces get neutralized by the earth pressure moves down,
thus producing greater moment in the steining of the well. More-
over, the value ' P, ', the intensity of passive pressure at depth 9,
worked out is based on the ultimate values of the soil, i.e.. at the
elasto-plastic limit. Correct prediction of the properties of soils is
also not possible. Due to the soil being saturated and also due to
other reasons already stated, it is desirable to allow a factor of
safety. The calculated total passive pressure per unit length of well
based on its ultimate value for purposes of design, should be multi-
plied by a rcduction factor a. For non-cohesive soils, the value of
a should not be less than 0.50.

6.9. The deflection a t the maximum scour level to create full

passive resistance may have to be from $ to 3 inches depending on
the type of soil below the maximum scour level. The actual resistance
mobilized depends on the deflection of the well at this level. If the
ratio of the height of the bridge, above the maximum scour level to
the depth of embedment is considerable, the movement a t the bear-
ing level being the same for any heights of the bridge, the effective
deflection a t the maximum scour level will be reduced. The value
of a well then have to be further reduced proportionately, by a
factor if' given in Table 6.1 and Table 6.2. If tbe value of passive
pressure, q,,, (equation 6.4) so obtained for one well is less than the
applied resultant force Q for the well then the balancing force
(Q-q-..). well be shared by the well foundations in front of it on
either side depending upon the direction of the applied resultant
force through the medium of the superstructure. In that case the total
'Q' acting on one set of two wells may be equated to the sum of the
q,..., of these two wells. The value of q,,, at most can be multiplied
by '31' when two wells are taking part as the maximum factor for
any one well is only 2f in order to keep the soil within elasto-plastic
limits, assuming the value of a = 0.50. If the passive resistance
is still not adequate to balance it, the design of the well should
be revised, as it is not desirable to allow a greater sway of the
bridge.
6.10. If A is the maximum movement at bearing level at
height 'L' above the maximum scour level, the deflection A. at the
maximum scour level, considering rotation of the well at about p D
above its base will be [vide Fig. (6.2)l.
 .?

where A = -%
L '
and considzring tilt of the well about its base
A. will be given [Vide Fig. (6.3)] as :
(6.3b)
D
For various ratios of --,
L
the value of A. can be determined

D
for a given A. Assuming that -= 1.00 will produce full resistance
L
D
with afactor of safety of 2.0, the values of A, and f for different -
ratios for A - 1.0 and P = f, are given in Table 6.1. Similarly
Table 6.2 gives the value of A , and f for A = 1.0 and P = 0.
L
-

(For one well-Rotation about a point 4D

above the base)

(For one well - Tilt about the base)

 FOR BRIDQES 31
N SINKINGOP WELL FOUNDATIONS
D ~ I Q AND
From Tables 6.1 and 6.2, it is seen that the ratio of the depth of
embedment to the height of bearing above the maximum scour level
has a significant effect on passive resistance that may be developed.
6.11. Skin friction may reduce considerably the effects of the
applied load and create conditions of a light-bulk head. If such a
condition is expected, then Terzaghi's analysis of free rigid-bulk-
heads could be adopted. The pattern of pressurr dis!ributioo at
plastic limit will then be as given in Fig. 6.3.

Fig.6.3
6.12. Due to the size of wells being large the shape factor
included in the expression developed in this chapter may not have
greater influence on the extent of passive pressure mobilized.
6.13. The quantum of passive earth resistance offered to the
well will be given by the expressions :
qmaa = mD. (D-2D1) (6.4)
in which 2 D, = 3 HI fJ9 HIY--2D(3H,-~D) (as)
where,
q,,, = the equivalent maximum earth resistance acting a tH ft
above the maximum scour level,
H = height in feet, above the maximum scour level, of the
point of application of resultant horizontal force due
to applied forces and moments,
D = depth, in feet, of well below the maximum scour level,
Hi = (H+D).
32 BALWANTRAO& MUTHUSWAMY
ON

Dl = depth, in feet, above the base of well where plastic flow

of soil begins,
= rn \v ( k 9 - k.) c o s * ~ = m, D, intensity of resultant
2
passive pressure per foot length a t depth D below the
maximum scour level,
m, = cz w (k9-k.) cos $12, to be taken from Fig. 6.4.
$ = angle of internal friction in degrees
k,, k.= intensity of passive and active pressures respectively,
assuming angle of well friction equal to half the angle
of internal friction of the soil.
w = weight of submerged soil in ib per cu. ft.
.
m, = ti, i b,
m = reduction factor equal to one half,
r = shape factor equal to unity for rectangular shapes and
x
-
4
for circular shapes, but could h: neglected if the
size of well is larger than 15 feet, and
b = diameter or length of well in feet in the direction of
flow.
..
t
..
: ."
i
iI "

.,<

. . ...". ~. ,.
,. ,.
m... "-a,.
. ,, .
Fig. 6.4

6.14. ~t can generally be assumed that as the wells are heavy,

they will tilt very nearly about their base. For this case, the follow-
ing condition is to be satisfied (see Fig. 6.5).
qmw(+ m D' -
F: (6.6)
 where. F-frictional force at the base.

Fig. 6.5

Taking moments about the base,

The above.value of q,. should be used for calculating the base

pressures. The normal base pressure will decrease to t h e ~ x t e n tof the
vertical component of the earth pressure due to well fr~ction. This
vertical component of the force is,
PV =a rn,~,. t b (6.8)
where m,= a%(k,-k.) sin +2 ,which
- can -be taken from
Fig. 6.4.

6.15. Wells in Clay Strata

For well embedded in predominantly clay strata, the passive
pressure offered is cvaluaied by modifying Rankine's formula which
does not take 6 , the well friction into account by Bell's correction.
For sustained forces like moment caused by tilt etc., no relief by
way of passive pressure by clayey soil should be taken.
The formula for passive pressure will then be :

where, w-weight of submerged soil, Ib per cu. ft.

c s u n i t cohesion. Ib per sq. ft., and
+=angle of internal friction in degrees. For purely
cohesive soils with +=On. the aboveexpression reduces to :
p.=wx+2c. (6.10)
34 RAO & MUTHUSWAMY
BALWANT ON

Pure clay is rarely met with. Admixture of clay and granular

material will impart the combined properties of cohesive and non-
cohesive soil and make the case general. The value of unit
cohesion. c. assumed in the above equations is determined by
experiments. In the cases of clay masses that have actually failed,
it has been observed after aoalysis that the overall resistance offered
by a clay mass is less than one half the calculated resistance based
on the experimental value of c. It is generally considered desirable
that a reduction factor a equal to 0.33 be applied to get the
probable passive pressure in case of clay masses.
Then p,=a I$#. t. 6. tans
(-+- 3x + 2 a c. 1 b. tan

orpP=+a~. t b x+2= c. t b (for (4=0°)

(%+$I (6.")

. # #
m*..IO*
*I
I*TO*'
" n.
.I"I.,
,.
Pig. 6.6

6.16. Duriog sinking of wells, the clay next to the well will get
disturbed and get remoulded by the squeezing out of some of the
water.
6.17. The re.sult of a test and l l ~ evariation with depth of the
value of c ' for both the undisturbed and remoulded clay is given
in Fig. 6.6. I t shows that though the rate of increase of cohesion
with depth is [here, it is not very substantial. The value of ' c '
cannot be taken i~nifnrmthroughout the depth; the law governing
its variation is not known ; therefore, an average rectangle has been
considered for the purpose of design. The value of ' c ' ior the
purpose of evaluating the passive resktance should be from a sample
taken from about ll3rd depth of embcd~nentof well below maximum
scour level and shall be an average between its remoulded value and
its experimental value ou an undisturbed sample.
 Photo 1 Photo 2
Failure of a bridge pier Foundation of a bridge showing
due to scour variations in rock characteristic

;'.

,:, "t:
.:.<L--;:.,.., Photo 4
Helmet and the fittings in the
Photo 3 foreground. The skip box fixed in
Diver with helmet on before position ready for concreting
entering the well bottom plug
 Photo 6 Photo 7
Skip box open at top. Skip box showing the
Note : Canvass cover release mechanism

Photo 8
Load test of a well
 HIR BRIDGES
OF WELLFOUNDATIONS
AND SINKING
DESIGN 39
6.18. When the well is resting in and on clayey soil mixed
with little sand, the bulk head formulae could be used with suitable
modifications ; the base frirction being absent will not restrict its
rotation about the base. Tho assumption here, as already argued,
is that the average resistance of e in clay per foot depth is consrant
because it is independent of the magnitude of the tilt of the well.
The expressions (6.11) can, therefore, be written as given heldw :

where, ml= a w t b. tana ( % + t)

5 a wt b., (for $ = 0°)
and m,=2a c t b. tan
+
- 2 6 c t b. (for = 0").
3
(:- + -
The pressure distribution can be assumed as giwn in Fig. 6.7.

nr

Therefore, the total passive resistance

+
qmw. = mr Dla 2m, Dr - (im, D +mt D) (6.13)
qm... (H+D) = - 2/3ml D,' +
(m, D -
mr) Dr' +
2m1 D.Dr - (116mx D" +mr 0') (6.14)
 Eliminating q,... from the above two expressions, the value of
D, can be obtaiaed by solving the following cubic equation :

Knowing the value of Da, the value of q,.,. and the moments
at any point can be worked out.
6.19. The maximum quivalent horizonal force, q,.. . due to
the pasrive resistance of the soil having been calculated, the
unbalanced force acting at H feet abovr the maximum scour level
that is contributing to the resultant overturning moment at the base
will be :
Q x =(Q-qmse) (6.16)
and M R -(Q-~ma=). ( H + D )
='R (H+ D). (6.17)
In order to keep the bearing pressure of the soil at the base within
the permissible limits, At,, iq equation (6.17) must be less than or
equal to h f ~in equation (6.2). that is, <M, .
If M n 7 M B , then it should be corrected either by altering the
dimensions of the section of the well or its deplh of embedment by
trial and error On arriving at the factors that make MR = M R . the
actual foundation pressure, ' p b ' cdn be checked from the following
expressions :

where, pns=the actoal design bearing pressure at the base,

and /'s=--,M R the flexi~ral stress due to the resultant
ZB
moment at the base.
6.20. If the soil surrounding !he well is in layers of direrent
strata both non-cohesive and cohesive. then the analysis should be
based on the soil that predominates at the lower levela below the
n ~ a x i m u ~scour
n level.
6.21. When a well rests squarely on rock, no tilt about its
base can be expected. Possibly tlie well cannot even rotate nbout a
point on ils verLical axis due to the bond between the concrete of
the plug and rock and any dowel bars that may have been provided.
In guch sit~ations, for the purposes of design, the maximum
moment that could be expected to develop upto base should be
transferred to the bed.
 DESIGN AND SINKING GP WELL FOR B ~ m m 41
FOUNDA~ONS
6.22. For calculating the most stressed section of the well
steining, it is necessary to find the depth below the maximum scour
level where the shear is zero.

Fig. 6.8

In Fig. 6.8 Shear and Moment diagrams for non-cohesive soils

are indicated. The maximum moment, ,\.I..., . will occur at 'x.'
feet below the maximum scour level when.
P.r = Q..
that is, 4fnd = 0,

or, .* = (%)A
and, M,,,,,,. - (f)-
h a - 2 1 3 Qo 2 Q 4
nl

6.23. Similarly, Shear and Moment diagrams for cohesive soils

could be drawn using Fig. 6.7. The maximum moment for cohes~ve
soil will occur at ' .,: ' feet below the maximum scour level when.
p.-Q..
that is, $ 111, x2+irr,x-Q,.
or, .Y= - ;- +J ( ~ : ) ? + 2 2 &
111,

and, M,,,.,. = M, +Q0r-(1/3Qox+I/6i~irsa)

or. M .,,... = 116 (6 M,-k4 Q,.Y - nl?.it) (6.22)
6.24. The passive resistance for wells which have earth
surcharge on one side, like tlie wells below abutments, requires to
be calculated.by modifyirtg the passive pressure diagram as given in
Fig. 6.9.
 Fig. 6.9

Taking moments about the base,

where, m. = intensity of active earth pressure per foot length

at scour level due to earth fill behind the
abutment and the well, and
m, = aa given under para. 6.13.

6.25. The metbods for istimating the lateral earth support for
well foundations and calculating the maximum moment in the
steining of well foundations are explained in the following numerical
examples.

Example I :
A well foundation of a bridge in a non-seismic zone is assumed
to be embedded 46 ft below the maximum scour level, for considera-
tions of foundation soil. The data collected for designing the well
foundation are given below :
External diameter of the well 20.00 ft
Steining thickness 3.00 ft
Area of well base. A 3 15 sq. ft.
Section modulus, Za- of well b a ~ e 785 ft3
Total moment a t the maximum scour
level, M, 13,800 kips. ft
Resultant force at the maximum scour
level, Q. 166.0 kips
Soil surrounding the well Sand
 Allowable bearing pressure of soil, pb 6.0 tons per sq. R.
Total weight on the base, W 3,230 kips
Weight of submerged soil, w 60.0 ib per cu. ft.
Angle of internal friction of soil, $ 30' (submergtd)
Ratio of the depth of embedment to the
height of bearings above the maxi-
mum scour level, A 0.33
(i) Lateral Pressure :
Using equation (6.5),
2D1 - 3Hr f J ~ H ,-=2 0 HI - D)

From graph in Fig. 6.4,

m, = 0.1352
m = 0 . 1 3 5 2 ~ 2 0= 2.7 kipsleu. ft.

-
From expression (6.4),
qmR,. ) X 2.7 X 46 (46.0 - 4 2 . 8 )
= 198.5 kips.

-
For the ratio of the depth of embedment to the bearing height
equal to 4, the reduction factor f 0.454. Then (for the design
purposes),
q ,,,,,, = 0.454 x 198.5 = 90.0 kips for one well.
or q,.,,,, =3 x 90.0 =; 270.0 kips for two wells

> 166.0 kips.

The passive earth pressure mobilized in this case is sufficient with
two wells coming into action assuming no extra horizontal force is
acting on the adjacent well.
(ii) Maximum moment on the well:
Using expression (6.19). the deoth, below the maximum scour
level, of maximum moment,

Using expression (6.20).

= 15,620 ft kips.
Example 2 :
Same data as in Example I . Assume that the well tilts about
its base.
Using expression (6.7).

= 340.0 kips
with A =? 4, reduction factor f = 0.50
Then q,,,,,. = 0.50 x 340.0 = 170.0 kips
> 166.0 kips.
The pas~iveearth pressure that is expected to be mobilized is
sufficient to relieve the applied resultant horizontal forces.
Example 3 :
Consider in Example I that the soil surrounding the well is clay
mixed with little sand. Assume that the unit average coheslon
c = 750 lb per sq. ft and the angle of internal friction of the soil;
4 = 5". All other data remnin the same as in Example :.
li) Loferal Pres.vtrre r

,It. = 0.3~3
= 0.90
-
In expression (6.15),
55.0 x
kips!sq. ft.
m r 20 tan*(rr
4)
nlr = 2 x 0.333 x 750 :< 20 x tall (45' +
 Then, D2*+ 151 E,z + 4350 DI - 316200 = 0
Solving the cubic equation,
Dz = 31.48 ft
Using expression (6.13)
q,,,.. . = (0.90 x 31.48" )+ (2 x 15.70 x 31.48) -
(4 x 0.90 x 46a + 15.70 x 46)
=. 1885 - 1675 = 210 kips.
The passive earth pressure that is expected to be mobilized is
sufficient to relieve the applied resultnut horizontal forces.

(ii) Moximur~imoment on well :

Using cxpression (6.21), the depth of maximum moment.

Using cxpression (6.221,

2 15.70
M ,,,,.. = 13,800 +-
3
2: 166 x 8.6 - - cx 8.6'

14,944 ft kips.

In order to havc sufficient margin of passive resistance in clay.

the point of rotation should be as low as possible from tlie maximum
scour level. This leads to the important conclusion that the wells
surrounded by clay sho~rld, if possible within reasonable cost, he
founded on sand or similar strata. In that case, there is the likelihood
of the well being tied up by some Base friction and lower the point
of rotation.
46 BALRANTRAO& MUTHUSWAMY
ON
7. DESIGN OF WELL STEINING

7.1. After determining the maximum molnents and loads, the

design of well steining through which the forces acting on the bridge
are transmitted to the base of well requires to be considered. The
stress in a well steining varies depending on the depth. The moments
will go on increasing upto a certain depth below the maximum scour
level. Thereafter, its value will go on reducing due to the passive
resistance offered by the soil surrounding the well and the base will
practically be subjected to direct loads only.
7.2. The section of the well steining just below the well.cap
has least direct load but is subjected to a considerable moment and
therefore, this section is critical for tensile and shear stresses. At a
level below the maximum scour level where the horizontal force gets
neutralised by the passive pressure of the earth, i.e., where the shear
becomes zero, the moments are maximum and the direct loads are
also considerable. This section is critical for compressive stresses.
7.3. When the well is circular and practically watertight, it is
subjected to hoop compression during rising floods. This hoop
compression varies depending on the flood levels. Hoop compression
in the sti- is uniform upto the maximum scour level. During the
fall of floods, the well steining is ~ubjectedto hoop tension caused by
the granular material in the well. Hoop tension or compression acts
a t right angles to the forces due to direct loads and should be com-
bined to get the resultant. If the wells are not circular, the stresses
in the steining should be cnlculnted taking the moments caused by
the pressure.due to diserential he-? in such case.
7.4. Foi~ndationwells are usually massive and are made of
concrete or bricks. For withstanding various stresses caused
during sinking operations, both vertical and hoop reinforcement
should be provided. Thc amount of vertical reinforcement
required depends usu:~lly on the weight of the well when held up or
when it is required to resist the upward Tbrce imparted t o it by
skin friction during its downward descent. As could be shown,
these forces are significant (vide Fig. 7.1). Let H be the depth
rn?
~I
o which the well has progressed and h the height at which it has
got suspended. If the weight of the well suspended is greater than
the skin friction acting over a height (H-h), then the well will move
down. Such condition could be expected to develop in clay strata
when cutting edge is provided with an offset during a sand blow.
The maximum value of 'h' that could be expected to get suspended
will therefore be :
x ( D - r) IVH= n wlli (D - r ) + f (7.1)
where D = ex:ernal diameter of the well in feet,
I = thickness of steining in feet,
w = unit weight of the material of the steining per
cu. ft.,
f - skin friction rer sq. ft.. and
P = weight added for sinking like extra steining or

r f mf--
kentledge.

Solving h = - 0 t w] ~ - 3 - P (7.la)

This equation indicates that the skin friction and unit weight of the
well have a bearing on determining the steining reinforcement. The
process is simil;lr to drawing the well thlough an earth mass.
For example, for given depth, H = 100 ft./= 1000 lb/sq. ft.
D = 30ft,r = 3 f t , a n d w = 120lbpercu.ft.;
h = 66 ft, when P = 0.

Steel required to fuily carry this weight will be 113 sq. in., i,e.
nearly I50 lb per 100 cu. ft. of concrete. I t will be noticed that for
the value of skin friction assumed, the steel required to carry this
weight will be co!isiderable.

Taking the average value of skin friction and average type of

soils met with it is usual to provide steel at the rate of 45 Ib and 60 Ib
per 100 cu. ft. of brick (in addition to plates) and concrete steining
respectively. Out of this quantity, verfical reinforcerner~tcould be 75
per cent and the remaining 25 per cent can be in the shape of hoop
bars or lateral ties. The vertical reinforcing bars generally consisting
of 3!4 in. or 1 in. diameter bars should he placed near both the outer
and inner faces of the well steining. The adequacy of the laterals
should be further checked for the moments due to eccentric assessed
kentledge and half the weight of thr: well with an eccentricity equal to
one-fourth the width of the well in any direction. This condition is
critical when the well has sunk to half the designed depth. It should.
also be checked fol- a point load equal to q,.,. (vide Para 6.13) acting
along the diameter.
7.5. Foundation of wells located in seismic areas are some timea
subjected to considerable tensile stresses for which reinforced cement
codcrete wells are better suited. The thickness of the steining of
reinforced cement concrete wells must not be less than 9 inches in
any case and in the case of concrete steining not less than 12 inches.
7.6. Wells sunk in deleterious soils should be suitably
protected.
7.7. Circular wells, especially of brick steining are subjected to
external and internal pressures. Water and earth pressures acting on
the outside and earth filling or water filling acting from inside. can
be a n a l y ~ dfor principal stresses by Lame's solution.
Where the boring results indicate a clay strata overlying a sand
strata and the wells are taken below theclay layer, sometimes artesian
conditions are encountered ;sometimes on dewaterine of wells sand
blowing in the well takes place. To provide for such contingencies,
particularly for wells with brick steining, the design should be checked
for an internal pressure due tn water in the full height of the
steining.
Ifp, is the uniform internal pressure per unlt area, at the
circumferential or tangential stress and o, radial stress as indi-
cated in the Pig. 7.2 the stresses at any point A at a distance

Fig. 7.2

of r from centre the maximum stresses are given by the following :

(i) When thc cylinder is subjected to uniform internal
pressure p,
(a) hlnsir~rrrmtensile stresses on rhe innerf0c.e :
 D ~ G AND OF WELL
N SINKING FOR BRIDOPJ 49
FOUNDATIONS
(b) Masi~numtensile stresses on the oulsldefocc :

(ii) When the cylinder is subjected to uniform external pressure

pp per unit nrea :

(a) Maximun~eon1pressil.e stress oeclrrs oil the insideface :

The maximum value of a,occurs s t the outside face and

is equal to p, ; then the maximum values a, and a. d o
not occur on the same face when the cylinder is subjected
to an external pressure.
(b) Stresses on outer face :

7.8. In the design of steining. consideration is given to make it

of such section and weight to require milimum of kentlcdge for
sinking. Thick or heavy sections, however. increase the direct pressare
and reduce the tension on the foundation soil.
7.9. If it is anticipated that pneumatic sinking may have to be
resorted to during sinking operations, provision of an annular bracket
at a suitable level should be incorporated in the design of the steining
to provide a seal for air locks.
8. DESIGN OF WELL CURB AND CUTTING EDGE
8.1. Well curb n0w.a-days is usually made of reinforced con-
crete, with a steel ciltting edge. The inner face of the curb is generally
sioped two vertical to one horizontal.

8.2. The cutting edge of a well ie almost always made of steel.

As it cuts through the bed, it must be extremely strong and rigidly
tide to the well curb to withstand distortion. warping, twisting,
shearing, crushing and spreading out.

For steel caisson to be Roated to site. the cutting edge must also
serve as a part of the girder or truss of a deep curb which acts as a
barge.
50 BALWANTRAO& MUTHUSWAMY
ON

8.3. Design of Curb for Sinking

The curb cuts through the soil by the dead weight of the well
steining and kentledge, if any, when the inside of the well is dredged.
After the well has penetrated the soil to a considerable depth, the
forces acting on the curb will be as shown in.Fig. 8.1.

Fig. 8.1.

Let d mean diameter of the curb in feet,

F

N = weight of steining in tons per fool run,

8 = angle in degrees of bevelling with the horizontal,
p = coefficient of friction between soil and concrete of

-
curb, ustl;~llydefined by tan = tan 20' = 0.364,
P force in tons per foot run of curb acting uormally to
the bevel surface,
Q = farce in tons per foot length of curb acting tangen-
t~allyto the bevel surface, and
H = horizontal resultant force in tons per foot of curb.
Then.

Sin S - li Cos 6
H pn foot run = N ( ~ ~ - - = ! , )
(!
and total hoop tension, FI = I r . A . , =a,!, 5.~2
- $, (8.3)

where, K
 D ~ N
AND SINKINGOF WELL FOUNDATIONS FOR BRIWES 51
While sinking, the external compression or active earth pressure
of the soil may not be fully developed at the curb due t o unsettled
conditions.
8.4. Sometimes, during sinking operations in case of a deep
dredge hole the well may suddenly descend. This can be caused by
sand blows, springs etc. I t is, therefore, desirable to make provision
for increased stresses due to such exigencies by increasing the hoop
tension reinforcements by 50 per cent and by providing vertical bond
rods. The tension in the curb will be (see Fig. 8.1).
H - 0.75 N K ~ (8.4)
8.5. Cnrb Resting on the Bottom Plug
When the cutting edge is prevented from moving down iythe
reactions developed a t the interface of the curb and the bottom
plug, the reaction. neglecting cumulative effect of skin friction. could
be resolved into horizontal and vertical component3 by assuming
formation of a two-hinged parabolic arch within the thickness of the
bottom plug. The weight of the material filled in the well and the
bottom plug will be transmitted to the bed directly.
8.6. For the condition assumed in para 8.5 under the action of
a load uniformly distributed along the horizontal span of the concrete
plug, the following expression for H can be obtained:

Fig. 8.2

where 'r' is the vertical height of an imaginary inverted arch as

shown in the Fig. 8.2. The value of 'q' is calculated by dividing the
total weight coming on the base by the plug area.
8.7. It is reasonable to assume that in granular soil, the hoop
tension H gets relief from active earth pressure around the curb, vide
Fig. 8.3.
 Fig. 8.3
I f p be the active earth pressure D feet below the maximum scour
level and p at the top of curb, i.e., (D - h) ft below the maximum
x o u r level, then the total hoop compression will 1e. :

where. p = f kw Dl,
-
p' = f kw ( D a)',
w = submerged weight of soil,
= angle of internal friction, and
1 - Sin 4
k=
1 + Sin 4
and the net boop tension will be :
HI = ( H - C)

It is, however, desirable that the steel provided in thecurb shall

be generally not less than 5 lb per cu. ft. (vide Fig. 8.4).
 DESIGN AND SlNKMo OF WELL FOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIDGB( 53
8.8. Due to the horizontal force H caused by the bevelled
action, a moment is produced at the junction of the curb and the
steining, vide Fig. 8.4. This moment per running foot will be :
b
M, = H.-
2 (8.8)
Reinforcement provided at the corner A to take care of this
moment should be taken along th: bevel face and anchored well into
the steining.

(I) While the well is bring sunk

Outside diameter = 14 ft
-
Erective diameter, d 12 ft
N = 16 tons per foot run
Taking p -0.364
0.786-(0.364 ~ 0 . 6 0 6 )
K = (0.354 X 0.786)+0.606
=0.63.
-
Hoop tension, H = 0.75 x 0.63 x 16 x 12 90.62 tons.
(2) While the well curb is resting on the bottom plug
( a ) H o o p tension
Given :
Downward load = 1500 tons
Less :
(i) weight of plug = 60 tons
(ii) weight of sand fill =I40 tons
Total =ZOO tons

--
Net weight on the soil = 1500 - 20G = 1300 tons
-q 8.45 tons per sq. ft.
r 4.125 feet
Then,
Hoop tension, H - 8.45 x 12'
16~4.125
 (b) Relief due to earth pressure :
(Assuming the bed material to be sand)
&v = 69 1b per cu. ft.
4 = 30'
D = 40 ft
b = 2.75 ft
p = 8.2 tons per foot run
p' = 7 tons per foot run

Hoop compression C E 7.6 x 2.75 x 1412 tons = 146 tous.

Net hoop tension for which reinforcement should be provided

for :
H' .= (222 - 146) = 76 tons. However, it is better to
provide for H = 222 tons as the simultaneous materialization of
active earth pressure all round the well is doubtful.

(3) Reinforcement for the moment due t o force as in (I) at

Section A :

= 10.5 ft. tons.

hfo=x(Y
2 2)
In the above example it is seen tiiat in this particular case the
curb is subjected to most severe stresses while the well is being
sunk.
8.10. If the well is rectangular or square, the horizontal thrust
from the bottom plug will produce tension in tlre sides as the curbs
are not free to deflect due to their contact with bottom plug by
wedge action.
The rec!angu!ar curbs tend to split at the corners. The
pressure distribution on a rectangolar and ii sauare curb is shown in
Fig. 8.5.
 DES~GNAND OF W@LLFOUNDATIONS
SINKING FOR BRIWES 55
If H is the thrust transmitted by the plug per foot length of
curb, then the total pressure acting on the sides AB or DC will be :
a
P E H J 6 - - 2 (8.9)
and tbe total pressure acting on BCand A D or on all the sides of the
square curb will be :
p = aH-- (8.10)
2
Tensile reinforcement for the shorter sides AD and BC should be
designed to take a pull equal to H and for the longer
side or for the side of a square, the reinforcement should take a
pull equal to oH/2. The reinforcing bars should be anchored pro-
perly by rooping them round the corners tqresist splitting and these
corner bars should be designed to take tenslon :
t = 0.866 6H. (8.1 1)
8.11. Sometimes the curbs project a little out'or beyond the
steining to reduce skin friction developed while the well is sunk.
The utility of this projection in sand strata in rcducing the skin
friction is doubtful ; the sand mass closes quickly the gap formed by
this project~onduring sinking. In clay strata where the projection
of thecurb will reduce skin friction to a great extent, it will leave a
gap between the clay strata and the well. This gap may not close
up for a considerable time and the passive resistance assumed in
the design may not materialise due to lack of contact w ~ t hthe
surrounding soil.
8.12. Sbrpe of the Cutting Edge
The cutting edges are usually designed with a sharp edge or with
a stub nose. These are shown in Fie. 8.6. Some engineers prefer
stub nose. The cutting edge projecting from the curb face should be
capable of taking the bending stresses caused while correcting the well
for any tilt or shift. As the steel of the cutting edge is liable to rust
in due course, its area is never taken into account as re~nforcementof
the curb.
 8.13. Bottom Plug for the Well
The compressive forces t o which the concrete plug is subjected
to, can be calculated by assuming 311 arch formed between the curb
faces within the concrete plug. This assumed arch has very little
rise compared t o span. Therefore, for the purposes of design, the
axial force caused can be safely assumed equal to horizontal thrust

q d"
Axial thrust per running foot H = -
8 rr
(8.12)

In the example given in para 8.9, e s m n i n g 2 ft 9 in. thick plug

the thrust per sq. inch in the plug will be :
222
17x-174
2240 - 126 lb per sq. io.
which is within the limit for 1.: 2 : 4 cement concrete.
8.14. Filling of sand in wells is i;sually done up t o the bottom
of a top concrete plug immediately L?clow the well cap. This sand
filling serves the purpose of transrnittir~gload directly to the bottom
plug and may afford some relief to the sceining. If sand filling is done
up to the maximum scour level only and portion above it is filled
with water or left unfilled, it is essentiill that the bottom plug should
be capable of receiving the load from the steining and transmitting it
to the base in which case the thickness of the bottom plug should be
atleast equal to half the diameter of the dredge hole.
Sometimes forming of the b o l t o ~ nplug with a positive sump to
get a bulbat the base may be difficult especially i n sandy strata ; in
such cases the transmission of the load by the plug by arch action
may not materialise. To cover such con~ingencies,it is better to fill
the well above the bottom plug with sand up to!he top plug imme-
diately below the well cap. For small wells, it will probably be better
to fill thesame completely with lean concrete or lean plum concrete
with plums not exceeding 15 per cent of concrete, topped with a t least
one foot thick I : 3 : 6 cement concrete on which the well cap can be
laid. Tbough this method is more expensive, the transmission of
loads to the base is assured.
 9. DESIGN OF A WELL CAP

9.1. Inner vertical reinforcement or bond rods of the steining

are always taken into the well cap for providing bond. The extent of
fixity thus developed between the well cap and the steining is
difficult t o estimate. It is therefore ignored, and the well cap designed
as a simply supported slab for the load coming on it.
The well cap supports the subctructure of the bridge by spanning
the dredge hole of the well and in case of more than one separate
well, by spanning the distance between the wells. The top of well
capsare usually kept at low water level or at low tide level for general
appearance and reducing obstruction to the flow.
9.2. The piers or subs~ructure transmit to the well cap not
only the direct loads but also moments caused by the various
horizontal forces.
9.3. Length of a reinforced concrete pier at its base is usually
from end to end of the steining with full bearing on the steining.
For the design of lower portion of R.C.C. pier as a rectangular beam,
the effective depth cannot be taken greater than half the length. The
bearing blocks, i.e., the end walls of the well steining should be
designed to distribute the end loads on the steining to its safe bearing
pressure. In this case, the cap of the well should be designed to
take its own weight and that of the above mentioned portion of pier
acting as a beam, vide Fig. 9.1.

r * I D BEAM

PLAN

!='I1 'a!d
 9.4. The square or rectangular well caps supported o n all four
sides are usually designed as flat plates. The formulae for deter-
mining stress and strain in a well cap can be taken from any
standard book. The formulae for flat plates are based on the
assumption that the thickness of well cap is not more than about
one-quarter of the least transverse dimension. The Poisson's ratio
t o be assumed for converting these formulae for a concrete well
cap is0.15.

If the cap is rectangular, there will be lifting of the corners.

The moment due to this restraining should be provided by suitable
reinforcements at top. The reaction in a rectangular well capis
not uniform.

10. MATERIALS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WELL

10.1. Brick masonry, generally with 1 : 3 cement sand

mortar, is extensively used for well steining in those areas where
good quality bricks are available. Stone masonry in cement mortar
is also used ; its weight per cu. ft. being greater than the brick
stenining, it needsless kentledge for sinking of the well. If stone
masonry is built with lime mortar, the height of !he steining to be
built dai!y should be limited to avoid bulging of the masonry. Such
bulging presents particular difficulty in keeping the well plumb while
sinking.

10.2. The steining masonry is almost always reinforced with

steel rods of 4 in. to I in. diameter bond bars and lateral ties as
given in Chapter 7 packed with 4 in. x 4 in. or 6 in. x 6 in.
cement concrete all round and further horizontally reinforced a t
both faces with flat iron of 4 in. x 1 in. or 318 in. at every 6 to 10 ft
intervals tied to bond rods by sleeve nuts or bottle nut joints.

10.3. Cement concrete 1 : 3 : 6 with 4 in. to 6 in. plums

covered on all sides equal to their least thickness and not exceeding
15 per cent of total is also used for the construction of the well
steining.

10.4. Another type of steining adopted is made of '.Prepackt

Concrete", also called colcrete, or colloidal concrete, etc. The
principle is that the broken stone pieces are packed between forms
and colloidal cement mortar or slurry 1 : 2 is poured in by means
of pipes laid at 3 ft intervals. The packing is done in layers of about
3 ft. The mortar travel round the stoner and fill? the crevices and
the whole becomes a well knit concrete The To-ms can be removed
after 24 hours and the next stage of concrete if required added after
another 24 hours. Some authorities in India do not permit this type
of construction.
In the costal areas where tht rivers are tidal, it is desirable to
use high grade cement concrete 1 : 2 : 4 and, to use if necessary
sulphate resistant cement ; in such cases the cover over steel should
not be less than three inches.
10.5. The allowable stresses in masonry with these materials
are given in Table 10.1.

TYPCof steining material

Direct FO om press ion Tension.
compression. 1 io bending.
fb per sq, in. jlb per sq. in.
I per
sq. in.
i1 Shear
stress. !h
p a sq. m.

Brick m ~ u o r y
(i) in lime mortar Nil
(iil in cement sand mortar
1:3 Nil
Stone masoon
(i) in lime mortar I : 2 Nil
(ii) in cement sand mortar
1:3 Nil
Plum concrete with cement
concrete 1 : 3 : 6 Nil
Prcpackt concrete Nil
Cement concrete 1 :3 : 6,
Cemmt concrete 1 : 2 :4 Nil
R.C.C. 1 :2 :4 75

For the steining, the design stresses should not exceed 80 per
cent of the above to allow for any overstress caused by tilts. and
shifts during their rectification. The minimum thickness of stelning
is given in paras 5.7 and 7.5.
10.6. In the cage of brick masonry provided with mild steel
bars as bond bars. as these bars ate not bonded in the same sense as
bars embeded in cement concrete for proper composite action, i! is
not desirable to take the transformed sectional area of these bars ~ n t o
account.
10.7. In seismic areas to keen the oressure on foundation and
the centre of gravity low, sometimes hsnd illinp in the foundation wells
is done only i ~ to
p the maximum scour level. This adds to the general
stability of the bridge and reduces the dead load moment. In all such
cases, it is good practice to lay about 3 ft thick concrete plug on top
of the sand filling.

11. SINKING OF WELLS AND ITS PROBLEMS

11.1. Wells are sunk to their predetermined depth by dredging
or removal of bed material below the cutting edge. The dredging is
most commonly done by mechanical grabs, where dredging is not
possible, excavation under water is done by divers with the use of
compressed air and weighted steel helmers. In difficult cases,
pneumatic sinking is resorted to.
11.2. Sinking by mechanical grabs presents no difficulty except
that the control over the sinking of wells truly plumb is not so close
as when carried out by divers. In the case of deep welln, it is good
practice to do the first 25 to 30 feet manually and, after the well has
been taken plumb to good grip depth, to do mechanical grabbing.
Well sinking by divers using steel helmets and compressed air
has generally similar problems as in the case of pneumatic sinking.
11.3. Equipment required for sinking of wells includes (i) grabs
(illustrated in Fig. 11.1). operated hy chains or more recently by
cranes. (ii) dredgers, (iii) clay cutters for digging in clayey strata,
stone crackers for bedding wells on rock and shear legs for operatiug
these grabs or dredges and (iv) helmets, in some cases. for the pro-
tection of divers (Photos 3 and 4).
11.4. The method to be adopted for sinking a well requires
careful consideration.

0.'" r,Olro
Fig. 11.1
 ,
DESIGN OF W ~ L FOUNDATIONS
AND SINKING L FOR BRIDGES 61

DETAILS OF GRAB

Height I Width
j
I'
Capacily Main Side Of
Opsn Closed open Closed urn
I
)O CU. ff. V.0' 6'-9" 5'-3" 1
5'-10" 20'-3" 14-7" 4'43.
35 ,, 10'43' 8'-0" 5.4" &2" 18'-2" 11'.6" S.0'

a .. I ' 9'4" 5'.10' 6'-6" 20'-9" 16'-0" 5'-6'

45 s, 12'0. lW-0" 1 6'-2" 1'-0" 20'-0' 14'-6" 5'-6"

Two major bridges located very near each other. with fpunda-
tions taken deeper than 100 ft through clay and sandy strata with
very similar characteristic variations and having wells of very nearly
equal sizes and of steining areas, presented an interesting study of the
relative merits of the two methods of sinking adopted. One contrac-
tor did the sinking of wells with divers while the other made use of
grabs. Both had organised the works efliciently.
The relative merits were examined with the following conside-
rations for selecting the most effective methqd for any particular
aituation :
(I) Cost of sinking, excluding overheads but including
plant depreciation and running expenses, kentl~dge,etc.,
( 2 ) Initial cost of the equipment t o be used,
(3) Speed of sinking of wells for quick completion of
work, and
(4) Safety during sinking.

(1) Cost of Sinking

Theobserved actual cost of sinking of the wells, adopting the
two different methods, varying with depth is shown in the graph,
Fig. 11.2. It may be seen that sinking of wells by divers is cheaper
than sinking of wells using grabs for a depth upto about 20 ft
below water level. After that depth the c o ~ of
t sinking using mecha-
nical grabs is more economical : it is a s much as 20 to 25 per cent.
Beyond the depth of about 110 ft below water level, it may be
assumed that the sinking o f wells by divers is almost impossible.
It can be considered that the limit for sinking wells by d ~ v e r suslng
steel diving helmets and compressed air is about 40 t o 50 feet below
water level. For greater depths sinking by using grabs is decidedly
62 BALWANTRAO & M ~ U S W A M
ONY

Fig. 11.2

cheaper. Expressions for rise in cost, assuming parabolic variation

(vide Fig. 11.2) with depth adopting any of these two methods can
be wrltten as :
(a) by using grabs
x = 0.044 y' +c (11.1)
(b) by using divers
x = 0.055 y' + e' (11.2)
where, y = depth of sinking in feet,
x = average cost per foot length of sinking at
that depth, and
c and c' = constants.
(2) Initial Cost of Equipment
The initial cost of equipment used by divers using steel helmets
and compressed air and that necessary for adopting grabs using
mechanically operated hoists, etc., varies codsiderably ; the latter
being more expensive. For small projects, this may be an important
factor and may offset the economy gained on mechanical gcabbing.
This consideration will, of course, be different if the contractrog firm
pnssesses the grabbing equipment.
However, in cases where sinking is t o be done t o a depth of
30 t o 40 ft below the bed, expensive macliinery for working grabs is
not required as manual o r a n ~ m a force
l can be used for working the
 DESIGNAN13 SINKING
OF WELLFOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIDGE$ 63

grabs. In such cases, work o a sevrral wells is started sim~!ltaheously.

This makes position easy as i t does not involve procuring and opera-
tion o f mechanical equipment.

(3) Speed of Sinking

The average speed of sinking of a well oeing divers was about
one-third the speed of sinking usinggrabs.

:4) Safety
In case of grabs, there is no danger of men losing their life due
t o a sudden sand blow or due to water preccure at sreat depths of
sinking. Whereas in cilse of divers usins steel helmets and compress-
ed air. the divers are always in danger of failure of equipment. ?and
blows and working at great depths
11.5. The method adopted for correctly placing the curb
depends on local configuration.
(I) Ifthe bed of the river is high. the bed is excavated upto
within say 6 in. above the subtoil water level The curb
is then laid there and after it has sufficien!ly hardened,
say after 5 days. steining is built over it [Fig. 11.3 (all.
..-t -. .-

Fig. 11.3 ( a )
w
. -""..
Fig. 11.3 (b)

(2) If the location of the well is at a place with water which

cannot be drained, diverted o r pumped out, sand island
method which envisages the construction of a temporary
island by dumping sand on which the curb and steining
are built is resorted t o [Fig. 11.3 (b)]. In these cases,
sinking up to the bed of the stream is done through known
materials (artificially placed sand) and controlled quite
accurately and later it is guided in vertical direction by
the pressure of the sand forming the island while the
well is sunk through heterogeneous and less favourable
materials below.
At places where sand island cannot be maae economically by
just dumping sand there, the sand filling for the island must be
contained by suitable timbering, o r sheet piling o r by riprap,
forming coffer dams and must. be protected against scour and
erosion. The very placement or a sand island in a river of tidal
creek or channel tends to increase the velocity of the current which
may cause scour beyond desirable limits.

The sand island method has been very sucassfully used upto
I5 ft depth of water. The sides of the sand island must be at least
three times the diametcr of the well.

COFFER o m
Fig. 11.4
11.6. If the depth of standing water and the variation in the
water.level at the site of the well make the formation of sand island
uneconomical, sometimes steel caissons with cutting edges are
floated to the site and sunk into position. The curb and the
strakes are hollow and made of mild steel plates f in. and in. thick
suitably braced with angle irons depending on the size of the well
and the depth of standing water. The operation consists of towing
to the site and potitioning a manageahlc height of the strake by
tugs and adding concrete gradually iu the annular-span as the
caisson sinks to its position adding further strakes when required.
A description of the method adopted for sinking the steel caissons
for the Brahmaputra Railway Bridge near Pandu will be of
interest (see Photo 5).
The r t n l caissons used were of the Double D shape with
overall dimension of 53 ft 6 in. by 32 ft the thickness of steining
was 9 ft and that of the central diaphragm 7 ft 6 in. The well
curb was 15 ft high and was made of f in. thick steel plates
properly braced inside. The strakes above the curb were 7 ft high
and all joints were made watertight. A cast iron seating ring was
attached to the first strake for fixing the adapter for the airlock,
should sinking under pneumatic pressure be necessary.
Each well curb weighing 121 tons was assembled on level
ground and one strake was assembled on it. A small quantity of
concrete was placed in the curb to make the cutting edge water-
tight. With the rise ia flood level, the well curb floated up and the
sinking srts were taken to the well curb which was moved to the
 D ~ amNSINKINGOR WRLLFOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIW 65
site. A draft of about 4 ft was maintained and for this purpose the
water inside the caisson was removed by compressed air.
The sinking sets consisted of'two barges with trestles 46 ft high
and cross beams on top. The barges were 36 feet apart. The cross-
beams on the top were designed to take a load of over 10 tons.
After placing the sinking sets roughly in position, strakes
were added and small quantities of concrete poured into- the
annular apace sufficient to lower the caisson leaving adequate free-
board or further addition of strakes. The total height of each
caisson depended upon the depth of water at the time of grounding
and the critical grip required. Before grounding, however, the
caisson was positioned accurately with cutting edge just about a
foot or so above the river bed. Each caisson was held by six
pully blocks when grouaded on river bed, concrete was poured in
the annular space sufficient to give an initial grip of 6 ft or so.
Grabbing and concreting were repeated and when the critical grip of
about 20 ft was obtained the whole annular space was filled with
concrete. Thereafter, building of steel caisson was discontinued and
ordinary cement concrete steining built. Until the critical grip is
obtained, it is necessary to ensure that the weight of the caisson plus
the concrete in the annular space slightly exceeds the buoyancy to
avoid the caisson tiltin~. Any uneven sdf-sinking or scour will result
in aggravation of the tilt.
After the erection of strakes a t nearly the c0rrec.t position,
deep scouring on the upstream side was observed. To prevent the
scour, sand bagging was done on the upstream side.
While erecting the caissons, heavy tilting caused by rapid
current in deep waters was observed and this tilting increased with
the increase.of a~bmergence. This was rectified by tying a wire rope-
round the well at 8 ft to 10 ft from tile bottom and pulling it from
the upstream side bv means of a hand-winch fixed on properly
anchored boats.
11.7. Dredging, Jetting md Sinking
The removal of material by dredging the wells is usually
accomplished by clamshell buckets. For dredging through hard
material the heaviest and largest bucket that can operate in the
dredge hole should be used.
When the caisson approaches very hard strata, special rock-
cutting teeth should be added to the grab or very often heavy chisel-
ling resorted to for breaking such strata. The chisels may consist of
long steel beams with tempered chisel points or a set of rails with
cutting edge clamped or bolted together. These cao be operated by
raising and dropping manually or mechanically.
 11.8. In those cases where due to the depth water and
peculiarities of the soils, sinking by the use of grabs, etc., cannot be
done, pneumatic sinking or in some cases sinking by divers with the
use of steel helmet and compressed air is resorted to. Both these
methods are very expensive and slow.
11.9. In the case of divers using steel heirnets, continuous
supply of compressed air is required.
In one of the bridge works, compressors with a capacity of 250
cu. ft. per minute and 110 cu. ft. per minute were used for supply of
air to the divers using steel diving helmets. For a depth up t o 40
ft, compressors with a capacity of 110 cu. ft. at 45 lb per sq. in.
pressure were found suitable. Beyond that depth compressors with
a capacity of 250 cu. ft. at 150 lb per sq. in. pressure were used.
Compressors worked with electricity were not used because conti-
nuous supply of energy could not be ensured.
Upto 40 ft depth, a 250 cu. ft. per minute at 50 10 per sq. in.
supply can feed air required by 8 to 10 divers. Beyond this depth
and upto a depth of 60 ft it can supply air to 6 divers and beyond
60 ft only to two divers. Each diver required on the average 1+ cu.
ft. of air per minute. Beyond 50 ft depth below water the operation
becomes very slow and hencc uneconomical.
11.10. As a safety measure, it is essential that, either there
should be two compressors with their compressed air supply suitably
connected together working simultaneously on each well, each com-
pressor capable of giving the full required supply, or one compressor
on each adjacent well with inter-connected compressed air supply
arrangements and a pressure tank be provided. In this case, each
compressor should be of the capacity to meet tbe full requirements
of both the wells.
lI.11. The rate of sinking of a well is a function of the rate
at which the bed material is removed from the well bottom. Sand
from upper layers was removed at the rate of 120 to 160 cu. ft. per
hour by four divers. Digging in clay is more difficult and the out-
put is reduced by about 50 per cent. This rate wds maintained upto
a depth of about 40 feet. As the depth increased, the number of
divers put on the job was reduced and the output decreased consider-
ably and, as a consequence, rate of sinking went down. The rate of
sinking in top sandy layers was 1 ft Gin. per day and in middle clay
layer it dropped to 7 in. due to difficulty of digging in clay and again
increased to 9 in. in saudy strata. The reduced progress in the sandy
strata at r'nese depths i\ mainly due to !he smaller number cf divers
working a t those depths. These ratcs o r sinking may go down consi-
deiably if obi~ructions like tree trunks or boulieri, arc met.
 DIBIGNAND SINKINO mu
OF WBLLFOUNDATIONS B R I W ~ 67
It is important t o note that the quantity of earth removed for
sinkiig a well varies, and depends on the curb area or the outer
dimensions of the well. The quantity of sandy bed removed may be
as much as 2 to 2.5 times the calculated quantity based on the area of
the well, due to sand flowing in from sides during grabbing operations.
In a clayey soil, the,quantity of bed material removed will be compar-
ably less. For work~ngout diver hours, output per diver may be taken
as 10 cu. ft. per hour in clay and I5 cu. ft. per hour for sand. Working
day for divers is given in Table 11.1. The observed endurance of
divers to remain under water at different depths and the wages
demanded on one of the bridge works in 1961 are also given in Table
11.1.
TABLE11.1
- - ~ ~~

Depth
--
0 to 50 it
I
Duration of shift per day
in hours at a stretch
Wages in r-s per
diver per shift in 1961

5010 60ft
60 to 70 ft
Beyond 70 ft
~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ p ~

11.12. In.well sinking upto 50 ft depth below water the divers

did not appear to feel much discomfort. Beyond this depth, the
divers got pinning, itching and scratching sensations. These discom-
fortsincreased much more a t depths of 80 ft to 100 ft and caused pain
all over the body which lasted for a considerable period. At greater
depths. the divers are liable to get cramps. partial paralysis and un-
consciousness due to heavy strain. In such situations, immediate rest
for next 10 to 15 days appears necessary till their health is regained.
They have to be kept under constant medical attention Divers work-
ing under deep water generally require more salt. They should.
therefore, be given salt drinks before entering the dredge hole. It is
good practice to give them a glass of butter milk or glucose with
plenty of salt. If there is faintiog or indication of fatigue, intra-
muscular or intravenous injections of .'Gluco Saline" were found
effective.

11.13. Precaution to be taken by the Divers

At the bottom of the well, the diver should . b able
~ to sit with-
out losing his balance. The steel diving helmet worn by the diver
weighs about 50 lb in open air, it loses its weight as the diver
descends down due t o increase in air pressures 2nd as such the helmet
68 RAO& MUTHUSWAMY
BALWANT ON

should be suitably weighed. The diver should not enter until

sufficient air pressure has been built u p and the machinery can work
satisfactorily.
The diver should secure signal rope to his upper arm and
descend down by a r o p ladder till he reaches the water level. There
the helmet with the hose pipe are fitted to sit comfortably over his
head and shoulders. It is necessary that the hose pipe and signal rope
are laid out carefillly by men who are very reliable and efficient. The
air prersure must not be varied while the diver is in water. Any
variation in pressure may cause unconsciousness or confuse the diver
at the bottom and he may travel up at a disastrous rate. If due t o any
reason the bucket containing the diggings does not come in (lie usual
time, the signal man should always enquire about the condition of the
diver. If no response is received, his co-worker should rent
immediately or the signal man should rush to his help. Any
slackening in these precautions will be dangerous and, therefore
considerable care and importance should be attached to the aforesaid
precautions.
11.14. Pneumatic sinking is resorted t o when difficulty is
experienced in sinking the wells through hard, or boukiery strata under
water o r if difficulty is encountered for the seating of wells on uneven
rock bed or for anchoring of wells into the rock under water. The
pneumatic sinking method provides the facility of open digg~ng. The
entrance t o the bed of the well is controlled by two chambers and men
go down the well by ladders to work with picks, shovels and olher
excavating tools.
At greater depths, the higher air pressure somelimes causes
deafness and adversely affects the muscles.
The air pressure inside the wells in case of pneumatic sinking
makes the well light by its uplift. Sudden decompression of the
chamber may be used as an aid to sinking by bringing suddenly the
full weight of the well to bear. The pressure of air to be maintajned
inside thc chamber is approximately one half pound per square ~ n c h
above the atmospheric pressure for each foot depth below the water
surface. If tbe depth below the water surface is 40 feet, then the
minimum pressure required will be 35 l b per sq. in.
11.15. A study of the history of an open well sinking leads to
the following conclusions :
(a) Most cases of initial tilting occurs because of attempts t o
rush the work before the well has reached the critical
grip depth.
(b) Most cases of serious tilting occurs when too rcdical steps
are taken to correct the m ~ n o initial
r tilts.
 AND
~ESION OF WELLFOUNDATIONS
SIYKINO FOR BRIDGES 69

11.16. Tilting also takes place when the well enters a harder
layer from a comparatively softer layer. This would be self-
explanatory by a reference to Fig. 11.5.

Tilting usually does not take place suddenly. Actually when thq
well is one or two feet above the level of comparatively harder
strata l h t movement of the well may be noticed as sand o r softer
strata starts flowing in the well along the slope or #he harder strata.
That is the time for taking effective measures t o prevent or set right
tilt, if any had taken place.
11.17. A well sinks by its own weight when the soil below its
cutting edge is removed. I f the side friction is so great as t o
retard the sinking under its own weight, additional weight o r kent-
ledge will have to be added. When the addition of kentledge does
nor make the. wdl sink, it is best t o suspend the work for sometime
dad allow the water in the well to reach its normal level, than lower
the water level by say 13 to 20 ft by pumping. The diflerential
head causes increased flow in the well. This Row reduces surface
friction and helps the well in sinking. In such cases, sometimes
the well sinks rather rapidly. However, care should be exercised
not to depress the water too much and thus avoid sand blowing and
consequences thereof.
In this connection a very instructive experience in sinking one
of the wells of a bridge is worth recounting. The well with 76 ft
long steining was being sunk through clay strata and was held up.
Grabbing to depth of 15 ft below cutting edge did not make the
well sink. Addition of 160 tons of kentledge proved ineffective.
70 BALWANTRAO& MUTHUSWAMY
ON

Dewatering of the well was resorted t o and when the water surface
was depressed by about 24 ft, the well suddenly went down 15 feet.
Investigations proved that there was still two feet depth of clay strata
below the cutting edge but the differential head o i water caused the
piercing of this clay seal causing considerable sar:d blowing which
made the well travel down 15 ft in one go.
Another interesting sand blow that occurred in a well of one of
the major bridges gives a n indication of the nature of the pheno-
menon. The clay layer was of poor qualify. The earth right from
the surface, within a radius equal t o the depth at which the blow
occurred, caved in and blow u p in the well. This caused cracks
and depression in the surrounding earth surface in concentric circles
as shown in Fig. 11.6. 'This flow caused n o movement of the well
as there was practically n o draw off of the soil from below the bed
o f the curbs.

F i g . 1 1.6

11.18. If the measures of adding kentledge and dewatering

fail, explosives are uscd t o induce the well t o sink. The explosive
generally used is gelignite with submarine detonator Half a stick
of this dynamite was used with success in each dredge hole of 9 ft
6 in, diameter. It ic important that in case of wellSwith two o r
more dredgs holes all wells should be subjected t o a simultaneous
explosio:i for wli~ch only electric firing arrangements should he
employed ;otherwise the well may not sink evenly.

1 1.19 Effect of Cants and Shifts

Every possible endeavour should be made t o sink a well a s
vertical as possible. Cants, if any, within limits may not b e
 DESIGNAND SINKING
OF WELL FOIJNDATIONS
FQR BRIDGES 71

dangerous, but must be examined about their possible ultimate

effects.
A well taken down to depth D feet has a cant slope *S',as in
Fig. 11.7.
I
-- : "

Fig. 11.7
If the well is to be brought hack plumb, the shift 'e' suffered by
:he well can be expressed by the equation :
e=SD, (11.3)
where, S is the slope of the tilt equal to t a ? tl
In equation (1 1.3), D,is the height from thc bottom about
which the well will rotate while being brought back to vertical posi-
tion by a force applied a t a height H ft above the bed level. The
value of D, in case of non-cohesive s o ~ l sand the value of Dsin case
of cohesive soils are given respectively ih equations (6.5) and (6.15).
From the ioregoing it may be secn that the point of rotation
depends on the height above the bed level at which the force is
applied and the depth by which the well has already sunk and not
on the magnitude of the correcting force. This will enable the shirt
to be calculated in advance by a;ljusting ihc point of application of
the force. In case of a bridg? most wells rectified were found to
rotate about 1/3rd depth of embedment from the base.
11.20. It is usual to restrict the shifts and tilts to certain
limits. Shifts of one foot and t i l t of l in 60 to l in 100 depending
upon the depth of wells are the mnsimum permissible limits. These
limits should be taken only as a y:~ideand every shift or tilt of n well
be dealt with in each individual case.
11.21. The shifts changc span lengths and thereby induce
eccentric loads on the well steining and the foundations while the
tilts cause uneven pressure on foundations. The magnitude of the
ill effects depends upon the size of the well and depth to which
it is sunk. These are illustrated in Fig. 11.8 which shows that the
effect of a cant on wells of same size differs at different depths. This
also indicates the necessity for rectifying the cants immediately lbey
are noticed.
72 BALWANTRAO& MMUTHUSWAMY
ON

Fig. 11.8

a*.,
If a simple tilt occurs at a certaindepth and the sinking conti-
nued till designed foundation depth is reached, theshift at the bottom
could be ereater than at the top a s shown in Fig. 11.9.
4 .e--

",...
. %"-

-
-.- , !

Fig. 11.9
These shif!s and tilts may take place in any cornbization as
shown in Fig. 11.9. The total shirt at the base will then be lhc sum
of the two shifts. The development ol'tilts and shifts actually obser-
ved in a well of a bridge will illustrate t h i ~poin!, vide Fig. 11.10.
 DESIGN
AND SINKINGOF WELL FOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIDGES 73

11.22. For rectifying the cant, the following methods which

can be adopted :
are usually f o l 1 0 ~
N ~L T
D U U

Fig. 11.11

(I) By applying an eccentric loading as in Fig. 11.1 1 on the

higher side and removing more material from the dredge hole on the
same side.

(2) By open excavation on one side and depositing mom

earth on the other side as in Fig. 11.12. By this operation the earth
pressure on the higher side is released and that on lower side in-
creased, thus mrrecting the cant.

Fig. 11.12

(3) Yet another method adopted is by artificially arresting

the sinking on the lower side and accelerating it on the higher side,
vide Fig. 11.13. For this, hard wooden blocks 12 in. by 9 in. and
74 RAO & MUTHUSWAMY
BALUANT ON

5 ft long lived with steel piate at top are inserted at four or five
places underneath the cuttins edge on the lower side and sinking
operation is continued on the higher, side. After the cants are
rect~fied, these blocks are removed. By this method cants as high
as I in 24 are known to have been rectified. If in. spite of the best

Fig. 11.13

efforts, the tilts arc not rectified lo a desirable degree. the effect of
eccentricity on bearing prescurrs could be minimised by projecting
the concrete caps so as to keep the resultant reaction within
permissible limits.
11.23. Bottom Plugging
(I) Bottom plug of a well usually consists of (I : 2 : 4) cement
concrete laid by means of tremic or skip boxes. Plugging done with
"prepackt concrete" is also considered satisfactory. It has been
noticed that the concrete laid for the bottom plug takes longer time
to set and considerable proportion of cement gets washed resulting
in weak c h c r e t e and, therefore. 10 per cent extra quantity of cement
should be added in the concrete.
(2) Bottom plupging should always be done in one conti-
nuous operation when the water in the well is at its normal level.
If there are two or more dredge holes, plugging should be done
simultaneously and to equal heights in all the dredge holes.
(3) Before plugging the bottom of a well, sounding should be
taken to check that there is no sand lying above the cutting edge
of the curb and t o ascertain the depth at various points in the
dredge hole for getting a fair idea of the profile of the bottom and
its cubic contents. For the required quantity of concrete in the
plug, quantity of aggregate to be used should be 89 cu. ft. for every
100 cu. ft. of calculated quantity.
(4) Founding wells on uneven rocky bed is always difficult.
Careful observations of boriogs are required specially if pinnacles
arc observed from the base rock. The rock may have to be blasted
all the way down or underpinning may have to be resorted to, to
support the steining of the well.

( 5 ) The bottom plug may be in the shape of a bulb, the

advantage of this is that it will produce arch action, reduce hoop
tension in the curb and give greater bearing area.
(6) While founding the well on rock, it should be securely
anchored to the bed by taking it 9 in. to I ft into the rock bed.
Dowel bars when uced should. :is already stated, have twice the length
io the plug compared to the length embedded in the rock to develop
full bond, vide Fig. 4.2. This is necessary t o account for the possl-
b i h y of slips and tensile stresses that may exist between the base and
lock nufpce.
(7) Bottom plugging could be done by
(i) using a tremie,
(ii) using skip boxes, o r
(iii) use of colloidal concrete.
By the use of tremie, the entire, plug can be concreted in one
continuous operation. This process is quite useful and practicable
upto depths of 35 to 40 feet below normal water level, b q ond this
depth trouble due to arching of the concrete being poured is u,ually
experienced. Arching effects sometimes can be avoided by pourlog
concrete under pressure.
A skip box is a steel or wooden box with two openable flaps at
the bottom. The flaps are operated by a lever worked with a rope
from the top of the well. On reaching the bottom the lever is pulled
by the rope to open the door at the bottom. and deposit the concrete
there when the skip is being lifted up (Photos 6 and 7). The capacity
of a skip box is designed to suit :he capacity of the winch or other
machinery used for lowering it.
Before starling the plugging operation, the water in the well
must be still and upto its normal level. Concrete must be.of
normal consistency as if being used on %ark out of water. Plugglng
operation of the well must be continuous and completed ln aday.

12. TESTWG OF WELL FOUNDATIONS

12.1. To be sure of the validity of assumptions made in the

design of bearing capacity of the bed of the well, it is desirable to
test the well for the actual design load.
76 BALWANT
RAO& MUT~IUSWAMY
ON

12.2. In the case of wells resting on granular bed material like

sand, etc., large settlement could take place, therefore the magnitude
of safe allowable load on such beds is usually limited by the
considerations of settlement rather than base stability.
12.3. Equally loaded Footings of equal size rssting at the same
depth on uniform granular bed will settle equally. Footings with
equal intensity oTpressnres but with direrent sizes will stress different
volumes of soil and thus tend to settle unequally as can be seen
in Fig. 12.1. Thus the testing of wells for bearing pressures on soils
is beset by this drawback.
6.

" I.
7.
3
5 '*
c I*
;24

.
.d
ior
u
.a
0 I I. I, 1D g
m,.**n*OF 111. LOIDlD

Fig. 12.1

12.4. The following load tests can be carried out at site :

(I) Loading the well after it has been plugged,
[2) Loadins the well and determining the bearingpressure of
the reduced section of the well steining before it is plug-
ged and
(3) By plate bearing test on bottom of the well before
plugging.
12.5. The first method is direct and reliable. The choice of
this method. however, depends upon the consideration whether it will
be possible to break the bottom plug without damage to well if the
test results show inadequate bearing czlpacity of the foundation
soil. As the breaking and removing of the plug is not easy, load
tests is carried on wells before they are plugged and also by plate
bearing tests directly on the foundation soil.
12.6. The weight of the bottom plug and thefilling material of
the well could be considered as directly passing on the soil below.
When load is added, it is reasonable to consider that only the load
plus weight of the plug and the weight of the well less buoyancy is
coming over the base or the cutting edge.
12.7. The usual ~ r a c t i c eto arrive at the test load is to work
out the dead and live loads coming on the well and add another 25
 DESIGN
AND SINKING OP WELL FOUNDATIONS FOR BRIDGES 77
to 50 per cent on both the dead and the live load. If due to
rather large skin friction -there being no scour and. great depth of
embedment-the test load is found to be insufficient to overcome the
skin friction, i t may be nrcessary to add extra loads to produce slight
settlement of say, half an inch in a plugged well and more in case of
a well without plug.
12.8. When the well without a plug and without any sand fill-
ing is tested, due to the wedge action of the curb, the settlement under
the load (calculated pn the basis of the steining area to the plugged
area) will be rapid in the beginning and will stop when balanced
by the increased volume of the curb penetrating the bed. Neglecting
the skin friction at the interface of the curb and soil, and if ' p ' is
the maximum bearing capacity per sq. ft. of soil. ' n,' the load
- .O""P".

Fig. 12.2

applied per sq. ft. over the steining of thickness It' aAd 'd' the depth
at which the curb will come to rest during a test under that load, vide
Fig. 12.2, then the factor of safety '7' with respect to 'n,' for the well
without plug is given by :
(12.1)

Where, D = average diameter of the well.

For the plugged well, the factor of safely will be e?, where 0 is
the reduction factor which depends on the type of soil and the ratio
of the area of the steining at the depth .d' to the area of the well
base. From graph in Fig. 12.1, it can be shown that the value of
R will be :

+
0.00 12 (0
Dt
t)'
1
and 11 ,. - [ 1 - 0.004 ( D t t ):
(12.2)
78 BALWAMRAO & MUTHUSWAMY
ON

In this expression (12.1), the value of 'd' is known under an

-
actual load test for a given 'w' as (d z) will be the observed settle-
ment. The ratio IV
Will then give factor of safety. For example, if
a factor of safety of 4 or 10 is obtained, then the magnitude of the
valne 'd' for a particular 'w' and wcll si7.e : D = 20 ft, t = 3 ft and
y = 6 ft, would be 18 in. and 7 in. respectively. As the shape of the
curb is not a true triangle but blunt, say 3 to 4 in. wide at its bottom
for a value of '2' equal to 6 in., it can be expected to give a true
settlement of 12 in. and 1 in. for the respective load factors and the
factors of safety assumed in this example. Conversely, if these settle-
meots are noted during a test, the factors of safety that could be
expected can be determined with respect to load 'w' added on the well.
A study of the shape of the settlement curve drawn for the well test
will give an idea as to when the skin friction is overcome. Until the
skin friction is overcome, no settlement will take place and once the
settlement takes place i t will be on the basis of the intensity produced
by the additional load added between the time the settlement starts
and that at the time of measuring the desirable settlement. The
value oft) in the expression (12.1) should be based on that load
intensity.
12.9. The result of testing plugged wells will be more or less
similar. The behaviour of a plugged wcll under an actual load test
(Photo 8) is given in Fig. 12.3. The actual superimposed load was

-,
z

0 2
?
I
0

., .,
"""".#
.,
0"",.WE,

Fig. 12.3

836 tons giving an intensity of load of 2.82 tons per sq. ft. Fig. 12.3
shows that under a total load (superimposed load.plus weight of the
well) of 540 tons the well did not move, tllereby ~ndicatingthat total
skin friction and buoyancy is nearly 540 tons. In this case, skin
friction was approximately 440 lb per sq. ft.
 ~ I G AND
N SINKING FOUNDATIONS
OF WELL FOR BRIDGES 79
12.10. The load increment and the corresponding settlements
recorded are shown on the same graph. It will be seen that for an
increase in the intensity of 0.75 ton per sq. ft. (2.00 to 2.75 tons per
sq. ft.) the settlement was0.6 inch. For a settlement of 2 in., consi-
dering the large size of well, the safe bearing capacity will work out
to 2.5 tons per sq. ft. This appears to be reasonable for medium
yellow sand.
12.1 1. During the removal and after removing the test load
the well cannot be expected to recover the settlement by elastic
rebounding unless the load added over and above that requ~redto
overcome skin friction and buoyancy is greater than the skin friction
that will act in the opposite direction. Thus once the load overcomes
the skin friction that part of the load gets locked up and keeps the
soil stressed permanently. This phenomenon was noted in the-actual
load test described in para 12.9. Thus it can be concluded that,
once the reaction due to live load gets transferred to the base of
the foundation well, it remains locked there if the skin friction
developrd below the maximum scour level is greater than the live load
reaction. Thus the foundation pressure under a bridge becomes set
after some time.
12.12. The arrangement for a plate bearing test (Fig. 12.4)
consists of a stiffened 24 in. square or ;I suitable sized steel plate
which supports a stanchion of' fabricated steel and angle irons. The
stanchion should rest on a roller assembly to transmit the load verti-

cally. The stanchion projects outside the well and supports a loading
platform. A lever device resting on a knife edge independent of the
stanchion can m a ~ n i f ythe settlement 10 to 15 times dependingon the
ratio of lever arms itlid measure settlenlents accurately upto 0.001 inch.
The reliability of result of this test depends upon the size of the
plate but this again is restricted by the capacity of the loading
platform. In order to produce the erect of surcharge, the plate
should be covered with sand to a height in the ratio of the model to
prototype dimensions.
If the dimensions of the prototype are D and B a n d that of
the model d and b as shown in Fig. 12.4, then
BID = bld (12.3)

Where, d = surcharge required for this size of plate. This

surcharge works out to 20 ft, for D = 100 ft, B = 10 ft and
b = 2 ft.
12.13. For testing a well, the weight of the testing assembly is
first noted and the zero reading under this load taken.
The stanchion and the loading platform are supported by
hydraulic jacks which can be operated slowly to apply the loads
gradually. After every increase in load, the jacks are operated until
the settlement stops, where the jacks should be locked and readings
taken. jacks operated again and further load added and so on till
the load equal to twice the design load, i.e.. twice the actual dead
and live loadis applied. The results of load intensity versus settle-
ment should then be drawn on a graph.

nn I* "OVn'
-0 01 .l*1 o* Y m l Y l U I

Fig. 12.5

(i) Test conducted on a well sunk through sand strata is

given in graph in Fig. 12.5 which shows the result when
theload was left in position until the settlement came
 t o an equilibrium. It may be noted from this graph that
a t least 12 hours should elapse before taking a reading and
adding the next increment of load to get the correct load
settlement curve.

Fig. 12.6

(ii) The results of a plate bearing test conducted on a poor

soil, consisting of 58 per cent clay, 32 per cent silt and 6
per cent sand, at the bottom of a well show that the safe
bearing capacity was reached even before a settlement of t
in. had taken place and the shear failure took place even
at 1 in. settlement. The soil was of organic type with large
fissures. The size of well was 9 ft external diameter and
was 47 ft deep. Load settlement curve given in Fig. 12.6
shows that the elastic limit was reached at 2.7 tons per
sq. ft. With a factor of safety of 3, the allowable bearing
pressure on this type of soil was 0.9 ton per sq. ft. The
plate used for testing was of 2 ft diameter. From this it
appears that for soils which are poor, the settlement
should not be the criterion for design but the correct
knowledge of the bearing capacity of the soil at site is
most essential.

13. CONCLUSIONS
Scienlific design of well foundations is still an open subject.
The Authors have attempted to bring together in one place the
experiences of field engineers facing the complex problems connected
with the practical sinking of wells. Considerable amount o f factual
material has been drawn from many sources which might have not
been fully acknowledged eycept where direct mention is made. The
Authors are very much indebted to various engineers who have
added to the knowledge of well sinking by recording their experience
and discussions.
82 BALWANTRAD & MVTHUSWAMY
ON D e s l ~AND
~ SINKING OF
WELLFOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIDGES

I t is the view of the Authors that model studies will have t o be

further intensified taking into account the experience gained at the
timeofconstruction and latter from the performances of well founda-
tions while in actual service. T o serve this purpose, data and
observations collected o r made during inspection of bridges o r in
laboratories should be freely exchanged. Dissemination of such
knowledze will boster re.earch into the hitherto partially explored
aspects of scour, base pressure, passive pressure, skin friction and the
material of construction for wellc in general.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Authors are grateful t o Shri S . L. Bazaz, Additional Con-

sulting Engineer (Bridges), Ministry of Transport and Communica-
tions. for the encouragement given for writing this Paper.
The Authors also acknowledge the suggestions given by their
colleagues, in particular Shri N.S. Ramaswami, and the help given by
Messrs. Khem Chand, Murdeswar, B.C. Thndani, Ranjit Singh and
J.K. Sharma in preparing the sketches and plates.

REFERENCES

I. Standard Specifications and Code of Practice for Road Bridges,

Section 11, Indian Road Congress.
2. Standard Specifications for Highway Bridgcs-American Association
of State Highway 01hcials-1957.
3. Larsen and Arthur Toch-Scour Around Bridge Piers and Abut-
ments. Iowa Research Laboratory.
4 Gales Pichard-"The Curzon B r i d ~ eat AllahabadW-Institution of
Civil Engineers-London-Paper No. 3623, 24th March, 1908.
5. Terzaghi-Theoretical Soil Mechanics-1943.
6 Salberg. F J -Pra:ttssl Well Foundations and Gtrder Erecoon for
Lesser "Major Rrtdgc\" In Indla-Tcchntcal Paper h o 322- Cj 0 I .
Mtn~slryof Rallusys Hallnay Board.
7. Nambiar, K.K. and Nambirr. P.G.-Design and Construction of a
Prestressed Concrctc Bridge across River Colcroon-Paper No. 192-
I.R.C. lournal, Vol. XXI-2. March 1957.
 DISCUSSION

Shri M. P. Apte (Chairman) in his opening remarks staled that

the Paper covered a vast field and many speakers might differ with
some of the points, but certainly the Authors had taken lot of pains
for collecting large amount of data useful to engineers. He then
called upon the Authors t o introduce the Paper.

Shri B. Balwant Rao (Co-Author) in his introductory remarks

stated that he had tried to put down in the Paper particularly that
information which suited the present day requirements on the design
and sinking of well foundations and complied with the requirements
of the IRC Standard Specifications & Code of Practice for Road
Bridges.

Some recent failures nf large diameter wells had brought into

focus the importance of a closer study of the design of wells particu-
larly large diameter wells.
A heavy well sinks more earily and tilts conipnratively less than
wells with lighter steining A lighter well needs comp~rativelyheavier
kentledge for sinking. If the kentledge was heavy and placed eccen-
tric t o rectify tilts, and if during that period rand blowing takes place,
o r artesian or semi-artesian spring is encountered, the well would
move down somewhat rapidly and the forces brought into play, espe-
cially those causing the stopping of the well at the bottom sometimes
damaged or cracked the well steining. This brought out the import-
ance of avoiding heavy kentledge and making the wells heavy so that
the wells mostly sink by their own weight o r with the help of very
little kentledge. The wells structurally strong could resist forces
brought into play during sinking and contingent works. Normally
the differential earth pressure etc., acting on the steining had been
found to have little effect in damaging a well during sinking.

Thus the subject of the minimum !bickness of the steining of a

well though well recognised had assumed great importance and need-
ed to bedealt with ratioonlly. Even n Committee of the IRC had been
constituted to go into this matter. The minimum thickness of steining
to be adopted in a well recommended in para 5.7 of this Paper had
been based on the assumption that on an average, the skin friction
to be overcome for rivers in India was of the order of 3 cwt. per cq.
ft. Two-thirds of this weight had been assumed to be overcome by
the self weight and the rest by kentledge. A factor for the depth
had been included, hecause the friction increased with the depth.
This rough and ready rule appeared to be satisfactory so far. l o
special situations, particularly of wells going through clay strata, it
was better to adopt a rational approach brought out in the Paper.

There was the other question of the extent to which the well
would get relief in the form of the passive resistance o f thc surroud-
ing soil. This had got to bc assessed for the depth below the scour
level. This problem was also under active consideration of an I.R.C.
Sub-committee. With heavier vehicles forming the bulk of the present
day traffic. large transverse forces are a reality and this aspect had
become important for the purposes of keeping the sub-structure of
the bridge true and vertical within tolerable limits. For deriving the
relief from clay soils, active pressure which takes tiwe to mate-
rialise w3s omitted from consideration. The side, friction in non-
cohesive soils has also been omitted. Its coming Into action was
doubtful due to vibration that might be present in the well due to
water flow and the movement of traffic.

Regarding other points concerning the design of the well, he

would like to clarify a little more, like the basis of the low bearing
values proposed for the design of the wells. As a consequence of
grabing operations, the pressure due to the overburden inside the well
would be released. This is reflected by the heaving up of the soils at
the bottom o r the well, and, therefore, higher initial settlement of the
.-,ell would occur when the load was applied, initially. If this initial
large settlement could be tolerated taking Into account the effect of
overburden for sandy soils, higher values of bearing capacity could
be adopted. The bearing capacity could be expected to improve due
to the overburden asserting itself slowly.

From the results of tests fonducted on wells, one felt that.

unless the soil was of a poor qual~ty or gas pockets were expected
wnducting tests on wells purely for determining the bearing capacity
was not worthwhile, except from considerations of academic interest.
However, tests could be so devised that it would help in determining
the relief that the soil surrounding the well offered. This could give
an idea of the distortion the bridge would undergo before being
brought to equilibrium under horizontal forces.

Dr. D. J. Henkel stated that there were to some extent c o n 8 i i

ting requirements between the sinking of well foundations and the
achievement of high bearing capacities in granular soils. If it was
intended to sink a wall foundation with the minimum of effort, it was
to be operated witha low water level inside the well and the excess
material grabbed out. This process led to subsidence of the ground
around the well and also to the disturbance o f the soil layer below
the well. As a result, the settlement under load might be high and the
ultimate bearing capacity low. On the other hand, if an excess head
of water in the well was maintained and excavation controlled very
carefully it might be dificult to sink the well, and kentledge might be
necessary. The settlement would, however, be lower and the bearing
capacity higher. The existence of this problem should be recognised
at an early stage in the design.

Althabgh the Authors had quoted the data given by Gale in his
Paper, they were not very explicit about the relatiohships between
the skin friction and the depth of embedment of well foundations in
granular soils.

It was coaveaient to consider the case where the ground snffaw

was below river level so that simple expressions for the stresses might
be used. For this case, a t any depth, d, below the ground surface,
the vertical erective stress was given by y' d, where y' was the sub-
merged density of the granular soil. The horizontal effective stress
would be given by KOy'd, where KO was the co-efficient of earth
pressure at rest.

The value of KO depended both on the type of soil and the

depositional history but, for soils which had not been preloaded,
KO= ( I - sing') following Jaky might be taken. The angle of
friction that could be mobilized between the soil and the material
of the well caqing was usually designated by 8. and, if there were
no disturbance of the soil by the installation of the well foundation,
the unit frictional force, j, resistrng penetration a t a depth, d
would be :
 Tbe avenge unit frictional force, f over the whole of the embed-
ded area for a total depth of penetration, D, would thus be :

If, however, any yield of the ground occurs during the process
of sinking the well foundation, the horizontal stress would be reduced
and, in the limit, wou!d approach a value of K. y' d, where K, was
the co-efficient of actlve earth pressure.

i. avarage skt~fnctlm, wfiz

0 200 *w coo ew 1000

-
4

120 -

1+0 -
160 -

UNIT SKIN TRCTION -DEPTH

 WELLFOUNDATIONS FOR BRIDGRPIERS 5
If reasonable assumptions regarding 9' and 8 were made, a
relationship could be plotted between f and depth for both K.and K.
conditions. Such a relationship was shown in figure on which all the
assiimptions were also indicated.

Some of the available data For the sinking of well. foundations

in various Darts of the world showed that. in general, the field
mearuremen~s appro~irnated reasonably well t o t i e assumption of
active Dressure conditions. I t was considered that a simple approach
of this' type might be of help to the designer when theprobiems of
well sinking were being considered. On pages 16 and 17 of the Paper,
where the Authors discussed the bearing capacity of well foundations
on granular soils, they implied that the bearing pressures should be
limited to the value applicable to a shallow foundation of the same
area on the same granular soil.

The problem of foundation design was essentially one of limit-

ing the derorm~tionsto within the limits that could be tolerated by
the structure. If care were used in the sinking of the wen foundation
and allowance was made for the fact that much of the settlement
would occur during construction, it might be safe to use rather higher
pressures than what the Authors had recommended.

Shri N. Sen stated that presentation of paras 4.9 to 4.14 gave

an impression that the Authors had dealt with a building foundation
and not a bridge fouodation ; the reeommended allowable settlement
of I in. was the paint at issue. Even then the issue about allowable
soil pressure had not boen correctiv wresented. Actuallv. .. allowable
soil 'pressure was determined by two'criteria : (1) bearing capacity.
and 12) allow3ble settlement. From bearing camcitv consideration.
allowable soil pressure was dettrrnined Gy dividing the ultimate
bearing ca~acitv, which meant a failure of the block of soil mass
beneaih the foindations, by a factor of safety, usually 3. But the
settlement consideration was not a failure condition it was onlv a
limitation depending upon the special needs of the superstruct&e.
It would not. therefore. be correct to use the term bearing ca~acitv
for a pressure correspondinp to a particular settlement. For iettli-
meat consideration again, the Authors had recommended a maximum
of 1 in. settlement even for a bridge structure which settlement was
actually the permissible settlement for a building structure. For a
bridge structure, much higher settlement could be allowed depending
on the design of the superstructure and on the arrangement, if any,
made for adjusting the settlement. It might be worth mentioning
here that the calculated design settlement of main piers of Howrah
Bridge was 5.13 in. for Calcutta main pier and 7.34 in. for the Howrah
main pier. It might also be interesting to mention here that provi-
sion had been made in the construction of the Howrah Bridge at the
anchorage for adjustment of the levels of the noses of the cantilever
arms and thereby of the suspended spans, should the settlement of
the main piers be such as to render this necessary.

The relationship given in para 4.12 was again not correctly

presented. Tarzaghi and Peck had established the following chan
giving the relationship between the "N" values and allowable soil
pressure on sand for one in. settlement :

WlL PRESSURE. F O R 'OOTlNGS O N

SAND ON T N E BA515 OF QESULTS
a p STANDARD PEtiETP4TlON TEST.
(After Terzaghi and Peckj

This chart was valid for shallow foundations above water table.
As settlement decreased with increase in lateral confining pressure,
it was true that the value of allow~hlesoil pressure obtained from
the above chart should be multiplied by a factor of 2 for deep
foundations. Again, if the water table was within a distance equal
to the width of the footings, the value obta~ned from the chart
would need reduction. The term "normal bearing capecity" used
in the expression was not correct. It should be "allowable soil
pressure" based on settlement consideration as given in Terzaghi
-
and Peck's chart. The factor submerged
- weight., which was a cons-
?
dry we~ght
tant for a particular sample, also needed modification as the factor
varied depending on the position of the water table and would be
submerged weight
equal to - - only when the water table was a t the
drv weight
foundation level o r acove it.

The case described in para 4.12 would apply to pier foundations

for buildings and not to bridges as after scour, foundations of a
bridge would be reduced to shallow foundations.

In the case of a bridge founded on sand, therefore, in the first

instance, it was necessary to fix the allowable settlement which a
particular design- would permit. Then the Terzaghi and Peck chart
for 1 in. should be used and the required value for allowable soil
pressure computed by assuming that the settlement varied directly
with the soil pressure. A further correction would be necessary for
the position of the foundations with respect to water table. This
procedure would give the allowable soil pressure on the basis of
settlement.
It was, however, to be noted that the Tenaghi Peck chart for
allowable soil pressure based on settlement consideration has been
established from the results of a large number of load tests in which
the effect of deep surcharge had not been considered. Consequently,
the use of this chart for deep foundations would amount to erring too
much on the conservative side. Ordinarily the soil around a caisson
was likely to be scoured to a fairly good depth so that the surcharge
of soil would not be very deep. With this qualification, the above
procedure for determining the allowable soil pressure would hold
good.

It was generally not necessary to ascertain the allowable soil

pressure in the case of sand from bearicg capacity consideratron,
unless the footings were very narrow, the water table was high, and
the sand was loose, as with a factor of safety of 3, bearing capacity
consideration would give higher allowable soil pressure. But the
allowable soil pressure shoulc', however, be checked from that consi-
deration also. The formula to be used could be as follows :
Allowable soil pressure = 4 (1.3 CNc+yD,Nq+0.6y,Ny)
with factor of safety of 3 for c~rcularfoundations, and
4 (1.3 CNe+ yDrNe+O.4r BNr)
for square foundat~ons.
 where y = unit weigh: of surrounding soil mass
and B = radius or side respectively of the circular or
square footing
C = cohesion
D, = surcharge above the foundation level atter
scour.
The factor N., N,, N,., are being capacity factors which depend only
on 4 and can be read from a chart prepared for this purpose.

Chorr showing relollon betwren 4 and the bcoring copacity focrors.

:Alter Temghi and Peck)

The 'N' values, as determined by standard penetration test

could be fairly reliably correlated with the values of 4, N, and No.
The chart given on next page would give the results of such correla-
tion. Hence if the 'N' values wereknown, the allowable soil pressure
based on bearing capacity consideration for cohesionless sand could
be calculated with the help of the chart and the equation given earlier.

The next question was to determine whether to ~onsidermaxi-

mum scour which would occur at the nose of a pier or average scour
for the purpose of calculating Dl. Adoption of maximum scour
would be on the safer side and was, therefore, recommended
for use.

In the case of a bridge foundation, the distribution of

pressure against the base might be trepezoidal or even triangular.
The soil pressure at the toe was in th;it case higher than the
average pressure. Therefore, the toe pressure was likely to govern.
the desrgn. In as much as relatively high pressure acts over
only a part of the base, the allowable soil pressure should be
higher than those calculated on the basis of procedure described
earlier. Little theoretical and no experimental information was
rvcw LOOSE

O 5
la I-
2
lo;$
J0 !3$
@ 23
u1Q
50 n 8
e
60 $5
70 2
4
!
il

ANGLL OF INTERNAL FRICTION.#.DEGRLES

C U R V U SHOWING TNLRt!ATIDN5HIP D U W L E N 6,bEARING C A m
FACTORS, A N D VALUES OF N FROM THC STAN~ARD
PENLTR ATION TLSTS.

available upon which a rational analyais could he based. It was,

however, commonly increased by 25 to 50 per cent over thevalue
permitted for a base with uniform distribution of pressure. The toe
pressure in that case should not exceed the increased allowable
pressure.
A pier foundation should not, preferably, be established on a
normally loaded clay. For foundation on preloaded clay, allowable
soil pressure from bearing capac~tyconsideration could be calculated
from the following equation.
Allowable soil pressure = 0.95 q,.
The above equation allows for a factor of safety of 3. The
value q, could be determined by means of laboratory tests on samples
taken contiuuously from drill holes by means of thin walled tube
samples. But for small projects, the value might be roughly estimated
on the basis " N values.
10 DISCUSSION
ON

The next step would be to calculate the differentia1 settlement

between adjacent wells for the allowablesoil pressure determined
from bearing capacity consideration. If it was found that the differ-
ential settlement was more than the permissible limits, then the soil
pressure should be adjusted in order to keep the differential settle-
ment within the limits. In the case of bridge foundation with unequal
distribution of pressure, the allowable pressure may be increased by
25 to 50 per cent mentioned earlier. The settlement of a pier on
preloaded clay had to be determined from the consolidation charac-
teristics of layer. In case of big project, elaborate soil sampling and
consolidation tests should be carried out for predicting settlement.
Table given below shows as to how predicted settlement compared
with actual settlement :

Predicted and recorded settlements for main

piers of Howrab Bridge

Calcutta main pier H m h main pin

Timc
in
_'a Mi_ I Recorded
.--.
Predicted 1 Recorded
-
laches Inches Inches Inches
0.08 0.57 0.22 0.35
0.55 0.92 0.74 0.49
1.02 1.17 1.55 1.15
1.35 1.37 2.04 1.59
1.60 1.67 2.45 1.83
1.80 1.81 2.79 1.96
2.15 3.36 -
2.50 3.85
3.60 5.40
4.21 6.39
4.62 6.90
5.13 7.74

For 4=O (consequently N,= 1) and D,= 15 ft, say. the expres-
+
sions y D,N,would be equal to 300 ib per sq. ft. which is not
negligible. Therefore, it would not be correct to neglect the depth of
surcharge in all cases as mentioned in para 4.13.
The appropriata term for 'Type of clay' used in Table 4.4 should
be consistency.
 FOUNDATIONS
W~LL FOR BRIDGBPIERS 11
The Authors should furnish complete details o f the results of
the load test represented by Fig. 4.3 which did not wnvey any-
thing to,a reader. The direct use of the result of such plate bearing
test, as suggested by the Authors, to ascertain the allowable soil
presaure might prove to be dangerous. Mere mention of grain size
like coarse, medium or fine would not convey any idea about the load
bearing capacity of the sand strata. Even coarse sand. if loose,
would have poor load bearing capacity. Therefore, relative density
must be indicated for such purpose. Wherever any material had
been borrowed from other publication it would be desirable to give a
reference to the publication in order to give the readers an oppor-
tunity to refer to the original for clarification whenever required.
Regarding para 6 which dealt with evaluation of earth prmsure
it might be mentioned that resultant earth pressure had two
components, one active earth pressure and the other psssive
resistance. An impreceptible movement of the well would
reduce the earth pressure a t rest to a value equal to Rankine's
active earth pressure. But as the horizontal deformation increased,
passive resistance would go on increasing and reach the maximum
value at "Rankine's state of plastic equilibrium." The Authors
had also'brought out the same idea about passive resistance but had
mentioned 'elasto.plastic limit' instead of a 'State of plastic
equilibrium'. He was not a w a ~ ewhether the term used by the
Authors was used in any standard publication. Moreover the word
'plastic limit' had go! quite a different meaning and was not at all
knnected with thk is<ue of earth pressure. he expression should,
therefore, be corrected.
The Authors had also mentioned that in the case.of a heavily
loaded well under a bridge, the horizontal movement of the well
would depend on the maximum movement of the pier s t bearing
level and as that movement in itself was small, the movement of
the well at scour level would be still smaller. They had, therefore,
suggested that the passive resistana should be reduced arbitrarily
to half the value. They had, however, applied the same reduction
to the active earth pressure also. As active pressure indicated the
minimum pressure that would be exerled by the surrounding
soil mass. this value must not be reduced further under any
circumstances.
Regarding passive resistance, Shri Sen stated that the resistance
depended on uncertain deformation factor viz., a co-efficiency of sub-
grade reaction which was neither based on any theoretical analysis
nor on information from wide range of experiments. Moreover as it
was a restoring force it would be better to adopt only the value of
earth pressure a t rest. That would mean erring on the safe side.
But if a higher value was to be adopted, it was necessary to
determine first how much the well could move a t the scour level and
then estimate the resistance offered by the soil mass by using co-
efficient of horizontal subgrade reaction values recommended by
Terzaghi in his Paper entitled "Evaluation of Co-efficient of Subgrade
Reaction", published in 'Geotechnique', December 1955.
In the case of cohesionless sand, value of this resmtancc would
be given by the equation :

Wherep (tonslfta) -increase of contact pressure due to

displacement 'y'
Y (ft) 3 displacement

Z (ft) = depth below the surface of surrounding

B (ft) -earth
width of surface of contact
nh (tons/fta) = a factor indicated by the following table
given in Terzaghi's Paper :
Volue of nn in tons/cu. ft.
for a pile I ft wide
Relofive density Dry or moist mnd Submerged sond
Loose 7 4
Medium 21 14
Dense 56 34
In the case of clay, the resistance would be given by the following
relationship :

where kh (tons/ft?=co-efficiency of horizontal subgrade reaction

k.1 = a factor indicated by the following table
given in Terzaghi's Paper.
Consistency
of cloy
Values of z; in tons./cu. ft.. for
square plates I ft x I ft andfor
long strips I fr wide resting on
precompressed cluy
Stirf
Very stiff
Hard
The resistance offered by clay with a consistency of medium to
very soft should be taken as equal to the earth pressure at rest.
 m BRIDQBPIERS
FOUNDATIONS
W~LL 13
On page 34, the Authors had mentioned that in the case of clay
masses that had actually failed, it had been observed after analysis
that the overall resistance offered by a clay mass was less than one
half the calculated resistance based on the experimental value of c. It
would be very helpful if the Authors could mention some reference in
this respect. I t would also be necessary to get a reference about
Fig. 6.6 to get more information about the test.
In para6.18, the Authors had opined that there being n o friction
at the base, the well would rotate about the point a t a level higher
than the base. But even if frictional resistance was absent, resistance
offered by cohesion would resist sliding of the base and wells were
most likely to rotate about a point at the base.
Shri R. G. Krishnan stated that the Authors had indicated in
para 3.1 that the scour depth depended also on shape and size of piers.
He had not indicated how the scour depth varied with piers of differ-
ent sizes and with different shapes of cutwaters. As the shape of
piers and cutwaters had a profound effect on the depth of scour,
these eRects should also be taken into consideration in determining
t v scour depth.
In para 4.9, it was mentioned that the b e a r i ~ gcapacity was
generally determined both from ultimate failure conditions and
settlement considerations. Elucidatioo of the Authors as to why 1 in.
settlement was fixed as the criterion for sandy soils and 116 the load
causing failure for cohesive soils, was sought.
In the case of well foundations on hard soil with soft soil
immediately below it, the failure was likely to be due to excessive
bearing pressure on the soft strata and not by breaking through hard
strata as indicated in para 4.14.
The dispersion of load generally assumed was 2 vertical to
I horizontal and not 60" with the horizontal.
Referring to para 12.12, the speaker suggested that it would be
preferable to conduct the,tcsts on two sizes of plates and extraploate
for results to get the bear~ngcapacity rather than testing on one size
of plate only.
Shri ManoranJan Samal stated that at present in all the wells,
one line of reinforcement was being provided at the centre of steining.
On page 47 of Paper, .the Authors had suggested that total
reinforcements should be put in two layers, one layer near the outer
face and the other near the inner face of the steining. It had been
mentioned that 60 Ib of reinforcement per 100 cu. ft. should be
provided, out of that 75 per cent in vertical and 25 per cent in
horizontal hoop bars. The idea of providing two layers of reinforce-
ment was perhaps due to the failures occurring in the well foundations
now-a-days. If one layer of reinforcement w.ould be near outer
face, than more tensile force would be resisted and hence cracks
would not develop very easily. But it was a fact that tensile stress
would be developed on the outer face of the steining in whatever way
well might tilt or shift. Soit was desirable that greater proportion of
reinforcement should be on the outer face. It did not seem feasible
to provide equal amount of reinforcement near the outer and inner
faces.
In case of clayey soil, the active pressure of soil being negative
upto a certain depth and if tbat pressure was included in calculating
the bending moments, it would help in stabilising the well and hence
the well could be sunk for lesser depth. In some cases, it so
happened that the depth of wells became double or more with the
neglecting of negative active pressure. So some clarification might be
given whether the negative active pressure should be included or
neglected in calculating the depth of foundation.
Shri B. K. Panda stated tbat a well was designed for a truly
vertical position, but in fact, and in practice, such a c x e never
happened. Out of the 46 wells sunk in Mahanadi Bridge on National
Highway No. 5 near Cuttack, only one well went down vert~cally.
In all other wells, there had been shifts and tilts. So, naturaily the
repositioning of the piers had to be done leading to unequal span
lengths. It was therefore better that well design should bedone taking
into consideration the permissible tilts andshifts, so that span lengths
remained equal.
The curves for sinking, were not as regular as had been
explained by the Authors. It was found in connection with
sinking of all the wells of the Mahanadi Bridge that curves were not
regular.
During the laying of bottom plug, the swelling ofconcrete and
deposition in layer was noticed. Usually the bottom plug was first
laid and then after 24 hours the sand filling done. Then immediately
it was found on checking the sump, etc., that the deposit was there.
For a depth of 5 ft of bottom plug, the silt deposit was about 4 to
5 ft. and, in some cases, even upto 6 ft. The material looked like
cake made up o? clay and lime and the results of tests at Alipore Test
House showed that it contained some lime and silt. The Authors
were requested to clarify this.
Shri S. Venkatammani stated, that, in para 2.4 on page 3,
the Authors referred to combination of longitudinal and transverse
forces at different bearings and in doing so, consideration in respect
of only the braking and such other forces had been taken while no
mention had been made about wind forces. Quite likely that they
might have made a rel'erence in respect of wind forces at a later
stage in the Paper, but for design purposes, these wind forces also
required to be taken into account appropriately combined with the
other forces and hence it was felt that a referencein this regard ought
to have been made here too.

In sub-para 4 of para 2.4 on page 3, the Authors suggested that

"In the seismic zones, seismic and braking forces are assumed to act
simultaneously at the fixed bearing and only the temperature force a t
the movable bearing". This rcight not be correct for one reason that
at the movable bearing it was not the temperature rorces that should
be taken into account, but it was the frictional force to which the
actual externally applied force was limited to that had to be taken
into account for design considerations. Therefore, it would be clear
that whereas the design of the substructure supporting the movable
bearing was to be designed without any increase in permissible
stresses as per the recommendations of the Authors, the same
design would be done with an increase of 15 per cent in the permissi-
ble stresses when temperature effects were also considered as provided
for in the I.R.C. Bridge Code-Section 11. Thus the design would, in
reality, be underestimated as the Authors' suggestion was followed.
It might be more appropriate to say that the design would cater for
horizontal forces at the movable bearing limited to the frictional
resistance of this bearing.

While considering the allowance of seismic forces in para 2.6.2

on page 6, unfortunately, no mention had been made by the Authors
about the seismic effect or the dynamic effect of the water around the
piers, which had a150 to be considered in the design and which
considerably affects the safety of the structural components. In item
(iv) of this para. the Authors had stated that, "In the case of foun-
dation wells filled with water instead of sand, etc.. for computing the
seismic forces the horizontal component of the weight of the water
should not be taken". He failed to understand why this should not
be taken. because under seismic disturbences it was the ground mass
below the scour level which fixed the well foundation, whereas all the
coinponents of the well including the con:ained water above the scour
level underwent a relative movement. As such it would only be more
correct to allow for the horizontal seismic component of the weight of
this water for design considerations.

In para < o n pages 21 & 22, it had been said that the choice of
the shape depended on a) the cost and ease of sinking ; (b) the extent
\
of control of tilts : (c) t i e loads to be,carried; and (d) the magnitude
of the horizontal forces. Although thls was so, the observation and
the selection of the well shape for the particular example dealt with
in sub-para 5.3 made one feel that the choice mainly depended on the
sinking effort and also only on the modulus of section in the bridge
direction. This was incorrect and it might be said that the shape of
the well was actually in addition, mainly governed by the relative
maximum horizontal forces and moments that were likely to come in
the bridge as well as in the flow direction. Thus for bridges in a
seismic area where these were equal, a single circular well might be
more suitable whereas the same might not he the case in other areas.

In arriving at the allowable minimum thickness of well steining,

greater emphasis had been laid on the actual skin friction that was
likely to be overcome during the sinking of the well foundations.
Although it was true that this was an important factor that decided
the minimum thickness of the well steining there were other factors
like the actual depth of the well, the type of soil encountered and the
side of the well dredge hole etc., which were of q u a 1 importance in
deciding the minimum thickness of the steining. Although a mention
in this regard hnd been made by the Authors towards the end of para
5.7 on pages 24 and 25. the required weightage to these factors had
not been given.
On page 24, it had been shown that for a given type of soil, the
required minimum thickness went on decreasing with increase in the
diameter of the dredge hole of the well. This would not be accepta-
ble to any design engineer dealing with such a problem. Although
mention had been made, towards the end of para 5.7, regarding the
necessity of increasing the thickness with the depth and diameter
of the well, it was felt that the recommendations made might not be
suited for all condi!ions. For instance, a cement concrete well with
an external dia. of 30 ft and sunk 70 ft deep below G.L. through a
stiff clay soil might be considered. According to Authors' recom-
3 ft 2.5 x 6 in.-
mendations, the minimum thickness of the well steining would be
-+ 4 ft 3 in. giving a dredge hole of 21 ft 6 in. But
it was felt that such a thickness might not suit thesinking conditions
met with. Similar difficulties had been met with in actual practice.

I t was felt that the recommendation made in para 6.17-in respect

of considering an average rectangle for a clayey soil, taking the results
of a test on a soil sample at 1/3rd depth of embedment below scour
level as specimen, if followed, was likely to make the design unsafe.

Although there was considerable controversy on the method of

approach for determining the lateral earth support, the approach
suggested by the Authors seemed to he very rational and acceptable
and, therefore, very useful. However, in calculating the lateral earth
support of clayey soil (refer derivations at pages 39-40), the'
reduction in passive resistance of the soil due to the active pressure
of the soil which was mobilised after a known depth, had not been
considered by the Authors in the derivations. This was an import-
ant factor appreciably affecting the results in the case of deep wells
 WELL POR BR~DGB
FOUNDATIONS PIBRS 17
commonly encountered for bridges. Therefore, the derivations were
required to be modified suitably.
The Authors' observation in para 6.20 on page 40 seemed to be
incorrect. For if the soil that predominated was confined only tp
reaches near the well base whereas entirely different types of sod
were met with in reaches just below the Scour level, the lateral
support, actually available would not be in conformity with the
Authors' suggestions. Therefore, every individual case should be
examined and the weighted average soil considered for design purposes
than the soil that was just predominant as suggested by the Authors.
About design of well steining, the speaker stated that unlike
what had been stated in para 7.2, the design section was, in more
than 50 per cent cases, critical for tensile stresses than for comprpsive
stresses, which should not be overlooked. At page 56, the Authors
suggest design of bottom plugs of wells as that of an arch. It might
be mentioned that the design should be done more as a dome instead
and if not, as a combination of a dome and a flat circular slab, which
seemed to be more rational.
Shri S. R. Jmhi stated that t h e Research Paper of Jowa
Highway Research Board regarding the various influences on the
depth of scour referred to in para 3 of the Paper covered the labora-
tory tests where the observations were made at every 10 minutes
interval from the starting of the Row. At the time of starting of flow
the scour depth naturally varied-somewhat similar to damping of
vibrations till it found its regime. In practice, however, the river
stream very rarely changed so suddenly to the full discharge and as
such a variation of scour depth was highly improbable.
Figure 3.3 showed tnat maximum scour rook place at the
upstream nose till the angle of flow was above 30" The scour at the
downstream nose was, therefore, less than that at the upstream.
The observations of the Iowa Highway Research Board were
eith reference to the actual depth of flow of streams. It was signi-
ficant that the actual depth of flow as referred by the Board was not
based upon the Lacey's formula for (depth of flow) the normal scour
depth. The formula for depth of scour as proposed by Lacey was no
doubt based on the observed depth but it could he said that the two
values would be identical. The modifications as applied by the Iowa
Board on scour depths derived by them should be very carefully
applied to the scour depths found by Lacey's formula. On reference
to Volume X of I.R.C. Journal, it would be clear that the 1:R.C.
clause regarding the depth of.maximum local scour was based on the
actual local scour depths as observed by the lndian Waterways
Experimental Station, Poona, under Indian conditions. They had
observed and concluded that the actual local scour around piers was
2 D where D was the Laay's scour depth. He. therefore, felt that
the results of the actual observations made in India should be adopted
rather than any other conclusions drawn under some different condi-
tions and on different basis.
The quantitative application of the results of Iowa Research
must, therefore, be applied with great caution. But a qualitative
approach could be very useful.
It could be seen from the scour pattern shown in the sketches
that the local scour was maximum at the upstream noseof the pier-
not at the downstream of wells. The shape of the scour was like an
inverted cone and the range of the local scour was to a distance of
about 0.5 times the longest dimension of the pier. From the above
qualitative observations, it would be clear that the assumption that
the maximum scour at 2D might be made for scour all round the pier
was safer as the maximum scour of 2D took place a t the nose only
while some less scour took place at the downstream end. It could
also & visualised that at the time of maximum local scour the bed
material lay in a sloping f ~ r mfrom the normal scour depth to the
maximum local scour depth at the pier. From the scour pattern and
from theconclusions of the Iowa Board, it was noted that these slopes
of bed slope at an angle equal to the angle of repose of the material.
This led to a very important conclusion that while considering the
earth pressures on the well, it was necessary to account for (he slope
of the scour hole from the normal scour to the deepest scour. The
wells should, therefore, be designed with earth pressures with
surcharge of the depth of soil from normal scour depth to the
maximum scour depth.
In para 5.4, it was proposed that a space between the two k l l s
should be three times the thickness of the steining. The difficulty in
sinking the two adjacent wells close to each orher was due to the
disturbance of soil pressures created. Further apart the two wells,
less was the influence on sinking of the other. As the disturbance
in the soil created by the well depended upon the diameter of the
well, he felt that the space between the two wells should be depcn-
dent upon the outside diameter of the wells. The space should also
depend upon the depth of sinking required.
While calculating the thickness of steining ,to overcome friction,
in para 5.7, he felt that the buoyant weight of stelnlng mater~alshould
be considered instead of actual weight. For all practical purposes,
wells were sunk under L.W.L. It was customary to calculate sinking
effort of well by using buoyant weights.
I t was feared in para 6.7, that the we!ls in clayey soils would be
left with permanent tilts due to the format~onof gaps a t tbe time of
mobilization of passive earth pressures. He would like to point out
that though in the calculations of active pressure, the cohesion f o r e
of-2C wns nealected, it was improbable that the same would not be
mobilised before the formation of the cleavages. Thus the condition
of earth pressures was the same as calculated even before the form-
ation of gaps. In this connection he should like to enquire if any
permanent tilts were observed to have developed in service. He felt
that there would not be any danger of any substantial residual tilts in
the well remaining after removal of the horizontal force.

In the calculations for esti~nationof pastive pressure e5ect of

soil, base sliding friction of $12 was proposed. There was no sliding
friction proposeu for clay. The base friction or the sliding resistance
at the base was given by the formula S=C+N tan 6. He felt that
full base friction should be considered while calculating the effects of
earth pressures.

In para 7.4, a scientific approach was made in finding out

tension in steining due to possible suspension of well by skin friction.
The weight of steining material considered should be buoyant weight.
The height of the suspended portion of well :

where;, = weight of water per unit volume. Using buoyant

weight of material and the data given for the example h-7R ft as
against 66 ft calculated.
Now as the well was suspended, maximum tension occurred just
below the lowest point of suspension. It was important that the
buoyancy for the full well acted at the bottom. The total tension of
the full well was, therefore, 567 tons and area of steel required was 71
sq. inches using usual 95 lb per 100 cu. ft. and allowable stresses.
Again looking to the problem it was seen that skin friction for upper
22 ft was assumed as 1000 1b per sq. ft. The actual average skin
friction might not be more than 150 lb per sq. ft for depth of 22 ft.
It will be seen that the steel required was very much less than 95 lb
per 100 cu. ft. as calculated above. The tension developed due to
suspension of well was, therefore, very nominal, if not totally
absent.

It wes .suggested in para 8.3 the horizontal forces w e n effected

due to the supporting reactions on the slope of the curb. The hoop
tension produced was evaluated to be 0.5 NKd. While assuming that
the fuU weight of well was resting on the incline surface of the curb,
the maximum reaction available from the bottom soil was an import-
ant aspect. The earth M o w the curb was under a standing earth in
the well only which was very nominal. It was doubtful what reaction
could be afforded by the such loose material under nominal confine-
ment. The hoop tension created was, therefore, nominal.
In the design of kerb on bottom plug, the bottom plug was
assumed to act like an arch creating hoop tension in the curb. He
felt that the theory used by the Authors in the design of curb for
sinking, in para 8.3, was more appropriate. The difficulties encoun-
tered in the solution by arch action theory in the case of flat plugs
were solved by using the theory of para 8.3.
Coefficient of friction now to be used in the formula was for
friction, between concretes cast in contact. The value of friction was
also increased by small bond created between two concretes. Thus
p c a n be conveniently taken as 1 if not more. Substituting p-I in
tbe farmula, hoop tension in example 2 of 89 is only 26 tons. Relief
due t o earth pressure must also be taken into account. Thus there
were almost no stresses introduced due to such eRects for forces acting
from the bottom plug in the usual cases of well design.
The Authors had expressed that if offset was left at the cutting
edge for well in clayey soil the portion above the offset would be left
hollow and no passive pressure relief could be available. The scour
was a process of shifting of silt or bed material. When such a big
transportation of material was being made by water at higher levels,
the gap, if at all left, while sinking of wells would be filled by other
material. Basically he felt 'that it was very improbable that the gap
would not be filled within the working period. The skin friction was
not zero which would have been zero if such a gap was left. Hence
he felt that there was very little danger in keeping offsets for curbs in
clayey soil.
While calculating the effect of wind loads on the superstructure,
it was proposed that a substantial force was effected in the longitudinal
direction. The pressures due to air or wlnd were supposed to act
normal to the surface. A tangential movement of wind would cause
frictional drags and its assessment must bf made on the basis of the
smoothness of the surface, humidity, viscos~tyand denslty of air, etc.
He felt that the air frictional dragwas very small and could he ignored
for the purpose of design.
Sbri L. M. Patm stated that the character of highly cohesive
soil varied widely from that of cohesionless soil in respect of skin
friction, water absorption capacity, shear strength, sett!ement and
bearing capacity. The bearing capacity of cohesionless soil increased
with depth, whereas this effect was inappreciable in the case of highly
cohesive soil. 1n para 4.13, the Authors had given the values of safe
bearing capacity for clay. The angle of repke in case of clay was
much less than that of sand. The Authors had also elaborately
mentioned these in paras 4.15 to 4.17.
 WELL F O ~ A T I O N S BRIDQB PlgRs
FOR 21
In the light of all those factors, the Authors should evolve a
suitable value of "Silt factor" for different kinds of clay and their
effect on bearing capacity analytically. Ultimately the finding out of
scour depth by Lacey' s formula with appropriate silt factor dcter-
mines the span and also the cost and economy.
In para 7.4 the quant~tyof reinforcement to be prbvidid i n
well steining was not very specific. In fact, the practice varied from
Slate to State. Someengineers preferred 1.5 ib per cu. ft. while
others adopt 2 to 2.5 lb per cu. ft.
He would suggest that a uniform practice o'f reinforcement in
well steining might be recommended for different.kinds of soil taking
the various stresses on well steining and factors affecting the sinking
of wells. He would suggest that the Indian Roads Congress codify
this at the earliest opportunity so as to bring economy anduniformity
in well foundation works all over the country.
In para 9, the Authors had generalised the design of well cap
which does not help much to the bridge enginars in the field; it
would have been better if some concrete e~ampleshad been taken
and solved. The design of well cap, well steining should be more
rational than hitherto done. Since a few standard type of well
foundations were adopted 311 over the country, a rational approach
might reduce the cost substantially.
He did not agree with the Authors' suggestion to have ''flat"
slab design of the well cap. Usually two-way slabs to support the
superimposed load, and take account of the various horizontal forces,
were designed.
Shri S. B. Patwardhan stated that in paras 4.6 and 4.7 and
Fig. 4.2, a way of anchoring wells founded on rocks was suggested.
The anchorages were proposed to take the full tension that might
develop between the well and the bed-rock. The effectiveness of such
an anchorage was really doubtful.
An uplift or tension was caused below the seat of the weU a s a
result of forces acting on the superstructure and the well steining
These forces gave rise to moments which. when excessive, caused
tension, not only in the base but in the steining as well. These forces
were transmitted to the base through interaction between the bevelled
surface of the kerb (cutting edge) and the bottom plug. This surface
of contact could not be assumed to withstand or transmit any tensile
forces.
What was proposed to be anchored in the rock was the bottom
plug, and not the well proper. This lsft the well free to tip over
in the absence of any positive provision to hold it down to the plug.
 The friction and bearing between the cylindrical portion of the
bottom plug projecting beyond the bevelled edges and the vertical
walls of wells were the only opposingforces which could prevent the
tilting of the well (if anchored as suggested by the Authors). Greater
the projection, higher would be the resistance offered. Again greater
the diameter of the well, greater would be the depth of penetration
necessary.
WAOOERATED TURNED POSITION OF THE WELL
KERB DUE TO UPLlFI

Provision of a curb, thicker than the steining, as shown in Fig. 2

might give a positive anchorage when the bottom plug was so cast as
to project sufficiently beyond the offset. The offset might be
.arranged in the kerb proper to avoid excessive depths of the bottom
plug. Adequate reinforcement might be provided across the cone of
shear failure to ensure firm anchoring of the well. These provisions
would be necessary in addition to the anchor bars proposed by
the Authors, to have afirm connection between the well and the rock.
THICKNESS t TO BE SUFFICIENT
TO TAKE THE SHEAR L O A D

Fig. 2
 In what way the weight of kentledge affects the lateral rein-
forcement (i.e., horizontal rings) para 7.4, was not understood. This
should be clarified by an illustrative example. In para 8.5 according
to Authors, the plug should be considered to act as an inverted arch.
etc. This approach did not seem to be quite rational, as far as the
design of the kerb was concerned. A force of N lb per running foot
of the kerb, acting vertically downwards was being transmitted t o the
plug through the medium of the bevelled surfaces. The active or the
disturbing force on the surface was the load N brought by the steiding
or kerb, and a reaction 'P'had to be developed betaecn the surfans.
such that its component in the direction of the disturbing force had
to be equal and opposlte to it. This force 'P'might be accompanied
by a force pP tangential to the surface of contact, depending upon the
absence or presence of friction between the two surfaces. Using the
notation of article, 8.3,

and H-N (sin 8--pcos 0

p sin 8+ cos0
the hoop tension H' would be given by

d
which reduces to R N tan 8.-
2
, w h m p=O.
The force P between the bevelled surfaces was thus induced by
the force brought in by the steining and it had to be dependent upon
the force N. Expression ( 8 . 9 was misleading as the terms q and r in
it were not independent functions. They were derivatives of H, which
was dependent on N. p and 9.
The plug would be subjected to the forces P and p P along its
periphery and the thrusts on the bevelled surface would be so ad-
justed that they were equal and opposite to the resultant of P and FP.
The directions of the peripherial thrusts and the horizontal plane
tangential to the bottom surface of the pl-.g, situated in its centre,
practically decided the rquation of the paraboloid or circular dome,
the bottom plug might be assrmed to act as.
The criterion given by equation 8.8 for the designing of the junc-
tion of the kerb and the steining was equally misleading. The thrust
P accompanied by the fric!ional force pP on the bevelled surface
would create a horizontal force H' which would be resisted mainly by
the hoop tension in the kerb. Very little portion of it would create
any hending moment i n the kerb as contemplated by the Authors.
24 D~scussro~
ON

Conaideration of a smali friction of this form as creating a moment

might to some extent be justified, but the Authors' proposal as made
wuld not be followed.
The design of the bottom plug of the wells suEered from the
anme defects as pointed out above. With the bevelled edges, fixed as
the radii of curvature, the rise of the imaginary a s h (more precisely
come) was fixed by the form of the imaginary arch, i.e., parabolic,
elliptical. circular or flat. The bulge of the plug should be sufficient
to accommodate the imaginary arch or dome and that was the only
physical limitation which decided the correctness or otherwise 01' the
assumed form.
In the case of wells resting on rock, the bulge of the plug was
not practicable and the plain concrete plug had to be designed to
take the hoop compression and the bending stresses caused in it,
while acting as an inverted circular slab (resisting the soil reaction)
simply supported all along its periphery.
Shri D.V. Sikka stated that in para 2.6.2 (ii) it was suggested
that the weight of water should not be taken into consideration.
I t was not clear why this had been done because there was no reason
to believe why it should not be taken into consideration, The water
inside would also vibrate with the well and its erect in no case be
different than that of sand filled inside a wall. A reference might
also be made to the Indian Standard 1893-1962.
Referring to para 2.7 (ii) he stated that it was a well-known
fact that the scour near the abutment was always high and scour
depths would, in no case, be less than that near the piers. It,
therefore, did not seem to be logical to provide for earth pressure on
the assumption that the scour would be 1.27 D as suggested. This in
itself was clear from Fig. 3.1 as well. Mention could also be made
of the practice of qaking the well next to abutment deeper than the
rest of wells because of deeper scour expected (Gales 1938, Sethi
1956).
In 4.9, it was stated that the allowable hearing pressure be
taken on the basis of compressibility in case of non.cohesive suil
and the shear strength in case of cohesive soil. That did not seem to
be justified. The allowable bearing pressure should be based on the
shearing strength of a soil and the settlements kept within permissible
limits.
In para 4.10, the statement of the Authors withregard to the
alternate wetting and drying of clay was not clear because the skin
friction to be considered was that due to friction offered by the grip
length, i.e., the portion of the well below deepest scour (2D);
this portion was always submerged and hence there would be at,
drying.
 The effect of compressibility of sand on the skie friction was
also not understood.
In his opinion, the skin friction was not taken into considera-
tion because of the following reasons :
(i) Uncertainty of its magnitude.
(ii) Due to the vibration set up due to water or air currents
or seismic loads the friction would be lost.
The statements in paras 4.11 & 4.12 had been taken from
Terzaghi and Peck page 491 and Peck et al page 243. These state-
ments would not apply to bridge foundation subject to scour because
the depth width ratio normally would in that case he of the order of
about 2 when full scour waq considered, which was the worst case.
He, therefore, felt that the methods as proposed by the Authors
should not be made use of because the approximations involved were
of high order.
The bearing capacity should he based on the unconfined shear
strength of the clayey soil which could be easily found out, rather
than making use of very approximate values given in Table 4.4. More
than the bearing capacity with respect to shear strength was the
settlement due to consolidation of clay strata and this should be given
due consideration in case it was found necessary to rest the well on
the clay strata. A reference on this case could be made to wells of
Howrah Bridge (Ward & Bateson 1947).
The values of angle 4 furnished in para 4.15 were rather vague;
it would be more approfiriate if the angle 4 was determined by some
simple field tests like the standard penetration test.
The values of skin friction recommended in para 4.17 were
rather high. There were various factors which affected the results,
the main factors being the strata, well surface and the size. The skin
friction data given by the Authors had been further extended by
Gales (1920) and Sethi (1959). Fig. 1. It might also be mentioned that
the increase of skin friction with depth was not that marked as point-
ed by the Author in Fig. 4.5. Even the well sinking data by Gales
on Curzon Bridge (Gales 1908) showed that the skin friction for a
particular well did not increase very much with depth. Terzaghi &
Peck (1948) also mentioned 3q page 489 that the skin friction reached
a fairly constant value below a depth of about 25 ft. The attached
Fig. 2 showed the effect of depth on skin friction. The data had been
analysed by the writer from the records of sinking of wells of
Ramganga Bridge at Bareilly (U.P.). The wells numbering 15 were
dumb-bell shaped of IS ft 9 in, diameter and made of masonry.
The strata was sandy.
 SlMllNG-ErrOOlt C W T . / S ~ .~ t . m
a u SURFACE

Fig. I.

The statement made in para 4.18 regarding the skin friction was
contradictory t o that made in para 4.17. The values suggested here
were very low as compared with para 4.17.
The minimum diameter suggested in para 5.7 was 5 ft which
in his opinion was too small for use with grabs. The normal
minimum diameter was about 8 ft.
In the example w was taken as 120 lb per cu. ft. It was not
correct because they were considering the submerged weight of the
well and it should be about 60 per cu. ft.
The design of well curb had only been done for the hoop
s m s e s that might develop during and after sinking. On the other
hand, the curb would be highly stressed when resting on an obstruc-
tion. say, a trunk which would give a two-point support.
In para 8.13.the thickness of bottom plug had been worked.out
by assuming it to be an arch. In his opinlot~it was not just~fied
because in general, the rise was not certain or in other words there
might be no sump below the cutting edge. The normal practice was
t o assume it as a simply supported plate. One such solution had
been given by Anderson (1966) page 235.
The purpose of sand filling had not been properly realised in
para 8.14. There was no doubt about the fact that the sand filling
would transmit absolutely no load from the well cap to the bottom
plug because of its being relatively very compressible and secondly
some settlement would always take place after filling and it would
not be incorrect to presume that there was no connection between
the well cap and filling. The filling was done only to provide stabi-
lity to the foundation.
It was suggested by the Authors that a well might be filled
completely as to transmit the load to the bottom plug. This would
not help in transmitting the load from the steining to the bottom
plug. Instead i f shear keys were provided in the curb and also the
stelning ns shown in Fig. 3, a better solution would be obtained.
 nOTlOM PLUG

C U I I W EDGE

Pig. 3

It might also be mentioned that at times, the bottom plug (seal) had
also been reinforced (Mears and Pool 1957).

8.
The provision of flat bars 4 in.x in, or 4 in. x f in. etc.
seemed to be quite a common practice an this was. also' advocated by
the Authors in para 10.2. One was at a loss to appreciate the. pro-
vision of this because they did not at all add to the strength of the
well. It would be better if the lateral reinforcement was provided in
the form of continuous bars as shown in Fig. 4.
I t was suggested in para 11.2 that in the initial stages, small
grab should be used instead of pig grab, this would afford good
control on sinking in the early stages
It appeared from para 11.12 that normal precautions for
depressurisations were not taken which resulted in casualties.
This happened because the I.R.C. did not have a code of practice
 WELL FOVNDA~ONS
FUR BRIDGE PIERS 29

HORIZONTAL REINFORCEMEMI

UEtNFOUCEMENl

Fig. 4. Cmrr-SecHon of Well

for pneumatic sinking. I t was suggested that the IRC Bridge Code
should include a chapter on work under compressed air. A reference
might, however, be made to Lee (1961) for details.

The writer does not agree with the statement made by the
Authors in para 11.17 that dewatering reduced skin friction. The
effect of dewatering was two-fold ;

(i) Increase in dead weight due to reduction in buoyancy.

(ii) Reduction in bearing resistanoc due to upward flow at

the bottom of the well.

Analysing a load settlement curve of a plugged well shown in

Fig. 12.3, the Authors had presumed that all the skin friction was
mobilised as soon as the movement started and that thereafter all the
load was borne by the bottom plug. It was not so. Some settlement
or movement was noccss?ry before full skin friction was mohilised.
In driven piles, this movement might be f to 6 in. and in bored piles
it was much more. The well could best be compared with bored
oiles and it could also be assumed that the soil laver immediatelv near
ihe bottom concrete was loosened because ofhredging operations.
In such cases. as sum in^ the elastic comoression of the well to be
negligible, it would not & inappropriate to'assume that at least 4 in,
or so settlement was needed for the full mobilisation of skin friction,
this settlement depending on the characteristics of the soil around and
at the bottom of the well. It, therefore could be seen that the
analysis furnished needed modifications.
 REFERENCES
Anderson, P. 1956 'Substructure Analysis and Design'. Ronald
Press Co.
Gales. R. R. 1908-'The Curzon Bridge at Allahabad'. Min. of Proc.
lost. C. E., Vol. CLXXIV, Part IV, p. 1.
Gales, R. R. 192WThe Hardinge Eridge over the lower Ganges at
Sara'. Min. of Pr&. of Inst. F.E., Vol. CCV. Pan I, p. 18.
Gales, R. R. 1938-'The Principles of River Training for Railway
Brrdges and their application to the case of the Hardinse Bridge over
the lower Ganpes at Sara', Jour. of I.C.E., Vol. 10, No. 2, 1938-39,
p. 135.
k. D. H. 1961-'An Introduction to Deep Foundation and Sheet
Piling'--Concrete Publication Limited.
Mnrs. R. P. and Pool, E. E.-'The Design of Neath and Briton r'rrry
Viaducts', Proc. of I.C.E., Vol. 7, p. 405.
Peck, R. B., Hanson. W. E. and Thorburn, 1953-'Foundation
Engineering'-John Wiley.
Sethi. H.K.L.-'Ganga Bridge Mokameh, Part I: Jour. of I.E.I., Vol.
37. Part I. p. 301.
Sethi, H.K.L.-'Ganga Bridge Mokameh Pan 21. Jour. of I.E.I., Vol.
40-3, Part 1, p. 69.
Temghi, K. and Peck, R.. B. 1948-'Soil Mechanics in Engineering
Practice', John Wiley.
Ward, A. M. and Bateson, E. 1947-'The New Howrah Bridge,
Calcutta, Design of the Structure', Jour. of I.CE., Vol. 28, p. 167.

Shri A. K. Sen wanted to know whether in case, where the rock

surface was inclined, i t was necessary to sink all the sides o f the well
inside the rock. T h e Authors had prescribed t o make the wells
embedded to a depth of about 6 in. t o 9 in. beneath the rock surface.
I t was generally seen that in order t o take the well 6 to 9 in. beneath
the rock surface on the sloping side, considerable rock cutting was
required to be done on the higher side which was very expensive,
difficult and time consuming. If i t was considered that a t least one
side of the cutting edge should remain embedded under the rock
surface and the other side might remain above, he would like t o
know which should he adopted.

In cases where there was no tension developed a t t h e base of the

well and where adequate benching was done opposite t o the natural
inclination of the rock face, he would like t o know whether the
provision of anchor rods for arresting slip as suggested by the Authors,
could be done aw3y with.

Dr. R. K. Katti stated that para 6.8 gave an impression t h a t

the analysis covered in the Paper was for heavy ~i~ells.But para 6.11
suddenly switched over to the analysis of a light well. It looked as
though for the convenience of using Terzaghi's free-rigid-bulkhead
theory, the Authors had ignored their aim that they were trying to
give the analysis for heavy wells. In this connection both Terzaghi
and Pender had cautioned against using bulk-head theory for 'rigid
piers of heavy nature'. By 'heavy well', it was meant that only part
of the load was balanced by the skin friction and not all. The Authors
would have been somewhat correct if they had made the analysis a
particular case of a ' light well 'and clearly mentioned the assumptions
to start with. Secondly, if the skin friction was taken the^, the resul-
tant passive force and the active force would be at an angle and
not horizontal. In that case, to calculate k p and k d , the generalized
equation given in Theoretical Soil Mechanics by Terzaghi on pages
107 and 80 sho3ld have been used. Wherein.

kp= [:;-+) cos 8

sin wT)sin(++P)
3'
k ~ =
sin a sin (cc

sin a sin (a- 8)

+ 8)
i:zd++) sin (-+a) sin (=+PI

COS 8
sin (++ 8) sin (+-p)
sin (a- 8) sill ( a + p ) 1'

In article 6.1 5, the Authors had mentioned that skin friction

could not be relird upon in the case of clays. Bvt while deducing the
formula, they had assumed the point of rotation of the well at apoint
above the base. This could happen only when the skin friction cume
into play and that too when the well was very light. In other words,
the deduction of formula in para 6.18, was contrary to their own
assumption. Secondly. the Authors had neglected the presence of
active pressure below the tension Lones in the clay. This would lead
to unsafe design of grip length.
Shri P. R. Rnmadho referring to para 2.3 stated that for wdls
resting on stiff clay and passing through clayey strata, the buoyancy
was assumed as 80 per cent which seemed too much on conservative
side.
Accordina to Clause 216.3 of I.R.C. Bridee Code-Section 11.
if the bridge b a s founded on homogeneo~isimpermeable strata, no
buoyancy should be considered. In stiRclay which was partly imper-
meable and homogeneous, not more than 50 per cent buoyancy
should be allowed.
In para 2.4, the Authors had suggested that in the case of
balanced cantilever span full braking force should he considered at
the fixed end bearing. Again, this was much on conservative side.
Actually the force on rocker should be either H-UR or UR
whichever produced wont effect,
 In para 2.5 (iii), the pressure curve was assumed as straight line.
This would he so only in the case of uniform section. The curve
would be parabolic in case of the piers having uniform batter and
the formula derived would not he applicable.
In the formula it seemed that B was taken as constant. It would
be better if it was solved in two stages, one for the well and the other
for the pier.
The formula for total pressure p for a section with uniform
batter would he as below :
Consider a point at a distance, x
Total pressure phl

Tbe active pressure caused due to scouring of the earth would

not always be true, s i n a where the bed level was comparatively high
in comparison to the maximum scour level, the soil could not
 W e r ~FOUNDATIONS
FOR BRIDGEP m S 33
remain in that condition as the sliding would occur and the earth try
to adjust as per its angle of internal friction. This would be only
tme for wells having maximum scour level nearer to the bed level.
Hence generalization could not be made, as it would depend as per
site condition.
In para 2.7 (ii), instead of "scour level" it should be"maximum
scour level".
In para 6.8, the Authors had suggested a multiplying factor of
0.5 for calculating the passive earth pressure. This did no1 seem.
to be correct for all cases. The Authors had given the reasoning
for adopting this due to the soils being saturated. The submerged
weight of the soil which is nearly 50 per cent of the weight of the
soil had already been taken into account and was already on
conservative side.
This factor of 0.5 could be taken only in case of shallow wells,
i.e., with free earth support; in the case of the wells taken down to
the grip length, i.e., wells with nearly fixed earth support, this factor
should be unity (refer page 223 of "Theoretical Soil Mechanics" by
Terzaghi).
The factors derived would be more useful if derived in
terms of L and grip length. The value a for the case where full
grip length was provided might be assumed as nearly equal to
unity.
Reference para 6.14, it would not be correct to assume that
wells tilt nearly a t base. In case of deep wells, the point at which
the tilt would occur was at a quite appreciable distance from the
bottom.
Reference para 7.2, it was not necessary that the section of
well steining immediately below the well cap would have the
maximum tension. It will depend on the conditions at a particular
case.
The factors governing this would be height of the well above
maximum scour level, depth of the water, span of the bridge
horizontal forces coming over it etc.
Shri T. Chandnrnooli* stated that the present practice of
wnslderin the longitudinal forces on a bridge was disputed. A
ff
bridge wit simply supported deck, would for all practical purposes,
function as a hinged frame work, till the bearings came into play,
This and subsequent comments were received in writiog.
under any applied braking force. The determination of force felt by
individual piers was complicated particularly due to the elastic
behaviour of the deck. It would be safe to assume the full 'a'
force for a short and thick pier and (H-p.R) (Dead load) or
pR-whichever was greater hut less than H-in the case of a slender
and long pier. In the design of wells, it would be adequale to
consider a much reduced value of 'M', possibly HI2 as the deflection
of well required to develop the passive force would be high and this
could not be done without bringing the bearings on other piers into
play. The Authors were requested to examine this aspect and give
their opinion.
Reference paras 3.7 & 3.8 : He stated that for the clayey soils
5 t h col;siderahle amount ofcohesion, scour, as normally understood,
l.e., the movement of bed under high flood might not occur. Due
to the constriction of waterway, certain amount of surface erosion,
for short depths might Jccur, and it would not be normally necessary
to design the foundations from scour considerations. The Authors
were requested to furnish any further information available on this.
Para 4.9: In rivers with a dependable summer water Bow,
there would not be any change in the moisture content of the under-
lying clay, and it was probable that part of the load would be shared
by the skin friction. However, for wells resting on a hard stratum
and surrounded by a relatively compressible material, the skin fnction
bad to be ignored.
Para 6.9 : The Authors had considered the soil to be under
full plastic failure condition and recommended a reduction factor of
0.5. It was fmpor~ant that plastic flow should not start at
any stage, as it would result in irrecoverable plastic strains.. The
initial reduction factors of 0.5 suggested by the Authors elim~uated
this possibility, and the value obtained was equal to the value
obtained for no plastic failure.
The Authors had also suggested that tne resultant applied force
'Q' on a well was to be shared by the preceding and succeeding wells,
if the safe value of 'q' for the soil was exceeded. This did not appear
to be correct, as, the lateral forces, i.e., due to wind and water
current, were uniform over all the piers in the river bed and the only
variable force which could be apponioued between 2 or 3 piers,
would be the loogitudinal forces. It would be more appropriate to
apportion the longitudinal forces between 2 piers, as suggested under
para 2.4, and then calculate the resultant 'Q' forces which would be
taken by only one pier.
Paras 6.11 to 6.13 : The Authors had considered the well as a
light bulkhead, with the point of rotation higher than base and
ignoring base friction. If the well was to be treated as very light.
then the kp & ko values adopted by the Authors required modilication
 because the well friction would be absent, and the values
would be equal to the Rankine's values. However, as suggested by
the Authors, in para 6.14, the wells carrying bridge plers, would
rotate only about the bases, and it could be shown for most cases that
the p value required to he developed at base would be vety'low and
could be easily obtained. The well would function as a light bulkhead
only if the weight of well was less than PV, which would not be so
in the case of b r i d ~ epiers. Considering the example given by the
Authors on p. 44. case (2) taking the rn, value that would be
developed for this H force :

P R = f x 166x46s
129x6x46s---166=1230 kips.

The surface of contact between the plug and the soil being
rather rough, the co-efficient of friction would be very high. Even
when this force was overcome and the point of rotation moved up,
this force had still to be considered in stability computations.
The Authors had not. considered the restoring moment due to
thevertical component of pressures. In case of broad wells. this
would be a substantial force and taking these into account for a well
with base rotation, the final value for 'q' could be written as (for full
plastic failure):

where rnt = a w (kp+ka) sin 6 & rn, as given in the Paper.

(S=d/2)
& d is the dimension of the well in the direction of the force.
For a condition of no plastic failure, the equation could be written

and the reduction factor of 0.5 suggested by Authors was eliminated.

In all the analysis hitherto presented, it was assumed that the
stability of the well was obtained by the developing of the passive
pressure in the soil in front of the well. This naturally considered
certain amount of movement, at the top of the pier, and the harmful
effects of this movement were not investigated.
Unlike a sheet pile, a well had a finite width, and the frictional
mistance of the soil surrounding the well, would have considerable
influence in the stability.
 Prior to the application of any horizontal force, the well was
acted upon by the pressure a t rest of the surrounding soil which
would be uniform on all faces.

-- -

@
PRCSSURL AT RLST - PRESSURE AT REST TO CH4NGt
TO CUANOL IMTO A .- b TO ACTIVE STATE
P4bSIVL WATC

PRESSURE AT REST RLSTRAINING MOVEMWT A N 0

PAS'f* INTO * PA33lVL STATE FOR INCRE~SI)X; FWC
When a f o r e was applied, the well would rotate about a point
and the state of stress in the soil on opposite faces normal to the
direction of movement would change into active and passive states
creating the necessary forces for the stability of the well. This
movement of the well would be resisted by the frictional force of
the soil at rest on the other two faces parallel to the direction of the
movement. The actual movement of the well. and the consequenl
passive and active pressures would be obtained only when this force
was overcome.
~ n t r d d u c i nthis
~ force in the stability computations, the value
for 'q', i.e., theaaximum horizon!al force could be written as (for full
plastic failure) :

q= .V(bml D+2d m3
6 -. -- . .. -
H+ D
where PIr, = . ~ . K RW.
.
f = coefficient of friction between soil and well.
KR = coefficient of earth pressure at rest n$ & m, as
before.
For KR, Terzaghi had suggested values from 0.5 to 0.8 for sands
naturally deposited, with the recommendation that these could ba
increased where artificially compacted. In the case of bridge piers,
the sinking of the well shaft compressed the soil around to a large
extent. Further, for an attempted movement or rotation, the state
of stress in the soil on the sides would change into a passive state
thereby increasing KI(values while it might not be correct to assume
full passive values, it appeared reasonable to adopt KR values from
1.0 to 1.5. This would perhaps be still increased for very coarse
sands. In the example g i v ~ nby the Authors, the resistance to the
entire force by the side friction would be assumed:
Then nt, and m, = 0

Adopting the same values adopted by the Authors for y' & w,

The required KR value was 1.61 and this was quite possihk
The well might not rotate or move a t all. It was suggested that in
all the computations for the stability of wells this factor be wnsi-
dered and the KP & Kd values were to be further reduced as the
object was to reduce the probable rotation. For a reduction factor
of 0.5 and less, for KP & Kd values, the equations based on full
plastic failure might not be strictly correct but could be used as the
error was negligible. The correct equation could be written as (for
no plastic flow) :

suitable reduction factors could be adopted for ml& mr.

Para 6.18 : The Authors had stated that the base friction was
absent, and had assumed a higher point of rotation. This assurnp-
tion gave values much on the safer side. Such a condition would
be obtained only in cases, where the wells were very light so as to
leave contact with the base on application of horizontal forces. In
the case of bridge piers, the loads transmitted to the base were
considerably high and the frictional coefficient between the clay and
bottom plug though less, was always present. If the pR value a t
base was not sufficient to help the stability of the well, there might
besliding at the base. and the point of rotation would slightly move
upwards. Even then pR force would be present and had to be taken
into m o u n t in the calculations. It could be shown for most cases
38 DISCUSSION
ON

that the p value developed for a base rotation would be within

permissiblo limjts. The permissiblevalues would also be considerably
higher as suggested earlier.
The Authors had not considered the effect of active pressure.
These values could considerably increase for increasing Q values and
decreasing c values. I t might be necessary to consider these for
certain cases, and particularly Tor a sustained loading. However,
for stiff clays, these might be ignored. Again for increasing Q
values, the values based on full plastic failure with a reduction
coefficient might not be strictly correct though they could be used for
all the practical design cases.
One important question for wells in clav was the effect of
sustained loading. If the clay was of a highly consolidating type,
plastic strains wou!d result, and the wellmight not regain its position
completely even after the load was removed. The forces in the
longitudinal direction, i.e., hraking etc., were instantaneous, and
the might not be harmful. On the other hand. the lateral forces,
i.e., due to wind and water current, could be present for very long
periods and these could cause real damage if the wells were supported
by highly compressible clays alrouod.
U

The provision of two separate wells under each pier, would

minimise the base moments to a grezt extent: as the moment above
cap level would be eliminated by change in reactions of the wells
(assuming the cap as hinged, i.e., capable of' transmitting a shear
hut not a moment) and the nett moment at the base would be Hxd
against H (h+d) for a single well.
The effect of the frictional resistance of the soil on the sides wa8
also to be considered as before, in the stability computations.
 This subject OF lateral support afforded for wells resting in clay
merited serious consideration for experimental analysis and the
Authors might be requested to take up this matter with the research
institutions.

Para 8.3: The most severe stresses in the curb. would be caused
onits striking buried boulders, o r logs in the process of sinking. The
condition assumed by the Authors would occur when the curb was a t
rest, i.e., after it had sunk into the soil and for this condition, it might
not be correct t o assume the Q force between the curb and soil, as the
curb was not a free body sliding down the plane. Equating the forces
required for stability, the toral horizontal force would be N. sin 8.
it was doubtful whether this force would be localised on the curb
alone, as thesteining was continuous with thecurb. As suggested by
the Authors, the steel in the curb would have to be fairly heavy, t o
withstand the forces in the curb, during sinking, particularly in soils
with boulders and rock where these forces are not determinable.

Para 8.6 & 8.13 : The Authors had considered a bulb-shaped

bottom plug, and assumed an imaginary arch action in transmitting
the load. It was doubtful whether the arching action came into play
unless the concrete failed in flexure. This would, however, be an
additional safety measure, but on the other hand, if the bulb was
made very deep, the contact pressures and pressures below would be
non-uniform, and the initial settlement could be higher than what
would be obtained with a flat surface, particularly in clayey soils,
Even with a flat bottom, there would be horizontal force equal t o w
sin 8 cos 8. If the height of the inclined face of the curb was kept
as half the inside dimension of the well, it could be assumed that the
entire load was transferred by diagonal compression. However, as
suggested by the Authors, a very flat bulb at bottom would be rea!ly
helpful. In the equation (8.6), t h e p & pl values were the intensities
of pressure but not total press~lresas shown there. This probably was
a printing mistake to be rectified.

Para 12.4 : As suggested by the Authors, the most reliable

method of testing the well would be with a plugged well. The other
methods of testing, i.e., either on the cutting edge o r on a plate, had
obvious di~advantages. The settlements observed would be influen-
ced by the relaxed condition of stresses in the soil below and also due
to the disturbances caused by excavation. Further. these settlements
represented the characteristics o f the soil for a depth of 2 to 3 times
the size of the base carrying the test load. ~ n within
d this range (either
for a cutting edge on a plate).sit could be taken that 'the soil was
highly disturbed, and the settlements observed could be much higher
than what would be in final stages on a plugged well. The Authors
be requested to state, whether any observations for settlement were
made after the bridge was complzted and whether these could be co-
related with the test results.
Shri K. S. Rakshit stated that in para 2.4, page 3, it had
been stated that only temperature force was assumed to act at the
movable bearings. Though this statcment might be correct for
most of the bridge sturctures, it was not absolutely true. The force
that was taken by the free or movable bearing was equal to pi?
which might be due to temperature alone or due to the combina-
tion of temperature, tractive, seismic etc., specially for bridges with
long slender flexible piers having plate bearings on top. The teni-
perature force developed in such structures might be less than
and as such part of other horizontal forces would be taken by the
free bearings so as to make it equal to R.
The statement made in paras 5.2 and 7 that the steining of
circular wells was either in hoop compression or in hoop tension at
the time of sinking might not be correct. Recently it had been
observed in one of the bridges that cracks had developed in the well
steining during sinking similar in nature which might be expected in
a circular hume pipe loaded at top and bottom, i.e., inside cracks
along one axis and outside cracks along perpendicu!ar axis. The
reason for this type of cracks was probably due to the di!Tercntial
earth pressure along the two axes but definitely not due to hoop
tension or hoop compression.
In Table 5.2 the Authors had worked out the qteining tbick-
nesses for circular well which would give the required self-sinking
effort on the assumption of unit weight of steining material (probably
1 : 3 : 6 mass concrete) as 140 lb per cubic ft. The eKect of
buoyancy on the well steining had not been given due consideration.
This was a very important point which should not have been over-
looked. Generally, some portion of the steining remained above
the water table and as such, assuming 75 per cent average buoyancy,
the steining thicknesses required for 30 ft dia. (external) circular
well to overcome the skin friction were found to be 5.10 ft, 7.10 ft
and 11.I0 ft instead of 3.1 5 ft, 4.20 ft and 5.10 ft when the values of
skin friction were 403 psf, 500 psf, and 600 psf respectively.
I t had been mentioned in para 6.9 that the movement a t the
bearing level was the same for any heights of the bridge. This was
perhaps not true. The movement or deflection of the pier top due
to temperature force or other horizontal force such,as braking, seismic,
etc, would be more or less proportional to !ht helghts and hence the
movement of the well at the scour level would be nearly equal for
any height of the bridge provided other conditions remained the
same. Therefore, the introduction of a reduction factor 'y" for the
evaluation of passive resistance as advocated by the Authors did not
seem to be reasonable.
 S M K. C. Ray stated while going through the Paper, he
found that in para 6.7, page 28, it had been stated that once under
horizontal pressure, well might tilt to such at1 extent from which it
may never recover completely. As such it had been recommended
that a reduction factor a should he used to get the actual passlve
pressure assisting the stability of the well. It might be mentioned
here that during sinking operation. tilting of wells in all directions
is but a continuous phenomenon. Hence thls reduction factor
's'was rightly recommended. Value of 'a' for al! sorts of sods
and tilt would be so uncertain i f it would not be worthwhile to
consider the passive pressure at all.
This again was borne out by the Authors themselves in para
6.9 that owing to elasto plastic nature of soil, good amount of
de0ection was necessary for development of passive pressure.
Hence tilt gap plus thz deflection, wfiich the Authors themselves
had stated, might go up to 3 in. at the soil level for marshalling of
passive pressure. It might be imagined that a displacement of the
order of 3 in. at scour level might induce a displacement of the order
of 6 in, to 8 in, at the top of pier, which no designs could allow at the
bearings. This displacement would also add to eccentric moment at
the base of the well.
As explained above, if there was so much uncertainty and
risk about consideration of passive pressures, it is to be considered
whether it would he worthwhile to include them in working
out stability of a well. His impression about the stability of a
well was diEerent and it was his conviction that these were entirely
stable under their own conditions provided
adequate scour considerations and grip lengths
were provided as explained below :
Let,
Dw = dead weight at base of well
DL = live load reaction at base of
well
p = co-ef. of friction between base
and soil.
(A) Resistance against translation = R p
= p (Dw + DL). Taking p = 0.4,
+
RT = 0.4 (Dw DL). t 0,. 6,
+
Possible maximum value of P = 0.1 Dw 0.2 DL,take. 10
per cent seismic & 10 per cent braking effect neglectlag
water current pressure.
It is seen that F is always less than Rr.
Hence the well is safe against translation under its own
condition.
42 DISCUSSION
ON

fB)
, , Effect of F at tov would be such as to disturb the
foundation pressure C G . O Fkr..
distribution.
If a condition is impo- FOQC~S.
sed that at the limit-
ing point of n o tension
only the foundation
starts yielding, then
maximum resisting
moment amounts to
B
MRI=(Dw+D S ) ; ~ +c

In many cases it will be

found that Fh c: Ma1
t
(C) If, however, it is found that Fh > MRI, thecondition
of the forces acting on the solid well can be looked upon
as acted on by two additional
faces provided by resistance t-F
on the sides of the well against
tilting. If the side resistance
factor is taken as 'f' and area
in contact as A then additional
resisting moment Mas = BAJ
It will be seen in most cases
M'R = MRL -~+ ..-> Fh.
MR.
(D) If, however, again Fh z Mat
+ M m = M'R, tilting starts
and passive pressure generation
is started gradually when the pressure conditions may be
considered as shown. Here the friction resistance on one
side may vanish due to severance from the soil.
Here resisting moment (total)
B
MR - x ( D + ~ D ~ ) +PIU - I
B
P,b+TAf
It shall be seen that Ma is always
greater than Fh.
If one was to set out for an equili-
brium nfter condition D was reached,
one ~llowed good amount of depression
in the soil, and tilt would be such as to
cause physical disruption of the bridges
at the bearings. This was undesirable. His suggestiou was that
the design should be restricted to value of M B and it was hid coy!*
tion that if adequate grip length was provided, the value for s t a b ~ l ~ t y
shall be obtained in all cases. Cases for well foundations were
entirely different from those of bulkheads or sheet piles. Stabiljty
conditions in sheet piles were obtained entirely from passlve
pressure conditions as those were flexible and there were no other
scope for the resisting medium to offer the required strength. But
in case of wells which were immensely rigid in respect to soil.
there were other means to resist as explained in cases A , B and
C. This was possible owing to physical dimensions at the base of
the wells. In conclusion, it could be said that only meagre
information was available to standardise design of well founda-
!Ions. Good amount of observations and research were required
ln the field to come to asafe conclus~on. Regarding structural design
of well steining of circular wells, thick cylinder formulae had been
suggested vide para 7.7. Those were applicable only when the
material was isotropic and homogeneous. It was doubtful if they
could be suitably applied in case of masonry wells. I t would bt
better to use the ,hoop' stresses in such cases of design. In case
of concrete. steining, however, thick cylinder formulae might be
applied upto a limit where allowable tension in concrete was not
reached.
A very important shape of well, e.g., double 'D' had been
omitted here from calculation. Stress developments in such wells
were interesting. The most important and severe loading condi-
tion in a well could be had when they were in the process of
sinking in plastic clay. Owiug to plastic failure of surrounding
strata, amount of pressure developed might reach a value of a
dense liquid whose intrinsic weight was the weight of the soil. This
had been brought out by Westergaard. Aud during sinking. if this
pressure (P= Wh,when Wsweight of plastic clay) acted partially on a
circular well, it had been worked out with a sinusoidal distribution of
pressure that in addition to direct stresses an amount of moment of
the o!der of 0.16 pr' [r=mean radius of well] may develop. While
applylng this in case of well steining somewhere, it was found that
ordinary reinroraments in a R. C. well steining were inadequate to
withstand.
This was mentioned here only to emphasise the importance of
-
desim, asvect of well steinine which was a oroblem in three dimension
des6cityj.et to be solved.
Regarding design of well caps a good suggestion had been
made in para 9.3 where the bottom of a R. C. pier was considered
as a beam resting on well steining. This arrangement would be
useful if the load at bottom of pier consisted of vertical loading
44 DI~CUSSION
ON

only. Presence of moment at base of the pier would cause heavy

concentration of pressure on the bed block and those might cause local
crushing of the steining material.
A better suggestion should be to design well cap as a plate
resting on the boundary consisting of the steining and subjected
to direct live load and line moment. Ttis problem though a
difficult one could be tackled on numerical methods using plate
theory. There were no direct solutions. It must be realised here
that the mechanism for moment transfer at the base of the pier
should be perfect in the sense that in case of brick steining, t h e n
was no tension anywhere in the masonryor moments wereamply
resisted by the bond rods and transferred to the well-curb at the
bottom.
Shri B. Balwaat Rao in reply ,agreed with the comments of
prof. Henkel that considering t e lnrt~alhigh settlement and lower
settlement values in course of time, the bearing capacity of soil below
wells requires to be assessed. Shri Balwant Rao stated that he had
specially brought out this aspect in his introductory remarks. As
under service loads, the settlements would be low, the bearing
capacity can be assumed a little higher than the valces given in the
Paper.
2. Normally for wells with deep foundations (when the depth
_
-
is nreater than three times the diameter) while estimating the bearing
. . capacity it should 6.z taken into
I ..,(o account that for wells resting on
noncohesive soil like sand t h i first
phase of deformation under load
is chiefly a phase of compaction.
There is no sudden increase in
settlement or lateral movement.
Further, settlement of a founda-
tion on dense sand as well as on
loose sand is attended by the for-
mation of a comoacted core. This
11
compacted core' causes the dis-
Fig. I. Stresses in deep placement of soil along the slip
foundations
surfaces which either reaches the
ground surface or terminates in the thickness of the soil, asillustrated
in Fig. 1.
He than referred to the question of the determination of
the quantum of passive resistance which could be assumed in the
design of wells. Several speakers commenting on this aspect have
taken the horizontal subgrade reaction, or the base reaction or
included the active earth pressure and have tried to give their own
formulae. While deriving the passive resistance formulae in the
Paper, the Authors had taken note of such factors.
Taking the tilt of the wells into account, the actual pasape
resistance diagram of the earth will be a paraboloid in shape. tts
volume goes on increasing with the increase in the deformation and
reaches the value given by the Rankine's formula, and after that the
deformation is purely plastic. This is shown in Fig. 2
The procedure adopted in the derivation of the formula given in
the Paper was to calculate the resistance assuming the. Rankine's
values and apply a factor of safety,

3. The base reaction was not included in the computation

baause the exact position and the shape of the resultant reaction is
indeterminate. The Authors have, therefore, confined themselves to
the determination of the side support only and assuming that the
balance moment will be borne by the base.

Fig. 2.
(Nore :Surcharge effect not considered)

4. The materialization of the active earth pressure specially

in clay soils immediately after every tilt caused by momentary
forces was doubtful. The value of the active earth pressure will be
small and would introduce an error of only 5 to 6 per cent, which, if
not considered in computation, will not result in any serious error
because of the safety factor assumed in the design for ciay soils, and
not taking the relief offered by the skin friction. The magnitude of
the deflection given in para 6.9 is practically for ultimate conditions.
For Rankine's values of passive resistance (considered in the Paper)
this is likely to be small and the factor 'f' proposed in the Paper
may, if desired, be omitted from thecalculations especially for compact
sand and gravels.

An actual test on a well revealed that practically no tilt of the

well took place right up to the place of design moment. Perhaps the
base and side frictions developed a system of couple preventing any
rotation. This indicates that the problem may have to be treated in
three parts, viz., (i) No tilt stage, (ii) elastic, and (iii) plastic stages.
Extensive tests are required to determine and assess the effect of size
and depth of embedment of wells on these factors, to d~termine the
quantitative relief from each of these.

5. The Authors generally agreed with the remarks of

S k i K. C. Ray, of the necessity of extensive observations and
research on the passive resistance encountered by the wells, under
field conditions.

6. Replying to Dr. R. K. Katti's comment, on the formula

derived for clay soils, it was clarified that it was in keeping with the
assumptions made. Considering the higher factor of safety assumed
in this design, the passive resistance calculated should give reasonable
values of the grip.

7. S k i Maoorpnjao Samal raised the point regarding

placing of steel reinforcement in the well steining. The function of
reinforcement in steining was to prevent the well getting damaged by
bending and being held up in suspension during sinking operations.
If the reinforcement was placed in the centre of the steining, the
steining is likely to crack right upto the centre of the steining which
will be contrary to the assumption that well steining can take some
tension. Reinforcement placed equally near both the faces of the
well steining will prevent this and crovide greater resistance t o
tension.

8. The 0bse~atioU of Shri B. K. Panda on the silt and

lime deposit noticed by him soon after the bottom plug was placed
in position and sand filling was carried out is interesting. In absence
of greater details, it is di5cult to say what exactly was the cause.
 9.1. He then referred to the comments of Shri Venkata-
ramani on the force caused by the movement of superstructure by
temperature variations. The Authors agreed with Shri Venkata-
ramani's contention that no increase in permissible stresses is to be
assumed while taking this force into account.

9.2. Regarding Shri Venkataramani's point that if the bottom

plug is assumed t o be dome shaped in the computation, the dome is
likely to collapse under the load transmitled to it by the kerb and it
will work itself into the well, and, therefore, the procedure adopted
in the Paper to treat it as an inverted flat arch was more realistic.

9.3. The shear resistance between the water and of the bottom
well being practically zero, it is not necessary for the water in partially
filled well to oscillate with the well.

10. Replying. Shri S. R. Joshi's remark, regarding the value

of the maximum scour, Shri Balwant Rao stated that it had been
brought out in the Paper that the Lacey's formula is applicable only
to alluvial river beds, and had recommended it for a cross-check of
the results obtained by the data given in Iowa Research Station
experiments. This was particularly of importance, where the river
was not trained to flow axially to the bridge and where the bed of the
river consists of boulders and granular material.

11.1. Referring to Shri S. B. Patwardban's comment that the

anchorages proposed at the base of the well and the rock surface
will not be effective, and that the well will tip over, if sufficient bond
rods were not provided between the well curb and the bottom plug,
the Author stated that the bottom plug is usually kept 1 ft above the
bevelled edge of the kerb, and thn prevents the separation of the
bottom plug from the well.

11.2. Shri Balwant Rao stated that it was not correct to say
that criteria given by the equation 8.8 for the design of the junction
of the kerb with the steining was misleading. If for any reason the
kerb is damaged, the reinforcement suggested in the Paper will be
required to keep the kerb in position and prevent it from spreading.

12.1. Replying to Shri D. V. Sikka's remark that maximum

value .of scour and not 1.27 d is to be adopted in front of the abut-
ment in its design, Shri Balwant Rao stated that maximum observed
scour in a straight reach of the river is 1.27 d. However, the I.R.C.
Code (1964 edition) lays down that the depth of the foundations of
the abutments must not be less than depth of the foundations of the
piers, the depth of 1.27 d suggested in the Paper is only for calculating
the earth pressure moment in dry condition of the river bed.

12.2. He agreed with Shri Sikka's remark that the skin friction
should not be taken into account for calculating the passive
resistance. I t is not possible to work out or predict the exact
quantum of skin friction ; because, effects of factors like, the kind of
strata, the size of the we!l, the material of the well, the depth of
sinking, local condition and depth to size ratio of the well were
dificult to assess.

The values of skin friction given in the Paper are a fair indi-
cation of the values that could be expected. The Authors are grateful
for the data given by Shri Sikka which will be most useful.

12.3. It was pointed out by Shri Sikka that the sand filling
may not be flush with the bottom of the well cap. This can be true,
in which case, whole of the load will be carried down to the foun-
dations through the steining. In the Paper, it was meant that in case
of the failure of the bottom plug, the well may settle down and the
sand filling will then come into play. The sand filling will under such
circumstances function as a medium for transmitting the load to
the base.

12.4. Authors agree that the reasons for the reduction of the
skin friction during de-watering may not be only due to the down-
ward movement cf the water on the outer face of the well.

13. Shri A. K. Sen's remark that it is essential to seat the

well on all its sides when resting it on an inclined rock surface is, of
course, ideal. This may, however, involve expensive operation like
pnuematic sinking.

14.1. In reply to Shri P. R. Anrnadhq's comment, Shri

Balwant Rao stated that the reasons for assumlng the combination
of forces a t the rocker were already given in the Paper. Tha
Authors are, however, grateful to him for working out a modified
formula for water pressure distribution on a pier with an inclined
face.

14.2. The reason for adopting the factor 0.5 for calculating the
passive resistance is to obtain a resultant passive resistance diagram
 WELLFOUNDATIONS
FOR B n m e hms 49
well within the so-called elastic limits of the soil. The saturated
condition of the soil will cause a reduction in the vertical subgrade
reaction and is not, therefore, connected with its submerged weight
which has been taken into account in deriving the formula for passive
resistance.

15. Referring to comments of Shri K. S. Rakshit, Shri

Balmnt Rao stated that Shri Rakshit's presumption is not correct.
Any possible lateral movement of the structure is prevented by the
obstruction caused by the abutments and the passive pressure
encountered will be limited to that extent and any excess will then
be shared between that well and the well next to it as brought
out in the Paper.