Do you need ground improvement?

[ozdemirhasan35]

I have a project. According to the results of the analysis, the soil safety is 13 t/m2, while the average stress is 16 t/m2, the maximum stress is 34 t/m2. ground group cz3 there is no liquefaction on the ground. It shows the stresses in the +1.6q combination. I need your comments on how to solve it

Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

 

[unver]

Re: Do I need ground improvement Hello My Suggestions Comment without seeing the project. -Maximum stresses can be reduced with some column curtain arrangements in the project. --Talk to the ground reporter; -- can it pull up the ground safety? (It's a weak possibility, but) -- If it can't pull, how many meters thick will it save your maximum ground tension when you lay a stabilized (duly laid and compacted) under the foundation? --Will it be economical? --If this is not the case, you will have to drive piles, ask how many meters you will drive, and ask the pile values for calculation. Unver ÖZCAN

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

Re: need ground improvement

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

the project is here

 

[M. Berat Denli]

Re: is soil improvement needed Hello, Soil tension should be looked at from G+Q and G+Q+E, not from increased G+Q loads. When looking from G+Q+E, you can increase it by 50% compared to DY2007 in floor classes A, B and C. To recover from ground tension; As Ünver said, you can reduce the tension by turning the columns into curtains. You can increase the concrete grade. You can basically reduce the strain by doing amps. You can also reduce the tension by inserting a short flood-like curtain behind the column. Piling is not economical when you have problems with local stresses. If you have a problem on the entire foundation surface, you can strengthen the ground by piling.

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

Re: is it necessary to improve the soil Berat Bey, when we look at the g+q loads, there are places exceeding 13t/m2 in the project, I tried to spread the load by throwing the columns as often as possible, but it is not possible to obtain a tension below 13. When you increase the g+q+e values by 50%, the stresses are mostly below 19.5 t/m2. The problem here is g+q, in this case, how about if ground improvement is made with jetgrout and the carrying capacity is increased?

 

[M. Berat Denli]

Re: is soil improvement necessary As you said, the ground safety stress does not recover in G+Q loading in the project. As I mentioned before, you can increase the bearing capacity of the ground with pile and jetgroud, but since there is a small regional problem in your project, it would be more economical to increase the soil safety as I mentioned above. Soil improvement makes more sense if the soil safety stress does not recover over the entire foundation soil.

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

Re: is soil improvement necessary

As you said, the soil safety stress does not recover in G+Q loading in the project. As I mentioned before, you can increase the bearing capacity of the ground with piles and jetgroud, but Since there is a small regional problem in your project, it would be more economical to increase the soil safety as I mentioned above.If the soil safety stress does not recover on the entire foundation ground, it would be more logical to make ground improvement.

Berat Bey is not regional, look at the g+q stresses, 13 t/ There is no value below m2.

 

[M. Berat Denli]

berat bey is not regional, look at the g+q stresses, there is no value below 13 t/m2.

You entered the ground safety stress 19 in the model you shared. In such cases, you can choose the 50% increase option to increase it in case of earthquakes.) You need to make ground improvement because it does not save all the ground.

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

berat is not regional, look at the g+q stresses, there is no value below 13 t/m2.

In the model you shared, you entered the ground safety stress 19. (In such cases, you can choose the 50% increase option by typing 13 on the ground safety stress to increase it in case of earthquakes.) You need to make ground improvement because it does not save the entire ground.

yes, we agree, Mr. Berat. Actually, if 1 basement is built, the building As it will both reach good ground and all stresses will be on the safe side and will be surrounded by a curtain all around, their loads will be spread, but the owner does not want to build a basement

 

[ebasakin]

Does the owner who does not want to build a basement make ground improvement? Or other engineers save everything, why can't you save?

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

Does the owner who does not want to build a basement do ground improvement? Or other engineers save everything, why can't you save it?

dude, the cost of making a basement is about 800 thousand TL, ground improvement will be more economical. If engineers are saving, here we go, we say goodbye, we pay our respects

 

[NYILMAZ]

I think you should add more curtains to the more appropriate places for the system. In addition, 0.35 for floor fixed loads is not a very high value. If you are considering the joists of the rib floor, they are calculated automatically. No, I can't say anything if not styrofoam but something else was considered as a filling material. Why are you trying to solve blocks that are as separate from each other as the foundation and superstructure on a project? When a single foundation is defined under the big main blocks, the stresses decrease a little more, but it is not enough. There are consoles in many parts of the building. So basically consoles can be made at the same points in a similar way. I think some consoles (ampatons) are too redundant. In the area where the elevators are located, you can make the under-elevator foundation amplitudes 60-70 cm (toward the building), and shorten the building's foundation amplitudes to 80-90 cm. As in the picture, you can make ampathes for S12, S13, S40 columns. I think that the foundation thickness may be a little more for an 11-storey building. With a little work, I was able to pull the stresses down. However, despite all this, I still could not reach the solution (as it is). Maybe it can go to a different solution with curtain solutions and dilatation cancellation as I wrote above. I couldn't try it as it required more effort Note: A raft named D 62 is visible between the rafts. Find object and delete it.

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

I think you should add more curtains to the system more appropriate places. Also, isn't it a very high value to take the floor constant loads of 0.35. If you think of the ribs of the floor, they are calculated automatically. If not, styrofoam as filling material I can't say anything but something else has been thought of. Why are you trying to solve blocks that are separate from each other, as with their foundation and superstructure, on a project? When a single foundation is defined under the big main blocks, the stresses decrease a little more, but it is not enough. There are consoles in many parts of the building. Then Basically, consoles can be made at the same points in a similar way.I think that some consoles (ampatments) are too unnecessary.In the area where the elevators are located, if the elevator can make the sub-foundation ampathes 60-70 cm (toward the building), the foundation ampatments of the building can be shortened to 80-90 cm As in the picture, you can also make ampatage for S12, S13, S40 columns. you are. I think that the foundation thickness may be a little more for an 11-storey building. With a little work, I was able to pull the stresses down. However, despite all this, I still could not reach the solution (as it is). Maybe it can go to a different solution with curtain solutions and dilatation cancellation as I wrote above. I couldn't try it as it required more effort Note: A raft named D 62 is visible between the rafts. Find object and delete it.

Nedim, first of all, thank you very much for taking your time to review. I entered brick as a filling material. (I tried it with styrofoam, though) The reason why I drew in the same project was that I wanted to draw on one sheet because there are two more blocks adjacent to these blocks, by the way, we can't make a console on the left side. We agree that some parts of the consoles are unnecessary, I will make the necessary abbreviations, I enlarged them for testing purposes, because I have been working on it for a long time, I did all kinds of trials but since the elevators will have pits there, it will be torn to the floor, so I have made the foundation a little wider with the amplifications and even the main part. I combined. Since the building is very long and L-shaped, I separated the whole mass with dilatation. I am trying to reduce the thickness of the foundation as much as possible. As soon as this ground can lift the load, I'm screaming so that you can heal me I think it's a separate area of expertise in healing. I think it will be necessary to negotiate with companies that are experienced in this field and solve the problem. I failed in this project because of ignorance Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

 

[NYILMAZ]

I think you should add more curtains to the system more appropriate places. In addition, 0.35 for floor fixed loads is not a very high value. If you are considering the joists of the rib floor, they are calculated automatically. No, I can't say anything if not styrofoam but something else was considered as a filling material. Why are you trying to solve blocks that are as separate from each other as the foundation and superstructure on a project? When a single foundation is defined under the big main blocks, the stresses decrease a little more, but it is not enough. There are consoles in many parts of the building. So basically consoles can be made at the same points in a similar way. I think some consoles (ampatons) are too redundant. In the area where the elevators are located, you can make the under-elevator foundation amplitudes 60-70 cm (toward the building), and shorten the building's foundation amplitudes to 80-90 cm. As in the picture, you can make ampathes for S12, S13, S40 columns. I think that the foundation thickness may be a little more for an 11-storey building. With a little work, I was able to pull the stresses down. However, despite all this, I still could not reach the solution (as it is). Maybe it can go to a different solution with curtain solutions and dilatation cancellation as I wrote above. I couldn't try it as it required more effort Note: A raft named D 62 is visible between the rafts. Find object and delete it.

Nedim, first of all, thank you very much for taking your time to review. I entered brick as a filling material. (I tried it with styrofoam, though) The reason why I drew in the same project was that I wanted to draw on one sheet because there are two more blocks adjacent to these blocks, by the way, we can't make a console on the left side. We agree that some parts of the consoles are unnecessary, I will make the necessary abbreviations, I enlarged them for testing purposes, because I have been working on it for a long time, I did all kinds of trials but since the elevators will have pits there, it will be torn to the floor, so I have made the foundation a little wider with the amplifications and even the main part. I combined. Since the building is very long and L-shaped, I separated the whole mass with dilatation. I am trying to reduce the thickness of the foundation as much as possible. As soon as this ground can lift the load, I'm screaming so that you can heal me I think it's a separate area of expertise in healing. I think it will be necessary to negotiate with companies that are experienced in this field and solve the problem. I failed in this project because of ignorance Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

It seems that the project is a whole. But if you are going to use dilatation, they are unlikely to produce the same solid at the same time. Therefore, if you are separating the basis in terms of project compatibility, you should draw the project separately. Project use by masters becomes much easier. Otherwise, it means a lot of beam details that are included in the big sheet. Can this project be done without dilatation? I guess yes. Therefore, the load distribution will also differ. The stresses in the dilatation zone are too high. Thus, the stresses in that region are reduced. Let me say something classic; Definitely the floor quality is not that low. If the cost of piling is too much, the cost of making a basement is too much, the cost of improvement is too much, I can tell you a less costly method: Find an experienced geotechnical job and pay three or five thousand lira more. Have peace of mind and keep your money in your pocket. It's worth spending a few days on this. I still think you need to overhaul the carrier system. Considering that there is a wall on it, you get 0.35 live load on all floors. These can also be reviewed. I wish you good work. Sent from my N. YILMAZ SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

I think you should add more curtains to the system more appropriate places. Also, 0.35 for floor fixed loads is a very high level. Isn't it worth it. If you are considering the ribs of the floor, they are calculated automatically. No, if not styrofoam is considered as the filling material, something else is considered, I can't say anything. Why are you trying to solve the blocks that are separate from each other, like the foundation and superstructure, on a project? When a single foundation is defined, the stresses decrease a little more, but it is not enough. There are consoles in many parts of the building. Therefore, consoles can be made at the same points in the foundation in a similar way. I think that some consoles (ampathments) are very unnecessary. You can make it 70 cm (towards the building) and shorten the foundation amplitudes of the building to 80-90 cm. You can also amplify S12, S13, S40 columns as in the following. I think that the foundation thickness may be a little more for an 11-storey building. With a little work, I was able to pull the stresses down. However, despite all this, I still could not reach the solution (as it is). Maybe it can go to a different solution with curtain solutions and dilatation cancellation as I wrote above. I couldn't try it as it required more effort Note: A raft named D 62 is visible between the rafts. Find object and delete it.

Nedim, first of all, thank you very much for taking your time to review. I entered brick as a filling material. (I tried it with styrofoam, though) The reason why I drew in the same project was that I wanted to draw on one sheet because there are two more blocks adjacent to these blocks, by the way, we can't make a console on the left side. We agree that some parts of the consoles are unnecessary, I will make the necessary abbreviations, I enlarged them for testing purposes, because I have been working on it for a long time, I did all kinds of trials but since the elevators will have pits there, it will be torn to the floor, so I have made the foundation a little wider with the amplifications and even the main part. I combined. Since the building is very long and L-shaped, I separated the whole mass with dilatation. I am trying to reduce the thickness of the foundation as much as possible. As soon as this ground can lift the load, I'm screaming so that you can heal me I think it's a separate area of expertise in healing. I think it will be necessary to negotiate with companies that are experienced in this field and solve the problem. I failed in this project because of ignorance Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

It seems that the project is a whole. But if you are going to use dilatation, they are unlikely to produce the same solid at the same time. Therefore, if you are separating the basis in terms of project compatibility, you should draw the project separately. Project use by masters becomes much easier. Otherwise, it means a lot of beam details that are included in the big sheet. Can this project be done without dilatation? I guess yes. Therefore, the load distribution will also differ. The stresses in the dilatation zone are too high. Thus, the stresses in that region are reduced. Let me say something classic; Definitely the floor quality is not that low. If the cost of piling is too much, the cost of making a basement is too much, the cost of improvement is too much, I can tell you a less costly method: Find an experienced geotechnical job and pay three or five thousand lira more. Have peace of mind and keep your money in your pocket. It's worth spending a few days on this. I still think you need to overhaul the carrier system. Considering that there is a wall on it, you get 0.35 live load on all floors. These can also be reviewed. I wish you good work. N. YILMAZ Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

As you said, Mr. Nedim, let's combine and solve and see the results together. I increased the floor loads because there is a wall on it. I was there while drilling was being done on the ground, I observed the spt in place, in the first 4 meters, spt comes out around 10-12, we made many drillings for all the blocks separately, in some places the ground is good, in some places it is bad. I think the most unsuitable situation, we sent the samples in the laboratory, I will share their results here as well. We calculate the ground bearing power together according to the foundation dimensions and their heights. Sent from my SM-G610F using Tapatalk

 

[NYILMAZ]

If there is no groundwater in the ground, and the laboratory results are satisfactory, good values can be achieved with teraghi bearing capacity. If 15-16 is caught, values of 25 kg/cm² will be reached, and a result can be reached with a little work on the structure. Come on, good luck.

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

If there is no groundwater on the ground, and if the laboratory results are satisfactory, good values can be achieved with teraghi carrying capacity. If 15-16 is achieved, 25 kg/cm² values will be reached, which can be achieved with a little work on the structure. .

lab. results came like this

 

[NYILMAZ]

According to these results, what did your floorman say, what kind of comments did he make and what did he give as a result? When you look at it, c cohesion is nice in triaxial pressure experience, but there must be an angle of fi, there is a value there, it needs a translation like alpha 0 or the whole page is needed, of course. Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[ozdemirhasan35]

According to these results, what did your grounder say, how did he comment, and what did he give as a result? When you look at the triaxial pressure experience, c cohesion is nice, but there must be a fi angle, there is a value there, alpha needs to be translated like 0 Or the whole page is needed, of course. Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

I thought the fi angle was 13.91 but

 

[NYILMAZ]

I thought the fi angle was 13.91 but

There is a difference when you say this. If fi is 13.91, the Zem must be very high anyway. The information is insufficient. I hope you will get answers that you like..