Draft for comments

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS

GUIDELINES ON

WELL FOUNDATION FOR BRIDGES

OVER INDIAN RAILWAYS

(REPORT NO. BS- )

DECEMBER 2005

ISSUED BY

RESEARCH DESIGNS AND STANDARDS ORGANISATION

LUCKNOW - 226011

1
 FOREWORD

20 years have passed since ‘Manual on the Design and Construction of Well
and Pile Foundations” was published in 1985. Since then lots of advances have
occurred in well design and construction. These developments have been captured
in recent A&C slips and editions of IRS Substructure & Foundation Code, IRC:78,
IS:456, and IRS Concrete Bridge Code. Very recently in 2005, Member
Engineering has also issued two technical instructions 1 & 2 for design and
construction of well foundation. All these developments, including learnings from
experiences of renowned ex-civil engineers like Vijay Singh, L. Singh and H.K.L.
Sethi have been captured in this draft guideline. We hope to get further suggestions
and comments from Zonal Railways for making it better.

I congratulate Mr. A.K. Gupta, Director/B&S/CB-II and his team consisting

of Mr. P.P. Singh, ADE/CB-II and Mr. Binay Kumar, SE/Design for coming out
with this draft.

( Lalloo Singh )
ED/B&S

2
 CONTENT

Sl.No. Description Page No.

1.0 Introduction 4
2.0 Comparison with Pile foundation 4
3.0 Types of Wells and its Suitability 6
3.1 Circular Well 6
3.2 Double D Well 6
3.3 Double Octagonal well 7
3.4 Rectangular Well 7
3.5 Twin Circular Well 7
3.6 Wells with Multiple Dredge Holes 8
4.0 Well Foundations in Existing Important Railway Bridges 8
4.1 Ganga Bridge at Mokameh 8
4.2 Jogigopha bridge near Jogigopha on River Brahmaputra 9
5.0 Design parameters 9
5.1 Founding Level of Wells Below HFL 10
5.2 Design of Well Steinning 12
5.3 Design of Well Curb 15
6.0 Material to be used 16
6.1 Concrete 16
6.2 Under Water Concreting 18
6.3 Steel 20
7.0 Well Sinking and Sinking Effort 21
7.1 Precautions during Well Sinking 21
8.0 Well Design and Soil Parameters 24
8.1 Preliminary Design 24
8.2 Design and Analysis of Well Foundation by Substructures 25
Code

8.2.1 Design 25
8.2.2 Settlement of Well Foundation 31
References 37
Appendix-A (ME’s Technical Instruction No.2) 38

3
The guidelines on well foundation for Railway Bridges over
Indian Railways
1.0 Introduction:
Well foundations had their origin in India and have been used for hundreds
of years for providing deep foundations below the spring water level for
important buildings and structures. The technique of sinking masonry wells
for drinking water is very ancient and even today small drinking water wells
are constructed all over the country using the same methods as were
prevalent centuries ago. Well foundations were used for the first time for
important irrigation structures on the Ganga canal including solani aqueduct
at Roorkee (India), which were constructed in the middle of the nineteenth
century. With the advent of Railways in India, construction of a large
number of bridges across major rivers became necessary and it was
recognized very soon that much bigger and deeper well foundations were
required for their piers and abutments.

2.0 Comparison with Pile Foundation

i) Well foundations provide a solid and massive foundation for heavy loads as
against a cluster of piles which are slender and weak individually and are
liable to get damaged when hit by floating trees or boulders rolling on the
river bed in case of bridge piers.
ii) Wells have a large cross sectional area and the bearing capacity of soil for
this area is much greater than that of the same soil at the same depth for
bearing piles of small cross-section.
iii) Well foundations can be provided upto any depth if only open sinking is
involved and upto a depth of 33.5m if pneumatic sinking is required to be
done. Pile foundations are generally economical upto a depth of 18m and in
some cases for depths upto 27m.
iv) Piles can not be driven through soil having boulders. Logs of wood which
are very often found buried even at great depths also obstruct a pile. It is
possible to sink a well after over coming these obstructions.

4
v) The size of well foundations cannot be reduced indefinitely as the dredge
hole must be enough to enable a grab to work and the steining must have the
thickness necessary to provide the required sinking effort. It is, therefore,
not economical to use well foundations for very small loads and pile
foundations are more suitable for them.
vi) Wells are hollow at the center and most of the material is at the periphery.
This provides a large section modulus with the minimum cross-sectional
area. They can resist large horizontal forces and can also take vertical loads
even when the unsupported length is large. The section modulus of
individual piles in a cluster is small and cannot carry large horizontal force
or vertical loads when the unsupported length is considerable as in case of
bridge piers and abutments in scourable riverbeds.
vii) The bearing capacity of a pile is generally uncertain. In most cases, it is not
possible to determine the exact strata through which each individual pile has
passed. It can not be said with confidence in the case of bearing piles if they
have gone and rested on the strata taken into account while designing them
or if they are resting only on an isolated boulder.
In case of wells sunk by dewatering or pneumatic sinking, it is possible to
visually examine the strata through which sinking is done in its natural state
and the material on which they are finally founded. Even when sinking is
done by dredging, the dredged material gives a fairly good idea of the strata
through which the well is sunk. Drilled piles and caisson piles also have this
advantage over the driven piles.
viii) Masonry in the steining wells is done under dry conditions and the quality of
masonry or concrete is much better than in case of cast in situ piles for
which concreting is done below the ground level and in many cases below
the water level, where it can not be inspected. Even in case of precast piles,
the concrete is subjected to a lot of hammering and damage to it cannot be
ruled out.
ix) In case of wells raising of the well steining and sinking are done in stages
and a decision about the foundation level can be taken as the work
progresses piles and the strata conditions become known . In case of precast
piles, a decision about the depth has to be taken in advance. If the bearing

5
 capacity of the piles at the design depth is found to be less than the
calculated value after testing, it may become necessary to redesign the
foundation and the piles of short length already cast may have to be rejected
or additional number of piles may have to be provided in each cluster. On
the other hand if the strata is too hard, it may not be possible to sink them to
the design depth and the piles may have to be cut which is costly and
wasteful. This does not apply to cast in situ piles.

3.0 Well Types and Their Suitability

The followings are the different types of well in common use in Indian
Railways as well as roadways. The advantages and disadvantages of each
type have also been discussed as below:

3.1 Circular well

This type of well is used most commonly and the main points in its favour
are its strength. Simplicity in construction and ease in sinking. It requires
only one dredger for sinking and its weight per sq. metre of surface is the
highest due to which the sinking effort for this well is also high. The
distance of the cutting edge from the dredge hole is uniform all over and the
chances of tilting are the minimum for this type of well. The well is
generally adopted for piers of single track railway bridges and those of
bridges on narrow roads. When the piers are very long the size of circular
wells becomes unduly large, which makes them costly and disadvantageous
hydraulically also as they cause excessive obstruction to the flow of water.
Nine metres is generally considered as the maximum diameter of circular
wells. Allowing cantilever of one metre on either side the maximum length
of the pier resting on this type of well is about 11 metres.

3.2 Double D well

This type of well is most common for the piers and abutments of bridges
which are too long to be accommodated on circular well. The shape is
simple and it is easy to sink this type of well also. The dimensions of the
well are so determined that the length and the width of the dredge holes are
almost equal. It is also recommended by some engineers that the overall

6
 length of the well should not be more than double the width. The
disadvantage of this type of well is that considerable bending moments are
caused in the steining due to the difference in the earth pressure from outside
and water pressure from inside which result in vertical cracks in the steining
particularly in the straight portions where join the partition wall.

3.3 Double Octagonal Well

These type of wells are free from the shortcoming of double D-well. Blind
corners are eliminated and bending stresses in the steining are also reduced
considerably. They, however, offer greater resistance against sinking on
account of the increased surface area. Masonry in steining is also more
difficult than in case of double D wells.

3.4 Rectangular Well

These type of foundations are generally adopted for bridge foundations

having shallow depths. They can be adopted very conveniently where the
bridge is designed for open foundations and a change of well foundations
becomes necessary during the course of construction on account of adverse
conditions such as excessive in flow of water and silt into the excavation.

3.5 Twin circular well

This type of foundation consists of two independent circular wells placed

very close to each other with a common well cap. It is necessary to sink
these wells simultaneously to ensure that the cutting edges are almost at the
same level all the time. The wells have a tendency to tilt towards each other
during the course of sinking on account of the fact that the sand between
them becomes loose and does not offer as much resistance against sinking as
on the other sides. If the depth of sinking is small say upto 6 or 7 metres, the
clear space between the two wells may be kept 0.6 to 1 m to avoid tilting.
For greater depth of sinking spacing of 2 to 3 meters may be necessary.
Since it is necessary to sink these wells simultaneously it is obligatory to
have two sets of equipment for well sinking and in this respect they do not
offer any advantage over double D or double octagonal wells. They are,

7
 however, advantageous where the length of the pier is considerable and the
sizes of the double D or octagonal wells become unduly large to
accommodate the pier. If , however, the soil is weak, the larger size of
double D or double octagonal wells may be required to keep the bearing
pressure on the soil within limits. Twin circular wells are advantageous only
when the depths of sinking is small and the foundation material is soft rock
or kankar or some other soil capable of taking fairly high loads. Design of
well caps for the twin circular wells also requires special care. Allowance is
made for relative settlement of the two wells and this adds to its cost. The
possibility of development of cracks in the pier due to relative settlement can
not be ruled out inspite of the heavy design of the cap except where the
wells are founded on rock or other incompressible soils.

3.6 Wells with Multiple Dredge Holes

For piers and abutments of very large sizes, wells with multiple dredge holes
are used. Wells of this type are not common in India. Wells of this type
were, however, used for the towers of Howrah Bridge. The size of these
wells is 24.8m x 55m and there are 21 dredge holes in each of them, In the
United States wells of this type are more common. The overall dimension of
the largest well are 60.5m x 29.6m and they support the piers of San
Francisco okland bridge. Each well has 55 square dredge holes of 5.2m x
5.2m size.

4.0 Well Foundations in Existing Important Railway bridges

4.1 Ganga Bridge at Mokameh

Well for the foundation has been fixed to be at 53 ft. 6 inch x 32 ft. size
with semicircular ends. It has two dredge holes 14 ft. D shaped. They are
covered by a 6 ft. deep well raft. The well curbs of the main piers were
made of mild steel and are 14 ft 10 inch in height and weight about 125 ton
each. The well curb were designed in steel instead of reinforced concrete.

1
HKL Sethi 1963

8
 The wells were designed in mass concrete with 9 ft. thick steining. The
wells were provided with cement concrete plugs both at the top and at the
bottom, the intermediate portion being filled up with sand. A grip equal to
one third of the maxm. scour was required, while according to Gales a grip
of 65 ft. should be provided. Keeping in view the enormous discharge and
the importance of this bridge, a grip of 65 ft. was provided. This gave a
depth of 126 + 65 = 191 ft. below the HFL. Two wells next to abutments
were sunk 10 ft. deeper to counter the extreme scour conditions, which may
be experienced around them.

4.2 Jogighopa Bridge near Jogighopa on river Brahmaputra2

The conventional double –D shaped wells with outer plan dimensions of

17.00 x 11.00m were provided at all locations except abutments and two
adjacent piers. Abutments are supported on 6.0m diameter twin circular
wells with common well cap. Double D wells as well as circular wells were
provided with 2.5m thick diaphragms in longitudinal direction. The
thickness of steining, in double D wells is 2.80m with 2.5m thick diaphragm
and that in circular wells is 3.5m at base and 3.0m at the top:

Foundation Design parameters:

Design discharge – 90400 cumecs.
Design discharge intensity – 90 cumecs/m max.
Max. velocity of flow – 5.0m/sec.
Design founding level – RL (-) 36.75m
Buoyancy. Well resting on sand – 100%
Well resting on rock – 75%
Max. tilt – 1 in 80
Maxm shift - D/40
5.0 Design Parameters3

2 L. Singh 1998
3 ME’s Technical Note No.1

9
5.1 Founding Level of Wells Below HFL:

Rivers with scourable beds increase their cross sections when they are in
flood by the rise in the water level and also by scouring their beds thus
increasing the depth of flow. Rivers in regime, which flow through
incoherent alluvium and are free to adjust their width of flow and their depth
with equal ease, acquire an elliptical cross section in the straight reaches
with the highest flood level as their major axis.

a) Under Normal Conditions

The depth of well foundations is decided with respect to the maximum scour
and stability. The depth of foundation should not be less than 1.33 times the
deepest scour below HFL, and it should be so selected that it provides
necessary stability with respect to overturning and sliding. The method of
determining foundation depth is explained in following paras:

Normal depth of scour (D) below HFL should be maximum of:

• Using Lacey’s formula for Design discharge Q (Cumecs) {DL =0.473

(Q/f)1/3}

Where f is the silt factor for representative sample of bed material obtained
from scour zone, and value of f for different bed material is given in para
4.6.5 of IRS Substructure Code (applicable for medium sand) = 1.76 √m (m
being diameter of bed material in mm over scourable depth),

The value is generally taken as 1.00 which is in itself quite conservative.

Extra allowance should however, be made when the bank or a portion of the
river bed are non scourable.

• Before applying Lacey’s equation for scour depth, the width of the
channel should be measured and checked with the width calculated
by the following equation given by the Lacey:

L = 4.85√Q

10
 Where L = Linear watering in metres, Q = maximum flood discharge in
m3/sec.

If actual width is lesser than the width given by Lacey’s equation on account
of restraint on the river due to non-scourable banks or if it is proposed to
construct a bridge having a lesser water way than that given by Lacey’s
equation, the scour depth worked out by Lacey’s equation should be
0.61
⎛ w ⎞
increased by multiplying with factor ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ , where wc is the constricted
⎝ wc ⎠
water way and w is the Lacey’s regime width. Alternatively; For design
discharge intensity in cumecs due to constriction of waterway on account of
pier width, as per provisions of IRS Substructure Code {DL = 1.34 (q2/f)1/3}
where q is the discharge intensity in cubic metre per second per meter width
and f is the silt factor

• When the bridge piers are placed in the flow due to obstructions
caused by them, the scour increases around them. The multiplying
factor is given in para 4.6.6 of IRS Substructure Code. Increase in
depth of scour for design of foundation due to local scour around
nose of piers = 2DL

This, however, needs to be checked from observed scour around piers as per
hydraulic model study. Scour depth reported by model study need not be
doubled as in case of calculations done for normal scour.

• Grip length = one third of 2DL. However, adequacy of grip length should be
checked for stability of well pressure including safe bearing capacity of soil
with all vertical and horizontal loads as applicable under normal conditions.

(b) Under Seismic Conditions

Procedure same as above under normal conditions, but design parameters

like discharge, intensity of discharge, HFL etc. should be for seismic
conditions as per provisions of IRS Substructure Code. Adequacy of grip
length under this condition shall be checked with values of loads and

11
 moments for seismic forces as per dynamic analysis carried out by approved
methods like one done by IIT/ Kanpur or Roorkee etc.

c) Low water level

Depth of foundation is always measured below LWL. It is customary to

place the bottom of the well cap at LWL. This is done in order to enable
inspection of the well cap.
Low water level is determined from gauge levels of the river for as large
period as possible particularly from consideration of as long working period
as possible. From the available charts, LWL adopted should give ideally
150/ 180 days for working. Of course in river like Brahmaputra this is not
available where maximum time available is 130/140 days. Thus LWL is not
necessarily the lowest gauge level. This is also important so that the well
cap can be cast without use of coffer dams etc.

d) Check for bearing capacity

Most of deep foundations are on sandy beds at foundation level. The

allowable bearing capacity can be calculated by

q = 5.4N2B + 16 (100 +N2) D

q = Allowable soil pressure in kg/sq.m

N = SPT value.

B = Smaller dimension of well cross section in metre.

D = Depth of foundation level below scour level in metre.

For calculating Bending moment both active and passive soil pressures
around the well should be considered.

A factor of safety usually of ‘3’ is taken.

5.2 Design of Well Steining:

a) Design of Steining: The normal Railway practice is to provide plain cement
concrete. The reinforcement provided in such cases is very nominal in the
form of bond rods and lateral ties. Bond reinforcement of about 0.12% of

12
 sectional area and ties of about 0.04% of the volume per unit length is found
to be adequate and should be adopted. Check against tensile stresses in
steining causing cracking should be made using following formula both for
seismic and non seismic conditions.

2q ( B − SinBSin 2 x - sin B cos 2 x)

Soil Pressure =
π

M P
F = -
Z A

F = tensile stress in t/m2.

M = Moment in t –m.

A = Cross Section area in sq.m.

Z = Sectional modules of well in m3.

q = Density of soil = 1.5 t/m3

P= Total lateral pressure in t/m2.

The above was used in checking stresses in Mokamah bridge over River
Ganga. Details in Technical Paper No. 336 ‘Ganga Bridge at Mokamah’ by
Shri H.K.L. Sethi.

b) Thickness of Well Steining

Thickness of well steining is always designed in consideration of sinking

effort required to sink the well without taking recourse to use of kentledge or
dewatering.

The sinking effort available may be calculated by simple calculation based

on following, taking due account of buoyancy .

Axw ⎧ H1 ( w − δ ) H 2 ( w − δ )
f= ⎨ + X + }
P ⎩ H3 w H3 w

Where,

13
f= Average sinking effort in t/m2.

A= Cross sectional area of well steining in (m2)

w= Unit weight of plain concrete in t/m3

δ= Unit weight of water in 1 t/m3

P= Perimeter of well in (m)

Values of H1, H2, H3 are as shown in the figure

H1 = height of well above water. H1

H2 = height of well below water level

H2
and upto bed level

H3 = depth of well below bed level, H3

where skin friction applies.

In limiting conditions, H1 = 0, H2 < of H3, hence H2/ H3 is neglected.

Axw ⎧ { w − δ }
Hence f = ⎨
P ⎩ w

Taking weight of concrete as 2.3 t/m3

1.3 weight of steining per meter length of well (w)

f = x
2 .3 perimeter (P)

4 w
This is nearly taken as x
7 P

The skin friction of soil varies at different level and is dependent upon type
of soil also. This can be calculated by using following formula:

2Φ
F =1 / 2 ka.( Z − 2Cka ) tan
3

Where,

F = Skin friction in t/m2.

14
 Ka = Active pressure coefficient
Φ = Angle of shearing resistance of soil (degrees)
C = Half of unconfined compressive strength.
Z = Depth of foundation below Scour level (m)
r = Density of soil in t/m3.
This is calculated below LWL. But empirical values are also safely used
with fair degree of confidence.
Stiff and soft = 0.73 to 2.93 t/m2
Clay = 4.88 to 19.53 t/m2
Very soft clay = 1.23 to 3.42 t/m2
Dense sand = 3.42 to 6.84 t/m2
Dense gravel = 4.88 to 9.76 t/m2
For alluvial deposits, minimum sinking effort required is of the order of
5t/m2.
Thus using the Formula available, sinking effort can be verified from (f =
4/7 W/P).

c) Grade of Concrete

Concrete steining for the well is traditionally and conventionally treated as

MCC/ Plain concrete only and never as RCC. This is not withstanding the
fact that reinforcements are provided in the concrete but they are meant for
temperature, shrinkage, and bond. This has been the practice in Indian
Railways for ages and has stood well. The concrete is generally not richer
than M-15 (1:2:4)

5.3 Design of Well Curb

Most important element of well curb is the cutting edge. This is designed
from consideration of following:
• It should be able to cut through hard strata.
• It should be able to stand on a single point in case of a sloping rock/
large boulder, tree trunk etc. without getting damaged.
• It should be able to withstand additional forces caused by occasional
blasting.

15
 There is no known methodology for the design. More commonly is to use a
design which has proved itself for various important Railway bridges under
very difficult conditions. For a typical circular and Double ‘D’ well for
large well foundations, know design is available as per the enclosed sketch.
Double D type is more prone to tilt and shift due to unsymmetrical shape
and possible unequal dredging. Thus, it is essential that the well is heavy in
deep foundation.
Only part of the well curb should be armoured, may be 1 to 1.5 metres level
from the cutting edge level, as shown in the sketch.
Well curb should have an offset (7.5sm in Jogigopha bridge) all around the
well steining. This is for the purpose of reducing skin friction during
sinking operation by keeping the soil close to the steining in disturbed
condition. Cutting edge inner angle was 24o upto 2m height in Jogigopha
bridge.

Well curb should be placed on a platform/ Island built on river bed. In

Jogigopha bridge, for example, island was created upto depth of 5m by
driving two rows of 6” sal ballies by 1 ton monkey at 0.8m c/c upto a depth
of 4m below river bed. Bamboo mattings were tied with the two rows and
the space between them were filled with sand bags, to build a 25m dia
islands by filling with sand by crane/ dredger. For wells in deeper locations
Caissons were fabricated and launched in the river. These were of mild steel
plate shells with angle struts, with 215 T of steel in 15 m height of Caisson.
Typical sketches of well curbs have been shown in Appendix A, as included
in ME’s Technical Instruction No.2.

6.0 Material to be used:

6.1 Concrete

In specifying a particular grade of concrete, the following information

should be included:

a) Type of mix, that is, design mix concrete as nominal mix concrete.
b) Grade designation

16
c) Type of cement
d) Maximum nominal size of aggregate.
e) Minimum cement content (for design mix concrete)
f) Maximum water cement ratio.
g) Workability
h) Mix proportion (for nominal mix concrete)
i) Exposure conditions – As guided by table No. 4 & 5 of IS-456:2000.
j) Maximum temperature of concrete at the time of placing.
k) Method of placing and
l) Degree of supervision.
The protection of the steel in concrete against corrosion depends upon an
adequate thickness of good quality of concrete. The free water cement ratio
is an important factor in governing the durability of concrete and should
always be the lowest value. Cement content not including fly ash and
ground granulated blast furnace slag in excess of 450 kg/m3 should not be
used unless special consideration has been given in design to the increased
risk of cracking due to drying shrinkage in thin sections as to early thermal
cracking and to the increased risk of damage due to alkali silica reactions.

(Clause N0. 5.2.1 of IRS CBC) When the designer wishes to have an
estimate of the tensile strength from compressive strength, the following
expression may be used.

fcr = 0.7 f ck

where,

fcr is the flexural strength in N/mm2; and

fck is the characteristic compressive strength of concrete in N/mm2.

(Clause No. 14.2.2 of IS-456:2000) Under water concrete should have a

very high degree of workability and confirm to IS:9103. The water cement
ratio shall not exceed 0.6 and may need to be smaller, depending on the
grade of concrete or the type of chemical attack. For aggregates of 40 mm

17
 maximum particle size, the cement content shall be at least 350 kg/m3 of
concrete.

(Clause No. 708.3.1 IRC 78:2000) In case of plain concrete wells, the
concrete mix for the steining shall not normally be leaner than M-15. In
case of marine or other similar conditions of adverse exposure, the concrete
in the steining shall not be less than leaner than M-20 with cement not less
than 310 kg/m3 of concrete and the water cement ratio not more than 0.45.

(Clause No. 708.7.3 IRC 78:2000) The well curb shall invariably be in
reinforced concrete of mix not leaner than M-25.

(Clause No. 708.8.2 IRC 78:2000) The mix used in bottom plug shall have
a minimum cement content of 330 kg/m3 and a slump of about 150mm to
permit easy flow of concrete through tremie to fill up all cavities. Concrete
shall be laid in one continuous operation till dredge hole is filled to required
height. For under water concreting the concrete shall be placed gently by
tremie boxes under still water condition and the cement contents of mix be
increased by 10 percent.

(Clause No. 708.8.3 IRC 78:2000) In case grouted concrete, e.g. concrete is
used, the grout mix shall not be laner than 1:2 and it shall be ensured by
suitable means, such as, controlling the rate of pumping that the grout fills
up all inter stices upto to the top of the plug.

(Clause No. 708.8.4 IRC 78:2000) If any dewatering is required it shall be

carried out after 7 days have elapsed after bottom plugging.

(Clause No. 708.10.1 IRC 78:2000) A 300mm thick plug of M-15 cement
concrete shall be provided over the filling.

6.2 Under water concreting: (Clause N0. 14.2 & 14.2.4 of IS-456:2000)

When it is necessary to deposit concrete under water, the method,

equipment, materials and proportions of the mix to be used shall be
submitted to and approved by the engineer-in-charge before the work
started.

18
Concrete cast under water should not fall freely through the water.
Otherwise it may be leached and become segregated. Concrete shall be
deposited continuously until it is brought to the required height. While
depositing, the top surface shall be kept as nearly level as possible and the
formation of seams avoided. The method to be used for depositing concrete
under water shall be one of the following-

i) Tremie- The concrete is placed through vertical pipes the lower end
of which is always inserted sufficiently deep into the concrete which
has been placed previously but has not set. The concrete emerging
from the pipe pushes the material that has already been placed to the
side and upwards and thus does not come into direct contact with
water.

When concrete is to be deposited under water by means of tremie,

the top section of the tremie shall be a hopper large enough to hold
one entire batch of the mix or the entire contents the transporting
bucket, if any. The tremie pipe shall be not less than 200mm in
diameter and shall be large enough to allow a free flow of concrete
and strong enough to withstand the external pressure of the water in
which it is suspended, even if a partial vacuum develops inside the
pipe. Preferably, flanged steel pipe of adequate strength for the job
should be used. A separate lifting device shall be provided for each
tremie pipe with its hopper at the upper end. Unless the lower end of
the pipe is equipped with an approved automatic check valve, the
upper end of the pipe shall be plugged with a wedding of the gunny
sacking or other approved material before delivering the concrete to
the tremie pipe through the hopper, so that when the concrete is
forced down from the hopper to the pipe. It will force the plug (and
along with it any water in the pipe) down the pipe and out of the
bottom end, thus establishing a continuous stream of concrete. It
will be necessary to raise slowly the tremie in order to cause a
uniform flow of the concrete but the tremie shall not be emptied so
that water enters the pipe. At all times after the placing of concrete

19
 is started and until all the concrete is placed, the lower end of the
teremie pipe shall be below the top surface of the plastic concrete.
This will cause to the concrete to build up from below instead of
flowing out over the surface, and thus avoid the formation of laitance
layers. If the change in the tremie is lost while depositing, the tremie
shall be raised above the concrete surface and unless sealed by a
check valve, it will be replugged at the top end, as at the beginning,
before refilling for depositing concrete.

ii) Direct placement with pumps – As in the case of tremie method, the
vertical end piece of the pipe line is always inserted sufficiently deep
into the previously cast concrete and should not move to the side
during pumping.

iii) Drop bottom bucket – The top of the bucket shall be covered with a
canvas flap. The bottom doors shall open freely downward and
outward when tripped. The bucket shall be filled completely and
lowered slowly to avoid backwash. The bottom door shall not be
opened until the bucket rest on the surface upon which the concrete
is to be deposited and when discharged, shall be withdrawn slowly
until well above the concrete.

6.3 Steel: (Clause No. 708.3.4 IRC 78:2000) For plain concrete wells, vertical
reinforcements (whether mild steel or deformed bars) in the steining shall
not be less than 0.12 per cent of gross sectional area of the actual thickness
provided. This shall be equally distributed on both faces of steining. The
vertical reinforcements shall be tied up with hoop steel not less than 0.04
percent of the volume per unit length of the steining.

(Clause No. 708.3.5 IRC 78:2000) In case where the well steining is
designed as a reinforced concrete element, it shall be considered as a column
section subjected to combined axial load and bending. However, the amount
of vertical reinforcement provided in the steining shall not be less than 0.2
percent (for either mild steel as deformed bars) of the actual gross section
area of the steining, on the inner face, a minimum of 0.06 percent of gross

20
 area steel shall be provided. The transverse reinforcement in the steining
shall be provided in accordance with the provisions for a column but in no
case shall be less than 0.04% of the volume per unit length of the steining.

(Clause No. 708.6.1 IRC 78:2000) The mild steel cutting edge shall be
strong enough and not less than 40 kg/m to facilitate sinking of the well
through the types of strata expected to be encountered without suffering any
damage. It shall be properly anchored to the well curb. For sinking through
rock cutting edge should be suitably designed.

(Clause No. 708.7.3 IRC 78:2000) The well curb shall invariably be in
R.C. of mix not leaner than M-25 with minimum reinforcement of 72 kg/m3
excluding bond rods. The steel shall be suitably arranged to prevent
spreading and splitting of the curb during sinking and in service.

(Clause No. 708.7.4 IRC 78:2000) In case blasting is anticipated, the inner
faces of the well curb shall be protected with steel plates of thickness not
less than 10mm upto the top of well curb.

7.0 Well Sinking and Sinking Effort

7.1 Precautions During Well Sinking

The following precautions must be taken during sinking of the wells.

i) When the wells to be sunk close to each other and the distances
between them is not greater than the diameter of the wells, they
should be sunk alternately i.e. one sunk ½ the dia in advance of the
other as the wells tend to draw towards each other in case they are
sunk simultaneously. Similarly when two parallel rows of wells
have to be sunk with centers of each at about 1m apart one row
should be sunk before the other or they can be started on different
ends or from the center towards two ends. The purpose of this is to
disturb the least possible area of the soil in the vicinity of well at one
time. It is also advisable to sink the alternate wells in a row in
preference to sinking them one after the other.

21
ii) In sinking of wells joined together, for example, dumb bell shaped
wells, the excavation in both the dredge holes should be carried out
simultaneously and equally to facilitate even sinking.

iii) The sinking of number of wells commenced in one season should be

such that they can be sunk to atleast 66% of their depth before the
seasonal flood. Wells not reaching this stage before rains should be
brought to the notice of the engineers in charge for his advise about
protective measures to be taken e.g. provision of temporary cap.
Sand drilling etc.

iv) All precautions should be taken against possible damage to the

foundations of structures in the vicinity of the wells prior to
commencement of dredging of the material from inside of the well.

v) During sinking, there is tendency to dump all the dredged material

close to the well and only on one side. This causes appreciable
difference of pressure on the sides of the well which tends to lean
towards the side where material has not been dumped. It is therefore
to be ensured that the dredged material is never allowed to
accumulate near the well . Firstly, it should be dumped at the time of
dredging as far away from the well as possible and then it should be
kept being removed simultaneously. The water running out of the
excavated material should not be allowed to flow close to the well
steining. A temporary drain should be made to take away this water.

vi) In sinking a pair of wells through sandy strata there is a tendency for
the two wells to draw closely to each other. These wells may,
therefore get considerably titled. To prevent this timber pieces may
be introduced in between the steining of the two wells.

vii) Generally in case of abutment wells, there is high bank on one side
of the well. The well curb is usually cast by digging up a pit slightly
bigger than the dimensions of the well. This results in surcharge on
one side of the well, which tends to lean away from the bank. In
such cases, it is worth while to spend a little more money in digging

22
 the original pit of sufficiently larger sizes leaving about 6.8 metres
clear distance round the well and by not permitting steeper than 1:1
slopes for the walls of the pit.

viii) Sometimes, in case of well situated in the river bed, the river stream
flow along one edge to the coffer dam made for the sinking of the
well. Generally, the dredged material is disposed off on that side
where derrick etc. are situated i.e. the edge close to the bank. This
causes adverse effect and the well tends to tilt towards the side on
which the river current is flowing. Arrangements have therefore to
be made for dumping the dredged material on the river current side.

ix) The sinking operations should be carried on with great caution

whenever cutting edge approaches the junction of different types of
strata. To control this boting chart should be consulted regularly.

x) When the well curb approaches a hard strata which dips at a

considerable angle the well may have a tendency to lean when being
sunk. This tendency should be prevented by supporting the well at
two or three places on its steining high the ground. A well should
also be secured against such possibility where the soil is fluid or semi
fluid in nature.

b) Sinking of wells:

The wells as far as possible be sunk true and vertical. Sinking should not be
started till the steining has been cured far at least 48 hours. A complete
record of sinking operations including tilt and shifts, kentledge, dewatering,
blasting etc. done during sinking shall be maintained.

c) Tilt and Shifts4:

As far as possible well shall be sunk without any tilt and shift. A tilt of 1 in

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
Manual on the design and construction well and pile foundation-1985 Cl. No. 15

23
 100 and shift of D/40 subject to a minimum of 150mm shall be taken into
account in the design of well foundation (D is the width or diameter of well).

If greater tilts and shifts occur their effects on bearing pressure on soil
steining stress, change in span etc. should be examined individually.

d) Sinking of well by resorting to blasting –

Blasting may be employed with prior approval of competent authority to

help sinking of well for breaking obstacles, such as boulders or far leveling
the rock layer for square seating of wells, blasting may be resorted to only
when other methods are found ineffective.

8.0 Well Design and Soil Parameters

8.1 Preliminary Design

a) Shape and size of the well

i) The outer sides of the wells should be preferably be vertical. In
special cases small offset may be allowed.
ii) The horizontal cross section should satisfy the following
requirements:
• The dredge holes should be large enough to permit dredging.
• The steining thickness should be sufficient to transmit the load and
also provide necessary weight for sinking and adequate strength
against forces acting on the steining both during sinking and
services.
• It should accommodate the base of the sub-structure and not cause
under obstruction to the flow of water.
• The overall size should be sufficient to transmit the loads to the soils and
• It should allow for the permissible tilt and shift of the well.
iii) When a group or groups of wells are sunk, the minimum spacing
between them should not be less than 1m.
b) Forces Acting on the Well
The following forces which act on the well should be first calculated:
i) Dead load of the bridge.

24
 ii) Self weight of the wells
iii) Live load
iv) Longitudinal forces
v) Temperature forces
vi) Water forces
vii) Wind load
viii) Seismic force
ix) Buoyancy effect
x) Earth pressure
xi) Skin friction
8.2 Design and Analysis Of Well Foundation By Sub-Structures Code:

8.2.1 Design

The design of well foundations shall be carried out for either of the
following two situations:

i) Wells surrounded by non-cohesive soils, below maximum scour

level and resting on non-cohesive soils;

ii) Wells surrounded by cohesive soils or mixed strata below maximum

scour level and resting on any strata viz. Cohesive soil, non–cohesive
soil or rock.

a) Wells resting on non-cohesive soils

For wells resting on non-cohesive soils like sand and surrounded by the
same soil below a maximum scour level, the design of foundations shall be
checked by both Elastic Theory and Ultimate Soil Resistance Methods as
given below which are based on IRC:45-1972 ‘Recommendations for
Estimating the Resistance of Soil below the maximum scour level in the
design of Well Foundation of Bridges.’ Elastic Theory Method gives the
soil pressure at the side and the base under design load, but to determine the
actual factor of safety against failure, the ultimate soil resistance is
computed.

25
The provisions given below shall not apply if the depth of embedment is less
than 0.5 times the width of foundation in the direction of lateral forces.

The resistance of soil surrounding the well foundation shall be checked :

i) for calculation of base pressures by the elastic theory with the use of
subgrade moduli ; and

ii) by computing the ultimate soil resistance with appropriate factor of

safety.

i) Elastic Theory

Step 1: Determine the values of W, H and M under combination of normal

loads without wind and seismic loads assuming the minimum grip length
below maximum scour level,

Where,

W = total downward load acting at the base of well, including the self
weight of well.

H = external horizontal force acting on the well at scour level.

M = total applied external moment about the base of well, including

those due to tilts and shifts.

Step 2 : Compute IB and IV and I

Where,

I = IB + mIv (1+2µ’ α)

IB = moment of inertia of base about the axis normal to direction of

horizontal forces passing through its C.G.

Iv = moment of inertia of the projected area in elevation of the soil mass

LD 3
offering resistance =
12

where,

26
L = projected width of the soil mass offering resistance multiplied by
appropriate value of shape factor.

Note: The value of shape factor for circular wells shall be taken as 0.9. For
square or rectangular wells where the resultant horizontal force acts parallel
to a principal axis, the shape factor shall be unity & where the forces are
inclined to the principal axis, a suitable shape factor shall be based on
experimental results :

D = depth of well below scour level

m= KH / K : Ratio of horizontal to vertical coefficient of subgrade

reaction at base. In the absence of values for KH and K determined by field
tests m shall generally be assumed as unity.

µ’ = Coefficient of friction between sides and the soil = tan δ, where δ is the
angle of wall friction between well and soil.

B
α = for rectangular well
2D

diameter
= for circular well.
π .D

Step 3 : Ensure the following :

M
H> (1+ µ µ’) - µ W
r

and H < M/r (1- µ µ’) + µ W

where,

r = (D/2) (I / m Iv )

µ = coefficient of friction between the base and the soil. It shall be taken as
tan φ

φ = angle of internal friction of soil.

Step 4 : Check the elastic state

27
mM/I not greater than γ (Kp – KA)

If mM/ I is > γ (Kp – KA), find out the grip required by putting the limiting
value mM/ I = γ (Kp – KA)

Where,

γ = density of the soil (submerged density to be taken when under water or

below water table)

Kp & KA = passive and active pressure coefficients to be calculated using

Coulomb’s theory, assuming ‘δ’ the angle of wall friction between well and
soil equal to 2/3 φ but limited to a value of 22-1/20.

Step 5 : Calculate

σ1 W − μ ' P MB
}= ±
σ2 A 2I

where,

σ1 & σ2 = max. and min. base pressure respectively.

A = area of the base of well.

B = width of the base of well in the direction of forces and moments.

P = M/r

P = horizontal soil reaction.

Step 6 : Check σ2 not smaller than 0 i.e. no tension

σ1 not greater than allowable bearing capacity of soil.

Step 7 : If any of the conditions in Steps 3, 4 and 6 or all do not satisfy,

redesign the well accordingly.

Step 8 : Repeat the same steps for combination with wind and with seismic
case separately.

28
ii) Ultimate resistance method

Step 1: Check that W/A not greater than σu/2

W = total downward load acting at the base of well, including the self
weight of well, enhanced

by a suitable load factor given vide Step 5.

A = area of the base of well

σu = ultimate bearing capacity of the soil below the base of well.

Step 2 : Calculate the base resisting moment Mb at the plane of rotation and
side resisting moment Ms by the following formulae :

Mb = QWB tan φ

B = width in case of square and rectangular wells parallel to direction of

forces and diameter for circular wells.

Q = a constant as given in Table 1 below for square or rectangular base. A

shape factor of 0.6 is to be multiplied for wells with circular base.

φ = angle of internal fricture of soil.

TABLE -1

D/B 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5

Q 0.41 0.45 0.5 0.56 0.64

NOTE: The values of Q for intermediate D/B values in the above range may
be linearly interpolated.

Ms = 0.10 γ D3 ( KP – KA) L

Where,

Ms = Side resisting moment

29
γ = density of soil (submerged density to be taken for soils under water or
below water table)

L = projected width of the soil mass offering resistance. In case of circular

wells. It shall be 0.9 diameter to account for the shape.

D = depths of grip below max. scour level.

KP , KA = passive and active pressure coefficient to be calculated using

coulomb’s Theory assuming “δ” angle of wall friction between well and soil
equal to 2/3 φ but limited to a value of 22-1/2°.

Step 3 : Calculate the resisting moment due to friction at front and back
faces (Mf) about the plane of rotation by following formulae :

(i) For rectangular well

Mf = 0.18 γ ( KP – KA) L.B.D2 Sin δ

(ii) for circular well

Mf = 0.11γ ( KP – KA) B2.D2 Sin δ

Step 4: The total resistance moment Mt about the plane of rotation shall be

Mt = 0.7 (Mb + Ms + Mf)

Step 5 : Check Mt not less than M

Where,

M = Total applied external moment about the plane of rotation, viz, located
at 0.2D above the base, taking appropriate load factors as per combinations
given below :

1.1 D .... (1)

1.1 D – B +1.4 (Wc +EP + W of S) . . . . (2)

1.1 D +1.6 L .... (3)

1.1 D – B + 1.4 (L + Wc +EP ) ... (4)

30
 1.1 D – B + 1.25 (L + Wc +EP + W or S) ….. (5)

Where,

D = Dead load.
L = Live load including tractive/braking etc.
B = Buoyancy
Wc = Water current force
Ep = Earth pressure
W = Wind force
S = Seismic force
Note : Moment due to shift and tilt of wells and piers and direct loads, if
any, shall also be considered about the plane of rotation.
Step 6 : If the conditions in steps 1 and 5 are not satisfied, redesign the well.

Note : Notation, symbols given in the clause 3.0 of Bridge Substructure &
Foundation Code, Revised in 1985 are not applicable for the above
Appendix-V.
b) Wells resting on cohesive soils

For wells founded in clayey strata and surrounded by clay below max. scour
level, the passive earth pressure shall be worked out by C & φ parameters of
the soil as obtained from UU (unconsolidated undrained) test and for
stability against overturning, only 50% of the passive earth pressure will be
assumed to be Mobilized (Refer para 6.9.3).

In wells through clayey strata, the skin friction will not be available during
the whole life of the structure, hence support from skin friction should not be
relied upon.

8.2.2 Settlement of Well Foundation:

i) The settlement of well foundation may be the result of one or more of

the following cases:

• Static loading,
• Deterioration of the foundation structure;

31
• Mining subsidence; and
• Vibration subsidence due to underground erosion and other causes.
ii) Catastrophic settlement may occur if the static load is excessive.
When the static load is not excessive, the resulting settlement may be
due to the following :

• Elastic compression of the foundation structure;

• Slip of the foundation structure relative to the soil;
• Elastic deformation or immediate settlement of the surrounding soil
and soil below the foundation structure ;
• Primary consolidation settlement of the surrounding soil;
• Primary consolidation settlement of the soil below the foundation
structure.
• Creep of the foundation structure under the constant axial load; and
• Secondary compression of the surrounding soil and soil below the
foundation structure.
iii) If a structure settles uniformly, it will not theoretically suffer
damage, irrespective of the amount of settlement. In practice,
settlement is generally non-uniform. Such non-uniform settlements
induce secondary stresses in the structure. Depending upon the
permissible extent of these secondary stresses, the settlements have
to be limited. Alternatively, if the estimated settlements exceed the
allowable limits, the foundation dimensions or the design shall be
suitably modified.

iv) The following assumptions are made in settlement analysis :

• The total stresses induced in the soil by the construction of the

structure are not changed by the settlement;
• Induced stresses on soil layers due to imposed loads can be
estimated, and
• The load transmitted by the structure to the foundation is static and
vertical.

32
 In the present state of knowledge, the settlement computations at best
estimate the most probable magnitude of settlement.
v) It is presumed that the load on the foundation will be limited to a safe
bearing capacity and, therefore, catastrophic settlements are not
expected. Settlement due to deterioration of foundations, mining and
other causes cannot, in the present state of knowledge, be estimated.
Such methods are not also available for computation of settlement
due to the slip of foundation structure with reference to the
surrounding soils and, therefore, not covered.

Wells Founded In Cohesionless Soil :

For wells constructed in cohesionless soils, the settlement due to dead load
of sub-structure will take place by the time the construction is completed and
the necessary adjustment in the final level can be made before erection of the
girder. In such cases, settlement shall be evaluated only for the dead load of
the super-structure.

Wells Founded In Cohesive Soil :

When wells are founded in cohesive soil, the total settlement will be
computed as per the provisions of clause 6.4. The settlements in clay occur
over a long period and time rate of settlement will be computed as per the
provisions of clause 6.4.2.3 of Substructure Code.

• Determination of bearing capacity

Bearing capacity for foundations in cohesive strata will be

determined in the similar manner as determined in case of
foundations in non-cohesive soils (para 6.3.1).

• Estimation Of Immediate And Primary Consolidation

Settlements
For computation of immediate settlement and primary consolidation
settlement, procedures provided in IS:8009 Part I and Part II –“Code
of Practice for Calculation of Settlement of Foundations”, shall be
followed.

33
• Estimation of secondary consolidation settlement may be
computed as under:

The Secondary consolidation settlement may be computed as under:

(a) If the load increment is more than (pc-po)

[i.e. Ìp > (pc-po)], then

Cc p
Ps = E log 10 c
1 + e0 po

(b) If the load increment is smaller than

pc-po [ i.e. Ì p < (pc-po)],

the corresponding equation will be :

Cc ( p + Δp )
Ps = E.Log10 o
1 + e0 po

Where, Ps = Secondary settlement

cc = Compression index

eo = Initial void ratio

Pc= Pre-consolidation
pressure
Po = Initial effective pressure

E = Thickness of clay layer

Ìp = Pressure increment

• Time Rate of Settlement

The Time Rate of Settlement will be computed in accordance with

the provisions of IS:8009 (Pt.I) based on Terzaghi's One
Dimensional Consolidation Theory. In practice, the consolidation
settlements take place much faster than those predicted from
Terzaghi’s Consolidation Theory.

Following reasons partly explain the faster rates :

34
 i) Three dimensional consolidation i.e. lateral release of excess pore
pressure;

ii) Release of hydrostatic pressure outside the footing area; and

iii) Horizontal permeabilities are usually much higher than the vertical.

Therefore, the rate of settlement should be corrected by factor of three to

five times faster. Actual rates of settlements in the area for similar cases
will be of great value for the accuracy of prediction for rate of settlement.

Note: 1. Settlement will be computed for the probable/actual sequence of loading

and correction for construction period will be allowed as per the provisions
of IS:8009 (Pt.I), clause 10.2, Appendix D.
2. While computing pressure increment below abutments, due care will be
taken to include the pressure increment due to earth fill behind abutment
also with the help of appropriate monograms (IS:8009-Pt.I, clause 8.3,
Appendix B).

Calculation of lateral earth pressure for soils with cohesion

It is seen that in many case of back fill of soil having c and Φ, only Φ is
considered and active earth pressure coefficient for Rankine’s formula is
calculated accordingly. This is totally incorrect.

In such cases, the earth pressure may be calculated using Bell’s equation
obtained from Mohr’s failure stress circle.

Principal shear stresses σ 1 and σ 2 will be:

σ 1 = σ 2 tan 2 (45 + Φ/2) + 2c tan (45 + Φ/2)

σ 3 = σ 1 tan 2 (45 + Φ/2) + 2c tan (45 + Φ/2)

Using Coulumb’s and Rankine’s k factors to calculate Earth pressures at

depth Z.

2c
Pa = r z ka – 2 c√k where Z =
τ ka

35
 Resultant R and its location y can be calculated by either neglecting tension
zone or altering pressure diagram for overall depth of soil.

(i) R = Pa(H-Z)/2 at y = (H-Z)/3 above base

Or

(ii) R = PaH/2 at y = H/3 above base.

1 - sin φ
Where ka = coefficient of active earth pressure for Rankine =
1 + sinφ

Φ = Angle of shearing resistance in degrees.

R = Density of soil

C = Cohesion of soil generally obtained from unconfined

comprehensive test.

By neglecting tension crack (Z), the lateral pressure obtained is generally higher and
is considered more conservative.

36
 References:

1. R.R. Jaruhar, Member Engineering- Technical Instruction No. 1 & 2 on Key

Design Parameters for Rail Bridges dated 06.06.2005.
2. Vijay Singh, BE (Civil), IRSE, Chief Engineer, India Railway – Wells and
Caissons, Nem Chand & Bros, Roorkee (U.P.), 1981.
3. L. Singh, Chief Engineer, North Central Railway, Allahabad- Salient Design
feature of Jogighopa Bridge, National Seminar on Bridge Engineering in
North East, Maligaon, Guwahati, 29th- 31st Oct., 1998.
4. H.K.L. Sethi, CE, M.I.E., IRSE (Retd.), Ganga Bridge at Mokameh,
Research Designs and Standards Organisation, Ministry of Railway,
Lucknow.
5. IRC:78-2000, Standard specifications and Code of practice for road bridges.
Section-VII, Foundation and Substructure (Second Revision), The India
Road Congress, Jamnagar House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi- 110 011.
6. IS-456:2000- Plain and Reinforces Concrete Code of Practice (Fourth
Revision) Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhawan, 9 Bahadur Shah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110 002.
7. Concrete Bridge Code- IRS Code of Practice Plain, Reinforced and
Prestressed Concrete for General Bridge Construction, RDSO, Lucknow-
226 011.
8. IRS Code of Practice for the design of Sub-structures and Foundations of
Bridges, RDSO, Lucknow- 226011.
9. Technical paper No. 335, River training and control for bridges.
10. Manual on the design and construction of well and pile foundation (1985),
RDSO, Lucknow.
-------

37
Appendix-A

38
39
40
41
42