Tilt of low-rise Digest 475

dıgest buildings
with particular reference to
progressive foundation movement

This Digest provides assessing the significance developments on more

guidance on the of tilt and the need for marginal sites gives added
assessment of the expert advice. importance to the subject.
significance of tilt of low- The issues of acceptability This Digest is
rise buildings resulting and tolerability of tilt are complementary to
from foundation particularly acute in low- Digest 251 which deals
movement. It should assist rise housing. The shortage with structural distortion
building professionals, of good building land and and cracking caused by
property valuers and the consequent necessity foundation movement.
insurance advisors in of siting new housing

The most acute foundation problems on poor

ground are often associated with small
buildings where deep foundations are not an
economically viable solution. Stiff foundations
can be provided relatively cheaply and it is
usually feasible to provide a raft foundation
which will prevent distortion of the building
due to differential settlement and resist
horizontal tensile forces. With this type of stiff
foundation, the remaining concern is whether
the building might tilt to an unacceptable
degree. Figure 1 shows the excessive tilt
(1/100) suffered by a new house.

Figure 1
Excessive tilt of new house caused by
collapse compression of fill on wetting

constructing the future

2

Distortion and tilt

With a stiff foundation, progressive foundation

movement has a very different impact on a
building and its occupants from the structural
distortion and damage that is discussed in
Digest 251.
● Where a building distorts, damage will Wide cracks
become visible in the form of cracks in the
brick walls and by doors and windows
jamming. As the ground movements
increase, the width of the cracks will
increase. Digest 251 has provided guidance
relating the degree of severity to the
observed damage in the form of ease of Narrow cracks
repair and crack width. Figure 2 illustrates
the cracking that occurs when a building Hogging mode

deforms in a hogging mode.

● Where the building tilts without distortion,
much larger movements can occur without Figure 2 Deformation of house in hogging mode
there being any noticeable effects. While this Digest 251 provides guidance on the assessment of damage
is advantageous in many respects, it does caused by this type of ground movement
mean that there may not be such clear
forewarning of impending and developing
problems. Figure 3 illustrates a building on a
stiff raft foundation that has undergone a
differential settlement s over the length of
the building L which has resulted in the raft
foundation tilting at an angle αf to the

, ,
horizontal.

,,
This Digest provides guidance for the situation

,,,,,,
where progressive ground movement causes
tilting of a building without significant
distortion. The guidance is complementary to αw
that given in Digest 251. αf
s

Figure 3 House on stiff raft foundation undergoing tilt,

see box below

Description of tilt
The tilt of a floor slab or foundation is the angle, α f, of the floor slab or
foundation to the horizontal. Similarly, the tilt of a wall is the angle, α w,
to the vertical. The tilt angle can be quoted in degrees or radians, or
alternatively the tangent of the angle can be used. In Figure 3,
tan α f = s/L. In this Digest the tilt of a foundation is described by
tan α f and is expressed as a ratio, eg 1/200. This means a tilt of
1 vertical unit for every 200 horizontal units. A ratio such as 1/200 is
easier to visualise than a tangent expressed as 0.005, or the
corresponding angle of 0°17’11’’.
 3

Tolerability of foundation tilt

In assessing the significance of foundation The wide variation in tilt limits for different
movement, it is necessary to address the buildings and applications is illustrated in
question of what magnitude of foundation Table 1.
movement is tolerable for buildings and their For buildings containing some types of
occupiers. However, the answer to an specialist equipment there is a very small
apparently simple question is a complex tolerance of tilt (eg a tilt criterion of 1/2000 for
function of the following factors: a warehouse containing high racking). The
● The purpose of the building necessity of such small tolerances needs to be
● The ownership of the building critically examined because they are likely to
● The type of building superstructure require expensive foundation solutions.
● The type of foundations The limit value of 1/250 for chimneys and
● The nature of the ground conditions towers in Table 1 is very much smaller than the
actual inclination to the vertical of the world’s
The consequences of unacceptable ground most famous tilting structure, the Leaning
movements can be grouped into three broad Tower of Pisa! Prior to recent stabilisation
categories: works, the Tower reached a tilt of 1/10.
● Aesthetic — the appearance of the building is
adversely affected Table 1 Limit values of tilt for different types of
● Serviceability — some function of the structure
building, or services such as drains, gas and Structure or component Tilt
water supply pipes, is impaired
● Stability — there is a danger of collapse of the Radar system[1] 1/50000
building or some part of it Satellite antenna tower[2] 1/6000
Machine operation —turbine[3] 1/5000
In view of this complexity, it is not surprising Warehouse — high racking[4] 1/2000
that the tolerability of building movement has Concrete tanks[5] 1/500
been of continuing concern to geotechnical Crane rails[3] 1/333
and structural engineers for many years and Chimneys, towers[3] 1/250
that it is difficult to give widely applicable Stacking of goods[3] 1/100
general guidelines on acceptable ground Floor drainage[3] 1/100–1/50
movements. Most of the important studies and
reviews of tolerable movements have been In most of the cases listed in Table 1, the
principally concerned with damage to problem is associated with the tilt of the floor
buildings resulting from distortion, and the or foundations of the structure. However, for
problems associated with tilt have received chimneys and towers the amount by which the
much less attention. walls are out-of-plumb is critical. In the simple
Where differential ground movement causes case illustrated in Figure 3, where the building
a building to tilt as a rigid body with little if any has a stiff raft foundation and the structure and
deformation or cracking of the walls, it is its foundations act as a rigid box, the tilt of the
necessary to decide at what point the tilt will raft, αf , and the out-of-plumb of the walls, αw,
become unacceptable from a perceptional, are of equal magnitude. However, in many
serviceability or stability standpoint. The cases there will be some distortion of the
problems caused by tilt will depend on the type structure, which will mean that the foundations
of building and its purpose. The tolerable tilt may tilt more or less than the walls rotate.
will therefore vary greatly depending on the For low-rise residential buildings,
type and usage of the building. particularly where there are owner-occupiers,
The theoretical maximum tilt of a free- noticeability is crucial to tolerability. Not only
standing wall prior to toppling can be readily will the powers of observation of occupiers
calculated, but the critical tilt at which collapse show considerable differences, but also the
of a building occurs will be dependent on, sensitivity to tilt will differ between individuals.
among other factors, the quality of For example, in regions where mining
construction and the extent to which the walls subsidence is commonly encountered, a small
of the building are tied together. In practice, the tilt is less likely to be noticed and more likely to
limiting factors for tolerable tilt of a building are be tolerated than in other parts of the country.
likely to be related to noticeability and Nevertheless, tilt of walls and floors of low-rise
serviceability rather than ultimate collapse. buildings is typically noticed when it is in the
4
region of 1/250 to 1/200. Problems associated usually be stabilised by means of tie bars. While
with serviceability are unlikely until a Table 2 is relevant to both new and existing
considerably greater tilt occurs, and structural low-rise buildings, it is emphasised that it can
distress may not occur until a tilt of 1/50, but in do no more than provide an indication of
terms of the re-sale value of a house, typical values of tilt at various stages from
perception is the key factor and when a tilt of design to remedial work.
1/250 is noticed there may be perceived to be a This Digest does not deal specifically with
problem. Serviceability problems can include insurance claims. However, it should be
doors swinging open and drainage falls recognised that insurance policies for domestic
becoming insufficient. At larger tilts some properties normally provide some cover for loss
cracking of brickwork may occur. or damage as a result of foundation movement,
Some indicative values of tilt for low-rise which may show itself through tilting.
dwellings are summarised in Table 2; further Insurance policies normally require the insured
information is given on the various values to inform the insurer of any damage as soon as
quoted in the table in the following sections. possible. In the absence of physical damage,
The indicative values of tilt given in the table such as cracks in the walls of the building,
are applicable to the tilt of a whole building — insurers are unlikely to accept that a pecuniary
both floors and walls; they are not relevant to loss has occurred unless the tilt requires
the situation where one wall of a building leans remedial action. The Institution of Structural
or bows outwards due to processes unrelated Engineers’ Subsidence of low-rise buildings [6]
to foundation movement and the wall can provides guidance on insurance issues.

Table 2 Indicative values for tilting of low-rise housing

Classification Tilt Comment

Design limit value 1/400 The maximum acceptable differential settlement across the building is related to the
design limit value for tilt. If the building is likely to tilt more than this limit value, ground
treatment or deep foundations may be required.
Noticeability 1/250 The point at which the tilt of a building becomes noticeable will depend on the type and
purpose of the building, and the powers of observation and perception of the occupiers.
Typically, tilt of low-rise housing is noticed when it is in the region of 1/250 to 1/200.
Monitoring 1/250 When tilting is noticed it is advisable to make some measurements to confirm that the
building has tilted. If the measured tilt is greater than 1/250, monitoring should be
carried out to determine whether the tilt is increasing.
Remedial action 1/100 Where tilts of this magnitude are measured, or the measured rate of increase of tilt
indicates that this degree of tilt will be exceeded, some remedial action should be taken.
This is likely to include re-levelling the building, perhaps by grouting or underpinning and
jacking.
Ultimate limit 1/50 If tilt reaches this level, the building may be regarded as in a dangerous condition, and
remedial action either to re-level or to demolish the building will be required urgently.
 5

Construction of new buildings

Where low-rise housing is to be located on a (a) simply supported distance x

site with poor soil conditions (foundation
settlement is likely to be more than, say,
20 mm) and deep foundations are not an x

economically viable solution, the provision of

stiff foundations for the houses may be an (b) cantilever distance x⁄ 2
attractive approach. This Digest is principally
concerned with the assessment of the
significance of the tilt of existing structures, but
two aspects of foundation design for new
buildings are examined:
● the design of a stiff raft foundation, and x
⁄2
● the avoidance of excessive tilt.
Figure 5 Design support conditions for stiff raft on fill
sites
Stiff raft foundations
The objective is to design foundations as a cantilever, as illustrated in Figure 5.
sufficiently stiff to ensure that differential Commonly adopted values of x are in the range
settlement results in the building undergoing a 3 m to 4 m. In most cases a ground beam depth
rigid body rotation (tilt) rather than distortion. of 0.6 m is adequate.
The extra cost incurred by providing stiff
foundations is not great in relation to the Excessive tilt
selling price of a house and the consequences
of the building damage that could occur if such It is necessary to check that the stiff raft will not
foundations are not provided. This approach to tilt beyond the design limit value. From an
foundation design should largely eliminate estimate of differential settlement due to all
distortion and cracking of buildings unless causes during the lifetime of the building, the
ground movements become large. Appropriate possible tilt can be assessed. Some of the more
provision should be made to reduce the risk of common causes of ground movement are
damage to underground services where they described in Digest 251 and are listed in the
enter the building. next section. A credible estimate of settlement
For low-rise domestic buildings, a stiff raft and tilt requires an appropriate site
usually takes the form of a composite slab with investigation. A set of six Digests deals with site
the slab acting as a tie between the edge beams investigation (see References).
and internal ground beams[7,8,9], as shown in The estimated tilt should have a reasonable
Figure 4. The detailed structural design of such margin on the likely noticeability limit of 1/250
a reinforced concrete foundation for particular and it is proposed that a suitable limit for
ground deformations is not a simple task and design purposes in a typical case is 1/400. For a
different design methods, embodying different building with a length of 8 m, a 1/400 tilt
assumptions, can give quite different depths for corresponds to a differential settlement of
the edge and internal beams. Raft foundations 20 mm. A tilt of this magnitude would not
should be designed by an appropriately normally be noticed. A smaller design limit
qualified civil or structural engineer. Current value would be impractical for most low-rise
practice on fill sites is to design the foundation dwellings.
such that, although the foundation slab is cast If the estimated tilt is greater than the design
on the ground, a distance x can be spanned and limit of 1/400, the foundation design needs to
a distance x⁄ 2 at the edge of the building can act be reconsidered. It may be appropriate to
consider some form of ground treatment prior
to construction of the raft foundation; there are
a number of widely available treatment
processes, and specialist geotechnical advice
should be obtained on their suitability to
particular site conditions and requirements. At
some sites where predicted ground movements
Figure 4 Raft foundation with stiffened edge beam are very large, it may be concluded that shallow
and internal ground beam foundations are not appropriate.
6

Tilting of existing buildings

Investigation is progressive, and this means that it is

imperative to identify the principal cause of the
Where it is noticed that a building appears to ground movement. The movements that cause
be tilting, measurements should be made to a building to tilt can be associated with a
confirm whether there is significant tilt and, if number of ground phenomena, the more
there is, to assess the likelihood of the tilt common of which are:
increasing. Digest 344 deals with the ● Consolidation of soft clays and organic soils
measurement of settlement that has already ● Collapse compression of poorly compacted
taken place and the measurement of the out-of- fills on wetting
plumb of walls. ● Volume changes in clay soils
● Mining subsidence
Measuring the tilt that has already taken ● Instability of sloping ground
place
If the building and its foundations are acting as Information on these and other causes of
a stiff box, then the tilt of the foundation and ground movement can be found in Digest 251
the out-of-plumb of the walls will be simply and in Subsidence of low-rise buildings [6].
related to each other as illustrated in Figure 3. Although the site investigation Digests are
In practice there is likely to be some distortion concerned with new buildings, they provide
of the building, which will affect the information that will be helpful in the type of
relationship between the tilt of the raft investigation envisaged here for existing
foundation and the out-of- plumb of the walls. buildings. A desk study (Digest 318), walkover
Level measurements around a readily survey (Digest 348) and, where necessary,
identifiable feature such as a course of masonry ground investigation (Digest 411), should be
or the damp-proof course (dpc) can provide an carried out to determine the most likely cause
estimate of the amount by which the of ground movement. Leaking drains and
foundation is out-of-level. However, the water supply pipes should be identified. The
particular feature that is surveyed may have presence of trees and their distances from the
been built out-of-level. According to building should be noted (Digest 298).
Digest 344 it can be assumed that most
detached and semi-detached pairs of houses Monitoring ongoing tilt
will not be out-of-level by more than 15 mm at Where the initial survey confirms that the
the time of construction. building has a tilt greater than 1/250, it is
The amount by which walls are out-of- suggested that monitoring should be carried
plumb can be measured using a plumb bob and out to determine whether there is progressive
ruler or an optical instrument. Digest 344 ground movement.
suggests that it may be assumed that an To determine the rate of settlement over a
external masonry wall of a two-storey building reasonably short time scale requires precise
was not out-of-plumb by more than 20 mm at levelling equipment and stable reference
the time of construction, and many buildings datums as described in Digest 386. BRE
will be better than this. For a single-storey levelling stations should be installed at dpc
building this may be reduced to 10 mm. level at sufficient points around the building to
The potential errors in the estimation of tilt establish the form that the differential
due to initial out-of-level of brickwork courses settlement is taking. The results of the
and out-of-plumb of walls are large compared monitoring should make it possible to assign
with the noticeability level of tilt. However, the building to one of the following three
where the measurements on opposite walls of categories:
the building show similar results and the out- ● No further increase in tilt appears to be
of-level measurements are similar to the out- occurring
of-plumb measurements, it may be concluded ● Tilt is varying in a cyclic manner, probably
that the measurements give a reasonable associated with seasonal changes in water
estimate of the tilt. content of the soil
● Tilt is progressively increasing
Determining the causes of ground movement
When tilt has become noticeable and this has Tilting is often associated with drainage failure
been confirmed by measurement, it is and it will be helpful if drains are tested and,
important to assess whether ground movement where necessary, repaired prior to monitoring
 7
taking place. Where the degree of cyclic caused the building to tilt without noticeable
movement has to be assessed, monitoring distortion, appropriate remedial action to
should be carried out over a minimum period re-level the building may be considered.
of 12 months. Possible methods include grouting or
underpinning and jacking. Appropriate
Remedial action specialists will be required for the work. In
situations where it is decided to re-level the
Where no further increase in tilt is occurring or structure by injection grouting, it will be
the tilt is varying in a cyclic manner, the necessary to carry out careful monitoring of
maximum tilt that the building is likely to suffer foundation levels as grouting proceeds. If
should have occurred already. Where the re-levelling can be achieved, then there may be
movement is progressive, the monitored rate of little else needed to rectify in the building, since
movement should be interpreted in the light of cracks in walls and other signs of distortion
the most probable cause of the movement and should be very minor. In some cases it may be
an estimate of the maximum tilt should be advisable to repair and strengthen the building;
made. The following questions can then be this can include installing tie rods and, in
addressed: brickwork, mortar bed reinforcement.
● Is any remedial action required? Some form of ground treatment may be
● What should remedial action achieve? needed to address the cause of the foundation
● What forms of remedial action are movements. This type of remedial action is
appropriate? required where there are significant ongoing
● Is remedial action feasible? ground movements, for example due to
settlement of fill, or where some vulnerability
The answers to these questions will depend on to future movement is identified, for example
many factors and be building-specific. In the the presence of old mine workings. Grouting
following sections some general guidance is may be used to improve the stiffness of the
given which should apply in many situations. ground or to fill old mining cavities[10].
Monitoring should be continued during and
Remedial action trigger level after treatment to verify the effectiveness of the
For low-rise residential buildings where remedial works.
progressive ground movement is taking place,
remedial action is likely to be required when Feasibility of remedial action
tilt has reached 1/100. Where the tilt is smaller It needs to be established that there is a feasible
than this, but is increasing and will reach 1/100, form of remedial work that can rectify the
it may be technically easier and less costly to problem at an acceptable cost. With low-rise
deal with the problem earlier rather than later, buildings the cost of remedial work could
particularly where the stiffness of the exceed the cost of demolition and rebuilding.
foundation is indeterminate, and a lower Where a building is suffering from distortion,
trigger level may be appropriate. underpinning (Digest 352) is often used to
extend the foundations downwards into stiffer
Objectives of remedial action and more stable ground thereby reducing the
When it has been decided that remedial action potential for further movement. Mini-piling
is required, the objectives of such action (Digest 313) has often been used to underpin
include: existing buildings. Where a building suffers
● Re-levelling the structure from excessive tilt, underpinning on its own
● Ensuring structural integrity will not be adequate. Re-levelling of the
● Ground modification to address the cause of structure will require grouting or jacking.
the foundation movements Underpinning may provide a stable foundation
element that will facilitate jacking.
Where ground movements appear to have Re-levelling may not always be practicable,
ceased, re-levelling the structure and ensuring and much depends on the causes of ground
structural integrity may be the principal movement and the extent to which the
concerns. Where there is ongoing ground foundation movement is progressive. Also it
movement, some form of ground improvement may be difficult to determine if the foundations
may be the initial requirement. are sufficiently stiff and strong to survive the
planned remedial action. An absence of
Types of remedial action building distortion does not guarantee a stiff
Where a low-rise building has a stiff foundation, since the tilt could be due to the
foundation, such that ground movement has intrinsic form of the ground movement.
8

References
[1] Lambe T W and Whitman R V (1979). Soil BRE Digests
mechanics, SI version. Wiley, New York. 251 Assessment of damage in low-rise buildings with
[2] D’Elia B and Grisolia M (1975). On the behaviour of particular reference to progressive foundation
a partially floating foundation on normally consolidated movement
silty clays. Settlement of Structures, Proceedings of 298 Low-rise building foundations: the influence of trees
Conference, Cambridge, April 1974. pp 91–98. Pentech in clay soils
Press, London. 313 Mini-piling for low-rise buildings
[3] Sowers G F (1962). Shallow foundations. In 318 Site investigation for low-rise building: desk studies
Foundation engineering (Ed G A Leonards). pp 525–632. 322 Site investigation for low-rise building: procurement
McGraw-Hill, New York. 343 Simple measuring and monitoring of movement in
[4] Charles J A and Watts K S (2002). Treated ground: low-rise buildings. Part 1: cracks
engineering properties and performance. CIRIA Report 344 Simple measuring and monitoring of movement in
C572. CIRIA, London. low-rise buildings. Part 2: settlement, heave and
[5] British Standards Institution (1993). Flat- out-of-plumb
bottomed, vertical, cylindrical storage tanks for low 348 Site investigation for low-rise building: the walk-over
temperature service. Part 3. Recommendations for the survey
design and construction of prestressed and reinforced 352 Underpinning
concrete tanks and tank foundations, and for the design 381 Site investigation for low-rise building: trial pits
and installation of tank insulation, tank liners and tank 383 Site investigation for low-rise building: soil
coatings. British Standard BS 7777-3:1993. description
[6] Institution of Structural Engineers (2000). 386 Monitoring building and ground movement by
Subsidence of low-rise buildings: a guide for professionals precise levelling
and property owners. Second edition. ISE, London. 411 Site investigation for low-rise building: direct
[7] National House-Building Council (1999). NHBC investigations
Standards. Chapter 4.5 – raft, pile, pier and beam
foundations. Amersham, NHBC.
[8] Atkinson M F (1993). Structural foundations manual
for low-rise buildings. Spon, London.
[9] Curtin W G, Shaw G, Parkinson G I and
Golding J M (1994). Structural foundation designers’
manual. Blackwell, Oxford.
[10] Greenwood D (1987). Underpinning by grouting.
Ground Engineering, 20 (3) 21–30.

www.bre.co.uk
BRE is committed to providing impartial and BRE is the UK’s leading centre of expertise on building and Details of BRE publications are available Requests to copy any part of this
authoritative information on all aspects of the built construction, and the prevention and control of fire. Contact BRE from BRE Bookshop or the BRE website. publication should be made to:
environment for clients, designers, contractors, for information about its services, or for technical advice, at: Published by BRE Bookshop, BRE Bookshop,
engineers, manufacturers, occupants, etc. We BRE, Garston, Watford WD25 9XX 151 Rosebery Avenue, Building Research Establishment,
make every effort to ensure the accuracy and
Tel: 01923 664000 London EC1R 4GB Watford, Herts WD25 9XX
quality of information and guidance when it is first
published. However, we can take no responsibility Fax: 01923 664098 Tel: 020 7505 6622 © Copyright BRE 2003
for the subsequent use of this information, nor for email: [email protected] Fax: 020 7505 6606 March 2003
any errors or omissions it may contain. Website: www.bre.co.uk email: [email protected] ISBN 1 86081 613 4