×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

(OP)
Hi.

I am new to this forum and this is my first post/questions.

We are basically in the process of designing reinforced concrete pedestal or saddle support for a penstock.

I have almost completed the design including the checks for sliding, stability and bearing pressure (with more than adequate factors of safety). But our Senior Engineer suggested that i should also include the check for resultant force lying between middle third of the base.

Now in order to satisfy this check I will have to increase the size of the pedestal by quite a bit. The question is that is this check really necessary? I mean i am already getting adequate FOS for overturning (2.6) and also sliding (22). So what if i do not include this check and how can i justify it.

Also please clarify if this check is only for vertical forces or we have to include horizontal forces as well because when we include horizontal forces, the resultant force acts at an angle which takes it completely out of the middle third of the base.

Sorry for such a long and such a basic question.
Any answers/views would be really appreciated.
Regards,

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

bearing on rock or soil?

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

(OP)
@cvg
Its bearing on rock.

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

What load combinations did you use for calculating your factor of safety for overturning?  Did you use the 0.9DL or the 0.6 DL?

I've seen a number of projects have this as a design requirement. But, I personally feel it would be overkill when combined with the 0.6 DL factors.  

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

(OP)
Well basically i haven't used any load combinations or load factors in my calculations.

But I have checked that taking 0.6D gives a factor of safety less than 2 (1.83 to be precise). So i guess i will have to satisfy the check for resultant force.

 

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

I think the middle-third requirement is to maintain positive bearing over the whole bearing surface, which may or may not be a requirement in a particular case.

The 0.6DL is from ASCE 7, and may or may not be applicable to your project.  You wouldn't normally apply a factor of safety over and above the 0.6DL overturn check, though.

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

high pressures at the toe can cause bearing failure in soil , less likely in rock. keeping eccentricity within the kern will minimize the pressure at the toe. However, the standard of care is generally to keep it in the middle third.

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support


aakalim152

"So what if I do not include this check and how can I justify it."

I agree with the others that you need to check the location of the resultant, especially if your boss told you to do just that.  Your question above concerns me with the "so what" statement.  If that persists, eventually it will get you in trouble, if not fired.  DO not try to second guess your boss's authorithy in the office.  It is OK to ask questions though, always.  Just watch how you phrase it.  You might be misread.  I am probably one of those.  

Just trying to help.  Cheers.

 

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
http://mmcengineering.tripod.com
 

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

Our standard is to keep the resultant withing the middle 1/3 of the footing.  We will only allow the resultant to fall outside of the middle 1/3 for what we consider extreme short term loading conditions (0.6D + 0.7E).  

If you are concerned about the size of your base then maybe you should express your concerns to your boss.  I am sure he/she is well aware of how the numbers work and what this requested change will mean to the size of your base.

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

I've wondered about this many times...if your factors of safety are all working out, and your bearing pressure at the toe is within the allowable..why can't you just add top steel to the footing and make sure it works when the footing goes into negative bending?

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

Keeping the resultant within the kern just assures a trapezoidal stress distribution.  There is nothing inherently wrong with a triangular distribution if the overturning, sliding, and maximum stress limits are observed.

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

(OP)
Thank you all for you prompt and useful replies.

I finally increased the size of the pedestal which satisfied the middle third requirement.

Regards,

RE: Stability Check for Penstock Pedestal Support

aakalim152: hokie66 has already answered your original post to the point. SteelPE's suggestion is what we normally follow in our office. Keep the resultant within the middle third for sustained loading. It could fall outside the middle third for short term loading.  

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources