Foundations under the 60 t wine fermentation cisterns,Gevgelija – Macedonia

S. TomovGeing Krebs und Kiefer Int. and oth., ltd, Skopje, Macedonia

Lj. DimitrievskiFaculty of Civil Engineering, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia

ABSTRACT: This paper presents a new design of foundations as a result of analyses of previous errors.The errors occurred due to a lack of geotechnical investigations, poor design and improper construction. Asa consequence huge deformations and cracks on the fermentation cisterns platform occurred. The reasons forthese deformations were bad compaction of fill material, as well as the bad design and construction of thenearby cellar wall, which sustained large horizontal movements too. The main concept of the proposed solutionis considerable reduction of the horizontal forces, which endanger the stability of the cellar wall, and beadingthe cistern foundation on stiff rock. With the new design solution the shallow platform foundations are changedwith new deep ones. The new foundation consists of RC console beams under the all four feet of each cistern,fixed on longer beams and circular pile columns anchored on bedrock.

1 INTRODUCTION

Wine cellars need to be specifically constructed anddeep under the ground because of the requirement forlow temperatures. The cellar walls are almost 9 meterunder the ground surface. The site for the construc-tion was on the hill with agriculturally non productivesoil. Actually, the foundations were cut into local rockhill, which is considered to be a very good base forfoundations. The high bearing capacity of the groundwas so obvious that there was no need for geotechnicalinvestigations to be performed.

In the excavation phase the contractor enabled theconstruction of the cellar by blasting the rock and overblasting happened. In haste to exploit before the annualgathering, other errors occurred.The filling behind thewall was made before the strength of the concrete wasachieved and the proper compaction was not made.Theconstruction of the wall was not tied with horizontal,perpendicular beams before the wall loading.

The horizontal displacement of the wall was obvi-ous to the contractor, even so no measures for improve-ment were made. The construction continued, and thecellar and the hall above were built. A platform forthe fermentation cisterns was made in continuation ofthe cellar wall too. The errors were covered and couldnot be discerned. The wine cellar with its surroundingequipment began functioning and the first hectoliterof wine was produced and exported (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. View of the wine cellar with the hall and cisterns.

2 OBSERVATIONS, MEASUREMENTS ANDINVESTIGATIONS BEFORE APPLYINGTHE SOLUTION

2.1 Observations

After the construction, the whole platform inclinedto the side of the cellar and cracks in critical partswere noticed (Fig. 2). Large settlements over 150 mm

939

Copyright © 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK

become obvious in the contact edge of the cellar andthe platform (Fig. 3).

The horizontal deformations in the cellar wall wereso extensive that in some parts the columns in the wallwere touching the walls of 120 t wine cisterns.

Wrong measures were taken regarding the patchingup of the cracks and additional watering. When thewine production season was over, the investor decidedthat a scientific approach should be taken.

2.2 Geotechnical investigations

Investigations were made to support the failure diag-nostics. Two drilling holes were made and samplesanalyzed. The investigation revealed that the concretewas up to the designed quality standard and the top slabreinforcement was jammed in down part of the slab.The space under the slab was empty and the voids weremore than 150 mm.

The soil material beneath was poorly compactedwith the compression modulus less than 6000 kPa

Figure 2. Cracks on the platform under the cisterns.

Figure 3. Settlements on the edge of the platform nearthe wall.

(Balusev 1971, Obradovic & Najdanovic 1999). Theresults of the investigations confirmed the previoussuspicions.

3 ON THE WAY TO FINDING THE RIGHTSOLUTION

3.1 Structures observation and measurements

An expert team was invited to suggest a solution. Onsite, the irregularities were noted.The available techni-cal documentation, investigations and measurementswere analyzed. Additional geodetic measurementswere made. From the measurements of the platform therotation of the plate leading to differential settlementsof more than 170 mm were measured.

The differential deformations were lower above thebeam and larger in the field of the slabs.

The horizontal displacements on cellar wall werealso measured. The maximum displacement measuredin the middle part at a height of 9 m, was 230 mm.A diagram of the displacement of the wall with thecolumns is shown in Figure 4. Measurements of thehorizontal displacements of the inner columns werealso made.

These columns had deviated only 40 to 50 mm.These measurements show that the 80% of the defor-mations occurred before loading of the 60 t fermenta-tion cisterns. The deformations occurred in the earlystages of construction, from earth pressure.

3.2 Previous errors in the design

The review of the design documentation showed thatthe structure was poorly analyzed and designed, with-out 3D structural analysis, and not taking into con-sideration earth pressure, as well as the nearby 60 tfermentation cistern influences. The cellar wall wasanalyzed as a plate with fixtures on four sides loadedwith plain earth pressure without the influence of theheavy cisterns.

Figure 4. Measured horizontal displacements.

940

Copyright © 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK

The horizontal reactions from the earth pressurewere not taken into account in the column and frameanalysis. The columns were not stiff enough to endurethose horizontal reactions.

4 ANALYSIS OF THE SOLUTION

The new 3D analysis was performed for the cellarand hall above. The results showed that the structurewas burdened to a greater extent then was initiallyplanned in the design. The safety of the structurewas significantly reduced. Therefore, the solution ofstrengthening the cellar wall would be the most expen-sive one because it would require the dislocation ofthe fixed 120 t wine cisterns at the bottom of the cel-lar. To that effect, effort was made to reduce the loads.An analysis in Plaxis was performed (Brinkgreve &Vermeer 1998). Also, a model of the platform with thecellar walls and the fermentation cisterns was drawnup. In fact, two models are made: One without repairs,and the other with the suggested repairs. Both modelsare shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6. Geotechnical soilcharacteristics are shown on Table 1.

The bending moment in the first model was448 kNm/m, and 111 kNm/m in the second model.

Figure 5. Plaxis deformed model before repair.

This means that the influence on to the cellar wall com-ing from the fermentation cisterns was reduced fourtimes using this model based on load reduction. Stresswas reduced in the same ratio. The goal for load reduc-tion has been achieved, thus the safety of the structurewas raised significantly.

5 THE TECHNICAL DETAILS OF THESOLUTION

The technical solution consisted of transferring forcesfrom the cistern directly to firm rock hill. This couldbe achieved using the foundation structure shown inFigure 7.

The structure consists of reinforced concrete (RC)pile columns under every cistern. Each 60 t cisternhas four feet. The feet are on the RC console beams500/600 mm, finishing with transversal main beams700/1000 mm which are set on the RC pile columns.The columns are anchored in the bedrock. The longercolumns are Ø800 mm and shorter Ø1000 mm. Thissolution was chosen among other solutions becauseof its economical justification. This solution does notrequire the cisterns to be moved from their place, whichmeans there are no costs for moving the cisterns and

941

Copyright © 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK

Figure 6. Plaxis deformed model with suggested repair.

Table 1. Geotechnical soil characteristics.

Volume Friction Compactionweight angle Cohesion module

Soil (kN/m3) (◦) (kN/m2) (kN/m2)

1-Rock 22.00 40.00 40.00 100000.002-GFs 19.00 27.00 10.00 6000.003-GW 19.00 32.00 1.00 7200.00

disassembling the joint equipment. In order not tomove the cisterns the piles are dug up manually. Across section of the new foundation structure with thecellar wall is shown on Figure 8.

The structural 3D analysis of the foundation struc-ture was made by RadImpex Tower software. Cal-culation for the cases of worst loading and othercombinations were taken into account, and the nec-essary reinforcement was obtained (Tomicic 1988).The construction drawings were made based on therequired reinforcement.

6 CONSTRUCTING THE STRUCTURE

First the crushing of the old RC slab was made inthe places were the new structure will be constructed.

Figure 7. 3D model of the foundation structure.

After that the hand dug well for pile columns wasexcavated (Fig. 9).

The design suggested protection during diggingwith 3 mm thick steel tubes, but because of the goodsoil conditions the digging proceeded without protec-tion. Following this, the piles were heavily reinforced

942

Copyright © 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK

old R.C. platform

slope of the rock beforefilling

60 t cistern 60 t cistern60 t cistern

bedrock

cellar wall

old firm part ofthe RC platform

0.70/1.00

RC piles O0.80 m

RC piles O1.00 m console0.50/0.60 m

cellar

cellar hall

filled material

anchorsdrilled in therock

Figure 8. Cross-section through the foundation structure.

Figure 9. Hand dug well.

with Ø20 mm ribbed steel reinforcement. The pileswere filled with concrete with cube compressionstrength of 30 MPa after that. The beams were dug,reinforced and set in concrete (Fig. 10).

7 FURTHER ACTIVITIES

After the construction the feet of the cisterns weredropped on the beams. The geodesic measurementswere made. The settlements were measured before

Figure 10. Reinforced beams under the cisterns foots.

and after the exploitation of the fermentation cis-terns. Only minor settlements were measured. Eventhe elastic part of horizontal deflections was reduced.A second exploitation season passed without structuralproblems.

This year, on the same location the second part ofthe platform not occupied with fermentation cisternshad been repaired. The same approach was imple-mented. The extenuating circumstances were that thecisterns were not on that platform. This platform

943

Copyright © 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK

started exploitation for the first time this year and nosettlements occurred.

8 CONCLUSIONS

This paper was inspired from the errors that occurredin design and construction mainly due to the lackof geotechnical investigations and a geotechnicalapproach to the design. Perhaps, the reasons were thelack of time or coordination between the designer andcontractor, or even insufficient experience.

The earth pressure forces must be taken into theconsideration in all construction phases. Compactionof the filling gaps between foundation wall and theexcavated profile must be properly made every timewhen any foundations should be designed above.

The best solution for recovery of such complexproblems can be found after complete inspection onsite and in the design has been carried out.

The proposed solution was adapted to suit localconditions and was designed having in mind the

available construction technology. The main goal hasbeen achieved – no additional vertical or horizontaldisplacement occurred. The security of the structureshas been improved by reducing the internal forces andstresses in the old structure. During the carrying outof the above solution, the exploitation of the facilitieswas not detained.

Solutions with deep excavations must be imple-mented when the structures are already constructed atthe site and the functionality of these structures mustbe preserved. In the places where machinery has noaccess hand digging is the best solution.

REFERENCES

Balusev, B. 1971. Zemna mehanika. Sofia: Tehnika.Brinkgreve, R. & Vermeer, P. 1998. Plaxis Finite Element

Code for Soil and Rock Analyses. Rotterdam: Balkema.Obradovic, R. & Najdanovic, N. 1999. Mehanika tla u

inzenjerskoj praksi. Beograd: Rudarski Institut.Tomicic, I. 1988. Prirucnik za proracun armiranobetonskih

konstrukcija. Zagreb: DGK Hrvatske.

944

Copyright © 2006 Taylor & Francis Group plc, London, UK