Concrete slab and footing systems for large industrial buildings.

A
critical overview of current design methods for reactive clay sites
Anthony J Davis1* and Brian Ims2
1
Davis Naismith & McGovern Pty Ltd Consulting Engineers. Email: [email protected]
2
Douglas Partners Pty Ltd Consulting Geotechnical Engineers. Email: [email protected]

Abstract

The Australian Standard AS2870 Residential slabs and footings – Construction was first published in
1986 and is now in its 4 th edition. The scope of this standard is generally limited to single dwelling
houses or multiple townhouse developments and buildings classified as Class 1 and 10a under the
BCA (3) but can be applied to commercial and industrial buildings if they are similar to houses in size,
loading and superstructure flexibility. However, the unilateral application of AS2870 to large industrial
buildings is problematic in terms of technical relevance and practicality given the significant differences
in serviceability requirements, loadings and economics associated with larger plan area buildings as
compared to housing or smaller scale Class 10a buildings.

This paper focuses on the engineering principles involved in the design of slabs and footing systems
for larger commercial and industrial buildings such as situated in the highly reactive clay sites NW of
Melbourne and western Sydney. Particular emphasis is placed on soil structure interaction, site
characteristics, displacement sensitivity and the practicalities of footing system alternatives for large
commercial and industrial buildings. Examples are presented to compare footing system solutions
based on misapplication of AS2870 principles compared to systems based on fundamental
geotechnical and building serviceability principles.

Keywords: Industrial footing systems reactive clay

1.0 Introduction

There is no independent Australian design guideline or standard that deals specifically with the design
and construction of concrete slab and footing systems for large industrial and commercial buildings.
The Australian Standard AS2870 - 2011 Residential slabs and footings (1) is often referred to in
geotechnical reports and in legal expert reports as having relevance to these forms of slab and footing
systems.

This paper details a number of technical issues and concepts that need to be addressed by the design
and construction industry when considering the relevance of AS2870 to the design of concrete slab
and footing systems for large industrial and commercial buildings and in particular those slab and
footing systems constructed on reactive clay sites.

2.0 Practical issues – discussion

2.1 Serviceability

Most soils exhibit some form of reactivity (i.e. change in volume as the soil moisture changes), such as
would occur throughout the year. These movements cannot be prevented but appropriate attention to
design and construction details can go a long way to minimise their impact on a structure

The usual form of construction for industrial and commercial buildings differs from that for residential
buildings. In the case of large industrial and commercial buildings the more common forms of
construction generally involve the use of large open plan areas, highly articulated precast concrete
facades, metal clad walls, glazing systems, and suspended ceiling and partition wall systems. In the
case of residential buildings, the more common forms of construction still used in Australia involve the
use of brick and brick veneer facades with limited articulation and plasterboard clad stud walls
generally constructed with fixed plaster cornices at wall/ceiling junctions resulting in no internal wall
articulation. In addition residential buildings typically have much smaller plan areas and as such

1
residential structures are far more visually susceptible to soil reactivity induced movements than large
area industrial and commercial forms of construction.

2.2 Forms of construction

Large plan area industrial buildings constructed to accommodate modern warehousing and distribution
materials handling requirements commonly require that floor slab construction be built to very tight
levelness tolerance and high standards of finish. As such these floors are commonly constructed in
relatively large areas using laser guided equipment and are generally articulated (i.e. jointed) in such a
way as to minimize restraint to concrete shrinkage that might result in uncontrolled cracking. On the
other hand, residential construction generally utilizes ribbed or stiffened raft slab construction to
minimize slab distortion that could result in superstructure cracking. Such construction however often
results in restraint to shrinkage (at the stiffening ribs) that generally results in slab cracking, albeit that
such cracking is usually covered and hidden by non-brittle floor finishes.

Large industrial facilities often involve the construction of office space as part of the overall large area
building footprint. Whilst these may be considered similar to a house and fall within the auspices of
AS2870, these office areas may be relatively large in area and of multi- level construction resulting in
higher wall or column loads in comparison to typical loadings for residential buildings. The office areas
associated with industrial facilities are generally more open plan than residential buildings. The internal
partitions that are provided are often of the demountable type and not fixed to the ceiling in the same
manner as for residential buildings (i.e. no fixed cornices).

2.3 Construction methodology

The large spans of industrial and commercial buildings require the use of steel frame construction
which is commonly incorporated with precast concrete and metal clad walls or glazed facades. Where
site access allows, it is common practice to initially erect the steel framing, the roof cladding and then
erect and fix the façade elements. This order of construction allows for the floor slab construction to be
undertaken very late in the construction program and therefore in the protected environment which is
required in order to achieve the higher level of finish required for warehouse floors. It does require
however that footings for the columns and walls are constructed early and well in advance of floor
construction whereas residential floor slabs are generally much smaller in area and constructed in the
open air with the balance of the superstructure supported directly from the slab.

2.4 Economics and optimal performance

From an overall community point of view the cost of failures of footing systems should ideally be
balanced against the costs of excessive construction and design costs (2) and as such the
performance requirements and expectations should not be unrealistic. This issue is recognised in
AS2870 which states at clause 1.3.1 that “Buildings supported by footing systems designed and
constructed in accordance with this Standard on a normal site that is (a) not subject to abnormal
moisture conditions; and (b) maintained such that the original site classification remains valid and
abnormal moisture conditions do not develop; are expected to experience usually no damage, a low
incidence of damage category 1 and an occasional incidence of damage category 2” and at clause
1.4.2 “Foundation movement shall be assessed as the movement that has less than 5% chance of
being exceeded in the life of the building, which is taken as 50 years”.

Further to the above, AS2870 Appendix B includes information on foundation performance and
maintenance which expresses an expectation of some damage (cracking) occurring to residential
buildings. At clause B1 AS2870 notes “it is neither practicable nor economical to design for the
extreme conditions that could occur in the foundation if a site is not properly maintained” and “some
minor cracking and movement will occur in a significant proportion of buildings, particularly those on
reactive clays”. AS2870 places a maintenance requirement on owners that involves attention to site
drainage, limitations on gardens, restriction on the planting of trees and the need to repair leaking
services, etc. all of which are applicable to industrial and commercial buildings.

In some regard it is not unreasonable to expect that a higher standard of maintenance on commercial
and industrial properties would occur than would for a residential property. Also given the larger
allotment sizes involved with industrial facilities as compared to residential subdivision should result in
far less detrimental influences emanating from neighbouring properties (i.e. neighbours trees and poor
neighbouring drainage control).

2
3.0 Technical issues – discussion

3.1 Engineering design principles for reactive sites – residential buildings

AS2870 places emphasis on the use or modification of standard designs for residential buildings which
are based on typical forms of residential construction and loading. However, the Standard also
includes provisions for design by engineering principles which are primarily based around soil
structure interaction through an idealized “soil mound” model. (i.e. it is assumed that more stable
ground moisture conditions exist beneath the centre of the slab than at the edges). The idealized soil
mound shapes in AS2870 represent the range of ground movement that could be expected over the
life of the structure, on normal sites not subject to abnormal moisture conditions. In the case of central
heave, the mounding is the result of an increase of soil moisture under the building cover (i.e. the slab)
combined with a decrease in soil moisture around the perimeter. In the case of edge heave, the
primary cause of the idealized mound shape is that the moisture increase occurs around the perimeter
relative to the centre. Figures 1.1 to 1.4 below show the behaviour of covered areas in terms of
moisture movements and expected ground heave for both centre heave and edge heave conditions.

The fundamental outcome of the soil mound model is the determination of bending moment and shear
force effects on the footing system. For the central heave case the bending moments result from a
“cantilevering” of the loaded edges of the building (i.e. loading primarily imposed by the external walls
which also generally support roof and upper floor structure). The edge heave allows for determination
of the impacts of internal loads on the slab span between edge mounds. Figures 2.1 and 2.2 show the
resulting slab bending moments for the central and edge heave conditions.

3
3.2 Engineering design principles for reactive sites – industrial and commercial buildings

In the case of large industrial and commercial buildings the idealized soil mound concept can still be
considered applicable but needs further consideration of the structural loading, slab shrinkage and
structure articulation behaviour before application.

The edge loadings imposed by large industrial building construction (i.e. heavy column loads, heavy
precast concrete wall loads, multi-level perimeter column loads and the like) would, likely result in
excessive bending moments on an integrated raft or grillage beam style footing system. Hence, in
practical and economic terms it is essential that these heavy concentrated type loads be supported
directly on separate footings utilising the bearing capacity of the underlying soils. A similar argument
can be made for high internal column loads. Hence the design task is to limit the formation of the
centre heave mound or edge heave as much as possible so that footing systems do not need to be
fully integrated.

In order to achieve desired practical and economic outcomes for industrial and commercial building
construction it has been common practice over the past 30 years to incorporate either a deep wall/
footing “cut off” construction detail or impermeable paving to the building perimeter in combination with
good site preparation, drainage design and limitations on the planting of trees or large bushes near the
building perimeter.

The aims behind this approach have been to limit the initial soil heave that occurs when the floor slab
is placed over the soil and at the same time limit edge effects at the perimeter caused by soil drying.
Good drainage design limits the potential for edge heave effects and the limitation on tree planting is a
fundamental requirement to prevent the development of excessive and abnormal moisture conditions
that have been found to have the potential to cause excessive movement to almost any footing
system. Site preparation should target obtaining as uniform as possible moisture regime over the area
as close as possible to the expected long term conditions. When placing fill, care must be taken to
ensure that the moisture content of the placed material is within the specified range and that there has
not been excessive compaction of the materials (over compaction can be as detrimental to long term
performance as would under compaction). In highly reactive ground this does require closer control of
the operations than would a less reactive site.

Figures 3.1 to 3.4 show the behaviour of covered areas in circumstances where lateral moisture cut-
off is provided by way of deep footing/wall construction or the adoption of perimeter paving external to
the building perimeter.

4
4.0 Performance experience

The performance experience with industrial footing and slab systems is difficult to quantify for a
number of reasons not the least being the likely variability in performance expectations of industrial
and commercial property owners or their tenants and a propensity for most legal disputes involving
alleged footing system failures in the commercial arena to settle out of court and remain confidential.
Accordingly, performance experience does have to rely largely on Engineering Practitioner
experience.

While recent developments indicate that the commercial/industrial community performance

expectations may be changing and may be becoming unrealistic, it is, however, the authors’ collective
experience that reported failures of footing systems for industrial and commercial buildings have been
relatively minor over at least the past 30 years and that when taking into account the age of the overall
industrial and commercial building stock in at least Melbourne and Sydney, the failure rate of slab and
footing systems for industrial and commercial buildings is very low. The experience of the relatively
recent severe drought conditions in Melbourne from around 1995 through to late 2009, which should
have resulted in severe deep seated climate effects on building footing systems has not presented as
being a particular cause of failures or damage during this period.

Similarly, the construction of industrial and commercial buildings during the extreme dry periods up
until late 2009 should theoretically have resulted in at least transient edge wetting effects; however, to
the authors’ knowledge such incidences have not been widely reported.

In the case of buildings designed and constructed in the past 30 years and for which the authors have
had experience or direct involvement, the total number would be many hundreds of which reported
problems associated with the slab and footing systems would be less than 2% and actual failures
requiring substantial structural rectification works minimal. It has also been the authors’ collective
experience that the reported failures of older style industrial building footing systems (i.e. brick wall,
strip footing, bluestone footings etc) and more recent forms of concrete construction have been found
to be primarily associated with the presence or development of abnormal moisture conditions caused
by the planting and growth of trees too close to the footing systems or the general failure to maintain
the drainage and plumbing systems in and around these buildings. The authors have also observed
numerous failures of AS2870 compliant residential footing and slab systems where abnormal moisture
conditions have been the primary cause of failure despite the inherent strength and stiffness built into
these integrated forms of footing systems. In other words Practitioner observations are that it is the
development of abnormal moisture conditions during the life of a building that are the major concern
when it comes to footing and slab system performance irrespective of the structure and footing type.

5.0 Misapplication of AS2870 design principles to industrial and commercial buildings

5.1 Soil classification issues

A common observation in geotechnical reports carried out for industrial and commercial buildings is
the reference to the Soil Classification based around AS2870. While most reports will qualify such
classification as being a guide only, some designers in the industry tend to equate this classification to
the general requirements and limitations of AS2870. These requirements and limitations include the
exclusion of non-integrated footing and slab systems such as strip footing and infill slab construction
on sites with classifications other than Class A and S.

Other observations are that designers feel compelled to adopt stiffened “infill” slabs (i.e. raft slabs built
within a strip footing arrangement) in order to simply comply with particular AS2870 standard slab
designs for site classifications other than Class A and S.

5.2 Soil Compaction Issues

The large allotment sizes associated with industrial and commercial buildings often result in significant
cut/fill requirements for developments and the resulting depth of fill means that these sites would
technically be classified as “P” sites under AS2870 for which a common reaction is to resort to piles or
piers despite the fact that the standard for earthworks on large industrial sites is expected to be at a
higher level of supervision and testing in terms of moisture conditioning and compaction.

5
AS2870 places a limit of 400mm on controlled fill in the case of non – sand material before ‘requiring
an initial classification of ‘P’. Because of the allotment sizes associated with commercial and industrial
sites the cut/fill depths will often exceed 400mm by a considerable margin. In such circumstances it
has been the authors’ experience that non – integrated footing systems and non-piled systems have
performed satisfactorily on controlled fill depths greater than 400mm that have been compacted in
accordance with Australian Standard “AS 3798 – 2007 Guidelines on earthworks for commercial and
residential developments” to at least 98% standard compaction and within an appropriate range of
moisture content.

5.3 Design by engineering principles to AS2870

The rules for “design by engineering principles” as included in AS2870 require that the footing system
be designed for the effects of the idealized mound model, which in the case of houses implies using
two acceptable methods of analysis (i.e. Walsh or Mitchell) and an integrated footing system.

In the case of residential buildings the typical perimeter loading implied in the AS2870 standard
designs is in the order of 25kN/m as an edge wall load which is equivalent to around 100kN
concentrated load at the end of a cantilevering rib or grillage beam. The Standard does allow for
loading from two level construction including suspended concrete floor slabs, however the latter is
limited to Class A and S (i.e. non-reactive) sites.

For the case of two - level office buildings with suspended concrete slabs the concentrated load from
roof and suspended floor construction on a perimeter column is likely to be in the order of 350kN –
400kN subject to the form of construction. Depending on the type of building façade the total
concentrated load effect from floor loading and edge loading could be in the order of 450kN to 550kN
excluding the self-weight of the footing system and the ground level superimposed loads. Accordingly,
the proportioning in size and reinforcement of structural members for a fully integrated system
designed for an idealized mound model will be influenced by the significant increase in load although
the effects of this increase in load will impact on soil-structure interaction and in particular the
calculation for the value of “Ym” and the edge distance “e”. Essentially the idealized mound models
used in AS2870 cannot be readily or reliably applied to commercial and industrial loading.

6.0 Cost implications

The cost implications of adopting fully integrated footing and slab systems on large industrial and
commercial buildings on all reactive clay sites would be significant in terms of increased design and
construction costs resulting from the need for one off analysis of relevant soil-structure interaction
effects and the likely increase in concrete and reinforcement requirements. While it is likely that the
values for “Ym” and “e” will be reduced by the effects of the heavier loads the resulting design bending
moments and shear forces for the centre mound condition are likely to be significantly increased in
comparison to residential construction.

7.0 Non – integrated footing and slab systems

The Commentary to AS2870 – 2011 states at clause C4.1, “the design methods in Section 4 may be
useful for strip footings although, more often, past satisfactory experience is appropriate”. As noted
previously it has been the authors’ 30 years+ experience that non-integrated footing and slab systems
have been successfully adopted on industrial and commercial buildings in the reactive clay areas of
Melbourne and Sydney for many years. The authors’ also recognise their experience with the
performance of older building stock which includes the common use of non – integrated footing and
slab solutions.

7.1 Design principles adopted

It is the authors’ experience that the primary design requirement with any footing and slab system is
the avoidance of abnormal moisture conditions that may develop over the life of the building. In most
cases abnormal conditions develop due to poor maintenance or non-adherence to design
requirements and limitations, particularly related to the planting of trees too close to the footing
system. It has been the authors’ experience that these abnormal moisture conditions are equally
problematic for both fully integrated and non – integrated slab and footing systems.

For the case of non – integrated systems the other key measures have been found to include:

6
  Good site preparation including moisture conditioning of the subgrade in order to limit initial
heave effects caused by moisture increases resulting from the effect of the building cover.

 Provision of a deep perimeter moisture cut-off in the form of edge beams or wall and deep
strip footings in order to minimise the drying effect of moisture migration from under the slab or
the effects of moisture increase from external landscape areas to under the perimeter of the
slab.

 Adequate external drainage away from the perimeter of the building so as to avoid the
ponding of moisture and subsequent moisture migration under the perimeter of the slab.

 Adequate sealing of service trench penetrations under the slab at the point where they pass
beneath the building edge. This includes the sloping of trenches away from the building
perimeter and clay plugging at the point of penetration under the footing system.

 Adequate sealing of perimeter walls to the top of footings, particularly for precast concrete wall
panels

 Avoiding the use of irrigation systems close to building edges.

 Provision of perimeter impervious pavement wherever possible.

By adopting and maintaining the above design features the development of the theoretical centre
heave mound can be limited to that which occurs due to the effect of the building cover. The building
cover cuts off evaporation and alters the moisture condition of the subgrade under the slab and
depending on initial moisture content can result in very early heave of the slab. It is the combination of
this initial heave and any subsequent edge drying that may occur due to poor detailing and
maintenance that results in the formation of the full differential edge-centre movement.

7.2 Design circumstances and detail

Warehouse Buildings

For the case of large warehouse areas the adoption of integrated footing solutions is not practical or
viable for many reasons including:

 Floor flatness and levelness requiring the use of laser guided screeds which need a relatively
flat sub – base and which could not effectively operate over the top of slab rib trench
excavations.

 The need to erect the superstructure prior to the construction of the floor slabs in order to
avoid heavy construction traffic on the floor slabs and to provide protection from the elements
during the construction of the floor slabs.

 The increasing adoption of steel fibre reinforced concrete floor slabs that require complete
isolation from the structure and the sub-base in order to avoid major cracking due to shrinkage
restraint conditions.

 High storage rack loads around the perimeter of buildings that would have a major impact on
structural thickness requirements if the floor was to be designed as an integrated raft slab
subject to edge drying effects.

For the above reasons warehouse floors are designed and constructed as relatively thin slabs of
uniform thickness and generally fully isolated from the main building structure and placed on slip
membranes in order to minimize shrinkage restraint conditions. The perimeter of the building is
generally protected from edge drying effects by either impervious external pavements and surface
drainage systems or the use of relatively deep cut off walls at the outside edge of the slab. In addition,

7
these forms of floor construction are often articulated by control joints to minimize shrinkage restraint
cracking.

Figures 4.1 and 4.2 shows the expected behaviour of a very large covered area such as a warehouse
and which includes deep cut off footings, isolated pad footings and perimeter paving. These types of
buildings are often large clear span structures involving relatively large external column loads and
precast concrete wall loads and concrete floors that require articulation in the form of construction
joints and shrinkage crack control joints. External drainage is usually provided by purpose designed
and constructed in ground pipe systems and extensive use of impermeable pavement.

Reports on slab edge failures in warehouse construction has been minimal in the authors’ experience
other than in extreme circumstances involving the growth of trees close to the building perimeter.
Experience has shown that slab edges do tend to drop relative to the centre of the slab. Whilst it is
usually difficult to determine if this is due to continuing centre heave or edge settlement, the degree of
differential movement has generally been found to be minimal with no reports of slab failure caused by
rack post loading of unsupported slab edges.

Office Buildings

For the case of office buildings that are connected to or built into warehouse buildings, the slab and
footing system requirements are often considered by engineers to be more stringent than for the
warehouse part of the building. While there may be an argument that floor movement sensitivity in
office areas is more problematic than warehouse areas, this is not necessarily the case depending on
the use of the warehouse as there are some warehouse levelness limitations that can be more
stringent than the general requirements of AS2870 for concrete floors. However, the issue with office
areas appears to be seen as more problematic due to the presence of internal partitions, glazing and
brittle finishes such as wall and floor tiling. In response, the engineering solution is often to incorporate
a raft slab to the office areas even in circumstances involving multi-level construction where heavy
column loads or wall loads are supported on independent pad and strip footings. Such solutions are
thought likely to be in response to unwarranted pressure to be seen as responding to AS2870
solutions despite the fundamentals not supporting this approach. An isolated raft slab built within the
confines of a multi – level structure serves no real purpose in the context of controlling the effects of
soil movement.

As noted previously, the more flexible nature of construction detail in office buildings as compared to
residential construction allows for more structural movement to occur without necessarily resulting in
completely unacceptable incidences of damage or damage that cannot easily be repaired similar to
Category 1 and 2 damage in residential buildings. The practical and economic solutions lay in the
detail and in the adoption of more sophisticated and supervised earthworks and moisture migration
protection/prevention measures that can be built into the office structures. Such measures may include
the provision of a capping layer placed as early as possible over the slab area to induce as much initial
site heave as possible in combination with a deep perimeter moisture cut off wall/footing arrangement
that minimises subsequent edge drying effects and thus formation of the full extent of the idealized
mound. Perimeter planting needs to be avoided in order to eliminate the risk of extreme abnormal
moisture conditions and other solutions found for landscape and beautification treatment. If necessary
8
such features can be placed within areas constrained by deep root barriers. In cases where internal
partitions are built using plasterboard fixed to metal studs (as distinct from modular demountable
partitions) more attention needs to be paid to articulation of the walls and wall junctions, if only to
reduce the need for minor maintenance and repair from time to time.

The authors’ experience with regard to reports on office floor movement and damage have on
occasion indicated likely incidences of initial heave caused by the building cover effect or in some
cases lateral migration of moisture, however, the majority of cases have involved either the
development of abnormal moisture conditions or defective construction detail, (for example the lack of
recognition of potential movement when installing partitions and suspended ceilings can result in floor
movements lifting partitions and hence ceiling panels, which while in themselves of no real
consequence, appear unacceptable to an end user).

8.0 Conclusions

On the basis of Practitioner experience over a period of 30 years, including a period of very severe
and prolonged drought conditions from 1995 through to late 2009, it is the authors’ view that current
design methods incorporating the use of non – integrated slab and footing systems for industrial and
commercial buildings on reactive clay sites have provided an economical and serviceable solution to
the commercial and industrial user community. Where problems have been observed they have
generally been associated with the development of abnormal moisture conditions caused by poor
maintenance practices, non-conforming construction detail or the planting of trees too close to the
footing system.

The approach taken by AS2870 to slab and footing design and construction is essentially based
around single dwelling houses, town houses or similar structure with the intention of providing
standard solutions wherever possible to take into account the inherent limitations in residential
construction practices, particularly earthworks and to reduce overall costs to the general community
whilst accepting that structures built in accordance with the code can never be considered damage
free.

On the other hand large industrial and commercial building structures generally involve more
sophisticated design input, construction techniques and supervision which allow the engineering
designer more scope in achieving particular performance requirements.

The design and construction of non-integrated slab and footing systems which include pad, strip or pile
footings are adequately covered by relevant Australian Standards such as AS3600 (4). It is just the
application of such slab and footing systems on reactive clay sites that appears to invoke the use of
AS2870 whereas in fact the application of logical engineering principles can be applied to these
structures without the addition of unreasonable cost impost.

9
References

1. AS2870 – 2011, Residential slabs and footings – Construction

2. SAA HB28 – 1997, the design of residential slabs and footings by Paul Walsh and Don
Cameron.
3. National Construction Code Series 2014, Volume One, Class 2 to Class 9 Buildings
4. AS3600 – 2009, Concrete Structures

Bibliography

1. Dr J.E. Holland, residential slab research – recent findings August 1978

2. Dr J.E. Holland, J Washusen & D Cameron, seminar residential raft slabs, September 1975
3. Technical Report 34 Concrete Industrial Ground Floors, a guide to design and construction,
fourth edition, June 2014.
4. Building in accordance with AS2870 residential slabs and footings, P F Walsh

10