Skip to content
Queensferry

Module 2 · Lesson 2.2

Shallow, deep, or improve the ground

Three options, and the questions that choose between them.

Why this matters

Piles are expensive, slow, and require plant that does not fit on every site. They are also, quite often, the right answer. Knowing which situation you are in is worth more than knowing how to design either kind.

The choice is usually made by working down a short list of questions, in order.

Can a shallow foundation carry the load without excessive settlement? If yes, use one. Pads and strips are cheap, quick and understood by everyone on site.

Can it be made to work by going wider, or a little deeper? Widening buys bearing capacity but, as Module 1 showed, can make settlement worse. Going deeper reaches better ground and reduces net pressure at the same time, which is why a basement often solves both problems at once.

Can the ground be changed instead of the foundation? Vibro compaction, stone columns, preloading and grouting all alter the soil rather than the structure. On a large site this is frequently the cheapest answer.

Only then: does the load need taking to deeper ground? That is when piles earn their cost.

Settlement, not capacity, is the usual reason to go deep. A raft on soft clay will very often satisfy bearing capacity comfortably and still be rejected, because the predicted settlement — or, more often, the differential settlement between one part of the structure and another — is more than the frame and its finishes will tolerate.

This is worth stating plainly because it changes what you look for in a ground investigation. If capacity governed, strength data would be enough. Because settlement governs, stiffness and compressibility data matter more, and those are harder to obtain and easier to leave out.

Check yourself

A single-storey warehouse with a tolerant portal frame is to be built on 8 m of soft alluvium over dense gravel. Loads are light. Which option deserves to be examined FIRST?

Try it

Gross, net and the compensated foundation

Excavating removes stress the ground was already carrying. Only the net increase reaches the soil below.

1.5 m
180 kPa
19.0 kN/m³

Reading it

  • Net pressure is what the settlement calculation must use.
  • At 100% compensation the ground sees no stress increase at all.
  • Beyond 100% the foundation is a net unloading — and heave, not settlement, becomes the problem.
excavation 1.5 m — removes 29 kPaformation level
  • Paid for by excavation
  • Net increase on the ground
Stress removed
29 kPa
Net pressure qnet
152 kPa
Degree of compensation
16 %
Depth for full compensation
9.5 m

16% compensated. The settlement calculation should use 152 kPa, not 180.

Summary

  • Work down the options in order of cost: shallow, then wider or deeper, then ground improvement, then piles
  • Settlement rather than capacity is the usual reason a shallow foundation is rejected
  • A pile carries load past bad ground to good ground; with no good ground in reach it helps far less
  • What the structure can tolerate is part of the foundation decision, not a separate question
Progress is kept in this browser only.

This is educational material. It uses simplified examples to teach principles, and must not be relied on for real design or safety-critical decisions. Module overview and checkpoint