See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/354400090

TYPICAL FOUNDATION FAILURES AND REMEDIATIONS

Article · September 2021

CITATIONS READS
0 12,569

1 author:

Samer Zaidan
Jeddah Central Development Company (JCDC)
4 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Samer Zaidan on 07 September 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 TYPICAL FOUNDATION FAILURES AND REMEDIATIONS

Prepared by

Samer Zaidan

Civil Engineering, Construction Management, New Jersey Institute of Technology

CE 615-850 Infrastructure and Facilities Remediation

Summer 2021

Professor Giri Venkiteela

Assignment Submission Date: 08/01/2021

i
ABSTRACT

Building performance is strongly related to its foundation as a ground structure that provides
stability and support. The foundation intercepts the loads from the superstructure and transfers
them over the soil. Structure loads will result in movement in the soil; if the movements exceed
the design allowable movement, the foundation will experience failure.

Failure in foundation is very critical not only because it may increase and cause more damages in
the foundation itself, failure may cause redistributing loads in a way that was not encountered
during the design hence may affect the integrity of the whole structure.

It is essential to identify foundation failures and their reasons to provide adequate remedies and to
prepare sufficient preventions. Many foundation failures are due to inadequate soil protection,
improper geotechnical investigation, water level fluctuation, design errors, and improper
construction sequence. Preventive actions will reduce the failure reasons and causes, and remedial
actions will aid the problem and increase the structure's performance to prevent further failure.

This research introduces a new conceptual classification for the reasons and causes of foundation
failures differently than what is listed in the references. The new classification will assist in getting
a more precise analysis. Failures reasons and causes will be grouped by project phases (i.e., pre-
construction, construction, and post-construction), then preventions and remediations will be
addressed accordingly.

In addition, the research introduces a new numerical analysis for project phase – failure reasons –
failure causes – preventions/remediations analysis that may assist in understanding foundation
failures and remediations and may open a new window for further research in this field.

ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Item Page #
Title Page i
Abstract ii
Table of Contents iii
1. Introduction 1
2. Methodology 2
3. Discussion 3 - 14
3.1. Foundation 3
3.2. Types of Foundations 4
3.3. Types of Foundation Used in Mid-Size Buildings 5-6
3.4. Foundation Failures 7
3.5. Reasons of Foundation Failures 8–9
3.6. Causes of Foundation Failures 10 – 12
3.7. Prevention and Quality Control 13
3.8. Prevention/Remediation of Foundation Failures 13 – 14
4. Conclusions and Numerical Analysis 15 – 18
4.1. Project Phases – Failure Reasons Conclusions and Analysis 15 – 16
4.2. Failure Reasons - Failure Causes Conclusions and Analysis 17
4.3. Failure Causes – Prevention/Remediation Conclusions and Analysis 18
5. Recommendations 19 – 20
5.1. Project Phases – Failure Reasons Recommendations 19
5.2. Failure Reasons - Failure Causes Recommendations 19
5.3. Failure Causes – Prevention/Remediation Recommendations 19
5.2. Future Work 20
6. References 21
7. Acknowledgment 22

iii
1. INTRODUCTION

Foundations of building structures are essential elements as they transfer building loads and forces
into the ground. These will include all the loads apply on the building which will be diverted and
spread over a sufficient area to utilize the maximum allowable resistance of the soil. All loads
transmitted to the underlying soil cause generally cause movements. Normally there is the
allowable minimum movement asserted by the project’s geotechnical engineer and also by the
regulation provided in the building code. Generally, foundations are classified as either shallow
foundations or deep foundations.

The Technical Council on Forensic Engineering of the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE), gives the definition of failure in the construction industry as the ‘unacceptable difference
between expected and observed performance’.

Mistakes, omissions, and/or errors during the pre-construction phase of a project are behind many
failures in building structure; this is including conceptual and programming stages, geotechnical
investigations and recommendations, and design. In addition, several failures may occur during
construction due to wrong sequencing and poor materials and workmanship. Post construction
related to building monitoring and maintenance may participate in foundation failures as well.

A deflection in a foundation can be defined as a limited settlement in the foundation that can lead
to a certain amount of cracking. However, a foundation failure is caused by an excessive settlement
and deflection leading to serious damage to a building’s ceiling, floors, and other various parts.
The identification of damages is crucial in the detection of the classification of the types of
foundation failure that occurred.

This research assumes that cause is an action associated with an effect while reason is a motive,
justification, or explanation of an action. Accordingly, this research classifies most, if not all,
causes and reasons of foundation failures listed in the used references. For example, lateral transfer
is a cause of a foundation failure and the reason behind it is a design error was made. All reasons
and causes will be classified by project phases (i.e. pre-construction, construction, and post
construction).

Those classifications will assist in performing better reason, cause, and prevention/remediations
analysis for foundation failures.

Page 1 of 22
 2. METHODOLOGY

- The research targets mid-size commercial construction as this building size is within the
expertise of the researcher. A mid-size building is defined as single of multi-family residential,
commercial, office, or industrial space not over 3 stories in heigh and of any lateral extend
(Meyer, 2000: 1).
- The research is supported by four Professional Engineers (PEs); one geotechnical engineer,
two structural engineers, and one civil engineer.
- The research defines building foundation and demonstrates types of foundation with listing
some the advantage and disadvantages of foundations used for mid-size construction.
- Foundation failures will be discussed and their categories will be highlighted.
- Reasons and causes of foundation failures will be demonstrated and classified according to the
research assumptions regarding reasons and causes classification.
- Preventive actions of foundation failures will be briefly demonstrated and connected with
failure causes.
- Remediation actions of foundation failures will be explained and connected with failure causes.
- Failure reasons will be classified according to the project phases; as below:
Phase III: Pre-Construction.
Phase III: Construction.
Phase III: Post Construction.
- According to the subjective analysis of this research regarding the project phases and failure
reasons interference, this research introduces new project phase-failure reasons matrix to show
their interferences. Moreover, the research develops numerical analysis according the matrix
to determine the interference rate of each project phase on failure reasons and failure reason
participation rates.
- Same matrix and numerical analysis are introduced for failures reasons-causes and failures
causes-prevention/remediations.
- Conclusions were driven according to figures derived by the matrixes, and recommendations
were made accordingly.

Page 2 of 22
3. DISCUSSION

3.1. Foundation

Foundations are meant to transfer loads Figure 1

from the superstructure to the bedrock Loads Distribution by Foundation

beneath the surface effectively. They

form a critical part of the building
process which determines the stability
of a structure. The loads from the
superstructure are absorbed by the
foundation, which then transfers the
loads over a large enough region to
maximize soil resistance.

The main purpose of foundation is preventing structure to deviate from a close approximation of
its original shape, thereby preventing unacceptable distress or loss of functionality. Other
secondary functions of a foundation may be to provide a finished floor surface or method of
keeping water, soil, or vermin from the interior of the structure. A workable definition of a
functioning foundation for most cases is that the foundation must remain plane and level enough
to avoid unacceptable distortions or distress of the superstructure (Meyer, 2000: 2).

Foundation is considered as one of the most important milestones in constructing any building,
and this is in terms of design and build. In most projects, if not all, the schedule critical path starts
with the foundation as a predecessor of all major activities to complete the project; such as: steel
structure, building envelop, interiors, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and finishes.

The foundation and its successors are representing the longest path of activities in the project
schedule, while site construction and concrete represent parallel path of activities that may not
affect the project duration. In other words; the interrelated durations of the building foundation
and its successors are long to have all civil work done including: utilities, earthwork, and concrete.
This scheduling characteristic of foundation made it vulnerable to failure due to wrong
construction sequencing for the purpose of compressing the schedule to save costs.

Page 3 of 22
3.2. Types of Foundation

All foundations are divided into two categories: shallow foundations and deep foundations. The
words shallow and deep refer to the depth of soil in which the foundation is made. Shallow
foundations can be made in depths of as little as 3ft (1 m), while deep foundations can be made at
depths of 60 - 200ft (20 – 65 m) (Nangan, A.P, et al, 2017: 2).

Each foundation category has multiple types of foundations, as shown in the figures below:

Figure 2
Types of Shallow Foundation

Figure 3
Types of Shallow Foundation

(Mager, J. et al. 2020: 2 – 7)

The research focus group agreed that the highlighted types of foundations in Figure (2) and (3) are
usually used for mid-size buildings in Houston area.

Page 4 of 22
3.3. Types of Foundations Used in Mid-Size Buildings

3.3.1. Shallow Spread Footing Foundation

Spread footing is a shallow foundation has a wider bottom portion as compared to the load bearing
foundation walls it supports. This wider bottom portion spreads the weight of the structure over
more area to achieve more stability. Spread footing is further divided into two sub categories:

3.3.1.1. Pad Foundation

Pad foundation is a shallow foundation settles and spreads over Figure 4

the soil safely. If the soil at the site has sufficient strength and is Pad Foundation

not too deep then pad foundation is preferred. Thickness of pad

foundation is generally uniform. Pad foundation spreads safely
over the concentrated load to the bearing stratum. Hence the
design of the foundation should be stiff so that uniform spreading
of load to the soil takes place without making the foundation
pressure exceed the permissible bearing stress. This is achieved by making the pad deep or by
reinforcing the pad as both the techniques helps to spread the force in a predefined angle.

3.3.1.2. Strip Foundation

Strip foundation which is also called as strip footing is also a Figure 5

shallow foundation used to provide continuous level or stepped Strip Foundation

strip of support to a linear structure for example walls or closely

spaced rows or columns built in center above them. Strip
foundations can be done in mostly all sub soils, but a soil of good
bearing capacity is suitable. This type of foundation is generally
used for the construction of medium or low-rise buildings. The
underside of strip footing should be deep so that frost action does not take place. The position and
size of strip foundation depends upon the overall width of the wall. The old or traditional strip
foundation is basically equal or greater than overall wall width and also the foundation width is
three times the width of the supported wall (Mager, J. et al. 2020: 2 – 6).

Page 5 of 22
3.3.2. Deep Pier Foundation

It is also known as post foundation. Pier foundation is basically a Figure 6

Pier Foundation
collection of large cylindrical diameter to up hold the structure and
transfer large super imposed load to the firm strata below. It is
placed few feet below the ground. This is very convenient method
as the materials are easily available and the method is easy and
requires fewer amounts of materials and labors. It is also very cost
efficient. It is preferred in locations where the top strata consist of
decomposed rock overlying strata of sound rock. Pier foundation
is very common in commercial mid-size buildings in Houston area
and usually recommended by geotechnical engineers (Mager, J. et
al. 2020: 6).

3.3.3. Advantages and Disadvantages of Foundations Used in Mid-Size Buildings

Table 1
Advantages and Disadvantages of Foundations Used in Mid-Size Buildings
Categories Type Advantages Disadvantages
- Can be designed to accommodate - Large to cope high point loads.
Shallow Pad
tight sites. - Limited foundation suitability to
- Reinforcement for tension and shear point loads of framed buildings.
can be added. - Weak against differential
- Economic due to control of settlement.
foundation size. - Require support to prevent caving
- Shallow form of foundation needs in.
little excavation. - Weak against uplift forces, wind
forces and earthquake forces.
- Ability to withstand great loads. - Not suitable for every soil type.
Shallow Strip
- Multiple subtypes to choose for - You have to do the filling on a
articular purposes. single go and the amount of
- Lower Price than cast-in-situ material to prepare for filling is a
structures. problem.
- Easy to build. - It is only suitable in low rise
- Long service life. buildings.
- Better floor insulation.
- Varieties in terms of design. - Moisture problems and rain
Deep Pier
- Bearing capacity can be increased accumulation.
under reaming the bottom. - Creaking sagging and bouncy
- Cost and time efficient, and does floors.
not need extensive excavation. - Poor ventilation.
(Mager, et al, 2020: 2 - 7)

Page 6 of 22
3.4. Foundation Failures

Foundation failures can be categorized as stress controlled, environmentally controlled, or both.

If foundation fails, it is because they react to movement occurring in the supporting soil because
the foundation was not supplied with the means to resist such changing support conditions.

Stress controlled failures are those which are the result of the structure load on the foundation
elements interacting with the supporting soil; including bearing capacity failure, settlement of
improperly compacted fill, hydrodynamic or consolidation type soil settlement, or failure of
footing element itself.

Environmentally controlled failures are those which occur because of changes in the environment
which affect the supporting soil. Frequently environmentally controlled movement have very little
relationship with the building load stresses imposed on the soil. They can include swelling or
shrinkage of soils, downhill movement, soil creep, land slip, etc. Some of those occur due to
groundwater or oil withdrawal.

Foundation failures may appear according to two main factors: (1) Materials and (2) Functional.
Materials failures would include cracking or deterioration of the foundation materials while
functional failure involves distortion of the foundation which affects the superstructure appearance
and performance.

These modes are frequently found together but often materials failure may be related to some
independent factors such as concrete shrinkage and not stresses included by settlement or swell.

Functional failures would include excessive deflection or curvature, excessive overall slop or tilt,
differential movement, excessive settlement or heave, or excessive surface wear and deterioration
(Meyer, 2000: 2-3).

Understanding the appearances of foundation failures may assist in determining the causes of
failures then coming with proper remediation.

Page 7 of 22
3.5. Reasons of Foundation Failures

(Feld & Carper, 1997: 14) split the reasons of failure into seven categories: (1) fundamental errors
in concept, (2) programming deficiencies, (3) site selection and site development errors, (4) design
errors, (5) construction errors, (6) materials deficiencies, and (7) operational errors.

3.5.1. Fundamental Errors in Concept

Some projects failed due conceptual errors. The project may be unique to be beyond available
technology. The scale of the project may be outside the envelope of past experience. The project
may have been located in unusual environment where the prediction of environmental effects was
unreliable. Some failures of this type are not engineering failures; but rather, economic failures.
Then the concept is technically flawed, the resolution of evolving problems will require more
financial investment than originally anticipated then the project will be considered a failure.

3.5.2. Programming Deficiencies

Failure has been defined as an unacceptable difference between expected and observed
performance. This definition implies that the expectations of the client must be clearly understood
by the designer, and that they must be realistic. This type of deficiencies could be avoided through
communication during the programming phase of a project. The program should clearly define the
scope and intent of a project as an outset.

3.5.3. Site Selection and Site Development Errors

Failures often result from unwise land use of site selection errors. Figure 7
Harris County’s Floodplains
Certain sites are more vulnerable than others to failures. The most
obvious examples are sites located in regions of significant
seismic activity, in coastal regions, or in floodplains. Other sites
pose problems related to specific soil conditions such as
expansive soils or permafrost in cold regions (Feld & Carper,
1997: 14)-17.

Page 8 of 22
3.5.4. Design Errors

Design errors have contributed to many failures; these include: errors in design concept; lack of
structural redundancy; failure to consider a load or a combination of loads; deficient connection
details; calculation errors; misuse of computer software; detailing problems including selection of
incompatible materials or assemblies that are not constructable, failure to consider maintenance
requirements or durability, inadequate or inconsistent specifications for materials or expected
quality of work, and unclear communication of design intent. (Shamsudeen & Biodun, 2016: 8)
emphasized that Lack of coordination between principal players is one of the main factors causes
design errors. Thus, fundamental errors in concept and programming deficiencies are associated
with design errors.

3.5.5. Construction Errors

Construction is a dangerous occupation. Many failures of case-in-place concrete occur during

construction due to inadequate temporary support, premature removal of shoring, and premature
loading of concrete. Precast concrete and steel frame structures often experience stability failure
when temporary bracing is inadequate. Improper construction sequencing is also a source of
failure.

3.5.6. Materials Deficiencies

Some would claim that materials do not fail; people fail. Although it is true that most materials
problems are the results of human errors involving a lack of understanding about materials or the
ignorant juxtaposition of incompatible materials, there are failure that can be attributed to
unforeseeable materials inconsistencies. Designer have come to rely on modern structural
materials. However, manufacturing or fabrication defects may exist in the most reliable structural
materials.

3.5.7. Operational Errors

Failures can occur after occupancy of a facility as a result of owner/operator errors. These may
include alterations made to the structure, change in use, operational judgment errors, negligent
overloading, and inadequate maintenance. Some failures occur because maintenance or operation
personnel do not have the requisite knowledge or skills to operate the facility property (Feld &
Carper, 1997: 14-21).

Page 9 of 22
3.6. Causes of Foundation Failures

Causes of foundation failures are: (1) Load transfer, (2) Lateral Movement, (3) Unequal Support,
(4) Drag Down and Heave, (5) Change in Water Level, and (6) Construction Sequencing, (7) Poor
Workmanship, (8) Undermining Safe Support, and (9) Vibration Effects.

3.6.1. Load Transfer

The objective of foundation is to transfer the load on Figure 8

Load Transfer
superstructure to the foundation soil on a wider area. It works as
an interface between superstructure (over the ground) and
substructure (under the ground). The size of the footing is decided
in such a way that it distributes the pressure on the subsoil and it
is expected that the applied pressure never exceeds the permissible
limit of the subsoil. A factor of safety in geotechnical design is
adopted to take care of different sources of uncertainty involved
in geotechnical design and practice. These uncertainties include,
(a) the natural heterogeneity or inherent variability, (b) measurement error, and (c) model
transformation uncertainty (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 1).

3.6.2. Lateral Movement

Lateral movement in soil is possible when there is removal of

Figure 9
existing side support adjacent to a building or there is excessive Lateral Movement
overburden on backfill or lateral thrust on the backside of a
retaining wall. Lateral movement is also observed during
earthquake (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 3).

Elimination of existing lateral resistances or from the addition of

active lateral pressures. Saturation of the soil often increases the
active pressures and reduces passive resistances. Broken drains
alongside the footings cause washout of soil, which ultimately
leads to foundation failure. The debris from demolitions is frequently piled adjacent to basement
walls that had not been designed to resist such loads. Thus, basement walls often cave in and cause
the total collapse of the structure.

Page 10 of 22
3.6.3. Unequal Support

Footing resting on different type of soil, different bearing capacity Figure 10

Structure Tippin
and unequal load distribution will result in the unequal settlement
or what we call it a differential settlement (Srivastava, A. et al.
2012: 4).

The amount of settlement is equal for different footings when soil

resistances are identical and load distributions are
equal. However, when the soil resistances are not identical,
differential settlements occur. This can lead to the tipping of the
structure, the portion of the structure founded on the weaker soil
will tip away.

3.6.4. Drag Down and Heave

When footing is located on a compressible soil, there is a chance Figure 11
Crack Due to Heave
of foundation failure by drag down and heave. In plastic soils, new
settlements (drag down) are often accompanied by upward
movements and heave some distance away. When foundation
failure does occur, it is usually the result of differential settlement
or heaving of the soil that supports the foundation.

When the soil area near to footing is loaded by a new structure, it

causes new compression in the soil volume (Srivastava, A. et al.
2012: 2).

3.6.5. Change in Water Level

The change in water content can modify the dimensions and structure of the supporting soil. In
many cases, water companies extract the groundwater to such a level that it results in receding
groundwater levels and in turn, causes settlements with severe damage. Pumping from adjacent
construction excavations also affects the stability of existing footings.

Page 11 of 22
3.6.6. Construction Sequencing

Construction sequencing is a critical factor of foundation failures; removing formwork from

premature concrete, building masonry walls before adjacent steel columns, erect joist kickers
before applying maximum deal load on the building, etc. all may cause foundation failures.

3.6.7. Poor Workmanship

Poor workmanship is a major cause of foundation failures; insufficient compaction for the building
pad, inadequate waterproofing, wrong spacing and week tying for rebar, etc. may cause serious
damages to foundations.

3.6.8. Undermining Safe Support

Figure 12
Bracing and shoring system be provided to prevent a lateral shift Shoring

in the soil. A permanent support structure such as underpinning

should be installed where the new construction will undermine an
existing support system. If these provisions are ignored or entirely
omitted, cracks in existing structure may occur, and sometimes
tragic collapse of the foundation may also take place.

3.6.9. Vibration Effects

Figure 13
Construction activities such as blasting, pile driving, dynamic Pile Driving
compaction of loose soil, and operation of heavy construction
equipment induce ground and structure vibrations. The level of
ground and structural vibrations caused by construction work
depends on the construction method, soil medium, heterogeneity
and uncertainty of soil deposit at a site, distance from the source,
characteristics of wave propagation at the site, dynamic
characteristics and susceptibility ratings of adjacent and remote
structures, and sensitivity of the local population to the vibration.

Ground vibrations from construction sources may affect adjacent and remote structures in three
major ways: (1) structure vibration with/without the effect of resonance structure responses, (2)
dynamic settlement due to soil densification and liquefaction, and (3) pile driving and accumulated
effects of repeated dynamic loads (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 2).

Page 12 of 22
3.7. Prevention and Quality Control

(Ortega, I. 2000: 10) listed the followings as preventive/quality control actions for structural
failures: (1) collaborative design, (2) design-construction reviews, (3) particular attention to
construction phase, (4) inspection of construction site by designers, (5) and monitoring.

3.8. Prevention/Remediation of Foundation Failures

3.8.1. Load Transfer Remediation

For load transfer failures, the most commonly adopted remedial Figure 14
Foundation Underpinning
measure to rectify the problem is underpinning. Underpinning is the
process of strengthening and stabilizing the foundation of an existing
building or other structure. Underpinning is accomplished by
extending the foundation in depth or width so that it either rests on a
more supportive soil stratum or distributes its load across a greater
area. Use of steel piers, helical anchors and micro piles are common
methods in underpinning (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 1).

3.8.2. Lateral Movement Remediation

As such there is no remedial measure reported in literature to overcome failures of such magnitudes
but definitely preventive measures can be taken through, (i) proper planning of subsurface
investigation, (ii) analysis and design and (iii) construction quality control and supervision. For
small scale damages underpinning of structures are suggested (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 3).

3.8.3. Unequal Support Remediation

In Pisa tower, engineers used grout injection in 1943 to stabilize the Figure 15
Soil Extraction
foundation and this process led to a displacement of the tower and
the tip of tower titled 10 mm more to south of tower. A new
restoration idea was presented in 1990 known as soil extraction, or
soil subsidence, its goal was to excavate earth from beneath Tower’s
foundation on its northern side so that Tower would tilt back toward
perpendicular. Idea was put into motion after various tests on Tower
itself and on soil underneath its foundation (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 4).

Page 13 of 22
3.8.4. Drag Down Remediation and Heave

Preventive actions are: soil stabilization technique, compaction on wet side of optimum moisture
content, controlling direction of expansion using, control of soil moisture using plastic fabric
underneath the foundation, etc. Heaving is a leading cause of foundation failure. As a preventive
measure, rain gutters collecting water from roof play a vital role in protecting foundation by
controlling moisture or rain water entering the foundation soil. The possible remedial measure is
by underpinning with piers as explained in previous section (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 2).

3.8.5. Change in Water Level

To avoid the destruction of property and the groundwater fluctuation, it is important to monitor
potential sinkhole formation and control on dewatering (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 4).

3.8.6. Construction Sequencing Errors

Can be avoided by reviewing the baseline schedule by the designer to ensure that construction
sequence does not affect the entirety of the structure; items to be checked could be: concrete curing
period before removing formwork, erecting steel before adjacent masonry walls, erect joists
kickers after applying maximum dead load on the structure, etc.

3.8.7. Poor Workmanship

Poor workmanship could be avoided during the pre-construction phase by selecting the minimum
responsible bid with considering both qualifications and price. It could be controlled during
construction phase by the designer and/or third party through regular inspections. Experienced
operation and maintenance teams may control foundation damages during building occupancy.

3.7.8. Undermining Safe Support Remediation

There is no remedy for such cause but definitely preventive measures in terms of “supported
excavation system” for “deep excavation problems” can be adopted to avoid such failures
(Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 3).

3.7.8. Vibration Effects

Monitoring and control of ground and structure vibrations provide the rationale to select measures
for prevention or mitigation of vibration problems, and settlement/damage hazards. Active or
passive isolation systems are adopted in this regard (Srivastava, A. et al. 2012: 5).

Page 14 of 22
4. CONCLUSIONS AND NUMERICAL ANALYSIS

4.1. Project Phase (PP) – Failure Reasons (FR) Conclusions and Analysis

4.1.1. Pre-Construction Phase - Failure Reasons Conclusions

- Pre-Construction Phase generates the following failures reasons: Fundamental errors in

concept, programing deficiencies, site selection and development errors, design errors, and
materials deficiencies.

4.1.2. Construction Phase - Failure Reasons Conclusions

- Construction errors occur during the construction phase.

- Materials deficiencies occur during the construction phase when the contractor uses wrong or
poor quality materials.

4.1.3. Post Construction Phase - Failure Reasons Conclusions

- Operational errors occur during the post construction phase.

4.1.4. Project Phases (PP) – Failure Reasons (FR) Numerical Analysis

- Project Phases – Failure Reasons Matrix will show the interferences between each project
phase and failure reasons and interferences among all will be represented by number one (1).
- Summation of interferences per phase will be calculated as an Interference Frequency (IF).
- Summation of all IFs will be calculated as Total Interference Frequency (TIF).
- Project Phase Interference Rate (PPIR) will be calculated by dividing IF over TIF.
- Project Phase Interference Unit Rate (PPIUR) will be calculated by dividing PPIR over IF.
- Failure Reason Participation (FRP) will be calculated by multiplying PPIUR by the sum of
interferences of the failure reason with the project phases.
- FRP will be used to analyze Failure Reasons – Failure Causes.

𝐼𝐹 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑃𝑃 = ∑ 𝐼𝐹𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑃𝑃 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝐹𝑅𝑠 𝑒𝑞. (1)

𝑇𝐼𝐹 = ∑ 𝐼𝐹 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑃𝑃𝑠 𝑒𝑞. (2)

𝐼𝐹 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑃𝑃 𝑒𝑞. (3)
𝑃𝑃𝐼𝑅 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑃𝑃 = × 100%
𝑇𝐼𝐹
𝑃𝑃𝐼𝑅 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑃𝑃 𝑒𝑞. (4)
𝑃𝑃𝐼𝑈𝑅 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑃𝑃 =
𝐼𝐹 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑃𝑃

𝐹𝑅𝑃 = ∑ 𝐼𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑎 𝑃𝑃 × 𝑃𝑃𝐼𝑈𝑅 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑃𝑃 𝑒𝑞. (5)

Page 15 of 22
 Table 2
Project Phase-Failure Reasons Analysis

- Pre-Construction Phase generates 62.5% of the Failures Reasons in foundation.

- Construction Phase generates 25% of the Failures Reasons in foundation.
- Post-Construction Phase generates 12.5% of the Failures Reasons in foundation.
- In foundation failures; each of the following failure reason participate with the percentages
shown: fundamental errors in concept (12.5%), programming deficiencies (12.5%), site
selection and development errors (12.5%), design errors (12.5%), construction errors (12.5%),
materials deficiencies (25%), and operational errors (12.5%).
- It is obvious that pre-construction phase generates the most failure reasons in foundation.
- Because materials deficiencies are coming from both pre-construction and construction phase,
it has the highest participation rate.

Page 16 of 22
4.2. Failure Reasons (FR) - Failure Causes (FC) Conclusions and Analysis

According to the discussion of this research; reasons behind Load Transfer (LD) are: Fundamental
errors in concept, programming deficiencies, site selection and development errors, and design
errors. Other reasons interfering with causes are shown in Table (3).

Calculations of Interference Frequency (IF), Failure Reason Interference Rate (RFIR), Failure
Reason Interference Unit Rate (RFIUR), and Failure Cause Participation are similar to calculations
made in section 4.1.4. of this research.

Table 3
Failure Reasons-Causes Analysis

- Design and construction errors represent the highest effect of 20% on failure causes, while
other reasons averaging 12% only.

- Load transfer, unequal support, and change in water level have the highest participation of 16%
among failure reasons.

Page 17 of 22
4.3. Failure Causes (FC) – Prevention/Remediation Conclusions and Numerical Analysis

According to the discussion of this research; underpinning can be used to remediate lateral transfer,
lateral movement, unequal support, and sometimes drag down and heave. Other interferences
between failure causes and preventions/remediations are shown in Table (4).

Calculations of Interference Frequency (IF), Failure Cause Interference Rate (RCIR), Failure
Cause Interference Unit Rate (RCIUR), and Prevention/Remediation (P/R-P) will be similar to
calculations made in sections 4.1.4. of this research.

Table 4
Failure Cause-Prevention/Remediation Analysis

Load transfer, lateral movement, unequal support, and drag down and heave have the highest
interference of 16% with failures preventions and remediations, while other failure reasons are
averaging 8%.

Pre-coordination and quality control have the highest participation rate of 28% among all
prevention and remediation procedures. Building monitoring and maintenance also has high
participation of 24% compared with underpinning and soil extraction that made 16% and 4%.

Page 18 of 22
 5. RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Project Phase - Failure Reasons Recommendations

- Pre-Construction Phase has the highest interference rate (62.5%) while other phases are
averaging around (19%). Project concept, sufficient investigations, good design, thorough
reviews are very critical during this phase to avoid failures.
- Project phases produced high importance for construction materials (25%) compared with
other failure reasons that are averaging (12.5%); this is because construction materials are
called during the pre-construction phase then procured, constructed, and installed during
construction. Owners and engineers to provide exceptional attention to materials specifications
to ensure high performance.

5.2. Failure Reasons – Failure Causes Recommendations

- Design and construction errors have the highest interference (20% each) with the failure causes
while other failure reasons are averaging (12%). Thorough design and reviews and
construction quality control are required to avoid failures.
- Load transfer, unequal support, and change in water level have the highest frequency (16%
each) while other failure causes are averaging (7.2%). Pre-coordination with sufficient
investigation and good design are the best way to avoid those causes. In addition, quality
control during construction, and proper monitoring for the building are more efficient than
remediation.

5.3. Failure Causes – Prevention/Remediation Recommendations

- Pre-coordination, quality control, and building monitoring, and maintenance are totaling
preventive measures share of (80%) in foundation failures, leaving only (20%) for
remediations. Thus, preventive measures are more valuable than remediation.
- Load transfer, lateral movement, unequal support, and drag down and heave have the highest
interference rate of (16%) for each. Stress controlled failures are critical and require
exceptional pre-coordination and quality control.
- Poor workmanship came up relatively high with (12%) and this is due its effect on quality
control and building monitoring and maintenance. Workmanship is a key factor in controlling
failures.

Page 19 of 22
 6. FUTURE WORK

- Develop a questionnaire and distribute to wider focus group including geotechnical

engineers, structural engineers, civil engineers, general contractors, concrete subcontractors,
and companies specialist in foundation remediations.
- The questionnaire to request listing all potential foundation failures with their: 1) Reasons,
2) causes, and 3) preventive actions, and 4) remediation actions.

- Distinguish the difference between failure reasons and failure causes is very critical in
analysis foundation failure and remediation, it may bring new concepts for more priced
analysis.

- Perform same numerical analysis of this research with numerical consideration of

participation rates; as below:

▪ Numerically extend the participation rate of project phases on failure reasons.

▪ Numerically extend the participation rate of failure reasons on failure causes.

▪ Numerically extend the participation rate of failure causes on preventions/remediations.

- Develop Project Phase-Failure Reason-Failure Cause one matrix and explore outcomes.

- Explore preventions and remediations costs by unit price such as square footage of foundation
then add the cost as a factor in the calculations.

- The highest participations are represented by pre-coordination (28%) which lays in pre-
construction phase and building monitoring and maintenance (24%) which lays in post-
construction phase, leaving (100% - 28% - 24% = 48%) to the construction phase. Further
analysis is required to find the relationship between the construction phase interference (25%)
in Table (2) and the outcomes of Table (3).

Page 20 of 22
 6. REFERENCES

- Feld, J. & Carper, K.L. (1997), Construction Failures.

- Mager, J. et al (2020), Study and Analysis of Types of Foundation and Design Construction.
- Meyer, K.T. (2000), Defining Foundation Failure in Mid-Side Buildings.
- Nangan, A.P, et al (2017), Concrete Foundation Systems and Footings.
- Ortega, I. (2000), Systematic Prevention of Construction Failures.
- Shamsudeen, M. & Biodun, O.N. (2016), Design Errors on Construction Projects
- Srivastava, A. et al. (2012), Review of Causes of Foundation Failures and their Possible
Preventive and Remedial Measures.

Page 21 of 22
 7. ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Deepest appreciation to New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) for this magnificent
educational journey during the last two years. It was an honor to be one of NJIT students.

Sincere gratitude to professor Giri Venkiteela, PHD for his support, motivation, enthusiasm, and
immense knowledge.

Appreciation to the focus group of this research who assisted in brainstorming ideas, providing
inputs, supporting the new numerical analysis of this research, and providing some of the research
reference.

Focus Group Members:

Sam Khafaji Geotechnical Professional Engineer LBA Engineering
Rawhi Khalifeh Structural Professional Engineer RSK Engineering
Fadi Al Mahamed Structural Professional Engineer Paramount Engineering
Saif Al Haddad Civil Professional Engineer Tune Engineering

Never the last,

Thank you, Noor,

You were the light I was following to know where to go.

Among all that noise of work and school, your voice was that solo string musicing piece and
stillness to keep me following the light.

Page 22 of 22

View publication stats