ECOTONE

DESIGN CRITERIA FOR FOUNDATION OF SOLAR PANEL MOUNTING STRUCTURE

Introdution:
Generally, driven pile method was the original preferred method for installing solar modules, the
repurpose of landfills and contaminated superfund sites as home to solar farms has the use of CAST IN
SITE CONCRETE BEAM + SLAB RAFT FOOTING stand as the apt foundation approach for the landfill sites.
Landfills and contaminated superfund sites are ideal candidates for solar farms because they are
considered already disturbed lands and thereby relieve the pressure to develop on undisturbed or
uncontaminated lands.
However, many of these sites do not permit or allow ground penetration for obvious reasons. Once you
get past the three feet of top cap soil, you reach the contaminated soil below. This is one area where
cast in site concrete raft footings win out over driven piles because they provide a non penetrating
solution. Other areas where cast on site concrete raft footings are finding success, is in solar installations
going in over bedrock where penetration is difficult if not impossible, solar installations with high water
tables, and installations with adverse soil conditions such as corrosive soils or soils with poor passive
earthpressure characteristics.
In addition to not penetrating the ground, cast in site beam +slab raft footings offer a variety of other
benefits such as:
No soil Penetration.
Minimal site excavation/preparation needed.
Accommodates most site locations and conditions.
Design performance is based on solar asset weight which is calculated precisely at 650kg for a carrying
capacity of 22 solar panels per steel structure. (on the contrary driven piles rely on assumed passive soil
pressures and other assumptions)

ECOTONE
DESIGN CONSIDERATION

2
The advantage of cast in site beam + slab raft concrete footings over pile+ post mount /pre cast ballast
foundation system and the 3 stability issues that are taken into design consideration are:
Overturning (up lift)
Sliding
Overshading

OVERTURNING (UPLIFT)
Excessive wind load forces can cause over turning moments (what is commonly referred to as uplift).

Figure 1 Overturning on pre cast Ballasted Footing System

Figure 2 Overturning on Post Mount System

FIGURE 1, results from a failure of the precast ballasted footing to successfully counter excessive wind
loads. (This means the footing was the wrong weight and or size for the application.)

ECOTONE
Overturning on a pile driven or post mount system, FIGURE 2, results from a failure of the mounting
hardware, racking system, or post/soil interaction due to excessive wind loads.

SLIDING
Sliding is a potential failure that has been overcome with the concept of beam + slab raft footing
combination.
Although not as catastrophic as overturning, sliding can occur due to the wind induced forces on the
solar array system. The wind not only tries to push the Solar Array system horizontally, but it also
creates a lift which reduces the actual dead load of the entire system, see FIGURE 3. This reduced dead
load coupled with the horizontal wind force is what creates the possibility of a solar module and its
foundation sliding horizontally. Taking into consideration the type of Sub grade material on which the
beam + slab raft footings will be installed is the primary factor to provide resistance to sliding.
The ideal type of Sub grade is a well drained granular course material such as sand.

Figure 3 Sliding of pre cast ballasted Footings

OVERSHADING
Another common mistake is to install rows of solar modules too close together which results in
overshading. In driven pile or post mount applications this can result from not fully understanding
the affect that a change in height can have on the way shadows fall on the solar system as a whole. With
precast ballasted footings this can occur as a result of altering the thickness of the ballasted footing in an
attempt to add weight when additional weight is required due to regions of higher wind speeds. Thicker

ECOTONE
ballasted footings could increase the overall height of the solar electrical system which could require an

4
increase in distance between rows to eliminate possible adjacentrow overshading,see Figures 4&5.

Figure 4Overshading on Ballasted Footing System

Figure 5Overshading on Post Mount System

This can avoided by uniform thickness of cast In site concrete beam + slab raft footing .

OTHER FACTORS
One of the biggest misconceptions within the solar industry in regards to cast in site concrete footings
is that the footing size and the unit cost are directly related to the energy output or
watts of the solar electrical system. This could not be farther from the truth. The footing designs have
nothing to do with the power output or price per watt, and everything to do with the following:

Bearing Pressure.

Tilt angle and tracking characteristics of the solar power system.

Local design wind speeds where the solar power system is to be installed.

ECOTONE
Support and racking configuration.

5
Overall solar module system size and weight.
Local design codes and project requirements.
Soil characteristic relative to friction, sliding, consolidation, slope stability, etc.

Bearing Pressures:
Once the footing has been designed (sized) to prevent overturning and sliding failure, the soil bearing
pressures should be checked to ensure that they are in compliance with a soils engineers report that
may specify maximum bearing pressures.

Tilt Angle:
To maximize the output of the solar power system, especially in PV Solar Array applications, the
Optimal tilt angle is typically specified for nontracking systems, and remains fixed.
Structurally, higher tilt angles result in an increased wind load on the solar module which would require
a larger ballasted footing. In addition, higher tilt angles may require an increase in distance between
rows to eliminate adjacentrow overshading, see FIGURE 4&5. A lower tilt angle is often desired to
minimize the wind forces and reduce the footing size.
A lower tilt angle also results in reduced adjacentrow overshading potential which allows
the module rows to be spaced closer together. A cost comparison could be done to compare the tilt
angle versus the adjacentrow overshading versus the ballasted footing size. In addition, lower tilt
angles allow for more compact utilization of the land available by minimizing the unusable area that is in
shade thus offering an opportunity for more solar modules.

ECOTONE
Wind Speed:

6
The most significant impact on the cast in site concrete footing design is due to the local design wind
speed. The local design wind speed can be found from the International Building Code, IBC, or from
the local building department where the solar power system is to be installed. It is imperative to get
the correct design wind speed as it has a direct impact on the footing dimensions, and thereby the
economics of the project. The force on the solar power system from the wind is directly related to the
wind speed squared ,V Square.

STRUCTURAL STANDARDS AND CODES:

The substructure for Solar Power Plant panel are designed as reinforced concrete structure beam+raft
foundation subjected to vertical loads, self weight, dead load, live load and horizontal loads such as wind
loads. The various Indian standards followed for evaluating loads, structural analysis and design are
given below.
SL.No
1

Code
IS: 875 (Part 1) 1987

IS: 875 (Part 2) 1987

Description
Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other then
Earthquake) for Building and Structures Unit Weight of
Building Materials and Stored Materials

Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other then

Earthquake) for Building and Structures Imposed
Loads

Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other then

Earthquake) for Building and Structures Wind Loads
3

IS: 875 (Part 3) 1987

Code of Practice for Design Loads (Other then
Earthquake) for Building and Structures Special Loads
and Load Combinations.

ECOTONE

7
4

IS: 875 (Part 5) 1987

Criteria for Earthquake Resistance Design of structures.

Earthquake Resistance Design and Construction of

Building Code of Practice.
5

IS: 1893 2002 (Part I)

Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures
Subjected to Seismic forces Code of Practice.

IS: 43261993
Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete.

IS:13920 1993

IS: 456 2000

IS: 1786 1985

10

IS: 432 (Part 1) 1982

Specification for High Strength Deformed Steel Bars and

Wires for concrete reinforcement.

Specification for Mild Steel and Medium Tensile Steel

Bars and Hard Drawn Steel Wire for Concrete
Reinforcement Mild Steel and Medium Tensile Steel
Bars

ECOTONE
11

IS: 432 (Part 2) 1982

12

IS: 3370 (Part 1) 1965

13

IS: 3370 (Part 2) 1965

14

IS: 3370 (Part 4) 1965

Specification for Mild Steel and Medium Tensile Steel

Bars and Hard Drawn Steel Wire for Concrete
Reinforcement Hard Drawn Steel Wire.

Code of Practice for Concrete Structure for the storage

of liquids General Requirements.

Code of Practice for Concrete Structure for the storage

of liquids Reinforced Concrete Structures.

Code of Practice for Concrete Structure for the storage

of liquids Design Tables.

Steel for General Structural purpose Specification.

15

IS: 20621999

16

IS:1904 1986

17

IS:8002007

18

IS:801

Code of practice for Design and Construction of

foundation in soils General Requirements.

General Construction in Steel Code of practice

CODE OF PRACTICE FOR USE OF COLDFORMED LIGHT

GAUGE STEEL STRUCTURAL MEMBERS IN GENERAL
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION