Bearing Capacity PDF

CE-632
CE
632
Foundation Analysis and
Design
Ultimate Bearing Capacity

The load per unit area of the foundation at which shear failure in soil
occurs is
i called
ll d the
th ultimate
lti t bearing
b i capacity.
it
1
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant
Principal Modes of Failure:

General Shear Failure:
Settlement
Load / Area
q
qu
Sudden or catastrophic failure

Well defined failure surface
Bulging on the ground surface adjacent to foundation
Common failure mode in dense sand

Load / Area
q
Local Shear Failure:
Setttlement
qu1
qu
Common in sand or clay with medium compaction

Significant settlement upon loading
Failure surface first develops
p right
g below the foundation and then
slowly extends outwards with load increments
Foundation movement shows sudden jerks first (at qu1) and then
after a considerable amount of movement the slip surface may
reach
h th
the ground.
d
A small amount of bulging may occur next to the foundation.
3

Load / Area
q
Punching Failure:
Setttlement
qu1
qu
Common in fairly loose sand or soft clay

Failure surface does not extends beyond the zone right beneath the
foundation
Extensive settlement with a wedge shaped soil zone in elastic
equilibrium beneath the foundation. Vertical shear occurs around the
edges of foundation.
Aft reaching
After
hi ffailure
il
lload-settlement
d ttl
t curve continues
ti
att some slope
l
and mostly linearly.
4
Rela
ative dep
pth of fou
undation
n, Df/B*

0
Relative density of sand, Dr

0.5
05
Local
shear
Vesic (1973)
1.0
10
General
shear
2BL
B =
B+L
*
Circular
Foundation
Punching
shear
Long
Rectangular
Foundation
10
5
g
g Capacity
p
y Theory
y
Terzaghis
Bearing
B
Rough Foundation
Surface
Strip Footing
k
j
Effective
Eff
ti overburden
b d
q = .Df
qu
neglected
Df
a
g
45/2
III
Shear
Planes
II
II
e
45/2
i
III
c-
c
soil
f
Assumption
L/B ratio is large plain strain problem
Df B
Shear resistance of soil for Df depth is neglected
General shear failure
Shear strength is governed by Mohr-Coulomb Criterion
Terzaghi
s Bearing Capacity Theory
Terzaghis
B
1
qu .B = 2.Pp + 2.Ca .sin B 2 tan
4
qu
Ca= B/2
cos
Pp
1
qu .B = 2.Pp + B.c.sin B 2 tan
4
Ca B.tan
d
Pp
Pp = Pp + Ppc + Ppq
Pp = due to only self weight of soil
in shear zone
Ppc = due to soil cohesion only
(soil is weightless)
Ppq = due to surcharge only
7
Terzaghi
Terzaghis
Weight term
Cohesion term
qu .B = 2.Pp B 2 tan + ( 2.Ppc + B.c.sin ) + 2.Ppq

4
B. ( 0.5 B.N )
Surcharge term
B.c.N c
qu = c.N c + q.N q + 0.5 B.N
B.q.N q
Terzaghis bearing
capacity equation
Terzaghis bearing capacity factors
K P
1
N = tan 2 1
2
cos
N c = ( N q 1) cot
e2a
Nq =

2
2 cos 45 +
2
3 in rad.
a=
tan
2
4
Terzaghi
Terzaghis
Local Shear Failure:
Modify the strength parameters such as:
2
cm = c
3
m = tan 1 tan
3
2
qu = c.N c + q.N q + 0.5 B.N
3
Square and circular footing:

qu = 1.3c.N c + q.N q + 0.4 B.N
For square
qu = 1.3c.N c + q.N q + 0.3 B.N
For circular
10
Terzaghi
Terzaghis
Effect of water table:
Case I: Dw Df
Surcharge, q = .Dw + ( D f Dw )
Case II: Df Dw (Df + B)
Dw
Df
Surcharge, q = .DF
In bearing capacity equation
replace by-
Dw D f
( )
B
Case III: Dw > (Df + B)
=+
B
Li it off iinfluence
Limit
fl
No influence of water table.
Another recommendation for Case II:

= ( 2H + dw )
dw
2 sat
H
2
+ 2 ( H dw )
H
d w = Dw D f
Rupture depth: H = 0.5 B tan ( 45 + 2 )
11
p
g Capacity
p
y Analysis
y
Skemptons
Bearing
for
cohesive Soils
~ For saturated cohesive soil, = 0
N q = 1, and N = 0
Df
For strip footing:

N c = 5 1 + 0.2
with limit of N c 7.5
B
Df
N c = 6 1 + 0.2
with limit of N c 9.0
B
For square/circular
footing:
g
For rectangular footing:
Df
B
+
N c = 5 1 + 0.2
1
0.2
for D f 2.5
B
L
N c = 7.5 1 + 0.2 for D f > 2.5

L
qu = c.N c + q
Net ultimate bearing capacity,
qnu = qu .D f
qu = c.N c
12
Effective Area Method for Eccentric Loading

In case of Moment loading
Df
B
B=B-2ey
AF=BL
L=L-2ey
ex
ey
ex =
My
ey =
Mx
FV
FV
IIn case off Horizontal

H i
t l Force
F
att
some height but the column is
centered on the foundation
M y = FHx .d FH
M x = FHy .d FH
13
General Bearing Capacity Equation:

(Meyerhof, 1963)
qu = c.N c .sc .dc .ic + q.N q .sq .d q .iq + 0.5

0 5 .B.N .s .d .i
Shape
f t
factor
Depth
factor
N q = tan 2 45 + .e .tan
2
inclination
f t
factor
Empirical
p
correction
factors
N c = ( N q 1) cot
N = ( N q 1) tan (11.4
4 )
[[Byy Hansen(1970):
(
)
N = 1.5 ( N q 1) tan ( )
[By Vesic(1973):
N = 2 ( N q + 1) tan ( )
qu = c.N c .sc .dc .ic .gc .bc + q.N q .sq .d q .iq .g q .bq + 0.5 .B.N .s .d .i .g .b
Ground factor
Base factor
14
15
M
Meyerhofs
h f Correction
C
i
Factors:
F
Shape
Factors
sc = 1 + 0.2 tan 2 45 +
2
L
for 10o
B

2
sq = s = 1 + 0.1 tan 45 +
L
2
for lower value
sq = s = 1
Depth
Factors
d c = 1 + 0.2
tan 45 +
L
2
Df
for 10o
d q = d = 1 + 0.1
tan 45 +
L
2
Df
for lower value
d q = d = 1
Inclination
Factors
o
ic = iq = 1
90

i = 1

16
Hansens Correction Factors:

Inclination
Factors
Depth
Factors
FH
for = 0
ic = 1
2 BL.c
5
0 5F
0.5
FH
iq = 1
F
BL
.
c
.cot
+
V
For = 0
For > 0
Df
for D f B
d c = 0.4
B
Df
1
d
=
0.4
tan
for D f > B
c
B
Df
for D f B
d c = 1 + 0.4
B
Df
1
=
1
+
0.4
tan
for D f > B
d
c
B
For D f < B
2 Df
d q = 1 + 2 tan . (1 sin )
Shape
Factors
1 (1 FH )
ic = 1 +
for > 0
BL.su
2
5
0 7F
0.7
FH
i = 1
+
F
BL
.
c
.cot
1/2
sc = 0.2ic .
B
L
for = 0
sq = 1 + iq . ( B L ) sin
i
For D f > B
Df
2
1
d q = 1 + 2 tan . (1 sin ) tan
d = 1
B
for > 0
L
s = 1 0.4
0 4i . ( B L )
sc = 0.2 (1 2ic ) .
Hansens Recommendation for cohesive saturated soil, '=0
qu = c.N c . (1 + sc + d c + ic ) + q
Notes:
1. Notice use of effective
base dimensions B, L by
H
Hansen
b
butt nott by
b Vesic.
V i
2. The values are consistent
with a vertical load or a
vertical load accompanied by
a horizontal load HB.
3. With a vertical load and a
load HL (and either HB=0 or
HB>0) you may have to
compute two sets of shape
and depth factors si,B, si,L
and di,B, di,L. For i,L
subscripts use ratio L/B or
D/L.
4. Compute qu independently
by using (siB, diB) and (siL,
diL) and use min value for
design.
18
Notes:
1. Use Hi as either HB or HL,
or both if HL>0.
2. Hansen (1970) did not give
an ic for >0. The value given
here is from Hansen (1961)
and also used by Vesic.
3. Variable ca = base
adhesion, on the order of 0.6
to 1.0 x base cohesion.
4. Refer to sketch on next
slide for identification of
angles and , footing depth
D, location of Hi (parallel and
at top of base slab; usually
also produces eccentricity)
eccentricity).
Especially notice V = force
normal to base and is not the
resultant R from combining V
and Hi..
19
20
N t
Note:
1. When =0 (and 0) use
N = -2sin(
( ) in N term.
2. Compute m = mB when
Hi = HB (H parallel to B) and
m = mL when Hi = HL (H
parallel to L). If you have
both HB and HL use
m = (mB2 + mL2)1/2. Note use
of B and L
L, not B
B,L
L.
3. Hi term 1.0 for
computing iq, i (always).
21
Suitability of Methods
22
IS:6403-1981 Recommendations
Net Ultimate Bearing capacity:
For cohesive soils
qnu = c.Nc .sc .dc .ic + q. ( N q 1) .sq .d q .iq + 0.5 .B.N .s .d .i
qnu = cu .N c .sc .d c .ic

N c , N q , N
Shape
Factors
For rectangle,
sc = 1 + 0.2
Inclination
Factors
B
L
sq = 1 + 0.2
B
L
s = 1 0.4
B
L
12
sc = 1.3
1 3 sq = 1.2
s = 0.8 for square, s = 0.6 for circle
tan 45 +
L
2
Df

d q = d = 1 + 0.1
tan 45 +
L
2
d q = d = 1 for < 10o
d c = 1 + 0.2
N c = 5.14
5 14
as per Vesic(1973) recommendations
For square and circle,
Depth
Factors
where
where,
Df
The same as Meyerhof (1963)
for
10o
23
Bearing Capacity
Correlations with
S
SPT-value
a ue
Peck, Hansen, and
Thornburn (1974)
&
IS:6403-1981
Recommendation
24
Bearing Capacity Correlations with SPT-value

SPT value
Teng (1962):
For Strip Footing:
1
qnu = 3 N 2 .B.Rw + 5 100 + N 2 .D f .Rw
6
For Square
F
S
and
d
Circular Footing:
1 2
qnu = N .B.Rw + 3 100 + N 2 .D f .Rw
3
For Df > B,
B take Df = B
Dw
Water Table Corrections:
Dw
Rw = 0.5 1 +
D f
Dw D f
Rw = 0.5 1 +
Df
[ Rw 1
Df
B
[ Rw 1
B
Limit of influence
25
Bearing Capacity Correlations with CPT-value

0. 2500
IS:6403-1981 Recommendation:
Cohesionless Soil
qnu
qc
0.1250
Df
B
1.5B
to
2.0B
0.1675
qc value is
taken as
average for
this zone
0.0625
=1
0
0
100
200
300
400
B (cm)
Schmertmann (1975):
N N q
0.5
qc
0.8
in
kg
cm 2
26
Bearing Capacity Correlations with CPT-value

Cohesive Soil
qnu = cu .N c .sc .dc .ic

Soil Type
Point Resistance Values

( qc ) kgf/cm2
Range of Undrained
Cohesion (kgf/cm2)
Normally consolidated
clays
qc < 20
qc/18 to qc/15
Over consolidated clays
qc > 20
qc/26 to qc/22
27
Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil

Depth of rupture zone =
tan 45 + or approximately taken as B

2
2
Case I: Layer-1 is weaker than Layer-2

Design using parameters of Layer -1
Case II: Layer-1 is stronger than Layer-2

1
B
Layer-1
B
L
Layer-2
2
Distribute the stresses to Layer-2 by 2:1 method

and check the bearing capacity at this level for
limit state.
Also check the bearing capacity for original
foundation level using parameters of Layer-1
Layer 1
Choose minimum value for design
Another approximate method for c- soil: For effective depth
tan 45
4 + B
2
2
Find average c and and use them for ultimate bearing capacity calculation
cav =
c1 H1 + c2 H 2 + c3 H 3 + ....
H1 + H 2 + H 3 + ....
tan av =
tan 1 H1 + tan 2 H 2 + tan 3 H 3 + ....

H1 + H 2 + H 3 + ....
28
g Capacity
p
y of Stratified Cohesive Soil
Bearing
29
g Capacity
y of Footing
g on Layered
y
Bearing
Soil:
Stronger Soil Underlying Weaker Soil
Depth H is relatively small

Punching shear failure in top layer
General shear failure in bottom
layer
Depth H is relatively large

Full failure surface develops in top
layer
y itself
30
Bearing Capacity of
Footing
on Layered
F ti
L
d Soil:
S il
Stronger Soil Underlying
Weaker
ea e So
Soil
31
Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil:

Stronger
Soil
Weaker
St
S
il Underlying
U d l i
W k Soil
S il
Bearing capacities of continuous footing of with B

under vertical load on the surface of homogeneous
thick bed of upper and lower soil
32
Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil:

Stronger Soil Underlying Weaker Soil
For Strip Footing:
2 D f K s tan 1
2ca H
2
qu = qb +
+ 1H 1 +
1 H qt
B
H
B
Where, qt is the bearing capacity for foundation considering

only the top layer to infinite depth
For Rectangular Footing:
B 2c H
qu = qb + 1 + a
L B
B 2 D f K s tan 1
2
1 H qt
+ 1H 1 + L 1 + H
B
Special
p
Cases:
1. Top layer is strong sand and bottom layer is saturated soft clay
c1 = 0 2 = 0
2. Top layer is strong sand and bottom layer is weaker sand
c1 = 0
c2 = 0
2 Top layer is strong saturated clay and bottom layer is weaker saturated clay
2.
1 = 0
2 = 0
33
y Loaded Foundations
Eccentrically
Q
M
e=
qmax =
Q 6M
+
BL B 2 L
qmax =
Q 6e
1 +
BL
B
qmin =
Q 6M
BL B 2 L
qmin =
Q 6e
1
BL
B
M
Q
For
e 1
There will be separation
>
B 6
of foundation from the soil beneath

and stresses will be redistributed.
Use
B = B 2e
L = L
Qu = qu . A
for
sc , sq , s , and B, L for d c , d q , d
to obtain qu
The effective area method for two way eccentricity becomes

a little more complex than what is suggested above.
It is discussed in the subsequent slides
34
Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically

Loaded
(Highter
1985)
L d d foundations
f
d ti
(Hi ht and
d Anders,
A d
C
Case
II:
eL 1
e
1
and B
L 6
B 6
3 3e
B1 = B B
2 B
B1
eB
L
eL
L1
3 3eL
L1 = L
2
L
A =
1
L1 B1
2
B =
L = max ( B1 , L1 )
A
L
35
Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded

foundations (Highter and Anders,
Anders 1985)
Case II:
L2
eL
e
1
< 0.5 and 0 < B <
L
B 6
eB
eL
L1
L
B
1
( L1 + L2 ) B
2
L = max ( B1 , L1 )
A =
A
B =
L
36

Anders 1985)
Case III: eL < 1 and 0 < eB < 0.5
B1
eB
eL
L
B
B2
1
L ( B1 + B2 )
A
2
B =
L
L = L
A =
37

Anders 1985)
Case IV:
eL 1
eB 1
<
<
and
L 6
B 6
B1
eB
eL
L
B
B2
A = L2 B +
L = L
1
( B1 + B2 )( L + L2 )
2
A
B =
L
38

Anders 1985)
Case V: Circular foundation
eR
L =
A
B
39
Meyerhofs (1953) area correction based on empirical

correlations:
(American
Petroleum
Institute,
l ti
(A
i
P t l
I tit t 1987)
40
Bearing Capacity of
Footings
on Slopes
F ti
Sl
Meyerhofs (1957)
Solution
qu = cN cq + 0.5
0 5 BN q
Granular Soil
c = 0
qu = 0.5 BN q
41
Bearing Capacity of
Footings
on Slopes
F ti
Sl
Meyerhofs (1957)
Solution
Cohesive Soil
= 0
qu = cN cq
Ns =
H
c
42
Bearing Capacity of
Footings on Slopes
Graham et al. (1988),
Based on method of
characteristics
1000
For
Df
100
10
10
20
30
40
=0
43
Bearing Capacity of
Footings on Slopes
Graham et al. (1988),
Based on method of
characteristics
1000
For
Df
100
10
10
20
30
40
=0
44
Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes

G h
Graham
ett al.
l (1988),
(1988) Based
B
d on method
th d off characteristics
h
t i ti
For
Df
B
= 0.5
45

G h
Graham
ett al.
l (1988),
(1988) Based
B
d on method
th d off characteristics
h
t i ti
For
Df
B
= 1.0
46

B l (1997):
Bowles
(1997) A simplified
i lifi d approach
h
B
f
= 45+/2
/2
g''
f'
qu
qu
Df
45/2
a'
e'
45/2
cc'
ro
b'
b
d'
B
g'
qu
N c = N c .
f'
a'
e'
45/2
b'
d'
Compute the reduced factor Nc as:
c'
Labd e
Labde
Compute the reduced factor Nq as:
N q = N q .
Aaef g
Aaefg
47
Soil Compressibility Effects on Bearing Capacity

Vesics (1973) Approach
Use of soil compressibility factors in general bearing capacity equation.

These correction factors are function of the rigidity of soil
Rigidity Index of Soil, Ir:
Ir =
Gs
tan
c + vo
Critical Rigidity Index of Soil, Icr:
I rc = 0.5.e
3.30 0.45 L
tan 45
B
B/2
vo = . ( D f + B / 2 )
Compressibility Correction Factors, cc, cg, and cq

For
For
I r I rc
I r < I rc
cc = cq = c = 1
cq = c = e
3.07.sin .log10 ( 2. I r )
B
0.6 4.4 .tan +
L
1+ sin
For = 0 cc = 0.32 + 0.12

For > 0 cc = cq
1 cq
B
+ 0.60.log I r
L
N q tan
48

Bearing Capacity PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bearing Capacity PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CE-632

Ultimate Bearing Capacity

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:

Sudden or catastrophic failure

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:

Local Shear Failure:

Common in sand or clay with medium compaction

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:

Common in fairly loose sand or soft clay

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:

Relative density of sand, Dr

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

qu .B = 2.Pp B 2 tan + ( 2.Ppc + B.c.sin ) + 2.Ppq

qu = c.N c + q.N q + 0.5 B.N

Terzaghis bearing capacity factors

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Square and circular footing:

qu = 1.3c.N c + q.N q + 0.3 B.N

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Case II: Df Dw (Df + B)

Case III: Dw > (Df + B)

No influence of water table.

Another recommendation for Case II:

Rupture depth: H = 0.5 B tan ( 45 + 2 )

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

For strip footing:

N c = 7.5 1 + 0.2 for D f > 2.5

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Effective Area Method for Eccentric Loading

IIn case off Horizontal

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

General Bearing Capacity Equation:

qu = c.N c .sc .dc .ic + q.N q .sq .d q .iq + 0.5

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

for lower value

for lower value

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Hansens Correction Factors:

d q = 1 + 2 tan . (1 sin ) tan

Hansens Recommendation for cohesive saturated soil, '=0

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

qnu = c.Nc .sc .dc .ic + q. ( N q 1) .sq .d q .iq + 0.5 .B.N .s .d .i

qnu = cu .N c .sc .d c .ic

d q = d = 1 for < 10o

as per Vesic(1973) recommendations

For square and circle,

The same as Meyerhof (1963)

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity Correlations with SPT-value