Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Footings On Unreinforced Slopes: Numerical Modelling Using Geostudio
Footings On Unreinforced Slopes: Numerical Modelling Using Geostudio
Footings On Unreinforced Slopes: Numerical Modelling Using Geostudio
= (1)
Figure 6 depicts the variation of the bearing capacity factor
(N
q
) with the setback distance (D
e
) and depth of embedment of
footing (D
f
) for both experimental and numerical investigations.
It can be seen that the trend of both the curve envelopes are same
showing the increment in the bearing capacity factor with the
increased setback distance and embedment depths. However, it
is to be noted that the magnitude of N
q
obtained from the
numerical analysis are lesser than that obtained from
experimental investigations, the reason of which is explained
later in Section 5.3.
Table 3: Estimated bearing capacity factor for various location of
the footing
D
e
4B 2.5B 1B -1B -3B -5B
D
f
0B Present 145.7 154.1 158.6
Bauer 120 165 180
1B Present 174.2 175.2 179.6 182.9
Bauer 120 160 215 225
2B Present 177.8 181.8 182.2 192.5 193.6
Bauer 120 180 220 300 320
3B Present 188.5 186.4 189.5 202.1 208.3
Bauer 140 190 290 - -
Figure 6(a) Variation in bearing capacity factor (N
q
) with
setback distance [Bauer et al. (1981)]
Figure 6(b) Variation in bearing capacity factor (N
q
) with
setback distance [Present study]
5.3 Critical discussion
This paper aims to establish a correlation between the bearing
capacity factor obtained from experiment investigations by
Bauer et al. (1981) and the same obtained through numerical
analysis using Sigma/W. There is, however, a major difference
in the computational procedure as compared to the experimental
investigations. When a footing is placed in the vicinity of a
slope, its bearing capacity is affected both by the loading rate as
well as the development of the slip surface during the loading
procedure. However, the present study carries out a load-
deformation analysis without considering the slope stability of
the system. Although this may be true for footings placed far
away from the slope face, but this technique definitely induces
ambiguity in the analysis of the system for the footings placed
near the slope face. Hence, an accurate comparison cannot be
conclusively carried out for such instances. This is evident form
the deformed mesh configurations of the two typical footings as
shown in Figure 7 (footing far away from the slope) and Figure 8
(footings placed in the vicinity of the slope face). Both the
figures portray the mesh deformation solely in the vertical
direction, which is not the real scenario for footings placed near
the slope, and in such case, the slope itself should show some
outward deformation and in turn, would contribute in the
reduction of the bearing capacity.
Fig 7. Deformed mesh for a footing placed away from slope face
Fig 8. Deformed mesh for a footing placed near to the slope
A critical study of the study reported by Bauer et al. (1981)
shows it to be somewhat obscure in completely reporting the
important and relevant parameters of the experimental
investigation. The researchers did not mention about the loading
rate. The angle of internal friction of the sand had been
considered as 45 (probably based on some presumptive
correlations between the relative density of the sand and the
angle of internal friction) which is, in general practice, possibly
not achievable for dense cohesionless soil. Moreover, the elastic
parameters of the sandy soil had not been mentioned in the
literature.
In absence of all these significant parameters necessary for
the numerical modeling, the present study was carried out on
certain assumed but reasonable values, which might be different
than that used in the actual experiment. Hence, this may lead to
the difference in the results when compared to experimentally
obtained magnitudes. However, it is to be understood that since
the trend of the numerical results are in agreement with the
experimental trend (as observed in Figure 6a and 6b), the
developed model is supportive enough to justify the
National Seminar on
Geotechnique Today: Prediction, Modeling and Construction
68
experimental results, and hence, verified. This model would be
used for further investigations in future.
6 CONCLUSIONS
Even with all the above mentioned assumptions and
uncertainties, a good correlation in the trend has been between
the bearing capacity factors obtained by the experimental results
and that by the numerical analysis. From the present study, it can
be concluded that as the footing is placed away from the slope,
the bearing capacity factor increases, which is quite obvious.
However, the variation obtained depicts a more linear tendency,
contrary to the non-linear variation of the bearing capacity factor
obtained by Bauer et al. (1981) through the experiments, which
may be attributed to the reasons stated earlier. The efficacy of
the numerical model developed has been verified and found to
be qualitatively agreeing with the experimental investigations.
7 REFERENCES
Bauer G.E., Shields D.H., Scott J.D. and Gruspier J.E. (1981)
Bearing Capacity of Footing in Granular Slope, Proc. 11
th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2: 33-
36.
Gemperline M.C. (1988) Centrifuge Modelling of Shallow
Foundation, Proc. ASCE Spring Convention, ASCE: 45-70.
GeoStudio. (2007) GeoSlope Int. Ltd.
Huy N.Q., Tal A.F.V. and Holscher P. (2006) Laboratory
Investigation of Loading Rate in Sand, Technical Report,
Geoscience and civil engineering department, Delft
University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.
Meyerhof G.G. (1957) The Ultimate Bearing Capacity of
Foundation on Slopes, Proc. 4
th
International Conference on
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, I: 384-386.
Mizuno T., Tokumitsu Y. and Kawakami H. (1960) On the
Bearing Capacity of a Slope on Cohesionless Soil, Japanese
Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 1(2):
30-37.
Murthy V.N.S. (2003) Geotechnical Engineering: Principles and
Practices of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, USA.
Saran S., Sud V.K. and Handa S.C. (1989) Bearing Capacity of
Footings Adjacent to Slopes, J. Geotechnical Engineering,
ASCE, 115(4): 553-573.
Shields D.H., Scott J.D., Bauer G.E., Deschenes J.H. and
Barsvary A.K. (1977) Bearing Capacity of Foundation near
Slopes, Proc. 10
th
International Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 2:
715-720.