Southwest Jiaotong University

Department of Geotechnical Engineering

Foundation Engineering

Jun Feng, Ph.D.

Associate Professor
1
Chapter 7. Shallow Foundations-Settlement

2
Contents
7.1 Design Requirements
7.2 Overview of Settlement Analysis Methods
7.3 Induced Stresses Beneath Shallow Foundations
7.4 Settlement Analysis Based on Laboratory Tests
7.5 Settlement Spreadsheet
7.6 Settlement in Analysis Based on In-situ Tests
7.8 Settlement in Stratified Soils
7.9 Differential Settlement
7.10 Rate of Settlement
7.11 Accuracy of Settlement Predictions

3
7.1 Design Requirements

The geotechnical serviceability requirements for spread footings are

usually stated in terms of the allowable total settlement and the
allowable differential settlement , as follows:

▪ Total Settlement ()

  a
▪ Differential Settlement(D)
 D   Da
4
Total vs. Differential Settlement

δ=4m
δD=1.8m, ω =1/10
5
7.2 Overview of Settlement Analysis

（1）Plate Load Tests

6
7
（2）Based on Laboratory or In-situ Tests

8
7.3 Methods for Calculating Induced Stresses

 z = I (q −  zD )

9
（1）Boussinesq’s Method

10
⚫ Boussinesq’s Method

11
⚫ Pressure
Bulbs
（2）Westergaard’s Method

13
（3）Simplified Methods (Approximate)
• For circular foundations (Poulos and Davis, 1974)
  1.50
 
   
  1  
 z = 1 −    (q −  zD )
   B   
2

  1 +   
  
   2 z f   
 

• For square foundations (Poulos and Davis, 1974)

  
1.76

   
  1  
 z = 1 −    (q −  zD )
   B   
2

  1 +   
  
   2 z f   
 
14
 Simplified Methods (Approximate)
• For continuous foundations (Poulos and Davis, 1974)
  
2.60

   
  1  
 z = 1 −    (q −  zD )
   B   
2

  1 +   
  
   2 z f   
 
• For rectangular foundations (Poulos and Davis, 1974)
  
2.60 − 0.84 B / L

   
  1  
 z = 1 −  1.38 + 0.62 B / L
  (q −  zD )
   B   
  1 +  

 
   2 z f 

 
 
15
（4）Stresses in Layered Strata

E1

E2

16
7.4 Settlement Analysis Based on Laboratory
Tests

 Approach used when good quality “undisturbed” samples

can be obtained from soil
◼ Perform consolidation test
◼ Obtain Cc, Cr , e0, and ´m
◼ Perform settlement analysis
 Classical Method
◼ Based on Terzaghi’s Theory
◼ One dimensional compression

 Skempton and Bjerrum Method

◼ Considers distortion settlement
◼ Uses an adjustment factor for 3D compression

17
7.4.1 Classical Method

1）Computation of Effective Stresses

To apply Terzaghi’s theory of consolidation, we need to know both the initial
vertical effective stress, σ z0, and the final vertical effective stress, σ zf , at various
depths beneath the foundation. The values of σz0 reflect the pre-construction
conditions (i.e., without the proposed footing). We then compute σ zf using the
following equation:

18
2）Foundation Rigidity Effects

⚫ Influence of foundation rigidity on settlement.

⚫ The steel tank on the left is very flexible, so the center settles more
than the edge.
⚫ Conversely, the reinforced concrete footing on the right is very rigid,
and thus settles uniformly.

19
 Foundation Rigidity Factor

⚫ When performing settlement analyses on spread footings, we account for

this rigidity effect by computing the settlement using △σz values beneath
the center of the footing, then multiplying the result by a rigidity factor, r.
20
3）Settlement Computation

⚫ We compute the consolidation

settlement by dividing the soil
beneath the foundation into layers,
computing the settlement of each
layer, and summing.
⚫ The top of the first layer should be
at the bottom of the foundation,
and the bottom of the last layer
should be at a depth such that
△σZ<0.10 q.

21
 Thickness of Soil Sub-layers

⚫ Since strain varies nonlinearly with depth, analyses that use a large number of thin
layers produce more precise results than those that use a few thick layers. Thus,
computer analyses generally use a large number of thin layers.
⚫ However, this would be too tedious to do by hand, so manual computations
normally use fewer layers. For most soils, the guidelines in the above table should
produce reasonable results.
22
⚫ Settlement Predictions
N.C. Clays

Cc   zf 
c = r  H log 
1 + e0   z 0 

23
⚫ Settlement Predictions
O.C. Clays…… Case I

Cr   zf 
 c = r H log 
1 + e0   z 0 

24
⚫ Settlement Predictions
O.C. Clays…… Case II

Cr   c 
c = r H log 
1 + e0   z 0 
Cc   zf 
+ H log 
1 + e0   c 
Case II

25
Example 7.3

The allowable settlement for the proposed

square footing in the figure is 1 in. Using
the classical method, compute its
settlement and determine if it satisfies this
criterion. Assume the sustained load is
100 k.

26
1.5
4.5
9.0

27
7.6 Settlement Analysis based on In-Situ Tests
⚫ Techniques for estimating settlements in sands are nearly always based
on in-situ test results
⚫ In sands, settlement analysis is not performed based on consolidation
analysis
⚫ Instead, we use Equivalent Modulus of Elasticity, Es
⚫ Schmertmann method was developed primarily as a means of computing
the settlement of spread footings on sandy soils.This method was
developed from field and laboratory tests, most of which were conducted by
the University of Florida.
⚫ The Schmertmann method is based on elastic theory and calibrated using
empirical data. Schmertmann’s method is unique in that it uses a strain
distribution factor instead of a stress distribution factor to account for the
finite size of footings.
⚫ Schmertmann used a modulus, Es, which he described as the equivalent
soil modulus, which he correlated with CPT tip resistance and soil behavior.
28
7.6.1 Equivalent Modulus of Elasticity

⚫ Es from SPT Data (Table 7.4)

Es =  0 OCR + 1 N 60

29
⚫ Es from CPT Data (Table 7.3)

30
7.6.2 Strain Influence Factor

⚫ Schmertmann (1970) conducted

extensive research on the distribution of
vertical strain below spread footings.
⚫ He found the greatest vertical strains
below the center of a footing on
homogeneous sands do not occur
immediately below the footing, but at a
depth of 0.5 B to B below the bottom of
the footing, where B is the footing width.
⚫ The distribution of Iε with depth has
been idealized as two straight lines.
The peak value of the strain influence factor

q −  zD
I p = 0.5 + 0.1
 zp
31
7.6.3 Settlement Computation-Schmertmann method

I H
 = C1 C2 C3 (q −  zD )
Es

depth factor

secondary creep
factor

shape factor

32
Example 7.6

33
34
35
36
37
38
How Accurate are our Settlement Predictions?

⚫ Settlement predictions are conservative

more often than they are unconservative.
However, the range of error is quite wide.
⚫ Settlement predictions made using modulus
based methods are most accurate when
using in situ measurements to determine
modulus. Modulus determined CPT data are
much more precise than those based on the
SPT.
⚫ Settlement predictions in clays, especially
those that are overconsolidated, are usually
more precise than those in sands. However,
the magnitude of settlement in clays is often
greater.

39
Thanks!

40