2.

Bearing Capacity &

Shallow Foundation

11/18/2015 1
 Different Shallow Foundations Examples

11/18/2015 2
 Foundations

• A foundation is that part of a structure which transmits loads

directly to the underlying soil.
• This section is concerned with the bearing capacity of soil on
which foundations are supported
• The are two possible approaches to foundation design,

-The permissible stress method, as used in BS 8004:1986

-The limit state method, on which Eurocode 7 (EC7) is based

11/18/2015 3
Permissible Stress Methods( used a lumped factor of safety)

• A lumped factor of safety, Fs of the order of 2 to 3 or more, is used to

ensure that foundation loads are significantly less than the shear
strength of the supporting soil and that settlements are not
excessive.
• The relatively high value of the singular factor of safety allows for:
─ uncertainties in load conditions and the likeliness of
unfavourable conditions
─ uncertainties in soil conditions and parameters ( extent of
investigation)
─ consequences of failure
─ uncertainties in analysis methods ( mode of failure, water
table location, etc.)
11/18/2015 4
 Limits state Methods (used partial factors of safety)

Aims at ensuring that all relevant performance requirements

are satisfied under all conceivable circumstances:
• Ultimate Limit State - concerned with collapse and major damage
• Serviceability Limit States – concerned with serviceability and
minor damage
• Design is based on partial factors of safety for each element in the
calculations, for example:
─ Dead loads *1.0
─ Live (variable) loads *1.3
─ c’ ÷1.6
─ tan’ ÷1.25
─cᵤ ÷ 1.4

11/18/2015 5
Foundations

• The following limit states should be considered as

appropriate. Both ultimate limit states and serviceability limit
states must be satisfied.
Ultimate limit states
1. Bearing resistance failure caused by shear failure of the
supporting soil
2. Loss of overall stability due to the development of a deep slip
surface within the supporting soil
3. Failure by sliding under inclined or lateral loading
4. Combined soil/structure failure or structural failure of the
foundation element

11/18/2015 6
Foundations
Examples of ultimate limit states for footings

11/18/2015 7
 Foundations

Serviceability limit states

1. Excessive settlement ( or heaving):
excessive angular distortion
2. Vibration resulting in unacceptable
effects such as settlement and soil
liquefaction

11/18/2015 8
Design Considerations

Footing Design

• Bearing resistance

• Settlement

• Sliding Resistance

• Overturning (eccentricity)

• Overall Stability (slope stability)

11/18/2015 9
 Foundations

11/18/2015 10
 Terzaghi’s Theory of Bearing Capacity
• When the footing load (P ) is
increased, a pressure triangle ( wedge)
is formed below the footing which
would be pressed down. The soil on
the sides would get pushed upward.

• At failure, soil from the sides of the

footing may be heaved.

• If there is a larger surcharge, or the

dimension d increase, the soil will be
locked in and the bearing capacity
would increases. It is possible to
increase the bearing capacity of a
footing by increasing d.
11
 Terzaghi’s Theory of Bearing Capacity

11/18/2015 12
 Terzaghi’s Theory of Bearing Capacity

• Bearing Capacity Failure

How do we estimate the

maximum bearing pressure

that the soil can withstand before

failure occurs?

11/18/2015 13
 Terzaghi’s Theory of Bearing Capacity

• There is no method in obtaining the ultimate bearing capacity of

the foundation other than estimation
• The most popular – Terzaghi equations

• Assumption made:
─ Foundation is very rigid in comparison to the soil
─ Only consider shallow foundation (D≤ B)
─Bottom of foundation is sufficiently rough (≠smooth) - so that
no sliding occurs between the foundation and the soil
─ Soil beneath the foundation is homogeneous semi-
infinity mass

11/18/2015 14
 Terzaghi’s Theory of Bearing Capacity

• There are frictions and cohesions which exist between the

base and the soil

• These frictions and cohesions prevent failure wedge from

occurring underneath foundation

11/18/2015 15
Bearing Capacity Failure

Types/Modes of Failure

• General shear failure

• Local shear failure

• Punching shear failure

11/18/2015 16
 Mode of Failure
General Shear Failure
• Continuous failure surface develops between edges of the footing and the
ground surface
• As the pressure is increased towards the qf, state of plastic equilibrium is
reached initially in the soil around the edges of the footing, then gradually
spreads downwards and outhwards.
• Ultimately the state of plastic equilibrium is fully developed throughout
the soil above the failure surface.

• Therefore heave occurs on both sides of the footing although the final slip
movement would occur only on one side accompanied by tilting of the
footing
• Tilting of the foundation is not expected

• Typical failure mode for soil of low compressibility (dense/silt soil)

• Well defined in the qf (ultimate bearing capacity)
11/18/2015 17
 Mode of Failure

General Shear Failure

11/18/2015 18
 Mode of Failure
Local Shear Failure
• Significant compression of the soil under the footing and only
partial development of the state of plastic equilibrium.
• Slight heaving occurs
• Associated with compressibility soil (very soft, soft soil, very
loose, loose)
• Characterized by the occurrence of relatively large settlement,
qf not clearly defined

11/18/2015 19
 Mode of Failure
Local Shear Failure

11/18/2015 20
 Mode of Failure
Punching Shear Failure
• Occurs when there is relatively high compression of soil under
footing, accompanied by shearing in the vertical direction
around the edges of the footing

• No heaving of the ground surface and no tilting of the footing

• Large settlement with no failure plane and cause vertical

movement

• qf is not well defined

• Depends on the compressibility of the soil and depth of

foundation
11/18/2015 21
 Mode of Failure
Punching Shear Failure

11/18/2015 22
 Comparison of Modes of Failure

(a) General shear, (b) local shear and (c) punching shear
11/18/2015 23
 Failure Under a Shallow Strip Footing

Mechanism analysed by Terzaghi

11/18/2015 24
 Failure Under a Shallow Strip Footing

Mechanism analysed by Terzaghi

11/18/2015 25
 Shallow Foundation

Typical
Buried
Footing

Equivalent
Surface
Footing

11/18/2015 26
27
 Shallow Foundation

• Similar terms occur in all bearing capacity expressions.

They are functions of the friction angle and
− cohesion
− the surcharge applied to the soil surface
− the density (self weight) of the soil
11/18/2015 28
 Shallow Foundation

• The ultimate bearing capacity of the soil under a shallow strip

footing can be expressed as:
• expressed

• The terms Nq ,Nc and Nγ are known as the bearing capacity

factors
• Value can be determined from equations, charts or tables

11/18/2015 29
 Bearing Capacity Factors

11/18/2015 30
 Effect of Foundation Shape

• Continuous strip footing

• Square footing

• Circular footing

11/18/2015 31
 Allowable Bearing Capacity Equation

 The allowable bearing capacity, qa is the value used in the

design of footing size
 In North America, a factor of safety against general shear
failure, F is applied to the ultimate bearing capacity, qf :

 In Britain, india, etc., F is not applied to the surcharge:

11/18/2015 32
 Bearing Capacity Equation

The allowable pressure:

The gross allowable load:

The net ultimate bearing capacity:

The net allowable bearing capacity:

The net gross allowable load:

11/18/2015 33
 Example 1

Determine short term and long term ultimate capacity given

11/18/2015 34
 Equivalent surface footing

Short term – Undrained ( total stress) analysis

Position of water table not important – soil must be satured

11/18/2015 35
11/18/2015 36
Short term capacity

11/18/2015 37
Long term capacity

Effective stress (fully drained) analysis

11/18/2015 38
11/18/2015 39
 Long term capacity

11/18/2015 40
 Example 2

A square footing is shown. The footing will carry a gross

mass of 30,000kg. Using a factor of safety of 3,
determine the size of footing, B.

11/18/2015 41
11/18/2015 42
11/18/2015 43
 General bearing capacity equation
• Previous equations for bearing capacity do not consider
other factors such as
• Depth of foundation
• Inclination factors
• Base factors
• Ground factors
• Hansen 1970 proposed the following semi-empirical
equation for ultimate bearing capacity
q  cNcs d i b g  qNqs d i b g  0.5Bs d i b g
ult c c c c c q q q q q

• The detail of the general bearing capacity equation for

various authors is given in the separate sheets.

11/18/2015 44
Comparison of Terzaghi’s, Meyerhof’s and Hansen’s bearing
capacity theories ( Cerato, 2005)

11/18/2015 45
11/18/2015 46
11/18/2015 47
11/18/2015 48
11/18/2015 49
 General shear failure versus local shear failure
General shear failure (gsf) vs. Local shear failure (lsf)

• For General shear failure the bearing capacity equation is

solved for c and 

• For local shear failure the same equation may be used, but
with modified soil strength parameters, as follows:

11/18/2015 50
 Effective Stress Analysis

• Effective stress analysis is needed to assess the long term foundation

capacity.
• Total and effective stresses are identical if the soil is dry. The
analysis is identical to that described above except that the
parameters used in the equation are c’ , ’ , γdry rather than cu, u, γsat
• If the water table is at a depth exceeding 1.5B ( the footing width)
below the base of the footing the water can be assumed to have no
effect.

11/18/2015 51
 Effective Stress Analysis
• If the soil below the base of the footing is saturated, the
analysis must account for the water pressures.

• The effective bearing capacity

• The effective surcharge

• The effective (submerged)unit weight

11/18/2015 52
 Effect Stress Analysis

As before a general expression can be written with the form:

The Bearing Capacity Factors are identical to those from

Total Stress Analysis

Note that the total bearing capacity qf = q’f + uo

11/18/2015 53
Bearing Capacity when Groundwater Present
• Groundwater reduces the density due to buoyancy.
• When groundwater is present, the density of the soil needs to
be modified.
• It is assumed that the angle between the stress triangle and the
footing is:

11/18/2015 54
 Bearing Capacity when Groundwater Present
• The equivalent density of soil γe depends on whether
groundwater is present.
• If groundwater is within the stress triangle, the equivalent density
of the:

11/18/2015 55
 Analysis so far…..
Analysis has so far considered:
• Soil strength parameters
• Rate of loading (drained or undrained)
• Groundwater conditions (dry or saturated)
• Foundation shape (strip footing, square or circle)
• Inclined loading
• Eccentric loading
• Embedment (D/B> 1)

Other important factors include:

• Soil compressibility
• Non-homogeneous soil
11/18/2015 56
 Effect Stress Analysis

• In practice the Terzaghi factors are still widely used.

• The bearing capacity equation assumes that the effects of c’,

γ and  can be superimposed.

• This is not correct as there is an interaction between the three

effects because of the plastic nature of the soil response.

11/18/2015 57
 Effect Stress Analysis
• The formula give the ultimate bearing capacity.

• Significant deformations and large settlements may occur

before general bearing failure occurs.

• Local failure ( yield) will occur at some depth beneath the

footing at a load less than the ultimate collapse load.

• The zone of plastic (yielding) soil will then spread as the load
is increased. Only when the failure zone extends to the surface
will a failure mechanism exist.

• A minimum load factor of 3 against ultimate failure is usually

adopted to keep settlements within acceptable bounds, and to
avoid problems with local failure.
11/18/2015 58
 Total Stress Analysis u=0

11/18/2015 59
 Example 3

• A footing 2.25 Χ 2.25m is located at a depth of 1.5m in a sand,

the shear strength parameters to be used in design being c’ = 0
and ’= 300. Determine the ultimate bearing capacity:

a) if the water table is well below foundation level, and

b) if the water table is at that surface

The unit weight of the sand above the water table is 18kN/m3;
the saturated unit weight is 20kN/m3

11/18/2015 60
 For a square footing the ultimate bearing capacity ( with c=0) is
given by:

When the water table is at the surface, the ultimate bearing capacity is
given by

11/18/2015 61
 Bottom heave into excavations

11/18/2015 62
 Bottom heave into excavations

11/18/2015 63
 Example 5

Along braced excavation in soft clay is 4m wide and 8m deep.

The saturated unit weight of the clay is 20kN/m3 and the
undrained shear strength adjacent to the bottom of the
excavation is given by cu= 40kN/m2 and (u =0). Determine
the factor of safety against base failure of the excavation.

11/18/2015 64
11/18/2015 65
 Bearing capacity from building codes

• The codes give soil types and respective allowable bearing

capacity
• Some values may subject to modification under design
conditions
• Allowable bearing capacity [qa] for the foundation’s footing
within B ≤ 2m and Df ≤ 3m are given In following table

11/18/2015 66
 Bearing capacity from building codes

11/18/2015 67
 Bearing capacity from building codes

• [qa] (kPa) for cohesionless soils

• The values obtained from building codes in the case of

cohesionless soil depend upon relative density Dr (dense,
medium dense, loose), type of soil ( coarse sand and
gravels, medium sand, fine sand, silt sand) and location of
ground water.

11/18/2015 68
 Bearing capacity from building codes

11/18/2015 69
 Bearing capacity from building codes

• From previous bearing capacity formulas, we can see that:

• When the width of foundation B, the depth Df and the soil
parameters (c and ) are increased, bearing capacity is also
increased.

• Therefore, when B > 2 m and Df > 3m (but Df/B <4), the

allowable bearing capacity in above tables [qa] has to be
modified as follows, and we get

11/18/2015 70
 Bearing capacity from building codes

• qa = [qa] +k1γ1 (B-2) +k2γ2 (Df – 3)

• qa: is corrected (modified) allowable bearing capacity
• [qa]: Is allowable bearing capacity from above table
• B: width of footing when B < 2 m, use B = 2 m
• When B > 10 m, use B = 10 m
• Df : depth of foundation, When Df < 3 m, use Df = 3 m
• γ1 : Unit eight of foundation soil
• γ2 : Unit weight of overburden soil mass. Use average unit
weight if different types of soil
• Use submerged unit weight if the foundation is permeable
and is under water (water level is on ground surface).
11/18/2015 71
 Bearing capacity from building codes

• For Impermeable foundation use

• use γ2 which is saturated unit weight (water table is on
ground surface)
• K1 and k2 are respectively width B and depth Df correction
coefficients

11/18/2015 72
 Bearing capacity from building codes

11/18/2015 73
 Soil parameters for foundation design
The relevant soil parameters including strength (cu ,c’ & ’ ),
compressibility ( Cc, Cs or mv) and consolidation (cv) parameters
may be determined from laboratory or in-situ test data.

Laboratory tests
• Test should preferably be done on undisturbed samples of the
supporting soil at stress levels relevant to the expected foundation
loads
• Test commonly performed include:
-Shear box
-Triaxial Shear
-Vane Shear
-Consolidometer/ Oedometer
11/18/2015 74
 Soil parameters for foundation design
In-situ tests
• When it becomes difficult to sample undisturbed and
representative samples, especially in sand, the designer has to
resort to in-situ tests in order to estimate design parameters.
• Tests commonly used are:
- Plate load Tests (PLT)
-Dynamic Cone Penetration Test ( DPT)
-Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
-Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

11/18/2015 75