Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Standard view
Full view
of .
×
0 of .
Results for:
P. 1
soil - chapter 13

# soil - chapter 13

Ratings: (0)|Views: 48|Likes:

### Availability:

See More
See less

03/05/2013

pdf

text

original

CHAPTER
13
SHALLOW
FOUNDATION
II:
SAFE
BEARING
PRESSURE
AND
SETTLEMENT CALCULATION
13.1
INTRODUCTION
Allowable
and Safe Bearing
Pressures
The methods of calculating the ultimate bearing capacity of soil have been discussed at length inChapter 12. The theories used in that chapter are based on shear failure criteria. They do notindicate the settlement that a footing may undergo under the ultimate loading conditions. From the
known
ultimate bearing capacity obtained
from
any one of the theories, the allowable bearingpressure can be obtained by applying a suitable factor of safety to the ultimate value.Whenwedesignafoundation,wemustseethatthestructureis
safe
on twocounts. They are,
1.
Thesupporting soil shouldbe
safe from
shear failuredue to theloads imposedon it by thesuperstructure,2. The settlement of the foundation should be within permissible limits.Hence, we have to deal with two types of bearing pressures. They are,
1.
A
pressure that
is
safe
from
shear failure criteria,2. A pressure that is safe
from
settlement criteria.For the sake of convenience, let us call the
first
the
allowable bearing pressure
and the second
the
safe
bearing
pressure.
In
all our design, we use only the net bearing pressure and as such we call
q
na
the
netallowable bearing pressure
and
q
s
the net safe bearing pressure. In designing a foundation, we use
545

546
Chapter
13
the least of the two bearing pressures. In Chapter 12 we learnt that
q
na
is obtained by applying a
suitable
factor
of
safety (normally
3) to the net
ultimate bearing capacity
of
soil.
In
this chapter
wewill
learn how to obtain
q
s
.
Even without knowing the values of
q
na
and
q
s
,
it is possible to say fromexperience which of the two values should
be used in design
based upon the composition anddensity
of
soil
and the
size
of the
footing.
The
composition
and
density
of the
soil
and the
size
of the
footing
decide the relative values of
q
na
and
q
s
.
The
ultimate bearing capacity
of
footings
on
sand increases with
an
increase
in the
width,
and
in
the
same
way the
settlement
of the
footing increases with increases
in the
width.
In
other words
for
a
given settlement
5
p
the
corresponding
unit
soil pressure
decreases
with
an
increase
in the
width of the
footing.
It is
therefore, essential
to
consider that settlement will
be the
criterion
for the
design
of
footings
in
sand beyond
a
particular size. Experimental evidence indicates that
forfootings
1.20
m,
the allowable bearing pressure
q
is the criterion for the design
of
footings, whereas settlement
is the
criterion
for
footings greater than
1.2 m
width.The bearing capacity of footings on clay is independent of the size of the footings and as such
the
unit bearing pressure remains theoretically constant
in a
particular environment. However,
the
settlement
of the
footing increases
with
an
increase
in the
size.
It is
essential
to
take intoconsideration both the shear failure and the settlement criteria together to decide the safe bearingpressure.However, footings on
stiff
clay, hard clay, and other firm soils generally require no settlementanalysisif thedesign providesaminimum factorofsafetyof 3 on the netultimate bearing capacityof the soil. Soft clay, compressible silt, and other weak soils will settle even under moderatepressure and therefore settlement analysis is necessary.
Effect of Settlement on the Structure
If
the structure as a whole settles
uniformly
into the ground there will not be any detrimental
effect
on
the structure as such. The only effect it can have is on the service lines, such as water and
sanitary
pipe
connections, telephone and electric cables etc. which can break if the settlement isconsiderable. Such uniform settlementispossible onlyif thesubsoilishomogeneousand theload
distribution
is uniform. Buildings in Mexico City have undergone settlements as large as 2 m.However,
the
differential
settlement
if it
exceeds
the
permissible limits will have
a
devastating
effect
on the
structure.
According to experience, the
differential
settlement between parts of a structure may not
exceed75percentof thenormal absolute settlement.Thevarious waysbywhich
differential
settlementsmayoccurin astructureareshowninFig.
13.1.
Table
13.1
givestheabsoluteandpermissible differential settlements
for
various types
of
structures.Foundation settlements must be estimated with great
care
for buildings, bridges, towers,power plants
and
similar high cost structures.
The
settlements
for
structures such
as
fills,
earthdams, levees, etc. can be estimated with a
greater
margin of error.
Approachesfor Determining the Net Safe Bearing Pressure
Three
approaches may be considered for determining the net safe bearing pressure of soil. They
are,
1.
Field plate load tests,2. Charts,3.Empirical equations.

Shallow FoundationII:
Safe Bearing Pressure
and
Settlement
Calculation
547
Original position
of
column base
Differential
settlement(a)
T
H
(c)
t
^
Relative rotation,
/?
-Wall
or
panel
Tension cracks
H
Tension cracks
'
I
"—
Relative deflection,
A
^
,
,.
,Relative
sag
Deflection ratio
=
A/L Relative
hog(b)
Relative rotation,
Figure
13.1
Definitions of differential settlement for framed and load-bearing wallstructures
(after
Burland and
Wroth,
1974)
Table
13.1
a
Maximum settlements and differential settlements of buildings in cm.
(After
McDonald and Skempton,
1955)
SI.
no.
CriterionIsolated
foundations
Raft
1.
Angular distortion 1/300
2.
Greatest
differential
settlementsClays
4-5
Sands 3-25
3.
Maximum SettlementsClays
7.5Sands 5.0
1/300
4.5
3.2510.06.25

## Activity (1)

### Showing

AllMost RecentReviewsAll NotesLikes