This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Jignesh V Chokshi, L&T Sargent & Lundy Limited, Vadodara, India
For analysis of isolated rectangular footings with large bi-axial eccentricity, an accurate and efficient numerical approach satisfying all equilibrium conditions and suitable on computers is presented in this paper. Microsoft Excel, a cogent tool globally used by structural engineers, under its VBA programming environment is chosen for programming the numerical approach and graphically displaying input and results. A generalized program dealing with any conditions of eccentricities–zero eccentricity, one-way eccentricity or two-way eccentricity– is developed for analysis of rectangular footings. Several examples, with different eccentricity conditions are chosen to investigate accuracy of results and verify performance of the numerical approach implemented in the program. Introduction The bearing pressure distribution for rigid isolated footing resting on soil subjected to axial load and bending moments can be obtained by,
p := P A + Mx Ix z+ Mz Iz x
....................................................……………………...……..(1) In the equation 1, p = Bearing pressure under footing base at point (x, z), P = Axial Load; A = Area of Footing, Mx, Mz = Moment about X–axis and Z–Axis respectively, Ix, Iz = Moment of Inertia of footing about X–axis and Z–axis respectively and, x, z = Coordinates of point at which bearing pressure is to be calculated. From the above, eccentricity of loading for footing can be derived as,
Figure 1: Footing Geometry
ex = Eccentricity along X-axis from center of gravity of footing = Mz / P ez = Eccentricity along Z-axis from center of gravity of footing = Mx / P For isolated rectangular footings, called footings now onwards, when the loading point k(ex, ez) lies in middle third of the footing, called Kern (shaded area in Fig. 1), magnitude of p is positive and the soil below footing is said to be in compression. However, if loading point lies outside the Kern, magnitude of p at few locations in the footing is negative and that portion of footing is said to be in tension. Since, there exists no mechanism between soil and footing to
It is also necessary to keep sufficient area of footing remaining in contact with soil and bearing pressure not exceeding the allowable bearing pressure of the soil. Footings with one-way eccentricity.resist the tensile stresses. for footings with two-way eccentricity ex and ez outside Kern. for static equilibrium to occur. However. ez within kern area – Compression on entire base of footing 2. it is imperative to ensure satisfactory Factor of Safety against overturning. Position of Neutral Axis For footings with loading point outside Kern. ex = 0 and ez = 0 . either ex or ez outside kern. In the available literature. some portion of footing will remain unstressed and the force equilibrium will occur in the area of footing which remains in contact with soil. it is assumed that pressure varies linearly. 1. A numerical approach is described in the paper. ez outside kern – Two-way eccentricity It shall be noted that. Eccentricity Conditions For a footing. However. ez outside kern – One-way eccentricity along Z axis 4. ex > Lx/6 and ez =0 . The portion outside line of zero pressure will be completely unstressed and is called footing uplift area. large area of footing will remain unstressed and hence. bearing pressure at different points of footing will be modified and the line of zero stresses will shift towards loading point. tables or charts are cumbersome to implement and the information is very brief. Equilibrium Conditions In analysis of eccentrically loaded footings. for computer implementation of footing design process. the solution is not as simple as that for one-way eccentricity. there will be significant shift of initial neutral axis to its final position. or ex. The initial position of neutral axis can be obtained by connecting a line between two points having zero stresses on adjacent or opposite edges. The points of zero pressure on footing edges can be obtained by substituting p = 0 and appropriate coordinate of footing edges in Eq. ex outside kern – One-way eccentricity along X axis 3. 3 and 4 produces tension on some portion of the footing. solution to the problem is simple. ex > 0 and ez > 0 . To automate the footing design process on computer. possible eccentricity conditions can be enumerated as follows: 1. a numerical approach is the best choice. ex = 0 and ez > Lz/6 . charts and related equations. Volume of bearing pressure envelope shall be equal to the applied load P. conditions 2. Roark  provides tables and Peck  mentions an iterative method for footing with two-way eccentricity. Hence. Thus. following equilibrium conditions must comply. 1. ex. CG of bearing pressure envelope shall coincide with location of applied load P. Under these circumstances. In this approach. For footings having large eccentricities. Teng  shows graphical method. . the pressure will vary from negative to positive below footing base. 2. the stability of footing demands special attention. the footing is rigid and the effect of soil displacement has no effect on the pressure distribution. which solves this problem with tangible accuracy.
Ix. Calculate the center of gravity of pressure diagram envelope. The numerical procedure essentially works as follows: 1. Pressure at B & C = 0. Programming Strategy The solution methods suggested in the literature are very brief and do not explain a detailed procedure for implementation of the solution technique on digital computer. Case 1: No neutral axis – Compression case (Fig. Pressure at A= Pressure at D Case 7: Neutral Axis parallel to X-axis. Compare values of P. Lx. Figure 2: Positions of Neutral Axis 5. (P. C & D. For a given size of footing and loading. Hence. B. C and D = 0 Case 6: Neutral Axis parallel to Z-axis. following positions of neutral axis can be envisaged. Lz) 2. ez) 3. Iz. and ez obtained in step 6 and 7 with input parameters. Pressure at B and C = 0 Case 4: One end on BC and other end on AD.(A. 1) Case 2: One end on BC and other end on CD.As shown in Figures 1 and 2. pressure etc. et. Calculate the geometrical properties of footing. 6. ex. Mx. Calculate the pressure at corners A. for effective solution.  is adopted and implemented to obtain faster and accurate solution. 4. Numerical Approach One can imagine that it is almost impossible to obtain a unified mathematical equation that solves all of the above-defined cases. For selected neutral axis. the numerical approach is necessary. Obtain initial position of neutral axis for problems having tension on the corners. alter the position of neutral axis and repeat step 5 to step 8. Read size of footing and loading. Pressure at C = 0 Case 3: One end on AB and other end on CD. Mz. ex. Pressure at B. Calculate the volume of pressure diagram envelope. Pressure at A= Pressure at B Cases 2 through 5 are for footing with two-way eccentricity and cases 6 and 7 are for footing with one-way eccentricity. 7. Al. about neutral axis for portion of footing that remains in contact with soil. 8. calculate geometric properties. If difference is too large. A systematic . Pressure at C & D = 0. the numerical approach suggested by Peck. Pressure at C and D = 0 Case 5: One end on AB and other end on AD.
the iterations are performed in two phases. Calculate volume and CG of pressure envelop of polygon ABGHD using properties of triangle and tetrahedron. b2 for corner B and b4 for corner D normal to neutral axis EJ. Calculate geometrical properties. lies within the band bounded by three positions of neutral axis. ex and ez is found within acceptable limits. triangle EBG and triangle HDJ. 1. Igh = I(∆EAJ) – I(∆EBG) – I(∆HDJ). and center of gravity of pressure envelop with ex and ez. Calculate percentage error in the achieved solution. Compare volume of polygon with applied load P. Calculate moment of inertia of polygon ABGHDA about its base GH using. parallel to EJ. necessary changes are taken care in the generalized program. will be moved. 13. If the numerical error is more than acceptable limit. In cases 2 to 7. Read size of footing and applied forces. 2 to know initial position of neutral axis. find out the lower-most and upper-most position of EJ. the solution band is bounded by a polygon connected between points E1. This results in storage of three positions of line EJ. 7. 6 and 7. the problem is restricted to triangle EAJ. It can be inferred that the true solution. eccentricities and pressures at each corner of footing. 3. ex and ez is within acceptable limit. E2. 2. simply solve the problem using known method. 12. Now. calculate distance Z of loading point K. distance b1 for corner A. Figure 3 shows the location of line EJ where individual error for P. 3. This means that. 11. The strategy described here is for case 2.numerical procedure is described here demonstrating each component of the programming implemented for the solution of the problem. 10. 4. 14. select another axis EJ at next step and repeat step 8 to 12. line EJ . error for only one of P.the neutral axis. Extend point G on edge AB to locate point E and extend point H on edge AD to locate point J. J1 and J2. ex and ez is simultaneously within acceptable limits. Establish the acceptable numerical error in results and limit of number of iterations. For cases 2 to 5. Terminate further iterations when these three positions of line EJ are traced. at any of these three positions. pressure at C = 0. the unique position Figure 3: Solution Band of line EJ where numerical error for P. As shown in Fig. Select appropriate step for iteration. Microsoft Excel with its powerful VBA support is selected for implementing the numerical procedure on computer. Store the positions of neutral axis when individual error for P. 9. 8. To extract the solution band limits. 5. In the first phase. For cases 1. This completes the first phase of iterations where line EJ is moved parallel to initial neutral axis. Identify the pressure case of footing from Fig. ex or ez will be within acceptable limits. towards point K in subsequent iterations. 6. In this method. Calculate pressure at points A. B and D using pi = ( P x Z x bi ) / ( Igh ). For each position of neutral axis EJ. . For other cases. find out the position of points G and H on appropriate edges of footing where p=0.
At this point. ex and ez. all simultaneously. the accuracy of the first instance of solution is acceptable for all practical purposes. 4 or 5. the program abandons further iterations within J2 and J1 and new pivot point within E1 and E2 is selected. E2 on right. The footing area is divided into many small parts to produce refined bearing pressure diagram. Kern. 3) position of final neutral axis. over the footing surface. 18. 3). the numerical errors for P. Extensive effort is put on the graphical presentation of input and results. ex and ez is within limits simultaneously. The program constantly monitors the case of current neutral axis and calculates required properties accordingly. Footing Geometry: Size of footing. the point E1 is pivoted first and second point of neutral axis is altered from J2 to J1 with appropriate step size. While iterating within J2 to J1. loading point. 16. initial neutral axis and final neutral axis. the position of line EJ may represent case 3. if the solution diverges. However. all steps to find out volume of pressure diagram and CG of pressure envelope are repeated as explained earlier. with other end from J2 to J1 until the true solution is found. the objective is to find the position of EJ where error for P. origin. At every position of neutral axis during the iterations. a slightly larger band shall be used than originally extracted. the numerical errors for P. If the solution is not converged with the selected pivot. essential results such as pressures at A.15. ex and ez are calculated to monitor the convergence and limit on number of iterations is also verified at each step. The entire range from E1 to E2 will be pivoted during these iterations. shall be within allowable limits. 19. ex and ez. 6) maximum pressures at corners and 7) numerical difference in recovering P. the position of line EJ may get changed from one case to another. It shall be noted that. and hence. uplift area. For true solution to occur. . For example. J1 downward and J2 upward before initiating second phase of iterations. it is imperative that for a particular position of neutral axis within solution band. It is found that the results of other positions do not vary much for the desired accuracy. then pivot E1 is shifted at the next step towards E2. 2. Bearing Pressure Diagrams: 2D and 3D presentation of contours showing variation of pressure. B and D. the following output is generated: 1) The input parameters. Extraordinary features of Excel chart options are explored and the graphical features of the program includes: 1. The same is implemented in programming by slightly shifting point E1 on left. Here. solution search is an iterative process. 2) position of initial neutral axis. 4) effective compression area. during subsequent iterations. Since. Also. 17. it is expected that there may be other positions of final neutral axis. In the second phase. Results and Graphics Interface After successful execution of the program. during iterations. at the beginning of the iterations. It was observed that to achieve a tangible accuracy of 99 percentage or better. the position of line EJ may be representing case 2. after equilibrium conditions are met. position of final neutral axis are reported by the program. The very first instance of such convergence is reported and further iterations are abandoned. 5) load and loading point coordinates recovered. The second phase of iterations within the newly formulated solution band is initiated by assuming the neutral axis as a line joining points E1 and J2 (see Fig.
Graphical representation of footing geometry and pressure distribution diagrams for examples 1. Table 1 Verification Problems and Comparison of Results Problem No Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 Geometry and Load Data P 278.00 3.00 Lz 5.00 Mz 250.00 160.00 -512.00 0.00 Mx 278.450 0.2505 0.0804 ex 0.8 1249.0 333.200 4. 2.07 66.200 0.500 0.00 400. The results were compared with input data and not with solution obtained from any other reference.0 1500.00 0.0000 0.9 percentage or better for all problems under investigation.150 Bearing Pressure at Corners (Before Modification of Pressure) PA 28. 4.0000 0.47 0.0000 946 3 1067 3 The use of Excel with its VBA environment is phenomenally user friendly and endorses the structural engineers’ acceptance of Excel as a cogent tool for automating structural design work processes.624 2.200 4. use of Excel is found highly efficient.125 2.0 4000.050 0.9% is achieved.Verification Examples Many practical examples were selected to validate results produced by the program and monitor accuracy of the numerical approach presented here.50 2.00 6.72 308.888 as % of (Lx x Lz) Contact Area 77.0 2000.18 -100. The table also demonstrates number of iterations performed to solve the problem and run time taken on PC with P4 -1.09 52.0000 1.899 1.0 750.0020 0.75 PC -10.7500 0.50 2.976 1.0 1500.00 32.0822 0.00 50.8984 1.48 245.85 52.00 2.00 0.0020 P’A 32.0 5.0 3000.077 2.0126 0.0 0.75 PB 12.150 0.41 360.85 -47.25 PD 6.00 Lx 6. The time taken for finding the solution is computationally economical for incredible accuracy achieved.36 Comparison of Results Precovered 277.300 0.0088 0.50 5.00 -95.56 0.50 2813.250 0.3831 0.00 395.0 150.0 1250.0219 0. the numerical approach presented here can be effectively implemented to automate the footing analysis and design.00 256.01 14.0737 Run Time Data Iterations 1245 640 2081 673 Time 7 3 9 3 (Sec) (Units kN and m) 2000.00 4.2000 ezrecovered 1.0000 0.00 5.0008 0.0838 ez 0.0640 0.000 0.923 d 2.75 Results obtained by Numerical Method Case 2 3 4 3 Step 0.00 0.5996 1.24 749.0652 0.00 0.00 2.5GHz processor and 512MB RAM.60 129.89 146.0000 0.1251 2.600 1.0030 0.277 0.750 0.450 ex/Lx 0. Hence.00 P’C 0.00 0.18 102.00 179.300 832.00 64.00 -416.8.14 0.00 736.1 to 4.0 2.97 1300.0876 0.300 0.57 P’D c 4.00 2000.00 1300.750 0.0 2000.385 0.00 5.0030 0.100 0.00 0.400 0.4503 (%) Error in P 0.0010 3000.0000 0.7500 0.27 exrecovered 0.8 333. .000 1.00 0.0733 0.00 1800.00 16.88 265.10 P’B 11.00 160. 3 and 5 are shown in Fig.05 -37. Note that in all problems a tangible accuracy of 99.5000 0.60 -45.00 4.0020 0.201 ez 1.513 0. Observations and Conclusions The numerical approach suggested in this paper produces impressive results having a tangible accuracy of 99.0 1500.0647 0. Table 1 shows input data and true solution for selected problems. Even for such a complex problem like footings with two-way eccentricity.300 ez/Lz 0.18 2.00 162.00 ex 0.00 5 5 0.
000198.00 1.50 -2.000 Figure 4.25 0.50 -1.50 0.25 1.00 0.00 0.00 -0.25 2.00 0.00 -3.50 2.3 : Footing Geometry Example Problem No.000-180.000 140.50 -1.50 2.000 0.25 1.75 1. 2 ( Case 3 ) Footings with Two-Way Eccentricity 3.00 2.00 0.00 -2.000 220.0 398.000-26.000 398.00 498.25 0.00 0.5 : Footing Geometry Figure 4.00 2.000 -3.000298.00 798.3D 698.000-380.50 -1.0 98.000-38.2D Y-Axis: Width of Footing (Lz) 2.00 -1.50 3.00 0.000 198.25 Points along Z Axis Points along X Axis 20.000-6.000 30.75 -1.00 X-Axis: Length of Footing (Lx) Load Point Original_NA Final NA -20.00 2.00 -3.00 3.00 -2.000-18.00 -3.000 22.000-20.000 14.000 260.000 300.50 1.75 -0.2D Y-Axis: Width of Footing (Lz) 2.000 26.50 -1.00 2.000-300.00 2.50 -1.000-60.000 340.50 -2.00 -2.00 -2.000-10.00 1.00 Footing -2.00 Base Pressure Distribution Diagram .25 -1.50 2.50 -2.00 0.000-34.000798.000-2.50 0.00 1.000 298.00 0.000 -2.00 -1.00 -1.00 -3.00 -1.1 : Footing Geometry Example Problem No.000 Figure 4. 3 (Case 4 ) Footings with Two-Way Eccentricit y 3.75 2.000 34.000-100.000-22.00 1.00 -1.00 1.0 598.000 10.00 -0.000-220.000 Y-Axis: Width of Footing (Lz) 2.00 698.000-30.00 2.0 1.50 -0.000698.00 1.000-340.00 1.25 -2.25 -0.75 -1.0 198.00 -2.00 1.00 3.50 Points along X Axis 2.00 Footing -2.50 0.0 298.00 2.000 60.00 0.00098.00 Footing -2.50 1.00 -2.00 -1.6: Bearing Presure Diagram Points along Z Axis .00 -3.000 100.000498.00 1.00 Figure 4.50 -2.50- 1.00 -1.Example Problem No.0 -2.000 180.50 0.00 -1.00 1.000 18.50 1.000-14.000 6.000 X-Axis: Length of Footing (Lx) Load Point Original_NA Final NA Figure 4.00 -3.50 0.2: Bearing Presure Diagram Base Pressure Distribution Diagram .000-140.00 -1.00 3.00- 2.50 -0.25 0.75 0.00 -2.00 -0.00 -0.00 -2.0 498. 1 ( Case 2 ) Footings with Two-Way Eccentricity 3.000 598.000 98.00 2.50 3.00 -1.000-260.00 Final NA X-Axis: Length of Footing (Lx) Load Point Original_NA Figure 4.000598.50 1.4: Bearing Presure Diagram Base Pressure Distribution Diagram .000398.00 0.00 -0.0 -3.50 0.
New Jersey..7 : Footing Geometry Figure 4.0 1100.0 -2.00 0. .25 0..0 -100. New Jersey.00 0.000 -2.000300.25 0.00 -2. John Wiley and Sons.25 -2.0002700.00 -1.0 1500.0003100.00 1. C.. G.50 0. B.50 -1. C. Roark’s Formulas for Stress and Strain. Gujarat.25 0.Example Problem No.75 2.0 300. E.0 700.8: Bearing Presure Diagram Acknowledgement I thank my company M/s.000 1100.000-0.75 1. 7th Edition.75 -0.000 Y-Axis: Width of Footing (Lz) 2.25 1. References 1.. Peck R. L&T Sargent and Lundy Limited.00 3.. 2nd Edition.00 Footing 700. Englewood cliffs.000 1500.75 -1.000 -100.000 1.0002300.00 -0. and Thornburn W.00 -1. H. Vadodara.00 -3.25 2.00 0.50 1900. McGraw Hill.00 2700.00 2.00 1.00 -1.0001900. Foundation Design.0 2300.000 2300.50 -1. Prentice-Hall Inc. Foundation Engineering.00 2. Teng W.00 Final NA X-Axis: Length of Footing (Lx) Load Point Original_NA Figure 4. 3. India.25 -1. Englewood cliffs. Young W.50 -2.50 1.3D 2700.000 700.00 -3. and Budynas R. for the support.00 3100.50 -0. encouragement and providing computational facilities for this programming work. 5 (Case 5 ) Footings with Two-Way Eccentricit y 3.0 1900. 2.00 Base Pressure Distribution Diagram . New York..0 1.0001100. Hanson W.0001500.25 300.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.