CHAPTER 4.

BEARING CAPACITY
In fig. 4.1 is shown a strip footing, which is a shallow foundation supporting a
load-bearing wall. When establishing the area A of contact between the
foundation and the soil, two fundamental requirements must be satisfied:
- to ensure safety against the risk of shear failure of the supporting soil
(fig. 4.1 a),
- to limit the settlement s of the foundation to values allowable for the
structure and for its normal exploitation (fig. 4.1 b).

a.

b.
Fig. 4.1

The problem of bearing capacity, this chapter is dealing with, refers to the first
of the two above outlined requirements.
Bearing capacity represents the ability of a soil to carry a load.
The allowable bearing capacity is defined as the maximum pressure which
may be applied to the soil such that the two fundamental requirements are
satisfied.
The ultimate bearing capacity is defined as the least pressure which would
cause shear failure of the supporting soil immediately below and adjacent to a
foundation.
As shown in the chapter 7 (ar fi cap1), the problem of ultimate bearing
capacity is a special case of limiting or plastic equilibrium in a soil mass.
In the following paragraphs, the particular problem of the ultimate bearing
capacity of shallow foundations will be considered.
4.1 Failure modes
Present knowledge concerning the way in which failure of the soil supporting
shallow foundations takes place is based on analysis of both causes of
accidents in which various structures lost stability and interpretation of
experimental data. The experiments were conducted, in general, at small
90

scale in installations allowing to visualize the trajects followed by soil particles

during the process of gradual loading until the failure condition was reached.
On that basis, three main modes of failure were recognized, depending, in
essence, on the ground conditions.
a. general shear failure
Continuous failure surfaces develop between the edges of the footing and the
ground surface (fig. 4.2 a). As the pressure is increased towards the value of
the ultimate bearing capacity pf, the state of plastic equilibrium is reached
initially in the soil around the edges of the footing then gradually spreads
downwards and outwards. Ultimately, the state of plastic equilibrium is fully
developed throughout the soil above the failure surfaces. Heave of the
ground surface occur on both sides of the footing, although the final slip
movement would occur only on one side, accompanied by tilting of the
footing, as shown in fig. 4.1 a. The load-settlement diagram, which
accompanies this mode of failure, shown in the diagram a in fig. 4.3, puts
into evidence clearly the values of the ultimate bearing capacity p f for which
deformations increase indefinitely. The transition from the initial, quasi-linear,
part of the diagram and the point corresponding to p f is a short one.

Fig. 4.2
91

The general shear failure (sometimes named complete shear failure) is

typical for soils of low compressibility (dense sands, stiff clays) and for rocks.
b. local shear failure
In this mode of failure, there is significant compression of the soil under the
footing and only partial development of the state of plastic equilibrium. The
failure surfaces do not reach the ground surface and tilting of the foundation
is unlikely to occur. The load-settlement diagram (b in the fig. 11.3) shows
that the ultimate bearing capacity is not clearly defined and is characterized
by the occurrence of relatively large settlements. This mode of failure is
associated with soils of medium to high compressibility, (non-cohesive soils of
medium relative density, cohesive soils of medium consistency).
c. punching shear failure
This mode of failure occurs when there is compression of the soil under the
footing, accompanied by shearing in the vertical direction around the edges of
the footing. As the pressure is increased, the foundation penetrates into the
soil like a piston. There is no heave of the ground surface away from the
edges and no tilting of the footing. The load-settlement diagram (c in fig.
4.3) shows that large settlements are also characteristics to this mode of
failure and the ultimate bearing capacity, like in the case b, is not well
defined. Punching shear failure, is associated with soils of very high
compressibility such as loose sands and soft clays.

Fig. 4.3
In cases of local shear and punching shear failures, the ultimate bearing
capacity should be defined based on a deformation criterion. Available
experimental data show that settlements of shallow foundations
corresponding to a failure load are of the order of (3%...7%) B for clay soils
and of (5%...15 %) B for sands where B is the width of the foundation. Hence,
a settlement of 10% B could be adopted as a deformation criterion for any soil
92

condition in order to define pf (fig. 4.4). It follows also that plate load tests on
compressible soils should be conducted to settlements equal to at least 0.25
B, to be able to define the ultimate load from the load-settlement diagram.

Fig. 4.4
Besides the nature of the soil, the mode of failure depends also on other
factors such as:
- the depth of the foundation; punching shear failure will occur in a soil of
low compressibility, for instance dense sands, if the foundation is located
at considerable depth (deep foundation);
- the kind of loading; a dense sand subjected to cyclic loading will exhibit
punching shear failure;
- the rhythm of loading; a saturated, normally consolidated clay, exhibits a
general shear failure under a sudden loading, when no volume change
takes place, and a punching shear failure when the rhythm of applying
the load is slow and after each load stage the time required for the
consolidation of the soil is provided.
4.2 General hypothesis adopted for computing the ultimate bearing
capacity
For the computation of the ultimate bearing capacity p f the following
hypothesis are adopted:
- a continuous failure surface characteristic for the general shear failure
mode (fig. 4.5);

93

Fig. 4.5
- the failure condition f tan c is fulfilled in each point of the failure
surface;
- the shear strength of the soil between the level of the foundation and the
ground surface (part CD of the failure surface) is neglected;
- the friction between the soil above the level of the foundation and the
lateral face of the foundation (EB) is neglected;
- the friction between the soil located above and below the foundation
level (on the line BC) is neglected;
- the friction between the base of the foundation (AB) and the soil to which
it c.. in contact, is neglected.
With these hypothesis, the soil located above the foundation level is replaced
by a surcharge q = D, where D is the foundation depth.
4.3 Ultimate bearing capacity in the case of a failure surface made by
two planes
The two failure planes (fig. 4.6) have the inclinations in respect to the

horizontal of (45 o ) and (45o ) , corresponding to the development in

the mass of soil under the footing of two Rankine zones on both sides of a
imaginary, fictitious, perfectly smooth (frictionless) wall BD, namely the active
zone on the left of the wall and the passive zone on the right of the wall.

94

Fig. 4.6
Computing pf is based on expressing the active earth thrust P a behind a
vertical wall BD limited by an horizontal ground surface, on which a surcharge
pf is applied, and the passive resistance P p in front of the same wall, limited
by an horizontal ground surface on which a surcharge q = D is applied (fig.
4.7).

Fig. 4.7
Pa

1
H 2 K a pf H K a 2 c H
2

Pp

1
H2 Kp q H Kp 2c H
2

(4.1 a)

Ka

(4.1 b)

Kp

To find pf, the condition Pa = Pp is written, considering that:

H B tan (45 o ) B K p
2
Ka

1
Kp

p
1
1
H
f 2c
2
Kp Kp
pf

1
1
H Kp q Kp 2c
Kp 2

1
2
H K2
p q Kp 2c
2

Kp Kp

Kp
1
H 2c

2
Kp

1
2
B Kp K2
p Kp q Kp 2c Kp Kp
2
5
3
1
1
1
2
2
B (K p 2 K p 2 ) q K 2
p 2 c (K p K p )
2

Kp

Kp

(4.2)

95

The expression (11.2) can be put into the form:

p f q Nq c Nc

1
B N
2

(4.3)

where N q , N c , N , named bearing capacity factors, are depending on the

angle of internal friction , and have the following expressions:
5

(4.4)

N q K 2p ; N c 2 (K p 2 K p 2 ); N (K p 2 K p 2 )

4.4 Ultimate bearing capacity in the case of a curved failure surface

The problem is solved in three phases, corresponding to the following
conditions:
a. cohesionless, weightless soil ( 0; c 0; 0)
b. frictionless, weightless soil ( c 0; 0; 0 )
c. soil with weight ( 0 )
a. In the case of a soil without cohesion and weight, a suitable failure
mechanism for a strip footing is shown in fig. 4.8. The footing, of width B and
infinite length, carries a uniform pressure on the surface of a mass of
homogeneous, isotropic soil. When the pressure becomes equal to the
ultimate bearing capacity pf the footing will be pushed downwards into the soil
mass, producing a state of plastic equilibrium, in the form of an active

Rankine zone, below the footing, the angles ABC and BAC being ( 45o ).
The downward movement of the wedge ABC forces the adjoining soil
sideways, producing outward lateral forces on both sides of the wedge.
Passive Rankine zones ADE and BGF develop on both sides of the wedge

ABC, the angles DEA and GFB being ( 45o ). The transition between the
downward movement of the wedge ABC and the lateral movement of the
wedges ADE and BGF takes place through zones of radial shear ACD and
BCG. In his solution, Prandtl admits that the surfaces CD and CG are
logarithmic spirals, to which BC and ED, or AC and FG, are tangential. The
equation of the spiral is r ro e tan where is the angle between the initial
radius ro and the one corresponding to a point on the spiral; is the angle
made by the radius with the normal in any point of the spiral. A state of plastic
equilibrium exists above the surface EDCGF, the remainder of the soil mass
being in a state of elastic equilibrium.

96

Fig. 4.8
To find pf, first the equilibrium of the wedges ABC and BDE, as equilibrium of
forces on vertical direction, will be considered. Then, the equilibrium of the
transition zone BCD, as equilibrium of moments toward the point B, will be
written.
On the conjugated failure planes AC and CB are acting the reactions R I,
making an angle with the normal (fig. 4.9 a).
The equation of projection of forces on the vertical direction:

p f AB 2 R I cos ( 45o )
2

AB 2 ro cos (45 o )
2

p f 2 ro cos (45o ) 2 R I cos ( 45o )

2
2

cos (45o )
2 p r tan ( 45o )
R I p f ro
f o

2
cos (45o )
2

(4.5)

On the conjugated failure planes BD and DE are acting the reactions R III,
making an angle with the normal (fig. 11.9 b).
The equation of projection of forces on the vertical direction:
q BE 2 R III cos ( 45 o
BE 2 r1 cos ( 45 o
q 2 r1 cos ( 45 o

)
2

)
2

) 2 R III cos ( 45 o )
2
2

97


cos ( 45 o )
2 q r tan ( 45 o )
R III q r1
1

2
cos ( 45 o )
2

(4.6)

The equilibrium of the transition zone II (fig. 4.9 c) is expressed in terms of

the moment around the point B.

Fig. 4.9
The arc of the spiral CD belongs to the failure surface, therefore the reaction
RII makes an angle with the normal to the arc. Hence, the direction of R II
coincides with the direction of the radius and R II produces no moment in
respect to B. The moment equation becomes:
r
r
R I cos o R III cos 1
2
2

p f ro2 tan (45o ) q r12 tan ( 45o )

2
2

But r1 = ro

tan
e2

p f ro2 tan (45o ) q ro2 e tan tan ( 45o )

2
2

p f q e tan tan 2 ( 45o )

2

(4.7)

By writing: e tan tan 2 (45o ) N q

equation (4.7) becomes:
pf = q N q

(4.8)
98

From (11.8) follows that, in the case of a cohesionless and weightless

material, there is a bearing capacity only if there is a surcharge q.
To consider the effect of the cohesion, a normal stress equal to c cot
is added to the normal stresses p and q. The equation (11.8) becomes:
p f c cot (q c cot ) N q
p f q N q c cot ( N q 1)

By writing

(4.9)

cot ( N q 1) N c

equation (11.9) becomes:

pf = q N q + c N c
Nq and Nc are bearing capacity factors depending on

An additional term should be added to equation (4.10) to take into account

the self-weight of the soil. Experimental observations showed that a wedge of
soil remaining in elastic state, with faces making an angle with the
horizontal, is developed below the foundation and moves downwards
together the foundation, tending to produce the lateral movement of the soil
along the failure surfaces CDE and CFG (fig. 4.10). The passive resistance of
the soil mass above the failure surfaces is mobilized. The problem consists
on computing the passive resistance force Pp of a mass of soil ( 0, 0 ),
limited by a horizontal ground surface, behind a wall BC with inclination
and height H =

B
tan .
2

Fig. 4.10
The failure surface CDE is made of the line DE, corresponding to the passive
Rankine zone BDE, and by the arc of logarithmic spiral CD.
99

The passive resistance force Pp can be expressed:

Pp

1
1 B2
1
H2 Kp
tan 2 K p B 2 tan 2
2
2
4
8

(4.11)

The equilibrium of the elastic wedge ABC:

Q 2 Pp cos ( )

(4.12)

The ultimate bearing capacity is:

pf

Q 2Pp
2 B 2 tan 2 cos ( )

cos ( )

B
B
8B

1
1
B tan 2 cos ( ) BN
4
2

(4.13)

The following notation was used:

N

1
tan 2 cos ( )
2

Terzaghi assumed that and obtained the value of the passive

resistance force in the hypothesis of a curved failure surface.
Adding the additional term bringing the effect of the self-weight of the soil, the
expression of the ultimate bearing capacity pf becomes:
p f q Nq c Nc

1
BN
2

(4.14)

Relations of the kind of (4.14) were established by Terzaghi and other

authors. Most of them differ only with respect of the third component,
introducing the influence of the self-weight of the soil. These relations are
theoretically incorrect for a plastic material since they are superposing terms
corresponding to different failure figures such as those represented in fig. 4.8
and 4.10. However, the error implied is considered to be on the safe side and
is accepted in engineering practice.
4.4 Ultimate bearing capacity in the case of a purely cohesive soil
This is a particular case of the problem previously considered. The failure
mechanism shown in fig. 11.8 is transformed, when 0 , in the one shown
in fig. 4.11.
Equation (11.10) becomes:
100

p f c Nc D Nq c Nc D

(For

0 ,

(4.15)

Nq = 1)

Fig. 4.11
One defines as netto ultimate bearing capacity the difference between the
critical pressure in the geological pressure at the level of the foundation base:
pf

netto

p f D c Nc

(4.16)

The problem is to find the bearing capacity factor N c for this case (
c 0, 0, 0) .
An approach similar to the one used for the case ( 0, c 0, 0) is
adopted:

Equilibrium of forces acting on the prism I (fig. 4.12 a)

B
2
2
c Nc B 2 R I
2c 2
RI
2
2 2
2
RI

2 cB

1
c B ( N c 1)
2

(4.17)

The normal stress acting on the faces AC and BC:

c B ( N c 1)
RI
2
pI

c ( N c 1)
B
B 2

2
2
2
2
2

(4.18)

Equilibrium of forces acting on the prism III (fig. 4.12 b)

101

B
2
2
2 R III
2c 2
2
2 2
2
R III

cB
2

(4.19)

Fig. 4.12
The normal stress acting on the faces BD and DE:
cB
2 c
p III
B 2

2
2

(4.20)

pf is obtained by writing the condition that the moment of all forces

acting on the failure prism, in respect to the point B, is zero. Normal
pressures acting on the circular are CD having the direction of the
radius, do not give moment toward B.

AC
BD RD c AC BC c ( N c 1) AC

2
2
AB
DE
2 N c AB
c DE
2
2

c DE BDc

(4.21)

But AC = BC = BD = DE = r
AB 2 r

2
r
2

Relation (4.21) becomes:

102

r2

r
2
r2
r ( N c 1)
Nc
2
2

2 2 r2

r
2

2
r2
r2
r ( N c 1)
Nc r 2
2
2
2
N

1
2 c
Nc
2
2
2
N

2 1 c
2
2
2r2

N c 2 5.14

pf

netto

(4.22)

5.14 c

(4.23)

p f 5.14 c D

(4.24)

Skempton has shown that, in fact, the netto ultimate bearing capacity
increases with the depth D of the foundation until a depth D = 5B (fig. 4.13),
reaching a limit value 9 for Nc.

Fig. 4.13
For rectangular foundations B x L, for which
the relation:
pf

netto

5 c (1 0.2

D
B
) (1 0.2 )
B
L

D
2 .5 ,
B

Skempton proposed

(4.25)

103