Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Footing With BiAxial Moments
Footing With BiAxial Moments
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 eccentricitieszero 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 :=
Mx
z+
Mz
.........................................................(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 Xaxis and ZAxis respectively,
Ix, Iz = Moment of Inertia of footing about Xaxis and Zaxis
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,
Ix
Iz
resist the tensile stresses, some portion of footing will remain unstressed and the force
equilibrium will occur in the area of footing which remains in contact with soil. Under these
circumstances, bearing pressure at different points of footing will be modified and the line of
zero stresses will shift towards loading point. The portion outside line of zero pressure will be
completely unstressed and is called footing uplift area.
Footings with one-way eccentricity, either ex or ez outside kern, solution to the problem is
simple. However, for footings with two-way eccentricity ex and ez outside Kern, the solution
is not as simple as that for one-way eccentricity. In the available literature, Teng [1] shows
graphical method, charts and related equations; Roark [2] provides tables and Peck [3]
mentions an iterative method for footing with two-way eccentricity. To automate the footing
design process on computer, tables or charts are cumbersome to implement and the information
is very brief. Hence, for computer implementation of footing design process, a numerical
approach is the best choice. A numerical approach is described in the paper, which solves this
problem with tangible accuracy. In this approach, it is assumed that pressure varies linearly,
the footing is rigid and the effect of soil displacement has no effect on the pressure distribution.
Equilibrium Conditions
In analysis of eccentrically loaded footings, following equilibrium conditions must comply,
1. Volume of bearing pressure envelope shall be equal to the applied load P,
2. CG of bearing pressure envelope shall coincide with location of applied load P.
For footings having large eccentricities, large area of footing will remain unstressed and hence,
the stability of footing demands special attention. Thus, it is imperative to ensure satisfactory
Factor of Safety against overturning. 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.
Eccentricity Conditions
For a footing, possible eccentricity conditions can be enumerated as follows:
1. ex = 0 and ez = 0 ; or ex, ez within kern area Compression on entire base of footing
2. ex > Lx/6 and ez =0 ; ex outside kern One-way eccentricity along X axis
3. ex = 0 and ez > Lz/6 ; ez outside kern One-way eccentricity along Z axis
4. ex > 0 and ez > 0 ; ex, ez outside kern Two-way eccentricity
It shall be noted that, conditions 2, 3 and 4 produces tension on some portion of the footing.
Position of Neutral Axis
For footings with loading point outside Kern, the pressure will vary from negative to positive
below footing base. The points of zero pressure on footing edges can be obtained by
substituting p = 0 and appropriate coordinate of footing edges in Eq. 1. The initial position of
neutral axis can be obtained by connecting a line between two points having zero stresses on
adjacent or opposite edges. However, for static equilibrium to occur, there will be significant
shift of initial neutral axis to its final position.
6.
7.
8.
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. A systematic
15. It was observed that to achieve a tangible accuracy of 99 percentage or better, a slightly
larger band shall be used than originally extracted. The same is implemented in
programming by slightly shifting point E1 on left, E2 on right; J1 downward and J2
upward before initiating second phase of iterations. In the second phase, the objective is to
find the position of EJ where error for P, ex and ez is within limits simultaneously.
16. 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. 3). Here, the point E1
is pivoted first and second point of neutral axis is altered from J2 to J1 with appropriate
step size. At every position of neutral axis during the iterations, all steps to find out
volume of pressure diagram and CG of pressure envelope are repeated as explained earlier.
Also, the numerical errors for P, ex and ez are calculated to monitor the convergence and
limit on number of iterations is also verified at each step. If the solution is not converged
with the selected pivot, then pivot E1 is shifted at the next step towards E2. The entire
range from E1 to E2 will be pivoted during these iterations, with other end from J2 to J1
until the true solution is found. While iterating within J2 to J1, if the solution diverges, the
program abandons further iterations within J2 and J1 and new pivot point within E1 and
E2 is selected.
17. It shall be noted that, during iterations, the position of line EJ may get changed from one
case to another. For example, at the beginning of the iterations, the position of line EJ
may be representing case 2. However, during subsequent iterations, the position of line EJ
may represent case 3, 4 or 5. The program constantly monitors the case of current neutral
axis and calculates required properties accordingly.
18. For true solution to occur, it is imperative that for a particular position of neutral axis
within solution band, the numerical errors for P, ex and ez, all simultaneously, shall be
within allowable limits. The very first instance of such convergence is reported and
further iterations are abandoned. At this point, essential results such as pressures at A, B
and D, uplift area, position of final neutral axis are reported by the program.
19. Since, solution search is an iterative process; it is expected that there may be other
positions of final neutral axis. It is found that the results of other positions do not vary
much for the desired accuracy, and hence, the accuracy of the first instance of solution is
acceptable for all practical purposes.
Results and Graphics Interface
After successful execution of the program, the following output is generated:
1) The input parameters, 2) position of initial neutral axis, 3) position of final neutral axis, 4)
effective compression area, 5) load and loading point coordinates recovered, 6) maximum
pressures at corners and 7) numerical difference in recovering P, ex and ez.
Extensive effort is put on the graphical presentation of input and results. Extraordinary
features of Excel chart options are explored and the graphical features of the program includes:
1. Footing Geometry: Size of footing, origin, loading point, Kern, initial neutral axis and
final neutral axis.
2. Bearing Pressure Diagrams: 2D and 3D presentation of contours showing variation of
pressure, after equilibrium conditions are met, over the footing surface. The footing area
is divided into many small parts to produce refined bearing pressure diagram.
Verification Examples
Many practical examples were
selected to validate results
produced by the program and
monitor accuracy of the numerical
approach presented here. The
results were compared with input
data and not with solution
obtained from any other reference.
Table 1 shows input data and true
solution for selected problems.
Note that in all problems a
tangible accuracy of 99.9% is
achieved.
The
table
also
demonstrates number of iterations
performed to solve the problem
and run time taken on PC with P4
-1.5GHz processor and 512MB
RAM. Graphical representation
of footing geometry and pressure
distribution
diagrams
for
examples 1, 2, 3 and 5 are shown
in Fig. 4.1 to 4.8.
Observations and Conclusions
The numerical approach suggested
in this paper produces impressive
results having a tangible accuracy
of 99.9 percentage or better for all
problems under investigation. The
time taken for finding the solution
is computationally economical for
incredible accuracy achieved.
Hence, the numerical approach
presented here can be effectively
implemented to automate the
footing analysis and design.
Table 1
Verification Problems and Comparison of Results
Problem No
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
Geometry and Load Data
P
278.00 1300.0 1250.0 333.00
Mx
278.00 162.50 2813.0 150.00
Mz
250.00 1800.0 750.00 400.00
Lx
6.00
5.00
6.00
4.00
Lz
5.00
2.50
5.00
3.00
ex
0.899 1.385 0.600 1.201
ez
1.000 0.125 2.250 0.450
ex/Lx
0.150 0.277 0.100 0.300
ez/Lz
0.200 0.050 0.450 0.150
Bearing Pressure at Corners
(Before Modification of Pressure)
PA
28.72 308.00 179.18 102.75
PB
12.05 -37.60 129.18 2.75
PC
-10.18 -100.00 -95.85 -47.25
PD
6.48 245.60 -45.85 52.75
Results obtained by Numerical Method
Case
2
3
4
3
Step
0.0030 0.0020 0.0030 0.0020
PA
32.41 360.24 749.89 146.10
PB
11.14
0.00 395.56 0.00
PC
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
4.88 265.47 0.00
50.57
PD
c
4.624 2.200 4.077 2.923
d
2.976 1.200 4.513 0.888
as % of (Lx x Lz)
Contact
Area
77.07 66.01 14.09 52.36
Comparison of Results
Precovered
277.97 1300.8 1249.8 333.27
exrecovered 0.8984 1.3831 0.5996 1.2000
ezrecovered 1.0008 0.1251 2.2505 0.4503
(%) Error in
P
0.0088 0.0652 0.0126 0.0804
ex
0.0647 0.0640 0.0733 0.0838
ez
0.0822 0.0876 0.0219 0.0737
Run Time Data
Iterations 1245
640
2081
673
Time
7
3
9
3
(Sec)
(Units kN and m)
2000.0 2000.0
1500.0 1500.0
4000.0 3000.0
5.00
5.00
2.50
2.50
2.000 1.500
0.750 0.750
0.400 0.300
0.300 0.300
832.00
64.00
-512.00
256.00
736.00
160.00
-416.00
160.00
5
5
0.0020 0.0010
3000.0 1500.0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16.00
32.00
2000.0 2000.0
2.0000 1.5000
0.7500 0.7500
0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000
0.0000 0.0000
946
1067
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-3.00
-2.50
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00-
2.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
-0.50
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
2.50
3.00
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
Load Point
Original_NA
-2.000-2.000
2.000-6.000
6.000-10.000
10.000-14.000
14.000-18.000
18.000-22.000
22.000-26.000
26.000-30.000
30.000-34.000
34.000-38.000
Final NA
1.25
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
-0.25
-0.50
-0.75
-1.00
1.25
2.00
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.50
-2.25
-2.00
-1.75
-1.50
-1.25
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50-
3.00
-2.00
-3.00
-3.00
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
Load Point
Original_NA
Final NA
-20.000-20.000
140.000-180.000
300.000-340.000
60.000-100.000
220.000-260.000
100.000-140.000
260.000-300.000
698.000798.000
598.000698.000
2.00
798.0
498.000598.000
698.0
1.00
598.0
398.000498.000
498.0
0.00
398.0
298.000398.000
298.0
-1.00
198.0
98.0
-2.00
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
2.00
-2.0
Load Point
Original_NA
Final NA
-3.00
-2.50
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
20.000-60.000
180.000-220.000
340.000-380.000
3.00
-3.00
-3.00
-3.00
0.50
-1.00
-2.50
198.000298.000
98.000198.000
-2.00098.000
2700.0003100.000
3.00
2300.0002700.000
2.00
1900.0002300.000
3100.0
1.00
2700.0
1500.0001900.000
2300.0
1900.0
0.00
1100.0001500.000
1500.0
1100.0
-1.00
-2.00
700.0
700.000-
300.0
1.001100.000
-3.00
-3.00
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
Load Point
Original_NA
Final NA
-2.50
-2.25
-2.00
-1.75
-1.50
-1.25
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
-100.0
0.25 300.000-0.50
-1.25
700.000
-100.000300.000
Acknowledgement
I thank my company M/s. L&T Sargent and Lundy Limited, Vadodara, Gujarat, India, for the
support, encouragement and providing computational facilities for this programming work.
References
1.
2.
3.
Foundation Design, Teng W. C., Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood cliffs, New Jersey.
Roarks Formulas for Stress and Strain, 7th Edition, Young W. C. and Budynas R. G.,
McGraw Hill, Englewood cliffs, New Jersey.
Foundation Engineering, 2nd Edition, Peck R. B., Hanson W. E., and Thornburn W. H.,
John Wiley and Sons, New York.