You are on page 1of 16

CE-632 Foundation Analysis and Design

Ultimate Bearing Capacity


The load per unit area of the foundation at which shear failure in soil occurs is called the ultimate bearing capacity.
1

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:


General Shear Failure:
Load / Area q qu

Sudden or catastrophic failure Well defined failure surface Bulging on the ground surface adjacent to foundation Common failure mode in dense sand
2

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:


Local Shear Failure:
Load / Area q qu1 Set ttlement qu

Common in sand or clay with medium compaction Significant settlement upon loading Failure surface first develops right below the foundation and then slowly extends outwards with load increments Foundation movement shows sudden jerks first (at qu1) and then after a considerable amount of movement the slip surface may reach the ground. A small amount of bulging may occur next to the foundation.
3

Settlement

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:


Punching Failure:
Load / Area q qu1 Set ttlement qu

Common in fairly loose sand or soft clay Failure surface does not extends beyond the zone right beneath the foundation Extensive settlement with a wedge shaped soil zone in elastic equilibrium beneath the foundation. Vertical shear occurs around the edges of foundation. After reaching failure load-settlement curve continues at some slope and mostly linearly.
4

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:


Relative depth of fou undation, Df/B* 0 0 Relative density of sand, Dr 0.5
Local shear

Vesic (1973)
1.0

General shear

B* =
Circular Foundation

2 BL B+L

Punching shear

Long Rectangular Foundation


5

10

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Theory


B Rough Foundation Surface j neglected Df a g Shear Planes 45/2 III II e d II b Strip Footing k

qu

Effective overburden q = .Df 45/2 i III c- soil f

Assumption L/B ratio is large plain strain problem Df B Shear resistance of soil for Df depth is neglected General shear failure Shear strength is governed by Mohr-Coulomb Criterion

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Theory


B

1 qu .B = 2.Pp + 2.Ca .sin B 2 tan 4


qu

a Ca= B/2 cos

1 qu .B = 2.Pp + B.c.sin B 2 tan 4

Ca B.tan d

Pp = Pp + Ppc + Ppq
Pp = due to only self weight of soil in shear zone Ppc = due to soil cohesion only (soil is weightless) Ppq = due to surcharge only
7

Pp

Pp

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Theory


Weight term Cohesion term

1 qu .B = 2.Pp B 2 tan + ( 2.Ppc + B.c.sin ) + 2.Ppq 4

B. ( 0.5 B.N )

Surcharge term

B.c.Nc

B.q.N q
Terzaghis bearing capacity equation

qu = c.N c + q.N q + 0.5 B.N


N = K 1 1 tan P 2 2 cos
Nq =

Terzaghis bearing capacity factors

N c = ( N q 1) cot

e2 a 2 cos 2 45 + 2 3 in rad. a= tan 2 4

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Theory


Local Shear Failure:
Modify the strength parameters such as:

2 = c cm 3

= tan 1 tan m 3

2 + 0.5 B.N qu = c.N c + q.N q 3

Square and circular footing:


qu = 1.3c.N c + q.N q + 0.4 B.N qu = 1.3c.N c + q.N q + 0.3 B.N
For square For circular

10

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Theory


Effect of water table:
Case I: Dw Df Surcharge, q = .Dw + ( D f Dw ) Df B Surcharge, q = .DF In bearing capacity equation replace by Dw D f ( ) B Case III: Dw > (Df + B) Dw

Case II: Df Dw (Df + B)

=+

B Limit of influence

No influence of water table.

Another recommendation for Case II:


= ( 2H + dw )
dw 2 sat + 2 ( H d w ) H2 H

d w = Dw D f
11

Rupture depth: H = 0.5 B tan ( 45 + 2 )

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Skemptons Bearing Capacity Analysis for cohesive Soils


~ For saturated cohesive soil, = 0 N q = 1, and N = 0 Df For strip footing: N c = 5 1 + 0.2 with limit of N c 7.5 B For square/circular g footing: For rectangular footing:

D N c = 6 1 + 0.2 f with limit of N c 9.0 B D B N c = 5 1 + 0.2 f 1 + 0.2 for D f 2.5 B L B N c = 7.5 1 + 0.2 for D f > 2.5 L

qu = c.N c + q
Net ultimate bearing capacity,
qnu = qu .D f

qu = c.N c
12

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Effective Area Method for Eccentric Loading


In case of Moment loading Df

ex = ey =

My FV Mx FV

B
B=B-2ey

AF=BL

L=L-2ey ex ey

In case of Horizontal Force at some height but the column is centered on the foundation

M y = FHx .d FH
M x = FHy .d FH
13

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

General Bearing Capacity Equation: (Meyerhof, 1963)

qu = c.N c .sc .d c .ic + q.N q .sq .d q .iq + 0.5 .B.N .s .d .i


Shape factor Depth factor inclination factor Empirical correction factors

N q = tan 2 45 + .e .tan 2

N c = ( N q 1) cot
[By Hansen(1970): [By Vesic(1973):

N = ( N q 1) tan (1 1.4 4 )
N = 1.5 ( N q 1) tan ( ) N = 2 ( N q + 1) tan ( )

qu = c.N c .sc .dc .ic .gc .bc + q.N q .sq .d q .iq .g q .bq + 0.5 .B.N .s .d .i .g .b
Ground factor Base factor
14

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

15

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Meyerhofs Correction Factors:


Shape Factors

sc = 1 + 0.2

B tan 2 45 + L 2

for 10o

sq = s = 1 + 0.1
for lower value

B tan 2 45 + L 2

sq = s = 1
Depth Factors

d c = 1 + 0.2

Df

tan 45 + L 2

for 10o

d q = d = 1 + 0.1
for lower value

Df L

tan 45 + 2

d q = d = 1
Inclination Factors

o ic = iq = 1 90

i = 1

16

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Hansens Correction Factors:


Inclination Factors

FH for = 0 2 BL.c 5 0.5 FH iq = 1 F BL . c .cot + V ic = 1


For = 0 Df for D f B d c = 0.4 B D f for D f > B d c = 0.4 tan 1 B

ic =

1 (1 FH ) 1 + for > 0 2 BL.su 5 0.7 FH i = 1 FV + BL.c .cot


1/2

For > 0 Df for D f B d c = 1 + 0.4 B D f for D f > B d c = 1 + 0.4 tan 1 B

Depth Factors

For D f < B

2 Df d q = 1 + 2 tan . (1 sin ) B

For D f > B Df 2 d q = 1 + 2 tan . (1 sin ) tan 1 B


B for > 0 L s = 1 0.4i . ( B L ) sc = 0.2 (1 2ic ) .

d = 1

Shape Factors

sc = 0.2ic .

B L

for = 0

sq = 1 + iq . ( B L ) sin

Hansens Recommendation for cohesive saturated soil, '=0

qu = c.Nc . (1 + sc + dc + ic ) + q

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Notes:
1. Notice use of effective base dimensions B, L by Hansen but not by Vesic. 2. The values are consistent with a vertical load or a vertical load accompanied by a horizontal load HB. 3. With a vertical load and a load HL (and either HB=0 or HB>0) you may have to compute two sets of shape and depth factors si,B, si,L and di,B, di,L. For i,L subscripts use ratio L/B or D/L. 4. Compute qu independently by using (siB, diB) and (siL, diL) and use min value for design.
18

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Notes:
1. Use Hi as either HB or HL, or both if HL>0. 2. Hansen (1970) did not give an ic for >0. The value given here is from Hansen (1961) and also used by Vesic. 3. Variable ca = base adhesion, , on the order of 0.6 to 1.0 x base cohesion. 4. Refer to sketch on next slide for identification of angles and , footing depth D, location of Hi (parallel and at top of base slab; usually also produces eccentricity). Especially notice V = force normal to base and is not the resultant R from combining V and Hi..
19

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

20

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Note:
1. When =0 (and 0) use N = -2sin() in N term. 2. Compute m = mB when Hi = HB (H parallel to B) and m = mL when Hi = HL (H parallel to L). If you have both HB and HL use m = (mB2 + mL2)1/2. Note use of B and L, not B, L. 3. Hi term 1.0 for computing iq, i (always).

21

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Suitability of Methods

22

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

IS:6403-1981 Recommendations
Net Ultimate Bearing capacity: For cohesive soils

qnu = c.Nc .sc .dc .ic + q. ( N q 1) .sq .dq .iq + 0.5 .B.N .s .d .i
where,

qnu = cu .N c .sc .d c .ic


N c , N q , N

N c = 5.14

as per Vesic(1973) recommendations

Shape Factors

For rectangle,

sc = 1 + 0.2

B L

sq = 1 + 0.2

B L

s = 1 0.4

B L

For square and circle,

12 sc = 1.3 1 3 sq = 1.2 s = 0.8 for square, s = 0.6 for circle

Depth Factors

d c = 1 + 0.2

tan 45 + 2 Df tan 45 + d q = d = 1 + 0.1 2 L d q = d = 1 for < 10o


Df L
The same as Meyerhof (1963)

for

10o

Inclination Factors

23

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity Correlations with SPT-value


Peck, Hansen, and Thornburn (1974) & IS:6403-1981 Recommendation

24

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity Correlations with SPT-value


Teng (1962):
For Strip Footing: For Square and Circular Footing:

qnu =

1 + 5 100 + N 2 .D f .Rw 3 N 2 .B.Rw 6

1 + 3 100 + N 2 .D f .Rw qnu = N 2 .B.Rw 3


For Df > B, B take Df = B

Water Table Corrections:

Dw

D Rw = 0.5 1 + w Df Dw D f = 0.5 1 + Rw Df

[ Rw 1
1 [ Rw

Df B B Limit of influence
25

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity Correlations with CPT-value


IS:6403-1981 Recommendation: Cohesionless Soil 0. 2500

qnu qc
B 1.5B to 2.0B qc value is taken as average for this zone

0.1675

0.1250

0
0.5

Df
0.0625

=1

0 0 100 200 B (cm) 300 400

Schmertmann (1975):

N N q

qc 0.8

in

kg cm 2

26

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity Correlations with CPT-value


IS:6403-1981 Recommendation: Cohesive Soil

qnu = cu .N c .sc .dc .ic


Soil Type Normally consolidated clays Over consolidated clays Point Resistance Values ( qc ) kgf/cm2 qc < 20 qc > 20 Range of Undrained Cohesion (kgf/cm2) qc/18 to qc/15 qc/26 to qc/22

27

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil


Depth of rupture zone =

B tan 45 + or approximately taken as B 2 2


Case I: Layer-1 is weaker than Layer-2
Design using parameters of Layer -1

Case II: Layer-1 is stronger than Layer-2 B Layer-1 B Layer-2 1 2


Distribute the stresses to Layer-2 by 2:1 method and check the bearing capacity at this level for limit state. Also check the bearing capacity for original foundation level using parameters of Layer-1 Choose minimum value for design

Another approximate method for c- soil: For effective depth

Find average c and and use them for ultimate bearing capacity calculation

B tan 45 + B 2 2

cav =

c1 H1 + c2 H 2 + c3 H 3 + .... H1 + H 2 + H 3 + ....

tan av =

tan 1 H1 + tan 2 H 2 + tan 3 H 3 + .... H1 + H 2 + H 3 + ....

28

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Stratified Cohesive Soil


IS:6403-1981 Recommendation:

29

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil: Stronger Soil Underlying Weaker Soil

Depth H is relatively small Punching shear failure in top layer General shear failure in bottom layer

Depth H is relatively large Full failure surface develops in top layer itself

30

10

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil: Stronger Soil Underlying Weaker Soil

31

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil: Stronger Soil Underlying Weaker Soil

Bearing capacities of continuous footing of with B under vertical load on the surface of homogeneous thick bed of upper and lower soil

32

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil: Stronger Soil Underlying Weaker Soil
For Strip Footing:

qu = qb +

H 2 D f K s tan 1 2ca + 1H 2 1 + 1 H qt B H B

Where, qt is the bearing capacity for foundation considering only the top layer to infinite depth

For Rectangular Footing:

B 2c H qu = qb + 1 + a L B
Special Cases:

B 2 D f K s tan 1 2 1 H qt + 1 H 1 + L 1 + H B

1. Top layer is strong sand and bottom layer is saturated soft clay

= 0 2 = 0 c1
2. Top layer is strong sand and bottom layer is weaker sand

=0 c1

=0 c2

2. Top layer is strong saturated clay and bottom layer is weaker saturated clay

1 = 0

2 = 0

33

11

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Eccentrically Loaded Foundations


Q M

e=
qmax = Q 6M + BL B 2 L Q 6M BL B 2 L

M Q
qmax = qmin = Q 6e 1 + BL B Q 6e 1 BL B

B
qmin =

For

e 1 There will be separation > B 6

of foundation from the soil beneath and stresses will be redistributed. Use

B = B 2e for L = L

sc , sq , s , and B, L for d c , d q , d

to obtain qu

Qu = qu . A

The effective area method for two way eccentricity becomes a little more complex than what is suggested above. It is discussed in the subsequent slides

34

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded foundations (Highter and Anders, 1985)
Case I:

eL 1 e 1 and B L 6 B 6
B1 eB

3 3e B1 = B B 2 B 3 3e L1 = L L 2 L A = 1 L1 B1 2
B =

eL

L1

L = max ( B1 , L1 )
A L

35

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded foundations (Highter and Anders, 1985)
Case II:

eL e 1 < 0.5 and 0 < B < L B 6


eB eL L1

L2

L B

1 ( L1 + L2 ) B 2 L = max ( B1 , L1 )

A =

B =

A L
36

12

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded foundations (Highter and Anders, 1985)
Case III: eL < 1 and 0 < eB < 0.5

B1

eB eL L B B2

1 A = L ( B1 + B2 ) A 2 B = L L = L

37

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded foundations (Highter and Anders, 1985)
Case IV:

eL 1 e 1 and B < < L 6 B 6


B1

eB eL L B B2

1 A = L2 B + ( B1 + B2 )( L + L2 ) 2 A L = L B = L

38

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded foundations (Highter and Anders, 1985)

Case V: Circular foundation

eR

L =

A B

39

13

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Meyerhofs (1953) area correction based on empirical correlations: (American Petroleum Institute, 1987)

40

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes Meyerhofs (1957) Solution


qu = cN cq + 0.5 BN q

Granular Soil

c = 0 qu = 0.5 BN q

41

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes Meyerhofs (1957) Solution


Cohesive Soil

= 0

qu = cN cq

Ns =

H
c
42

14

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes Graham et al. (1988), Based on method of characteristics
1000

For

Df
100

=0

10

10

20

30

40

43

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes Graham et al. (1988), Based on method of characteristics
1000

For

Df
100

=0

10

10

20

30

40

44

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes Graham et al. (1988), Based on method of characteristics

For

Df B

= 0.5

45

15

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes Graham et al. (1988), Based on method of characteristics

For

Df B

= 1.0

46

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes Bowles (1997): A simplified approach


B f Df e 45/2 g qu a

= 45+/2

B f' g' qu a'

c e' 45/2 d' B r

ro b' b

c'

g' qu f' a' e'

Compute the reduced factor Nc as:

N c = N c .

b' c'

Labd e Labde
Aaef g Aaefg
47

45/2

Compute the reduced factor Nq as:

d'

= Nq . Nq

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Soil Compressibility Effects on Bearing Capacity Vesics (1973) Approach


Use of soil compressibility factors in general bearing capacity equation. These correction factors are function of the rigidity of soil

Rigidity Index of Soil, Ir:

Ir =

Gs tan c + vo
B 3.30 0.45 L tan 45 2

B B/2

Critical Rigidity Index of Soil, Icr:

I rc = 0.5.e

Compressibility Correction Factors, cc, cg, and cq


For

I r I rc

cc = cq = c = 1

= .( D f + B / 2) vo

For

I r < I rc

cq = c = e

3.07.sin .log10 ( 2. I r ) B 0.6 4.4 .tan + L 1+ sin

For = 0 cc = 0.32 + 0.12


For > 0 cc = cq 1 cq

B + 0.60.log I r L
48

N q tan

16